Why is ante bellum racist?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one should atone for someone else’s crime. We should learn from the past, but not dwell on it. Instead we should focus on the present and future. How should we as individuals, as a society, and in electing our governments, SLTT and Federal, address inherent bias and socio-economic disadvantage going forward? It is not a “they” problem, it is a “we” problem. I argue that a “hand up” is better than a “hand out”. What philosophy do you believe in? Revenge? Reparations? Unjustified privilege for any group? Keeping things the same because it’s easy and comfortable?

How do you address things like inherent bias if you believe in not dwelling on the past?

People don’t need to atone for someone else’s crime, but trying to right the wrongs that allow some of us to benefit, today, from prior generations’ crimes is work we should all be doing. There are people who continue to benefit from institutional racism. Before they can even begin to address it, they have to recognize that institutional racism exists. We still have lawmakers, and a sizable portion of white citizens who deny that there is institutional racism.

“A ‘hand up’ is better than a ‘handout’” is a nice slogan, but what does it mean? What sorts of concrete, real world policies illustrate the difference between the two to you?

One problem is that the benefits of institutional racism are distributed so unevenly while the approaches to combating institutional racism don't seem to be very nuanced in accounting for those disparate benefits. Yes, you can make the case that poor white people enjoy "white privilege," but the poor white person's lived experience is that their white privilege is swamped by the deficits caused by poverty. Subjecting the poor white person to the same remedial approaches one uses for rich white people simply isn't equitable.

Which remedial approaches?

Good question. What remedies are anti-racists proposing to address institutional racism?

Here’s a thing that has actually been done, and conservatives lost their forking shirts over it, calling it pork, a handout, unfair, wasteful and all sorts of other names, too. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/03/08/reparations-black-farmers-stimulus/

That’s but one small aspect of institutional racism and this one thing won’t fix it, but it’s something.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Here’s a thing that has actually been done, and conservatives lost their forking shirts over it, calling it pork, a handout, unfair, wasteful and all sorts of other names, too. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/03/08/reparations-black-farmers-stimulus/

That’s but one small aspect of institutional racism and this one thing won’t fix it, but it’s something.

Yeah, well, conservatives are silly and unserious people. That said, I doubt the folks on the Left will regard this as doing much good either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Here’s a thing that has actually been done, and conservatives lost their forking shirts over it, calling it pork, a handout, unfair, wasteful and all sorts of other names, too. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/03/08/reparations-black-farmers-stimulus/

That’s but one small aspect of institutional racism and this one thing won’t fix it, but it’s something.

Yeah, well, conservatives are silly and unserious people. That said, I doubt the folks on the Left will regard this as doing much good either.

Maybe if you show some real hustle, you can have those goalposts moved by the next time I prove you wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one should atone for someone else’s crime. We should learn from the past, but not dwell on it. Instead we should focus on the present and future. How should we as individuals, as a society, and in electing our governments, SLTT and Federal, address inherent bias and socio-economic disadvantage going forward? It is not a “they” problem, it is a “we” problem. I argue that a “hand up” is better than a “hand out”. What philosophy do you believe in? Revenge? Reparations? Unjustified privilege for any group? Keeping things the same because it’s easy and comfortable?

How do you address things like inherent bias if you believe in not dwelling on the past?

People don’t need to atone for someone else’s crime, but trying to right the wrongs that allow some of us to benefit, today, from prior generations’ crimes is work we should all be doing. There are people who continue to benefit from institutional racism. Before they can even begin to address it, they have to recognize that institutional racism exists. We still have lawmakers, and a sizable portion of white citizens who deny that there is institutional racism.

“A ‘hand up’ is better than a ‘handout’” is a nice slogan, but what does it mean? What sorts of concrete, real world policies illustrate the difference between the two to you?

One problem is that the benefits of institutional racism are distributed so unevenly while the approaches to combating institutional racism don't seem to be very nuanced in accounting for those disparate benefits. Yes, you can make the case that poor white people enjoy "white privilege," but the poor white person's lived experience is that their white privilege is swamped by the deficits caused by poverty. Subjecting the poor white person to the same remedial approaches one uses for rich white people simply isn't equitable.

Which remedial approaches?

Good question. What remedies are anti-racists proposing to address institutional racism?

Perhaps the PP who stated that "remedial approaches simply isn't equitable" can share what he/she had in mind when he/she wrote that.

I think it's like an Underpants Gnome situation.

1. Be aware of white privilege.
2. ???
3. End structural racism.

Hilarious.

And, yes, PP probably hasn't actually thought about it - just throwing words out to see what sticks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Here’s a thing that has actually been done, and conservatives lost their forking shirts over it, calling it pork, a handout, unfair, wasteful and all sorts of other names, too. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/03/08/reparations-black-farmers-stimulus/

That’s but one small aspect of institutional racism and this one thing won’t fix it, but it’s something.

Yeah, well, conservatives are silly and unserious people. That said, I doubt the folks on the Left will regard this as doing much good either.

Maybe if you show some real hustle, you can have those goalposts moved by the next time I prove you wrong.

DP. Sorry, you win the technical point but lose points for scope and effectiveness. We've been hearing demands for massive, immediate change to the entire social system of the United States and that this is the only way that the moral worth of the entire American project can be salvaged. Your first step was to give a few dollars to a handful of poor black farmers who were actually lucky enough to keep their tiny scraps of land. You didn't even think you needed to name a second step. How this rights centuries of wrongs remains a mystery to everyone but yourself. But congratulations on your victory anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Here’s a thing that has actually been done, and conservatives lost their forking shirts over it, calling it pork, a handout, unfair, wasteful and all sorts of other names, too. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/03/08/reparations-black-farmers-stimulus/

That’s but one small aspect of institutional racism and this one thing won’t fix it, but it’s something.

