Do you think the Black Americans are looking for a handup or a handout?

Question

I asked a question a few days ago (which most people attacked me personally just for asking) asking whether or not you thought blacks deserve reparations. Surprising, a lot of you were against reparations for blacks. Many sited that there are no longer any "living" slaves, your ancestors were not slave owners (probably becuase they could not afford slaves),others stated that the Africans were the ones that sold their own into slavery and are more responsible.

What about the remaining psychological damage that has been passed down from generation to generation. What about the "Willie Lynch" theory that was use to control slaves. Those traits are still manifest in African Americans today. What about when slavery was "finally" abolished and we had to deal with the angry whites who did not want us to have our freedom and to a certain extent the racism is still alive today making it hard for blacks to succeed (poor education, poor housing,broken homes, unfair judicial systems). Well?

I would also like to add that government assistance that was supposed to be available to "everyone" was not available right away to african americans. Even if you were to deduct what "some" of us got from the government regarding assistance for housing, food and money the government whould still end up owing billions of dollars.

How do you repay blacks for the many ideas for inventions that were stolen away from them that whites took credit for and to this day they never recieved payment?

How much do you think it cost to design and build buildings, highways, railroads, etc.

What about the black women to were forced to not only be midwife to her mistress but also lover to her mistresses husband. Made to ween the masters children on her own breast milk and then made to bread just for the sake of making new slaves.

What about the horrible mutilations and psychological damage passed on from generation to generation stemming from the "Willie Lynch" theory? Look it up?

I wanted to add another thought to blacks who do recieve public assistance for living. For years most of the caucasions blamed blacks for a over used welfare system. We were not allowed to indulge ourselves with those benefits until very late in the game when government funds were already depleated by those of the other race.

Another thing is that we are only approximately 12% of the population and of that 12% maybe 8% of us do receive benefits. I seriously doubt that our 8% is really wreaking as much havoc at the 38% of whites recieving benefits.

Answer 1

To be honest I think most Blacks are looking for pay back, I heard some say innocent whites need to be kill just as innocent black were. Yes blacks need equality but lets be honest giving blacks equality doesn't offset over 300 years of oppression and struggle. On paper all people need equal rights seems fine, but look deeper into this issue, you will find that the black race deserves much more than equal rights.

When Blacks were first "bought" (not sold) into slavery they were oppress from the time they were "purchase," not sold to whites. You can't sell nothing if no one is WILLING to buy it. Blacks were oppress from the time they got own until the time Dr. King died in 1968, by whites not Africans. Is giving the black race equal rights make right all the oppression they face?

How can 400 years of oppression which include segregation be made OK by giving them equality? Will equality fix or bring justice to the Millions America kill unjustified. Will equality fix or bring justice to tens of thousand that were lynch during the early 1900's. What about their lost knowledge of a language, religion, culture and customs? Will Brown was shoot over 1000 times beaten , then burned alive. These things did not happen in ancient times but in my and my parents generation. We were oppress so we couldn't vote this was only the 60's. So the ones who were slaves could not get anything for their misfortune because they had no rights to back then. Equal rights could not repay all that was done against the Black race. So in reality the two groups will never be equal one side had 300+ years of struggle and robbery while the other had/has 300+ years of privilege and benefits and the expense of one group, not just from free labor but from being on the side of the oppressors. That in it's self gave you privilege.

Truth is the people who would have inherited the money their father SHOULD have got are still here. Just as the people and nation who inherited that borrow wealth, is still here, and the wealth is still here. So if Blacks got paid for that wealth they would have left their descendants with something rather than a spirit of poverty. As a result 70% of elderly blacks have no financial assets. Which is a direct result form segregation design to keep the wealth in the white community and keep blacks from the houses, shools, and inherited wealth they help build for the white community. It's never to late to do what rights, however reparation will divide the country.

Blacks don't need reparations but equality, and as I said equality is not giving blacks equal rights. Truthfully all the things the white race did or has done against the black race most surely can not be repaid with equality, neither can it be repaid with all the wealth this nation has.

