1. The most important question: who will receive payments? This is
divided into many sub-questions, but we'll take them one at a time. So for
starters, how will you determine whether or not someone is "black"? Will
there be a commitee, or an agency made (or will an existing one be used?).
If there are to be payments, which I?m not sure I entirely agree with, it
would make sense to do it in the form of a tax reduction. That way, the
government isn?t directly handing out money and people are encouraged to
work to attain the benefit. To determine the blackness of a person, you
could simply look at them. Black is not a race. So in the cases of
Americans who are black, if there is any doubt some type of government
affidavit of the parents that requested their racial classification ie.
Census could be used.
2. In the case where it cannot easily be determined by skin color
alone, will family geneology be used? (Relatedly, one would then have to apply
question #1 to one's ancestors.) If so, what percentage of a person's
lineage would need to be "black" in order for them to qualify for payments?
1/2? 1/8? 1/32? And if they were only a percentage "black", would they only
receive partial reparation payments?
Again, as Americans we are required to classify ourselves for whatever
purpose. I would expect that any historic document that support the
classification of black/Negro/African American could be used. Regarding the
percentages, since we do not consider someone half black if you can
document blackness in your ancestry you should receive the same benefit.
3. Will those who are determined to be "black" also be required to
pay the taxes necessary to fund such reparations, in effect paying
reparations to themselves? If they are exempted in any way, then how
"black" would someone need to be to qualify for exemption?
I suggested a tax break for blacks so in that case no. Any documented
proof of blackness mentioned before.
4. If a "white" could prove through family records that none of their
direct ancestors ever owned slaves would he be exempt from paying?
Individual white people are not being asked to directly pay individual
black people. This is an issue with the government. As a resident of the US,
your tax dollars are spent on various programs that you may individually not
support. If it bothers you that blacks may receive some of your tax
dollars, then there are probably many more issues that you have with the
government.
These issues are not related to reparation, more closeley related to how
the government works. Are you bothered by the money being payed to native
Americans, you probably never stole any land either, but your tax dollars
pay that?
5. If a "white" moved here just last year, would he be required to pay?
Again, it is the government that should pay. To directly answer the
question yes. Any taxpayer living in America should understand that when
America was first begun it?s economy was based largely on free labor. This
benefit allowed America to accumulate great wealth, to the point where we
consider ourselves the wealthiest nation in the world.
Therefore once you become a citizen you receive the benefits.
6. If a "black" moved here just last year, would they be eligible for
reparation payments?
I would expect there to be a cutoff and a requirement for citizenship by
a certain date. If you just moved here, it is reasonable to assume that your
ancestors were not slaves here in America. If this person could prove
otherwise, maybe it would make sense.
If a "white" could prove that at least one of his ancestors were
slaves, would he be eligible to receive reparations?
Yes. I would encourage this because it moves toward documenting a common
ancestry between blacks and whites in America and it would shed a light on
the illusion of racism. The fact is neither black nor white is a race. Here
in America as you pointed out in the question, many whites DO have black
ancestors, and may blacks have white ancestors. This is race mixture is a
reality, which casts a suspicious light on the whole idea of race and the
perpuation of racism.
8. If it could be proven through family records that none of a
"black's" ancestors had been slaves, would he still be eligible for reparation
payments?
I suggest that if a person is a black American and their ancestors
didn?t voluntarily immigrate as many others did, there is no reason to try and
disprove slave ancestry. Another reason is that it penalizes blacks for not
being able to find records of their ancestry which is the norm since blacks
were treated as property. This is another grave side effect of slavery.
Most blacks are unable to trace their ancestry since they were named and
renamed, their families were split and no accurate records were kept on their
behalf.
9. Since we each have many "ancestors", how do we deal with different
ancestors having different fates? For example, if a "black" man had both a
slave and a slave owner as his ancestor, should he get reparations? What if
only one of any of his 126 ancestors from the last six generations were a
slave: would he still be eligible?
You make an assumption into the accuracy of record-keeping and the
ability of blacks to trace ancestry that far. From a white persons? perspective
this is reasonable since many white people are able to trace their genealogy
back to whatever country they originated from. This is not the case with blacks.
This is also one of the issues that the reparation discussion will
hopefully do, educate other Americans about the effects of slavery on the
American population.
10. Will payments take into account the total wealth and/or income of
the receiver? Or, to put it in terms that others have put it, will Oprah
Winfery and Michael Jordan be eligible to receive reparation payments?
What about black politicians, people who already have the ability to create
laws that all citizens of all colors must follow under the threat of
incarceration?
If Oprah and Mike don?t have a problem receiving reparations then they
should be able to get them. The same is true for a person with white skin
and black ancestors. If a policy was made, it is not being made based on
economics status, it is being based on belonging to a loosely defined
group.
11. Will "whites" below the poverty line be required to pay (even if
they are paying to Oprah and Jordan, and "black" politicians?)
Since my suggestion is based on taxes, they would be required to
continue to pay taxes according to the rate prescribed by the government.
12. And for the final question: will payments be something that will
continue indefinitely, or that will be made either once or for a limited
period of time? And if the latter, would getting reparation payments
exactly the way that you want them close out this issue forever, or are there
conditions under which additional future payments might be needed (and if
so, what are those conditions)?
I don?t necessarily think this is about money. Many anti-reparations
people are bothered at the implication of the payments. The real issue is the
racial divide in America. It would be convenient if we could simply pay the
problem away like we have tried with so many other problems, but the issue
is deeper than that. This is the only place in the world where it should be
OK to simply call our citizens Americans without regard to the illusion of
race. The government has not been able to formally apologize for a policy
that has done much damage to a specific group and the relations between
Americans as a whole. There are people, who like yourself, would rather
dissect the lack of a good solution, without recognizing a problem exists.
The statement I never owned slaves is typical of this mentality. You
probably never locked up Japanese people in camps either, but they got
paid. You probably never personally stole land from native Americans and they
got paid. You may or may not support some of our foreign policy decisions and
we pay for that all the time. My point is there seems to be an anti-black
sentiment that underlies the ? I never owned?..? attitude. I would expect
that if a group of people did a whole lot of free work that helped make my
country what it is, there would be a sense of gratitude and an affinity for
that group. That is not the case. Instead history does not even reflect the
real contributions that not just blacks have made but other non-white
groups.
| 