Can someone explain this to me? California passes historic slavery reparations bill yet there were never any slaves in CA

My guess is that they are paying for the unlevel playing field that has existed since slaves were brought to this Country.

Liberals, please don't leave California. That's all we ask of you.

It would seem to me that it matters not where slavery took place but who has descended from people who were enslaved and on that basis it makes sense. When people are wrongfully imprisoned and their convictions overturned aren’t they always compensated? Do you think people who are wrongfully imprisoned should only receive freedom as compensation?

I lived in CA for over 7 years. They LOOOVVVEEE spending money that they don't have. Maybe they'll raise the gas tax (again).

White people have been enslaved throughout history. Can I get in on this?

old guy 74 wrote:

My guess is that they are paying for the unlevel playing field that has existed since slaves were brought to this Country.

Can't wait until they pay reparations for agricultural workers.

Apparently there was.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_slavery_in_California#:~:text=Slavery%20did%20persist%20in%20California,in%20the%20favor%20of%20emancipation

.

I love threads like this. They explain how a US President is able to run on a platform that nakedly appeals to racial prejudice - unlike any other leader in the Western world. "White grievance" runs strong within you.

Whodunit wrote:

Apparently there was.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_slavery_in_California#:~:text=Slavery%20did%20persist%20in%20California,in%20the%20favor%20of%20emancipation

.

Pre statehood, but yes apparently so. And not all were Blacks. So what about the Mexicans?

Well, you may know more about white people being enslaved than me. But there was this thing called the Atlantic Slave Trade, you have heard about it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade

Obviously, other nations and empires used slaves of various 'races'. But in the US specifically it was indigenous peoples and Africans. If you believe in Justice for all, it should be pretty obvious that would be morally right to attempt to compensate those that have descended from these people in some way. It was obvious enough even at the time of abolishing slavery in the US that former slaves were being given land. Surely with your 2020 brain these things should make sense.

CA needs to pay reparations to the other 49 states for all the garbage that Hollyweird has spewed out over the years.

Armstronglivs wrote:

I love threads like this. They explain how a US President is able to run on a platform that nakedly appeals to racial prejudice - unlike any other leader in the Western world. "White grievance" runs strong within you.

Wow, did Trump sleep with your wife, sister and/or Mom? Is he the cause of all the bad things in your little world?

California has a massive multi-ethnic population. Are we back to the three-fifths compromise for how do we decide who is a payer and who is a receiver? I'm sure everybody will be honest about self-reporting their ethnic make-up. I'm too lazy to try to link to the "If gender is fluid, then is race fluid?" thread. I'm sure there is a simple workable solution to these issues that our union-bought state legislators can figure out, and it won't require more than several thousand new unionized state employees to administer.

Like all arguments for reparations, this one will fall flat on its face. Will they include descendants of indigenous people that were enslaved by Spanish settlers (and will they solicit money from Spain for this?). Will they solicit money from Mexico, who allowed slavery in California until 1829? Quite honestly, California as a US entity only loosely allowed slavery from 1848-1850 when it officially entered the union as a free state. Asian immigrants (it's worth noting that Asian Americans have the highest median household incomes among all races in California, not whites) and recent immigrants from Mexico, central and south America all faced as much adversity as faced black descendants of slavery (that really never took hold in California).

The plight of Asians is often overlooked. The early immigrants were basically slaves, the ones that came after wars in southeast Asia were fairly educated but broke and faced an uphill battle. They faced lyching, exploitation, exclusion acts, segregation in schools, employment discrimination, imprisonment in concentration camps, etc. (all after slavery was ended). And now they are the top earning racial demographic in California.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_immigration_to_the_United_States

do I pay or do I collect wrote:

California has a massive multi-ethnic population. Are we back to the three-fifths compromise for how do we decide who is a payer and who is a receiver? I'm sure everybody will be honest about self-reporting their ethnic make-up. I'm too lazy to try to link to the "If gender is fluid, then is race fluid?" thread. I'm sure there is a simple workable solution to these issues that our union-bought state legislators can figure out, and it won't require more than several thousand new unionized state employees to administer.

A big +1 to this. This is gonna be a mad scam.

No sh!t, the idea is absolutely unworkable. Millions of people of every race have immigrated to the US since the end of slavery who had absolutely nothing to do with it. Basic justice requires that these people not have to pay reparations. These people have intermarried with people who were here and may or may not have had something to do with it.

Similarly, descendants of slaves have intermarried with every race since the end of slavery resulting in millions of people whose ancestors were partially slaves, partially slave owners, partially people who were here but not slave owners and/or partially people who were not even here until after slavery. Who decides who pays and in what percentages? It will take a Nazi type inquiry into everyone's racial background to determine, unimaginably stirring up racial tension. Whatever happened to the melting pot? This idea is completely unAmerican.

ksjdfksjdfk wrote:

Well, you may know more about white people being enslaved than me. But there was this thing called the Atlantic Slave Trade, you have heard about it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade

Obviously, other nations and empires used slaves of various 'races'. But in the US specifically it was indigenous peoples and Africans. If you believe in Justice for all, it should be pretty obvious that would be morally right to attempt to compensate those that have descended from these people in some way. It was obvious enough even at the time of abolishing slavery in the US that former slaves were being given land. Surely with your 2020 brain these things should make sense.

And you do realize that the 'Atlantic Slave Trade' would not have been possible without the help of indigenous people, right?

You do realize that 'Africans' today are stealing and selling other Africans, right?

[quote]Fat Joe wrote:

Millions of people of every race have immigrated to the US since the end of slavery who had absolutely nothing to do with it.

People have 'nothing to do with' a myriad of things that their tax dollars pay for. That isn't a very good argument against reparations. There are far better arguments, mainly about the complexity of the issue, than to say 'i hAd nOtHinG tO Do wItH slAveRy!'

Yes, absolutely. I never said otherwise. But its no different than the argument about false imprisonment. When such a mistake is made you don't just say 'well that was in the past get over it'. You try to make it right. That is what a good, honest, and decent human being would do.