Answer 2

I agree that inequities still exist today. The number of possible tainted convictions being overturned because of reliable DNA evidence alone is proof of that.

BUT:

What does reparations have to do with it? Why wouldn't blacks rather seek true equality? You can't be a victim and an equal at the same time. Asking for reparations is just like asking for a handout, and it carries the air of pan-handling, thus furthering the stigma with which many non-blacks perceive blacks in general. It creates/furthers a negative stereotype. Furthermore, you and those who ask for reparations have no formula for fixing a true monetary value to the actual harm inflicted. The real victims of slavery died 50 years ago and more. You want $ for "psychological damages" due to harm inflicted on your grandpa or great-grandpa? What is your formula and where is your proof of real damage?

How about American Indians? Where the heck are their reparations?

A sizable chunk of the people in the US today are descended from people who had nothing to do with the slave trade economy of the 16 and 17 hundreds. You have no cause of action which you can trace to these people. Hell, Hispanics now outnumber blacks in the US and they came AFTER slavery. Think they want to hand over their hard earned money for reparations.

Reparations are a cop-out. An easy substitute for using the system as it exists and doing the best to improve one's lot in life. In that, minorities legally present in the US have my support and admiration.

Answer 3

Honestly, it's the year 2006. I wish people would get over it already. I don't think you deserve anything. I would feel the same way if whites were slaves. I truly feel that there are more racists in the balck community than there are in a white one. I could go on and on, but i'm not gonna waste my time. Everyone has their own opinion, like you do, and I just gave you mine in a nut shell. I think everyone should get over it. Do you see Jews or Irish asking for anything? No. Becuase they're over it. And if you don't know what I mean by bringing up those two cultures, do some research. I'm NOT trying to be offensive, I'm just being blunt.

Answer 4

No, blacks shouldn't get any reparations. Like everyone else in the US, work hard and earn things. Stop feeding the racial issue, that's the major problem. Blacks want equality, yet they want special treatment at the same time. You can't have it both ways.

Answer 5

no matter what there is racism, whether your black, white, red, orange, irish, italian, etc. i understand your frustration but what about how the irish were treated when coming to america, i dont see people running around getting upset over that. the only thing you can do is have future children educated for a better life. with that, they will succeed.

Answer 6

i miss affirmative action, but it seems that the 'new' system that promotes economic diversity (mostly in schools) is a wonderful assist to the poor black and poor white (like me! :) both. i notice that there is a lot of self-imposed seperatism... we all need to work on getting together and understanding one another.

Answer 7

okorder very good

Answer 8

Kristin G:

I agree with you. You are being blunt -- about how ignorant you are. You contend that the, "Jews and Irish" have gotten "over it" (when will white people use a new damn phrase?) yet it is grossly apparent that you are speaking from a level of miseducation.

There is a Holocaust Memorial in Washington and the holocaust never occurred here.

As a black woman, I agree that reparations for slavery should not be paid. I say this not for the ignorant canard spewed by most white people, that it occurred a long time ago and should be forgotten or even that "your grandfather's grandfather never owned a slave. The justification for reparations comes solely because the crimes committed against African Americans in this count has been categorized as a CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY.

My argument is strictly because a dollar amount could never be placed on my ancestors suffering.


