- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
Nobody currently alive was a slave in the United States.
We actually ended it here at the cost of 600k lives on both sides. If anyone deserves reparations it would be the families of the soldiers that died settling that issue.
(Even though slavery was a convenient scapegoat for that war, it was really about other issues)
It's not fair! Boo-hoo.
Let's definitely give some fiat to black old women with mortgages who were slaves.
Oh, they already died?
Never mind.
One total disaster of a POTUS is more than enough reparation for people who descended from ancestors 150 years ago who were slaves.
(rhetorical questions)
It's a demand that one group of people pay money to a second group of people because of something a third group of people did hundreds of years earlier to a fourth group of people.
To that formulation I would add: "Because they look kinda like those people hundreds of years ago."
I trust the militant injustice of the entire idea - not to mention its flat-out lunacy - is clear to everybody here.
Pick your analogy:
- Maybe reparations should be paid to the Irish for the persecution they had to go through on immigration to America, and any of the Polish or the Yugoslavian or the Chinese or the French or the Amish or the Italian immigrants who were in any way discriminated against when they hit Ellis Island;
- Speaking of Italians, maybe they should pay reparations to Christians for that whole coliseums-and-lions thing umpty centuries ago, and a team of lawyers should be hired to figure out what the hell to do with all of the Italian Christians;
- Maybe the Germans should pay reparations to the Italians for that whole "sacking Rome" thing that happened a few years later;
- Maybe people who bear a superficial resemblance to descriptions of Attila the Hun should pay reparations to anyone who looks vaguely Eastern European because, well, they look like him damnit!
- Maybe slim, beautiful women should pay reparations to fat and/or unattractive ones for the ages and ages of oppressive scamming on the available pool of men;
- Maybe muscular, macho jocks should pay reparations to pudgy and/or wimpy geeks for the ages and ages of oppressive scamming on the available pool of women;
- Maybe people who've made lots of money should pay reparations to people who haven't, because...
Ah, I see where this is going now.
Beneath the unintentional comedy that any closer look at the "reparations" concept brings up, there is a deadly-serious attack on human rights happening.
It's a scam of course. But beneath the scam is a festering evil. In a word - an ironic word - that evil is: A resuscitated slavery.
Below is a letter to the editor I wrote over a decade ago in response to a call for revising history, giving disproportionate credit to the slaves used to build the Capitol, and giving credence to the notion that the nation was built on the backs of slaves (a theory with which AR *must* have vehemently disagreed...)
---
To The Editor:
I found myself in agreement with Dan Thomasson's July Fourth editorial in which he suggests giving credit to those who struggled and suffered in silence to give us a nation.
It is far past time to give appropriate credit to those who struggled and suffered in silence from the first shots of the War of Independence to the 20th century, and without whose help our nation would never have been born.
Yes, we must give acknowledgement to those whose efforts allowed our nation to occupy a continent, to make our version of democracy known throughout the world. We should give humble thanks to those who worked, fought and died beside white men, with courage, but without complaint, and without liberty.
When, oh when will we build a monument to the horse in Washington? For the horse did every bit as much to give us the world we have today as did the slave population (both white and black.)
While Mr. Thomasson suggests we should revise history to suit his views, is he equally willing to give appropriate voice to those European Americans who sold themselves into slavery just to get here?
Is he content with the portrayal of such movies as The Patriot, which, while otherwise perhaps accurately depicting the war, completely distorts the relationship of the races during that period?
It has become a sport these days to rewrite history to give credit where credit is not due, to revise events so that those who are revered seem to be in agreement with modern dogma, and those who are portrayed villanously are at odds with modern dogma, as if the way liberals think today is the way good men have thought throughout history.
Mr. Thomasson's editorial makes it appear as if those 400 slaves volunteered their efforts, in selfless dedication to get the capitol built, while the truth of the matter is that those slaves put as much selfless devotion into their efforts as did the horses which also made the capitol possible. But it doesn't make guilty white liberals feel so good, put that way.
---
Enough said. No reparations.
Taken from Dineash D'souza's article on the Free Republic http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/6...