Yeah, well, conservatives are silly and unserious people. That said, I doubt the folks on the Left will regard this as doing much good either.

Maybe if you show some real hustle, you can have those goalposts moved by the next time I prove you wrong.

DP. Sorry, you win the technical point but lose points for scope and effectiveness. We've been hearing demands for massive, immediate change to the entire social system of the United States and that this is the only way that the moral worth of the entire American project can be salvaged. Your first step was to give a few dollars to a handful of poor black farmers who were actually lucky enough to keep their tiny scraps of land. You didn't even think you needed to name a second step. How this rights centuries of wrongs remains a mystery to everyone but yourself. But congratulations on your victory anyway.

“A few dollars” is not the way it was spoken about by conservatives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Here’s a thing that has actually been done, and conservatives lost their forking shirts over it, calling it pork, a handout, unfair, wasteful and all sorts of other names, too. https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/03/08/reparations-black-farmers-stimulus/

That’s but one small aspect of institutional racism and this one thing won’t fix it, but it’s something.

Yeah, well, conservatives are silly and unserious people. That said, I doubt the folks on the Left will regard this as doing much good either.

Maybe if you show some real hustle, you can have those goalposts moved by the next time I prove you wrong.

DP. Sorry, you win the technical point but lose points for scope and effectiveness. We've been hearing demands for massive, immediate change to the entire social system of the United States and that this is the only way that the moral worth of the entire American project can be salvaged. Your first step was to give a few dollars to a handful of poor black farmers who were actually lucky enough to keep their tiny scraps of land. You didn't even think you needed to name a second step. How this rights centuries of wrongs remains a mystery to everyone but yourself. But congratulations on your victory anyway.

“A few dollars” is not the way it was spoken about by conservatives.

Who cares? They complain about every liberal "handout" no matter how small it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The south has suffered grievously from the institution of slavery. It was a terrible error.

And it also profited greatly.

All by choice.

As did the North with their factories that needed cotton.

Yes, we ALL owe much to the enslaved people who toiled and died for our country.

Fortunately, the North didn't outlaw abolitionism.

Wealthy merchants from Northern states facilitated the trans Atlantic slave trade and imported slaves directly to the North, the South, and the Caribbean islands (google triangular trade). The North still imported slaves to the South and elsewhere after abolition efforts had begun in the North. Without the direct, enthusiastic participation of Northern states and Northern merchants in the buying and selling of humans, before the Revolutionary war and for decades after, the American colonies would not have been profitable. The focus on the Southern plantations is just a convenient distraction from how widespread and systemic slavery was. The entire economy relied on it.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/a-northern-family-confronts-its-slaveholding-past-88307/

[Anonymous]

Don’t forget the children. Children labored, too. There were no wage and labor laws protecting the children, women, or AAs.

[Anonymous]

There is no history without the history of exploitation of one group by another. None. It still happens today around the world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is no history without the history of exploitation of one group by another. None. It still happens today around the world.

So your answer is we should celebrate exploitation with fancy dress balls?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no history without the history of exploitation of one group by another. None. It still happens today around the world.

So your answer is we should celebrate exploitation with fancy dress balls?

The answer is that cancelling the balls is not an answer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The south has suffered grievously from the institution of slavery. It was a terrible error.

And it also profited greatly.

All by choice.

As did the North with their factories that needed cotton.

Yes, we ALL owe much to the enslaved people who toiled and died for our country.

Fortunately, the North didn't outlaw abolitionism.

Wealthy merchants from Northern states facilitated the trans Atlantic slave trade and imported slaves directly to the North, the South, and the Caribbean islands (google triangular trade). The North still imported slaves to the South and elsewhere after abolition efforts had begun in the North. Without the direct, enthusiastic participation of Northern states and Northern merchants in the buying and selling of humans, before the Revolutionary war and for decades after, the American colonies would not have been profitable. The focus on the Southern plantations is just a convenient distraction from how widespread and systemic slavery was. The entire economy relied on it.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/a-northern-family-confronts-its-slaveholding-past-88307/

Yes, many people across our country - and our economy - profited from enslaving other human beings.

Fortunately, some people in the North were able to look past the money, recognize this was wrong, and force the change.

But the harm was done and continued in other ways. We should do our best today to right our wrongs.

[Anonymous]

I take it that nuance isn't really your thing

DP. Nor is it yours. Nor do you seem aware that HBO pulled Gone with the Wind for it's racism until people complained and they put it back with contextual explainers for how it ignores the horrors of slavery. Which is a fine solution to me, but if that works, why can't I dress like Scarlet O'Hara at a party without endorsing either greed or racism?

Well, you can, but why would you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I take it that nuance isn't really your thing

DP. Nor is it yours. Nor do you seem aware that HBO pulled Gone with the Wind for it's racism until people complained and they put it back with contextual explainers for how it ignores the horrors of slavery. Which is a fine solution to me, but if that works, why can't I dress like Scarlet O'Hara at a party without endorsing either greed or racism?

Well, you can, but why would you?

Thank you for your permission to exercise my free will. Please provide photos of your entire wardrobe and let me ask you why you want to wear those things. If I don't like your choices, I will call you names.