The enslavement of Africans in the United States was one of most immoral acts in the development of the United States. Legalized slavery occurred in the United States from 1619 to 1865, and was followed by another one hundred years of consequent legalized subjugation of African Americans. Measures were taken to remedy the errors of slavery with the passage of the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments. However, the United States countered those advancements when it enacted Black Codes and Jim Crow which resulted in tolerated regimes of a new form of slavery: peonage, apartheid and disenfranchisement.
These laws essentially broke the promise America made to her new citizens for equal protection under the law. The Supreme Court’s decision in Plessy v. Ferguson in 1892, for example, gutted the right of equal protection for African Americans set forth in the 14th Amendment. According to Omar L. Winbush in Reflections of Homer Plessy and Reparations, this decision was, “the single most devastating Supreme Court decision relating to Black people living in America. The Plessy case should have allowed the Supreme Court to give full faith and credit...to the Civil War amendments”(Winbush, 153).
Instead, the federal government made laws and embraced policies that supported racism after the Civil War allowing racist laws and policies to prevail. Black people were further denied equal opportunity to compete for opportunities that were available to fellow White citizens for nearly a century after the passing of the 14th and 15th Amendments. Thus, the basis for reparations is focused on the constitutional rights that were aggrieved by white American citizens against their fellow man as well as the U.S. role in condoning such actions by failing to repeal illegal laws and statutes during and after slavery. According to Randall Robinson in The Debt: What America Owes to Blacks, “the federal government included racially restrictive covenants in its mortgage loans to whites until 1950. Banks participated in this systematic deprivation through the process of redlining neighborhoods. Racial profiling by law enforcement bodies continues at the present time”(Van Dyke, 62). In essence, the vestiges of slavery are still among us and federal government is justly held responsible for persisting the legacy of these wrongs.
In his 1989 Reparations Study Bill, Michigan Congressman John Conyers called for an acknowledgment of “the fundamental injustice, cruelty, brutality, and inhumanity of slavery in the United States and the thirteen American colonies between 1619 and 1865 and to establish a seven-member commission to determine whether the United States should make formal apology for slavery, examine whether, compensation or other appropriate rememedies should bee provided to the descendants of slaves, and, if so, identify who should be eligible for such compensation. However, despite this call for redress and others from organizations like the National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America, the United States government remains silent on the issue. In fact, the American government has gone to great lengths to prevent any discussion of atonement for past atrocities or for the present issues that are a result of slavery in this country. Despite boasting a history full of instances of U.S. support for reparations to individuals and communities that have suffered injustices the American officials seem intent on side stepping the issue of slavery. In “Reparations for American Slavery, James Haley avers that:

“On a March 1998 tour of Africa, then-President Bill Clinton offered a semi-apology for America’s participation in the transatlantic slave trade. The president expressed regret and contrition admitting that America had not always, “done the right thing by Africa,” yet he stopped short of a formal apology, asserting that to do so might antagonize race relations in the United States.

Haley contends:

“What went unspoken by Clinton was the fact that a formal apology could be interpreted in a court of law as an admission of guilt by the U. S. Government for sanctioning the institution of slavery. Such an admission might mean that the U.S. government could be successfully sued for reparations payable to the descendants of slaves” (Haley, 7)








