Didn’t Abe Lincoln free the slaves just to weaken the power of the Confederates? That’s what I heard in my history class.
The jews were not the only group who suffered during WW2, but they were the only ones who got monetary compensation. If we’re going to pay for past mistakes, we should pay either everybody or nobody. I don’t think we could ever pay everybody.
Reeshdawg,
Man, those modern-day history teachers sure do know their stuff, don’t they? (Rolling eyes, yawning . . . )
Lincoln only freed slaves in the South. Also, he didn’t want them to stay in America. He planned to have them shipped to Liberia. On a side note, did you know the slave who led the rebellion on the Amistad ended up going back to Africa to be a slave trader?
Lincoln wanted to give the former slaves the option to return to Africa IF THEY SO WISHED. He became, especially later on in his presidency, a greater and greater champion of black freedoms. In fact, in his last public speech, he advocated giving blacks equal rights, especially in regards to political equality. Supposedly it was this speech which finally sent Mr. Booth into action.
I have encountered Civil War revisionary history repeatedly in the last few years, and I find the assertion that the Civil War was SOLELY about “states’ rights” (or anything else) to be ridiculous. While states rights were definitely one of the central issues of the conflict, it CANNOT be escaped that the central states’ right that sparked the war was indeed slavery. It was the one issue that the two sides could not reconcile in the years leading up to the war, and the main issue that sparked political tension between the North and the South for the preceding decades. I have heard from ethnocentrist fruitcakes lately that the war had nothing to do with slavery, etc. That is a plain old crock of shit. I would welcome anyone who believes in this New Age redefinition of the Civil War to comment, so that you can be promptly educated.
Lincoln was anti-slavery coming into office. The southern states knew this, and it was a large factor that led to the first seccession, despite Lincoln’s claims that he would not abridge the slave-owning rights of the Southerners if by not doing so that would somehow hold together the Union.
Here’s some personal qualifications to muddy the waters of reparations: Fourteen generations ago, circa 1643, the first Van Wagenens (my family) came over from the Netherlands to the New Amsterdam colony in what is now New York. They owned a slave, and freed him a few years after arriving in the New World. Several hundred years later, the Van Wagnens in my direct line (now English-speaking, American citizens and Yankees to boot) sent every man of service age to fight in the war for the North. Several were wounded, and one died in the campaigns in Virginia in 1864 while fighting, long after Lincoln had positioned the war as directly anti-slavery. Now, here’s the question: Should I pay for the immorality of my Dutch ancestor, who was a citizen of the Netherlands, spoke Dutch, and owned a slave (which was legal, by the way, in mostly every country in the world at the time and in all the times preceeding that)? I happen to think that he was committing an atrocity by owning a slave, and my deep moral objection is one of the many reasons that I don’t own slaves today. Do I get a rebate for the work that my family members put into the Civil War (between the five of them who fought, nearly sixteen combined years of misery and war)? Do I get an exemption because one of my ancestors died while fighting to free the slaves? {p.s. I was not born into a historically wealthy family. Two generations back have us as lumbermen and railroad layers, so one could not possibly make the claim that several centuries later we were living the high life paid for by slave labor.}
They have already been paid back they have welfare!
Daniel Carver, go look up the acf’s stats about welfare recipients and you will see that the people who receive welfare in this country are very small in number. Also, I have always been told that there are more white poeple on welfare and it made sense since there are far more of them than any other race. But it seems that whites and blacks run neck at neck every month for the welfare crown. Doesn’t really mean anything to me but I wanted to point that out.
As far as reparations being paid for slavery. I think it is a ridiculous idea. I suppose some reparations should have been paid to the slaves but not their descendents. But let’s take look at the idea of paying the descendents. I don’t know how many, but a fair portion of the slaves were sold by tribe leaders to slave traders so I think the descendents of African tribe leaders should pay the appropriate reparations. On another note, I always held the idea that slaves were treated horribly, but a teacher pointed out that an owner probably would have taken care of an investment and fed them and gave them shelter. Its an idea but I don’t really know if its true. In any case, other races have endured worse: native americans. So I don’t believe people should continually harp on this topic and we should pick a more intelligent one to debate.
If the slaves get repartition what about the Jews in Europe? And like someone said what about the Indians? The list could go on and on.
Let’s not forget the various Europeans enslaved by the Romans for hundreds of years. At the time of Christ, which was not near the height of the Empire in terms of population, the Romans already owned in excess of 4 million slaves. Therefore there is a good chance that if you are of Western European descent of any kind that you could probably trace your way back to some slave ancestors, and can sue the piss out of the Italian government.
You must be kidding (in sarcastic monotone). If that judgement were rendered I would defect!
