Return of real estate to descendants of Black landowners/freeman : CA

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Racially restrictive housing covenants or red-lining is very different from this CA case. In the D.C. cases, they were prevented from purchasing in nice areas or refused mortgages/rental rates they qualified for. In the CA case, this family owned the land already and it was outright stolen through eminent domain without the proper value assessed or even against the family's will.

I do think incidents like what happened in Tulsa where the black community was literally massacred overnight and their homes/properties/commercial real estate burned down only to be taken over by white investors who swooped in like piranhas could be investigated and paid out.

That happened throughout this country. It happened in Georgia for example. And the white residents just took the land as their own. I am sure many Americans would be surprised if the full extent this history was finally revealed.

Also happened in Miami.

[Anonymous]

They also did it to Asians in the West.

See the Truckee Method and Japanese Internment.

We can keep going down this rabbit hole. Let's just cut a check to everyone for a million dollars at this rate.

[Anonymous]

I want restitution from the descendants of the landlords responsible for the Highland Clearances.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They also did it to Asians in the West.

See the Truckee Method and Japanese Internment.

We can keep going down this rabbit hole. Let's just cut a check to everyone for a million dollars at this rate.

Japanese interned were compensated to some degree in the 1980s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the people comparing current reparations to literal ancient history- when you know better, you do better. Black people getting back their stolen property should not make you feel threatened.

Is 1851 ancient history?

There's never a time limit on grievances.

Most countries in the former communist bloc don't go through restitution for the obvious reason - too much has changed, people are too dispersed, and that's much more recent than the 1860s.

I will say if a family can genuinely prove that direct ancestors had land forcibly taken in various guises and racism was a definite factor, then perhaps the state can determine the modern day equivalent of the land's value at the time of the taking, and divide it among all the known descendants of that family.

I imagine you can see what the problem is. A black land owner 100-150 years ago is likely going to have many descendants today, and the value of the land itself may not be that much.

I'm also sure some of you don't know that a lot of frontier lands in the 18th and 19th centuries had very murky titles and people did buy farmland only to later be kicked off them with no compensation because a bigger bully came along and was able to prove his title, which usually meant being a buddy with the local judge. This happened to Abraham Lincoln's father and was one reason why he left Kentucky for Indiana.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wait until they do the Native Americans.

Real estate in NYC alone is worth prob a trillion dollars. We all gonna pay natives too?

Manhattan was actually bought from the Indians in an agreed upon deal all parties. It was not stolen

[Anonymous]

One big issue in really rural south slaves were often given a bit of property at end of slavery and no deed ever filed or building permits. Properties just handed down and never sold. No title ever changed hands.

Some homes got destroyed in recent years flooding and tornadoes and FEMA wanted to help them rebuild.

But you have to prove you own house. Folks who lived their afraid to file for a deed as this is issue.

Great great grand dad got given plot. Six kids, one kid stayed. He had five kids and one kid stayed and he had six kids a d one stayed. With no will or tithe passing technically all those families can make a claim on property.

And this is a clearly owned property.

My own family farm my dad grew up on he had seven siblings and I have 40 first cousins. If no will or deed transfer and tried to spilt it up we have up to 47 people on new title.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the people comparing current reparations to literal ancient history- when you know better, you do better. Black people getting back their stolen property should not make you feel threatened.

So, what is your plan here? The city or the federal government is going to forcibly expel people who bought homes in certain parts of NW DC (almost none of which have any connection to people who developed the area) and give it to African Americans (almost none of which have any connection to people who lived there long ago)? Based on what? Some vague sense of collective guilt and cosmic justice?

Maybe it could just be leased to African Americans for 6 years or something.

So, the idea there is to make a stupid idea even stupider?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm Irish and would like reparations from the English for what they did to my ancestors

Go forth and conquer. But don’t voluntary come here and judges us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They also did it to Asians in the West.

See the Truckee Method and Japanese Internment.

We can keep going down this rabbit hole. Let's just cut a check to everyone for a million dollars at this rate.