However, in order to address the question of reparations, it is first necessary to understand the injuries for which reparations are sought. It is true that the institution of slavery was not a practice unique to America. For instance, in Race: An Evolving Issue in Western Thought, John Henrik Clarke assert that slavery, “...is almost as old as human societies...Slavery was a permanent feature of the ancient world, in Egypt, Kush, Greece and Rome. Every people has at
some time or another been slaves. In fact, Europeans enslaved other Europeans for a much longer time than they enslaved Africans. Yet, this slavery did not give birth to racism, though it did lay the basis for feudalism.”
Slavery was also practiced in Africa but those enslaved resembled the status of people held in European indentured servitude. They could be held captives taken in war or kidnapped in raids or even sell themselves into servitude. Furthermore, Femi Akomolafe contends “ it was not at all uncommon for African owners to adopt slave children or to marry slave women, who then became full members of the family. Slaves of talent accumulated property and in some instances reached the status of kings; Jaja of Opobo (in Nigeria) is a case in point. Lacking contact with American slavery, African traders could be expected to assume that the lives of slaves overseas would be as much as they were in Africa; they had no way of knowing that whites in America associated dark colors with sub-human qualities and status, or that they would treat slaves as chattels generation after generation. When Nigeria's Madame Tinubu, herself a slave-trader, discovered the difference between domestic and non-African slavery, she became an abolitionist, actively rejecting what she saw as the corruption of African slavery by the unjust and inhumane habits of its foreign practitioners and by the motivation to make war for profit on the sale of captives.”
Thus, the distinctive difference in American slavery is that it introduced an element that was never considered before in other societies: racism. Racism justified holding a person in bondage for life solely based on the notion of inferiority or superiority based on the color of ones’ skin. Furthermore, this unique system was sanctioned in the United States for over two
hundred years. In The Debt: What America Owes to Blacks, Randall Robinson contends that the enslavement of African peoples in the United States was “the most heinous human rights crime
visited upon any group of people in the world over the last five hundred years.” Furthermore, he contends that the claim for reparations is justified against the American government because
when slaves were freed, “the United States provided no meaningful compensation to the former slaves for the value of their labor, nor did it provide them with the economic assets needed to compete with the white community in the marketplace.” Thus, Winbush argues that this provided generations of white people with the economic advantage over their fellowman which “can be linked to the wealth accumulated” from slave labor and Jim Crow subjugation. (Winbush, 59).
Expounding on this in The African American Warrant for Reparations, Molefi Kete Asante contends that slavery in America was dehumanizing and subjected slaves to any violation the master deemed suitable. She asserts, “Slavery was not romantic; it was evil, ferocious, brutal and corrupting in all of its aspects. The enslaved was treated with utter disrespect...For looking a white man in the eye the enslaved person could have his or her eyes blinded with hot irons. For speaking up in defense of a wife or woman a man could have his right hand severed. For defending his right to speak against oppression, an African could have his tongue cut out. For running away and being caught and African could have his or her Achilles tendon cut...Among the punishments that were favored by the slave owners were whipping holes, wherein the enslaved was buried in the ground up to the neck; mutilation of the toes and fingers” (Asante, 5)
In Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl, a narrative by a runaway slave, Harriet Jacobs confirms this assessment in her experience of the conditions in slavery:


I knew a slave...James, was sold to a good sort of master. He became involved in debt and James was sold again to a wealthy slaveholder, noted for his cruelty. With this man he grew up to manhood, receiving the treatment of a dog. After a severe whipping, to save himself from further infliction of the lash, with which he was threatened, he took to the woods. He was in a most miserable condition...some weeks after his escape, he was captured, tied, and carried back to his master’s plantation. The master considered in jail to mild for the slave’s offence. Therefore he decided, after the overseer should have whipped him to his satisfaction, to have him placed between the screws of the cotton gin, to stay as long as he had been in the woods...cut with the whip from head to foot, then washed with brine, to prevent the flesh from mortifying and make it heal sooner than it otherwise would. He was then put into the cotton gin, which was screwed down, only allowing him room to turn on his side when he could not lie on his back. Every morning a slave was sent with a piece of bread and bowl of water...Four days passed, and the slave continued to carry the bread and water...by the second morning, he found the bread gone, but the water untouched...When the press was unscrewed, the dead body was found partly eaten by rats and vermin...They put him in a rough box, and buried him with less feeling that would have been manifested for an old house dog. Nobody asked any questions. He was a slave; and the feeling was that the master had a right to do what he please with his own property. Women are considered of no value, unless they continually increase their owner’s stock. If a slave resisted being whipped, the bloodhounds were unpacked, and set upon him, to tear his flesh from his bones. The master who did these things was highly educated, and styled a perfect gentleman.
He also boasted the name and standing of a Christian, though Satan never had a truer follower”(Jacobs, 43).


Although it has been said that the Constitution stated nothing outright about slavery, the federal government did in fact embrace policies that supported slavery. Such examples of this are the Federal Slave Law of 1793 and the Federal Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. In the former, the Constitution, “provided for the return of fugitive slaves”(Filler, 90) Slave masters posted runaway advertisements in newspapers such as the Southern Argus requesting capture of slaves for awards:

“Ranaway from the subscriber, two negroes, Davis, a man about 45 years old; also Peggy, his wife, near the same age. Said negroes will probably make their way to Columbia county, as they have children living in that county. I will liberally reward any person who may deliver them to me. –Nehemiah King”(Weld, 34)