All right you three. It’s time to actually pick up a textbook. Lincoln NEVER, EVER, had a single slave. I want each of you to pick up any book and find a single reference to him owning a slave. He was born dirt-poor in Kentucky. His father built a series of log cabins in Kentucky, Indiana, and Illinois. The only state that he lived in that allowed slaves in 1809 (his birth-year) was Kentucky. Guess what, he lived there until he was TWO YEARS OLD. Then he went to Indiana. HIS FAMILY HAD MINIMAL FINANCES. His father, Thomas, NEVER, EVER had a slave. Lincoln spent the great majority of his life not only in Northern, non-slaveholding states, but just above the poverty level. Not only that, but Lincoln was ALWAYS opposed to slavery. Please read ANY of the Lincoln-Douglas debates. Read ANY of his speeches when he was in the House of Representatives in 1848. In fact, read ANY public utterance he ever made. Before you post, you must read.
My mistake; it was George Washington I was thinking of who had owned slaves. Lincoln did not.
religion is in part to blame because many still feel guilt for our “original sin” and “the fall” which we clearly werent around to take part in. The case of the Jews is a bit more complex. Of the 8million killed i believe European Jews made up around 6 million. The main other groups killed were gypsies, political opponents (read communists), and inhabitants of USSR. Germany was fighting the USSR so it wont reimburse the soviets for slaughtering its POWs, we have had and still have a big Red scare, and gypsies are considered trash by most, at the least, they were poor long before the Holocaust. Jews did control much of the German economy, and were by far the largest group targeted. Companies like Bayer profitted clearly and directly from horrifying medical experiments conducted by Nazi doctors on Concentration camp prisoners. THus the case between slavery reparations and the Holocaust really is not very similar
To those in favor of “reparations,” I ask: Since my father’s parents came to this country around 1910 and my mother’s grandparents came to this country around 1915-1920, I do not have ANY ancestors who could have possibly owned slaves in this country. Therefore, should I be made to pay reparations to black Americans?
On July 4th we all celebrate our independence and feel patriotic and good about being American. Should we? I mean we really didn’t do shit did we? It was all our ancestors doing. Right? That’s laughable, our history is a tapestry of good and “evil” and we need to take all or none. As far as reparations…Japanese Americans(1990), Jews in Austria(1990), Indians and Eskimos(Canada 1998), ottawas of Michigan(usa 1996),Chippewas of Wisconsin(usa 1985), Seminoles of Florida(usa 1985) Sioux of south Dakota(usa 1985), klamathas of Oregon(usa 1980), Alaska natives(usa 1971) and german jews(germany 1952). If we’re going to be paying people, why stop before we get to African Americans? I personally don’t think any reparations should ever have been paid to anyone except those who were direct victims.
Buddy I’m going to go easy on you for saying something as stupid as “slaves were not treated horribly”. In case you didn’t know, slaves were fed, but they were also worked and beaten harshly, families were separated at auction, runaways were murdered as examples, young girls were raped. Oh and then there is the little matter of freedom? Remember that? MORON!!!
some say show me a slave, and i’ll pay. who said you will pay…for 200 years ( not included the cheap labor) america’s economy was directly or indirectly made a hugh profit off unpaid labor. after the american revolution ( a fight for freedom) not having financial backing from england, our “founding fathers” needed money and at that time agricultral trade & slave trade was beginning to rise and the government began to slowly regulate the economy through these trades. just a brief history of this governments foundation. back to the question - who should pay? the government( for not changing the “law” until 1969). Also the companies who profit directly or indirectly…
if we give slaves repartition should about jews in europe? let the jews in europe ask for repartition in europe… didn’t america give the japanese money for imprisoning them during WWII? dang, america only put them in “camps” they didn’t work for free building country financially for 200 years-
The truth of the matter is that there are a bunch of blacks out there that are lazy and don’t want to do she so they ask for money. What happens when the money runs out. Then they are going to want more. And what about welfare. There are plenty of people that get it, especially blacks. Granted there are not as many, especially anymore, thanks Bill Clinton for wellfare reform. I am not trying tostereotype or anything, but a few bad apples can ruin the bunch. Minorities have the greatest chance of success than white men this day and age. There are so many projects,grants,funding,scholarships, and aide to minorities. That even includes white women. If you want to get into the discussion of who is really oppressed this day and age, tell me one law that is specifically targeted at the white male. Tell me one scholarship that is targeted at the white male. Tell me one T.V station, or magazine just for white men or even white women. If I come out and make a television station called white entertainment television, I would have all kinds of people talking shit.At work we get a magazine called Hispanic. I am going to start one called Anglo, or whitey. Now, I am not a racist, that can be seen in the women I date especially. But I just get ticked of when I hear that people want restitution from 300 years ago, or that they are oppressed. They should have it so good. My family came over from the Czech Republic in the early 1900’s. I am not going to be liable for this SHIT.
Politics? bad subject my freind. All politictions are a load of fat currupt ballshiters with thier fingers in too many pies!