Virginia apologizes for slavery... why?

[John Feeney]

[ QUOTE ]
Many gross injustices can never be redressed, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

But is there something in between perfect redress and doing very little at all?

[ QUOTE ]
By the way, I also should mention that I have a strong quibble with the use of the terms "we" and "our" as they are used throughout this thread. I'm not included in the "we" or the "our"...

[/ QUOTE ]

But can't "we" mean something akin to "our people," or those people of the past with whom we might be associated in terms of general ancestry or continent of origin, etc.?

[ QUOTE ]
In my view, there are no redressments possible that make any real sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

Clear solutions are obscure at best. At one time, redress would have been relatively easy. All non-native-Americans could simply have either left this continent, leaving it to those who were here first, or perhaps worked out a mutually satisfactory agreement. Now, people would think such a thing was unthinkable, but would it be just?

[John Kilduff]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Many gross injustices can never be redressed, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

But is there something in between perfect redress and doing very little at all?

[/ QUOTE ]

Sometimes there may be.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
By the way, I also should mention that I have a strong quibble with the use of the terms "we" and "our" as they are used throughout this thread. I'm not included in the "we" or the "our"...

[/ QUOTE ]

But can't "we" mean something akin to "our people," or those people of the past with whom we might be associated in terms of general ancestry or continent of origin, etc.?

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps; but not insofar as accountability or responsibility, which seems to be the implied theme given the context. Also, if "we" is to be used in the large group sense, I do still have strong reservations about using it for any group not existing in the present. My ancestors aren't "we" or "us"; my ancestors are "they" or "them". The difference between the living and the dead is greater than any differences between racial, cultural or demographic groups. I don't believe I can say "when we arrived in America the 1600's" because I simply did not arrive at that time. I didn't come into this world until much more recently.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In my view, there are no redressments possible that make any real sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

Clear solutions are obscure at best. At one time, redress would have been relatively easy. All non-native-Americans could simply have either left this continent, leaving it to those who were here first, or perhaps worked out a mutually satisfactory agreement. Now, people would think such a thing was unthinkable, but would it be just?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know. I'm not sure the concept of justice can even be appropriately applied to such things. The Pilgrims left England to avoid religious persecution. First they went to Holland, but after settling in that liberal place, found themselves again threatened (by the possibility of encroachment and control by aggressive foreign powers). Holland was no longer considered the secure safe haven. So they went across the sea. Was it a just thing, that they sought freedom from religious persecution by colonizing the New World? What followed after was inevitable due to the continued influx of Englishmen and Europeans. Resources, including land, became increasingly contested, and the stronger and more numerous side won. The Indians were mistreated and their tale is truly tragic. Have you read Black Elk Speaks? I would highly recommend it.

As for justice, does it apply or have any basis in reality where existential struggles are concerned? The settlers faced many hardships and as the white man's populaton grew, life was hard for everyone. The frontier was hard for the Indians but it was also hard for the white man. I cannot help but think of the saga of the Indians as deeply tragic. But would it have been "just" for all the white men to return from whence they came? As before, I don't know if justice really has anything much to do with it. The settlers and frontiersmen came to make a new life for themselves and the Indians were in the way. This is also the story of the whole world, in a sense. When groups collide, the stronger group generally wins and the weaker group loses and suffers. Everyone and every group has its own life to lead, so to speak. There isn't a lot of historical tolerance for anyone who gets in the way, on any continent. Yes it's tragic but I don't think the settlers or pioneers could have afforded to just pack up and go back home acros the sea. It cost many everything they had just to make the initial journey, at great risk and often loss of good health as well.

Some of the later tragedies of the Indians might have been avoided - I say might because I don't know for sure. I think the white man could possibly have left the Indians much larger reservations at least (on the scale of states perhaps). I would feel better about it had it been left that way.

Yet money waits for no one and if there is money to be made there are those who must make it. Did the gold-miners and the ranchers and the farmers displace the Indians in some locales merely out of whim or greed or did many of them actually have no other route to a possibly more prosperous life?

