Settler-colonialism is still ongoing, and the damages from the slave trade still impact those from slave families and the countries they were taken from, and the gains from slavery have been protected. Imagine if one family stole everything from another, causing generational wealth in one family and generational poverty in the other. Should the generations born into wealth that came from theft not pay reparations to the people born into poverty as a direct consequence of said theft? The answer is yes.
I suggest that there’s no meaningful benefit to be gained by looking backward rather than forward. If you want to move to a different paradigm, that’s fine, but condemnation of the past is performative compared to putting forward laws and resolutions to benefit others. The Bill of Human Rights was forward-looking, this condemnation is backward-looking. Emphasize where we want to go and why we want to be there, rather than where we were and the mistakes we made as a society.
Slavery was evil, so was the destruction of indigenous peoples across the world. But we can’t yet change the past. We should reinforce that we will work to eliminate slavery (chattel and indenture), human trafficking, and the abuses related to it. Focus on what we can improve today and how we can improve things.
I suggest that there’s no meaningful benefit to be gained by looking backward rather than forward.
Okay, as long as we also take away all the historical family wealth that goes back generations too.
But that’s not how it works, is it? Great great great grandad gets to get rich off having slave plantations and his son gets to get rich off of Jim Crow sharecropping, and his great great great grandson gets to inherit that wealth without any complications.
This „punishment“ or rather responsibility would not be something that the average wage earning person has to worry about financially whatsoever. There is however a lot of accumulated wealth, that could be used for much better things than the third luxury Yacht in Monaco. So if this extraordinary luxurious wealth can be traced back to exploitation and slavery, and the government would enforce this money to be used for reparations in forms of community centers, museums, research for those who’s ancestors freedom, cultural heritage and often lives were taken, this would not be a punishment.
As a German I think there is good reason to individually act responsibly concerning the crimes of e.g. my great grandfather. It is not my crime, but it’s my responsibility to call it such, to do my best in every day live that something like it will not happen again. Calling that a punishment would be unfair compared to the suffering of the victims and their living relatives.
Oh yeah, it’s totally a radical Marxist–Leninist thing and not at all something obvious advocated for now by the UN (voted against or abstained from near-exclusively by its minority of perpetrators) and human rights organizations like Human Rights Watch:
Who should receive reparations?
In the US, all Black people who are descended from people subjected to enslavement and who inevitably suffer its present-day legacies should be eligible for reparations.
Black people in the US are due reparations as worthy recipients of redress, justice, and reconciliation for atrocities and human rights violations experienced during and since chattel slavery. Although the slave economy built vast generational wealth for whites and propelled the US into global economic leadership, the US government has never adequately accounted for these wrongs, which continue to impact Black people via structural racism and pervasive racial inequality today.
While this text is focused on the idea of reparations for Black people in the US, it bears noting that Indigenous communities have faced centuries of displacement, violence, and cultural erasure due to colonization and US policies. The case for reparations is essential here as well—and appropriate reparations in that context might take a very different form.
The conversation around reparations is ongoing and involves not only consideration of historical injustices, but also current disparities and the potential for reconciliation and healing within society.
If the tankies want to support reparations, then fucking good for them.
Once again driving the point home that the communists are consistently on the right side of history, to the point that when non-communists make the same correct points they get accused of being communists.
It is neither our whole thing nor is it wholly our thing. Again, the vote was 123 to 3, with abstentions mostly from imperial core / “always the same map” states. They’re the states that benefited from classical imperialism and are still benefiting from neo-imperialism.
The problem is that there’s a bunch of people who want to hold living people accountable for what was done by the dead.
Settler-colonialism is still ongoing, and the damages from the slave trade still impact those from slave families and the countries they were taken from, and the gains from slavery have been protected. Imagine if one family stole everything from another, causing generational wealth in one family and generational poverty in the other. Should the generations born into wealth that came from theft not pay reparations to the people born into poverty as a direct consequence of said theft? The answer is yes.
So you suggest ignoring how the current status quo is built on the continuous exploitation of racialized and colonized people?
“The status quo is built on the continuous exploitation of people”
*FTFY
I suggest that there’s no meaningful benefit to be gained by looking backward rather than forward. If you want to move to a different paradigm, that’s fine, but condemnation of the past is performative compared to putting forward laws and resolutions to benefit others. The Bill of Human Rights was forward-looking, this condemnation is backward-looking. Emphasize where we want to go and why we want to be there, rather than where we were and the mistakes we made as a society.
Slavery was evil, so was the destruction of indigenous peoples across the world. But we can’t yet change the past. We should reinforce that we will work to eliminate slavery (chattel and indenture), human trafficking, and the abuses related to it. Focus on what we can improve today and how we can improve things.
Okay, as long as we also take away all the historical family wealth that goes back generations too.
But that’s not how it works, is it? Great great great grandad gets to get rich off having slave plantations and his son gets to get rich off of Jim Crow sharecropping, and his great great great grandson gets to inherit that wealth without any complications.
I do not want to be punished for something that other people did in the past before i was born.
But benefiting from it is okay?
This „punishment“ or rather responsibility would not be something that the average wage earning person has to worry about financially whatsoever. There is however a lot of accumulated wealth, that could be used for much better things than the third luxury Yacht in Monaco. So if this extraordinary luxurious wealth can be traced back to exploitation and slavery, and the government would enforce this money to be used for reparations in forms of community centers, museums, research for those who’s ancestors freedom, cultural heritage and often lives were taken, this would not be a punishment. As a German I think there is good reason to individually act responsibly concerning the crimes of e.g. my great grandfather. It is not my crime, but it’s my responsibility to call it such, to do my best in every day live that something like it will not happen again. Calling that a punishment would be unfair compared to the suffering of the victims and their living relatives.
But you benefit from it, and others are punished from that theft. This is a generational problem.
Is your stance in any way informed by a privilege you hold?
Because there are a lot of people today who are still disadvantaged by the historic slave trade, who would meaningfully benefit from reparations.
So when you say “no meaningful benefit”, who exactly are you talking about?
Well, duh. Do you think Mother Nature won’t “hold” new generations “accountable” once ours destroy the planet with fossil fuels?
That’s literally .ml’s whole thing.
Communism involves justice and liberation for all, that does include righting past wrongs.
You sound like your family owned slaves.
Oh yeah, it’s totally a radical Marxist–Leninist thing and not at all something obvious advocated for now by the UN (voted against or abstained from near-exclusively by its minority of perpetrators) and human rights organizations like Human Rights Watch:
If the tankies want to support reparations, then fucking good for them.
Once again driving the point home that the communists are consistently on the right side of history, to the point that when non-communists make the same correct points they get accused of being communists.
Everything I don’t like is tankie.
It is neither our whole thing nor is it wholly our thing. Again, the vote was 123 to 3, with abstentions mostly from imperial core / “always the same map” states. They’re the states that benefited from classical imperialism and are still benefiting from neo-imperialism.
Libs are actually beyond reason sometimes I talked to one the other day who said child slavery in bangladesh was a one time incident