Japanese interned were compensated to some degree in the 1980s.

Not for their land.

Let's all get reparations. Then we can all pay off native Americans who got their lands stolen and were oppressed more than any other group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This legal case gives me hope that in Fort Reno, DC, Chevy Chase, DC and Tulsa (Greenwood) and other communities across the country, there is a possibility of the return of the land and or provide reparations to the descendants of Black homeowners who's land was taken to be given to White community development/White investors: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/bruces-beach-california-return-seized-property-black-couples-descendants/?fbclid=IwAR2VYOYUYbs1MgKUkkxh-Zvelt44hKa8ga7XOsdy3QGsSZ9Timj_EabFJJU

For those who may not know the histories:

Fort Reno -https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/e400085dbcf54a9aa0fc13c6fa541f87

Chevy Chase: https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2018/09/29/racist-history-chevy-chase-home-power-players-like-brett-kavanaugh/
https://www.historicchevychasedc.org/news-archive/the-belmont-syndicate-the-lost-plan-for-a-black-chevy-chase/

DC Racial covenants: https://jmt.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapJournal/index.html?appid=061d0da22587475fb969483653179091

Greenwood (Tulsa, Oklahoma): https://www.greenwoodrising.org/experience
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/tulsa-s-greenwood-neighborhood-found-prosperity-after-1921-massacre-then-n1268455

It's whose, sweetheart, not "who's."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the people comparing current reparations to literal ancient history- when you know better, you do better. Black people getting back their stolen property should not make you feel threatened.

Is 1851 ancient history?

There's never a time limit on grievances.

Most countries in the former communist bloc don't go through restitution for the obvious reason - too much has changed, people are too dispersed, and that's much more recent than the 1860s.

I will say if a family can genuinely prove that direct ancestors had land forcibly taken in various guises and racism was a definite factor, then perhaps the state can determine the modern day equivalent of the land's value at the time of the taking, and divide it among all the known descendants of that family.

I imagine you can see what the problem is. A black land owner 100-150 years ago is likely going to have many descendants today, and the value of the land itself may not be that much.

I'm also sure some of you don't know that a lot of frontier lands in the 18th and 19th centuries had very murky titles and people did buy farmland only to later be kicked off them with no compensation because a bigger bully came along and was able to prove his title, which usually meant being a buddy with the local judge. This happened to Abraham Lincoln's father and was one reason why he left Kentucky for Indiana.

So racism has to be shown? Economic exploitation doesn't cut it alone?

Just get on with your lives and stop thinking that being clever about ways to demand stuff from others is going to help you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm Irish and would like reparations from the English for what they did to my ancestors

So go get it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To the people comparing current reparations to literal ancient history- when you know better, you do better. Black people getting back their stolen property should not make you feel threatened.

Yes let’s keep making special exceptions just for blacks. The victimization is never going to end.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the people comparing current reparations to literal ancient history- when you know better, you do better. Black people getting back their stolen property should not make you feel threatened.

Is 1851 ancient history?

There's never a time limit on grievances.

Most countries in the former communist bloc don't go through restitution for the obvious reason - too much has changed, people are too dispersed, and that's much more recent than the 1860s.

I will say if a family can genuinely prove that direct ancestors had land forcibly taken in various guises and racism was a definite factor, then perhaps the state can determine the modern day equivalent of the land's value at the time of the taking, and divide it among all the known descendants of that family.

I imagine you can see what the problem is. A black land owner 100-150 years ago is likely going to have many descendants today, and the value of the land itself may not be that much.

I'm also sure some of you don't know that a lot of frontier lands in the 18th and 19th centuries had very murky titles and people did buy farmland only to later be kicked off them with no compensation because a bigger bully came along and was able to prove his title, which usually meant being a buddy with the local judge. This happened to Abraham Lincoln's father and was one reason why he left Kentucky for Indiana.

So racism has to be shown? Economic exploitation doesn't cut it alone?

Just get on with your lives and stop thinking that being clever about ways to demand stuff from others is going to help you.

This.