272 Slaves Were Sold to Save Georgetown. What Does It Owe Their Descendants?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again there are studies that show* that white people (doesn't matter if you are first generation, if you are poor, or if your family never owned slaves) still benefit from white supremacy and slavery. Any potential scholarships or settlement would be a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of things.

For instance White people with HS diplomas get more callbacks for jobs then blacks with Bachelor's. You can't tell me it's because of qualifications.

*Links are in this thread above

Get out of your ivory tower (or home office in Bethesda) and out to coal country in WV or KY and perhaps you will see how nonsensical this conclusion is.

Don't live in an ivory tower or Bethesda and I'm not suggesting there is no such thing as poor white people. Below is an excellent on explaining white privilege to poor whites.

http://occupywallstreet.net/story/explaining-white-privilege-broke-white-person

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again there are studies that show* that white people (doesn't matter if you are first generation, if you are poor, or if your family never owned slaves) still benefit from white supremacy and slavery. Any potential scholarships or settlement would be a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of things.

For instance White people with HS diplomas get more callbacks for jobs then blacks with Bachelor's. You can't tell me it's because of qualifications.*Links are in this thread above

It might be due to a number of factors. I can tell you that most companies want to have a diverse workforce. However, some of the names that parents are giving to their children, particularly more unusual and frankly, weird ones, may have an adverse effect on their kids' future employment prospects. Right or wrong, a potential employer might assume certain things based on an applicant's name about his/her SES status, upbringing, education quality, work attitude, social skills, etc. and may screen them out in public facing positions. An African-American child named Elizabeth, Sarah or Martin is going to get more chances than Shaqeena, LaTawanda or D'shaqan.

Right or wrong??? How about just plain wrong. A black person named LaTawanda with a bachelor's degree should get a job over a white boy or girl named Martin or Sarah with just a HS diploma because LaTawanda is more qualified. No need to write a paragraph trying to justify it.

depends on what job

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again there are studies that show* that white people (doesn't matter if you are first generation, if you are poor, or if your family never owned slaves) still benefit from white supremacy and slavery. Any potential scholarships or settlement would be a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of things.

For instance White people with HS diplomas get more callbacks for jobs then blacks with Bachelor's. You can't tell me it's because of qualifications.*Links are in this thread above

It might be due to a number of factors. I can tell you that most companies want to have a diverse workforce. However, some of the names that parents are giving to their children, particularly more unusual and frankly, weird ones, may have an adverse effect on their kids' future employment prospects. Right or wrong, a potential employer might assume certain things based on an applicant's name about his/her SES status, upbringing, education quality, work attitude, social skills, etc. and may screen them out in public facing positions. An African-American child named Elizabeth, Sarah or Martin is going to get more chances than Shaqeena, LaTawanda or D'shaqan.

Right or wrong??? How about just plain wrong. A black person named LaTawanda with a bachelor's degree should get a job over a white boy or girl named Martin or Sarah with just a HS diploma because LaTawanda is more qualified. No need to write a paragraph trying to justify it.

depends on what job

Of course you're trying to rationalize racism. How about you pretend it's an entry level office job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know that specific reparations for historical injustices is the best way forward. Might it not be better to ensure that every citizen is afforded a good education, access to medical care, social services, etc?

The Japanese, the Jews (of Germany), and Native Americans received reparations. It seems as if AAs have been blatantly left out of the mix when the entire world benefited from slavery. I don't think a check for every AA is even feasible but in this case scholarships from the institution that sold your ancestors to save themselves is the least they can do.

What raparations do you think native Americans have received? The US government has famously broken every single treaty. There is litigation over Indian money that Interior has been fighting for literally decades.

Holy cow you are ignorant.

You can't spell.

U.S. finalizes $3.4 billion settlement with American Indians

http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/26/politics/american-indian-settlment/

That's not reparations. That's the distribution of a trust held by the government. Nice try though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again there are studies that show* that white people (doesn't matter if you are first generation, if you are poor, or if your family never owned slaves) still benefit from white supremacy and slavery. Any potential scholarships or settlement would be a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of things.

For instance White people with HS diplomas get more callbacks for jobs then blacks with Bachelor's. You can't tell me it's because of qualifications.*Links are in this thread above

It might be due to a number of factors. I can tell you that most companies want to have a diverse workforce. However, some of the names that parents are giving to their children, particularly more unusual and frankly, weird ones, may have an adverse effect on their kids' future employment prospects. Right or wrong, a potential employer might assume certain things based on an applicant's name about his/her SES status, upbringing, education quality, work attitude, social skills, etc. and may screen them out in public facing positions. An African-American child named Elizabeth, Sarah or Martin is going to get more chances than Shaqeena, LaTawanda or D'shaqan.

Right or wrong??? How about just plain wrong. A black person named LaTawanda with a bachelor's degree should get a job over a white boy or girl named Martin or Sarah with just a HS diploma because LaTawanda is more qualified. No need to write a paragraph trying to justify it.

depends on what job

Of course you're trying to rationalize racism. How about you pretend it's an entry level office job.