Justice is a strange concept in some ways. It lives more in our heads than in reality. We would often like to see it but when push comes to shove, if we are on the side that really needs something, then we generally prefer that need to justice. How much of America's land did the white man need? I don't know the answer to that question.

[govman6767]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Are you joking??? He's clearly saying that if you're a minority and are "good enough" to clear the much lower standards minorities are held up to for college admissions you're not gonna have any incentive to work harder than that and match the effort of top white or asian high school students. If someone told me that all I needed was an 1100 SAT and low 3s GPA to get into an Ivy I probably would have chucked my books and played video games.


[/ QUOTE ]

he's not clearly saying that at all. what is clear is he pretty flippant about the disparity in SAT scores across race as if those in a lower socioeconomic bracket dont have real challenges in attaining those SAT scores.

why focus on the exception to the rule - the student that would score well above average if he blows off studying but score high enough to get into college? the rule is black scores are lower than white scores across the board.

im not sure why you are so steadfast in interpreting his statements. you staunchly defended him and told me how i should interpret another person's post. ive read enough of his posts in the past and think he can speak for himself.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you have a complex or something ????

Simply put if my job requires me to run a piece of equipment that my life depends on I want the best person possible to be designing, maintaining, building etc.

If i'm flying a plane, fighter jet, space shuttle, sailing in a boat, riding in a HumVee a Stryker, my ford ranger, or the forklift in a warehouse. I want the best possible person ensuring my saftey.

I DON'T CARE IF THEY ARE purple, black, red, white, orange, yellow, green, blue WTF would I care about someone's race.

I just want the best person qualified for the job.

As far as the sitting on the couch and let's go party thing please stop attacking me it was meant in generality.

There are prob just as many or more lazy ass white people who are collecting welfare and other social programs because they are too lazy to get off the couch.

It does not matter what race you are if your getting paid to sit at home and do nothing and driving a lexus your going to cry foul the second someone tells you to get a Job.

Here's a little story for you about me in case you still think I'm a racist.

I was TDY to Camp Shelby Mississippi after Katrina the storm wrecked the army base and their equipment needed repair to get ready for their Iraq deployment.

Me and my partner went to lunch at a little place on the way to the base. Inside I was sitting next to 3 OLD white dudes who were constantly making comments about the table full of black people across the way. I proceeded to ask the old men if they could keep it to themselves. I was told in so much a nice way to piss off. I told the senior citizens to GFT's. As the waitress came over and asked me and Sarge to leave I understood that racism is still alive and well in the south.

But I will never change my stance on any lazy person who's milking my tax dollars watching judge judy all day on my dime I don't care what color you are.

[IQ89]

I'm Rich, Biotch!

[John Feeney]

[ QUOTE ]
The Pilgrims left England to avoid religious persecution. First they went to Holland, but after settling in that liberal place, found themselves again threatened (by the possibility of encroachment and control by aggressive foreign powers). Holland was no longer considered the secure safe haven. So they went across the sea. Was it a just thing, that they sought freedom from religious persecution by colonizing the New World? What followed after was inevitable due to the continued influx of Englishmen and Europeans. Resources, including land, became increasingly contested, and the stronger and more numerous side won.

[/ QUOTE ]

I assume you're not suggesting the European settlers were justified in murdering and taking the land of those who were here first since they did so to flee religious persecution, and since the results seemed inevitable given their determination to settle here. I gather you're just demonstrating that it's explainable. Yes, we can explain it, but I don't think we can justify it.

While it's true justice is merely a human construct, we can do our best to apply it. It doesn't seem we've done so here.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes it's tragic but I don't think the settlers or pioneers could have afforded to just pack up and go back home acros the sea. It cost many everything they had just to make the initial journey, at great risk and often loss of good health as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps they could have ceased the migration once it became clear it would impose a grave injustice on the indigenous people here. Surely, though, they might have at least sat down and hashed out more mutually acceptable agreements.

I understand that in a time when many probably thought they were carrying out some sort of manifest destiny, that wouldn't likely have happened. But that doesn't justify it either, I don't think.

