warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
If any companies who profited from slavery want to pay reparations, feel free. Same with families who's ancestors used to own slaves.
WOuld reparations be appropriate in 2012 for Northern latinos?Would reparations for Southern Blacks have been appropriate in 1975, for segregation?
So is everybody with indian blood entitled to reparations? This includes Johnny Depp, Angelina Jolie, and probably tens of millions (if not the majority) of white Americans. What is the Indian threshold that must be met for someone to qualify for those reparations? How is that determined? Racial science, nazi textbooks? Or is self-identification the way to go?
Reparations might be a misleading term for that. Most Indian lands were ceded via legal treaties between nominally independent nations (US vs. respective tribe)
With specific treaty regulations frequently ignored by the US gouvernment, the most blatant cases of fraud have resulted in compensations awarded by commissions and courts. In some cases there appear to have been pretty nasty strings attached to those compensations.
AFAIK the money goes to the respective tribal governments (example the Black Hills case), federal government entities charged with indian affairs or to the affected indivuals (example for both the latter the Cobell case).
In any case you have to be the member of a federally recognized tribe to have any chance to get money, and if there are per capita payments at all, the amount of money tend to be not exactly overwhelming.
I am no lawyer, but I would think "reparations" describe extrajudicial payments.
AFAIK, there has not been any (substantial) "reparations" aimed explicitely to compensate for the historical, continental scale ethnic cleansing suffered by the Indian tribes.
Yes, but in the absence of African-American "tribes", let alone federally recognised ones, means that isn't much of a precedent. Perhaps if black nationalism had been more effective an ideology back in the day we could talk about paying reparations to the Commonwealth of New Ethiopia or whatever, but as it is...Indian tribes are still getting special privileges in many cases. Particularly to do things that are otherwise illegal in the states. Like casinos.
Yes, but in the absence of African-American "tribes", let alone federally recognised ones, means that isn't much of a precedent. Perhaps if black nationalism had been more effective an ideology back in the day we could talk about paying reparations to the Commonwealth of New Ethiopia or whatever, but as it is...![]()
By "even chance", he means, of course, statistical advantage in their favor...
True or false...
Based SOLELY on race, different quantitative standards (GPA, test scores, etc) are applied to applicants when seeking college entrance?
Neither false nor illegal (except in CA).False - and illegal. This has already been covered in a court case.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regents_of_the_University_of_California_v._Bakke
By "even chance", he means, of course, statistical advantage in their favor...
True or false...In whose favor? AA is just leveling the playing field. It's not like it gives massive advantages to African-Americans, especially when those individuals don't exactly benefit from good socio-economic conditions to begin with.
So would you give up your position for a qualified black applicant?In whose favor? AA is just leveling the playing field.
True or false...
Based SOLELY on race, different quantitative standards (GPA, test scores, etc) are applied to applicants when seeking college entrance?
End of story.
And by "statistical advantage in their favour" you mean, of course, "empowered to pose a threat to the hegemony of the white male". If we're playing that petty game.