Quote:
Originally posted by TheEpitome1920
To apologize means recognizing that it did happen and that corporations that are still in existence profitted from it. So in a way it does affect people who were never enslaved or owned slaves.
|
This is utter nonsense. Apologizing is not 'recognition' of any aftereffects of enslavement, and it is NOT a step toward curing these ills. Apologizing, in and of itself, is nothing but an appeasement. You should be pissed about this, if you truly believe in this cause, because it EFFECTIVELY ENDS THE DISCUSSION AND ALLOWS THE ISSUE TO GRIND TO A HALT INSTEAD OF PROGRESSING TO AN END.
Also, you've never addressed Rudey's point about why banks have been well-researched compared to other institutions. "I think there was a study about monuments" is not an effective retort, but rather a strawman for the issue.
Also, if reparations aren't about money, why is an exchange of money even included in the requests? If it's about curing societal ills, let's actively work toward curing the effects - handing someone cash does little to destroy ingrained inequity. [ETA: my point here is that the money should probably go to better use in programs that actively address the issues that are connected to slavery, instead of lump-sum payments to individuals. I don't know what those programs would be, so maybe the money should go to researching a better understanding of that, as well.]
Apologies from a conglomerate that purchased a bank 150 years ago that allowed slaves as colatteral also serve to do very little to solve inequities.
Let's put this another way - if every person who in any way ever had any contact with owning of African slaves were to give a heartfelt apology, would that end the issue of slavery's lingering effects on African Americans in the US?
Of course not. So let's get to the actual point here.