Though it's been the way of history, it doesn't mean it's right or that it *should* have been the way of history any more than the fact that people do kill people justifies a given murder. You know?

And certainly, we've done very, very little to make amends.

[John Kilduff]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The Pilgrims left England to avoid religious persecution. First they went to Holland, but after settling in that liberal place, found themselves again threatened (by the possibility of encroachment and control by aggressive foreign powers). Holland was no longer considered the secure safe haven. So they went across the sea. Was it a just thing, that they sought freedom from religious persecution by colonizing the New World? What followed after was inevitable due to the continued influx of Englishmen and Europeans. Resources, including land, became increasingly contested, and the stronger and more numerous side won.

[/ QUOTE ]

I assume you're not suggesting the European settlers were justified in murdering and taking the land of those who were here first since they did so to flee religious persecution, and since the results seemed inevitable given their determination to settle here. I gather you're just demonstrating that it's explainable. Yes, we can explain it, but I don't think we can justify it.

While it's true justice is merely a human construct, we can do our best to apply it. It doesn't seem we've done so here.

[ QUOTE ]
Yes it's tragic but I don't think the settlers or pioneers could have afforded to just pack up and go back home acros the sea. It cost many everything they had just to make the initial journey, at great risk and often loss of good health as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps they could have ceased the migration once it became clear it would impose a grave injustice on the indigenous people here. Surely, though, they might have at least sat down and hashed out more mutually acceptable agreements.

I understand that in a time when many probably thought they were carrying out some sort of manifest destiny, that wouldn't likely have happened. But that doesn't justify it either, I don't think.

Though it's been the way of history, it doesn't mean it's right or that it *should* have been the way of history any more than the fact that people do kill people justifies a given murder. You know?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not saying it was justified. I'm saying that it is the way of the world, and those who pushed the Indians out had their own needs. When group needs collide, that often leads to tragedy and ruthlessness.

Maybe a better more mutually beneficial arrangement could have been worked out...and as I said, I'd have preferred to see it left so the Indians at least retained far larger reservations, perhaps on the order of whole states.

Amends at this late date though make virtually no sense to me. If my great-great-grandfather was murdered, I don't expect the killer's great-great-grandson today to try to give me (the victim's great-great-grandson) money or something to try to make up for it. The time for amends is long past, and the actors today are completely different persons, in a different world.

[ QUOTE ]
And certainly, we've done very, very little to make amends.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again I must quibble. They did very little to make amends. We had, and have, nothing to do with it.

I would bet that I probably feel as sad for the plight of the original American Indians as you do. I just don't think there is anything much we can or should do about it at this far-too-late date.

Different eras = different people = different worlds.

For all the responsibility you and I bear, the tragedy of the American Indians might have happened on some planet orbiting Alpha Centauri. The same holds true for the plight of the American blacks which occurred under slavery.

[Mickey Brausch]

[ QUOTE ]


While it's true justice is merely a human construct, we can do our best to apply it. It doesn't seem we've done so here.

[/ QUOTE ]Let's not forget that, if we hold up History to judge right from wrong today (and seek retribution), we end up with both good and bad things.

On the one hand, restitution for the American Indian or the African Negro from the part of the White Man. Noble -- on account of past history, which involves genocide and slavery. On the other hand, the Armenians want a slice of Azerbaitzani land -- on account of past history, whereby they ruled the region. Tricky -- and very murderous.

I'd say that, theoretically, we'd be better off without ever learning what happened in History, be it good or bad. Collective Memento-like situation.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
I'd say that, theoretically, we'd be better off without ever learning what happened in History, be it good or bad. Collective Memento-like situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you leveling us here? Because I know you're not this stupid.

[Money2Burn]

[ QUOTE ]
It's not a matter of choice or culpability. It's matter of unfair advantages and rectifying them. It's saying, "We're sorry we completely [censored] you guys up for many generations. We will try to make sure you have the means to better yourselves."

[/ QUOTE ]

Since when is life supposed to be fair?

[tehox]

I thought this is worth the read