That judge T may not be based on qualifications, but ticks based on bias towards more common names. That's not about slavery, but prejuduces against subgroups of AAs who choose such names. You will have similar prejudices against white Brandis, Hispanic children named Jesus, and anyone named Mohammad. Yes, biased, but no, not based on whether your ancestors were slaves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why after over a century should people living today receive money, scholarships or other compensation because people they don't know, who died long before they were born, had something horrible happen to them? I'm a first generation American, and am the descendant of impoverished farmhands, maids, and cooks. I am also the descendant of a few doctors and teachers. My mother grew up without a father after her dad died at the hands of local criminals. A large portion of my family was prohibited from buying land, from voting, from participating in politics, and from exercising other basic rights. I can't imagine why I would be entitled to other people's money. I'm white, and my family is wealthy now. Should I be turning to someone for reparations?

This country is a mixing bowl. There are so many more people than when the atrocities when slavery, and many of us were dealing with our home country's issues, often horrible as well.

This argument could equally apply to the descendants of those who died in the holocaust, who are continuing to seek return of lost possessions (art, gold, bank accounts) of relatives many of them never knew for actions committed over 3 generations and 70 years or more ago. I suppose your answer in those cases would probably be different though.

Actually, my response is exactly the same. But thanks so much for assuming I'm a racist because,well, anyone who doesn't agree with you must be. I just understand that the us government, and most us institutions, are funded and otherwise supported by people from many backgrounds. AAs are far from the only group to have suffered atrocities, unfortunately. Trying to unwind atrocities from generations past seems both unproductive and divisive. Remember, you are talking about people who died well before anyone alive today was born.

I am part of the first generation in my family to have financial security, and I am, to be frank, now wealthy. But that's not how I grew up. And I can't imagine my parents ever wasting the time to look backward to figure out who owed them due to significant wrongs that befell their families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Again there are studies that show* that white people (doesn't matter if you are first generation, if you are poor, or if your family never owned slaves) still benefit from white supremacy and slavery. Any potential scholarships or settlement would be a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of things.

For instance White people with HS diplomas get more callbacks for jobs then blacks with Bachelor's. You can't tell me it's because of qualifications.

*Links are in this thread above

I've seen the studies about Elizabeth vs Shaniqua. But what about Bobbie Sue vs Shaniqua? Or Buddy vs DeAndre?

I know the studies say they think racism is the sole cause, but the white names listed in the studies I've seen are all middle class sorts of names.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ask not what your country can do for you buy what you can do for your country

This. +10000

+1

[Anonymous]

If they were slaves in DC, who is to say that their lives didn't benefit from being sold? Why is the assumption that there descendents are worse off than any other slaves?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why after over a century should people living today receive money, scholarships or other compensation because people they don't know, who died long before they were born, had something horrible happen to them? I'm a first generation American, and am the descendant of impoverished farmhands, maids, and cooks. I am also the descendant of a few doctors and teachers. My mother grew up without a father after her dad died at the hands of local criminals. A large portion of my family was prohibited from buying land, from voting, from participating in politics, and from exercising other basic rights. I can't imagine why I would be entitled to other people's money. I'm white, and my family is wealthy now. Should I be turning to someone for reparations?

This country is a mixing bowl. There are so many more people than when the atrocities when slavery, and many of us were dealing with our home country's issues, often horrible as well.

This argument could equally apply to the descendants of those who died in the holocaust, who are continuing to seek return of lost possessions (art, gold, bank accounts) of relatives many of them never knew for actions committed over 3 generations and 70 years or more ago. I suppose your answer in those cases would probably be different though.

Actually, my response is exactly the same. But thanks so much for assuming I'm a racist because,well, anyone who doesn't agree with you must be. I just understand that the us government, and most us institutions, are funded and otherwise supported by people from many backgrounds. AAs are far from the only group to have suffered atrocities, unfortunately. Trying to unwind atrocities from generations past seems both unproductive and divisive. Remember, you are talking about people who died well before anyone alive today was born.

I am part of the first generation in my family to have financial security, and I am, to be frank, now wealthy. But that's not how I grew up. And I can't imagine my parents ever wasting the time to look backward to figure out who owed them due to significant wrongs that befell their families.

I'd say unless you are one of original 272, you don't get anything. Are you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't know that specific reparations for historical injustices is the best way forward. Might it not be better to ensure that every citizen is afforded a good education, access to medical care, social services, etc?

The Japanese, the Jews (of Germany), and Native Americans received reparations. It seems as if AAs have been blatantly left out of the mix when the entire world benefited from slavery. I don't think a check for every AA is even feasible but in this case scholarships from the institution that sold your ancestors to save themselves is the least they can do.

These were groups of people.dicriminated against by the actions of a country. Georgetown is not a nation.

[Anonymous]

I love that this is happening to the snootiest schools in the North. All that liberalism goes right out the window when it's you that has to pay up.

[Anonymous]

I think the African slave seller-they were black folks selling black folks-should be offering any reparations. No white man rounded up the Africans. It was their own who sold them in Africa to buyers.

Time to stop crying about centuries old wrongs. Time to move on! If not, I want what's mine in reparations, too! Hell, everyone deserves reparations especially the Irish!

[Anonymous]

After we pay reparations to aborted babies.. They were actually killed so they have a greater grievance.

[Anonymous]

First, the article is beautifully written and so painful it made me cry. Especially the part that talked about slaves who were prohibited from learning to read or write not leaving marks as they moved through this life. The church's part in the slave market while trying to preserve religious indoctrination is mind-boggling and truly evil. I would urge you all to read the article.

If Georgetwon offers anything it should be a place on campus to reflect and discuss this part of history. Another fitting tribute might be to support students of color generally.