Reparations for Slavery

[eopfrank]

Thsi is a sensitive issue that I have been seeing on the news lately. I beleive that there is a suit filed suing companies for reparations for slavery. They are saying that the companies have profited, and the government, from the sweat of African American slaves.

I have thought about this issue for some time now; since I first heard about it a few years ago and it has ligitimacy.

But my take is that slavery was not an American institution. It was brought to America in the 1600's by Europeans... After Generation and generation of people being born to accept Slavery it was, unfortunately, Acepted. And if you think about it, it was only an American Institution for 90 years and for the 90 years there was much controversy... until it all came to a head...

So, who is actually repeonsible for Reparations? For Americans 600,000 lives were sacricficed to end the horrible institution so that is definately reparations...

What do you all think?

-Frank

[hoosier]

I agree that reparations have been made - not only by those who lost their lives in the Civil War, but by all those others who, though they weren't actually killed in the war, gave years out of their lives to the war effort that produced the end of the "peculiar institution." But I guess there are people who regard those reparations as, somehow, insufficient.

You ask a good question - who is actually responsible for reparations? In fact, that question probably needs to be expanded - who should be held responsible to pay the reparations, who should be eligible to receive the reparations, and what dollar amount of reparations should be appropriate?

Consider, just as a hypothetical example, a prosperous African-American businessman of today. It turns out that his investment portfolio includes shares of stock in one or more companies which, more than 100 years before he ever bought the stock, profited in some way from the institution of slavery.

What do we do in such a case? Do we say that, because this man is a descendant of slaves, he is absolved of any responsibility to pay any reparations, even though he is part owner of a company which once profited from slavery? Do we go the other way and say that, because he is a part owner of such a company, he is ineligible to receive any reparations, even though he is the descendant of slaves? Or do we apply some complicated formula taking into account the number of his ancestors who were slaves, the total number of their years of servitude, the number of shares of stock he owns, the amount of the company's profit that actually resulted from slavery, and goodness knows what all else, and try to determine the net amount he should either pay or receive?

If a lawsuit asking for reparations has actually been filed, I can't predict how it will turn out, but I can predict with a great deal of confidence that, no matter how it turns out, virtually no one will be satisfied with the result.

It's a pity to think that so much legal time and talent might be spent on such an exercise in futility.