Furthermore, the law provided the new profession of slave catcher. Since it was not mandated that a trial by jury be held for alleged runaway slaves; this allowed a loophole for treachery resulting
in many free black citizens being unjustly captured and sold into slavery. Hence, the U.S. government permitted the practice of slavery by individual Americans when it upheld oppressive and exploitative systems through a sequence of acts by the Congress, Supreme Court and state governments. (Weld, 34)
After slavery, Black people were further segregated and left to fend for themselves in harsh conditions. Previously mentioned policies such as Black Codes replaced slave codes which forbade slaves prior to the Civil War from reading, testifying in court or owning guns. Thus Black Codes reinforced the notion that a the newly freed Black man had no rights a White man was bound to respect. This policy was used to inhibit freedoms of the former slaves from work hours and behavior in the presence of White people. Black Codes, were laws regulated by state and varied across state lines. “In Mississippi, for example, freedmen were forbidden to rent or lease farms–they were only allowed to work on the property of someone else”(Salzberger & Turk, 19). However, Black Codes were soon found unconstitutional but Jim Crow soon took it’s place and was only brought to an end in 1964, nearly a century after the passing of the 13th Amendment.
Moreover, Southern courts offered no protection for people of African descent. This soon led to the rise of the White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan and their practices of terrorizing Black citizens by burning and lynching for the slightest accusation or “crime” without due process of law. This process is what is known as “white capping.” Whitecapping as a phrase coined in the early 1900s indicating the abuse of night riders who seized land from Blacks during the Jim Crow era. (Winbush, 48). These crimes mainly committed against Black farmers were usually veiled by accusations of improper conduct towards a white person, usually a white woman, when the real motive was to disenfranchise successful blacks of their land as in the case of the Tulsa Riots
in Greenwood. Winbush asserts, “due to the belief that...the success of some Blacks might unleash unrealistic (and dangerous) aspirations among the local Black population...Land theft was a frequent motivation in lynching Black families. It was a quick and easy way to illegally deprive Blacks of their land. It was not unusual for the grieving widow of the victim to abandon the land withing a few days after the murder of her husband or other male relative. The abandoned land would then be placed in auction because it had been deserted and new deeds would be drawn and agreements struck with the new owners that nullified existing title papers of the murdered owner.”
According to the NAACP, “3,334 lynchings” took place “between 1889 and 1918.” However, lynchings were not limited to the South. Three black men were lynched in Duluth, Minnesota in 1920. Tens of thousands of people, mostly black were lynched between 1867 and the 1930s.
Although the United States continues to remain mum on the issue, the fight for reparations in Americas is advancing to the forefront. One such example is that of Congressman John
Conyers, a Democrat from Michigan, who introduced the Reparations Study Bill (H. R. 40) to his colleagues in Congress in 1989 calling for an investigation of slavery and its impact on the descendants of African slaves. Unfortunately, to this day the bill continues to languish without consideration. In addition, there is the National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America established in 1987. Furthermore, there numerous other attempts for recent claims for reparations against the United States government by Harvard Law School Professor Charles Ogletree, attorney Willlie Gary, and the late Johnnie Cochran. Moreover, Legal Activist Deadria Farmer-Paellmann, has devoted several years of research linking “sixty institutions that profited from slavery” including “Aetna Insurance Company” for insuring the lives of Africans held in captivity for slave holders who benefitted from the unpaid labor (Farmer, 26)
Similarly, the notion of redress for slavery also has its detractors. David Horowitz, the author of Uncivil Wars: The Controversy over Reparations for Slavery , believes that there is no connection between the wrongs committed within the last few centuries and the status of African Americans today. Furthermore, he contends that African Americans owe the United States a debt. In the spring of 2001, Horowitz published his advertisement “Ten Reasons Why Reparations for Blacks Is a Bad Idea for Blacks—and Racist Too”in several college newspapers causing a firestorm of outrage. Though many rejected the ad refusing to publishing it, those that did print the article found several of their papers were destroyed by appalled students. In his ad Horowitz asserts, “If not for the anti-slavery beliefs and military power of white Englishmen and Americans, the slave trade would not have been brought to an end. If not for the sacrifices of white soldiers and a white American President who gave his life to sign the Emancipation Proclamation, blacks in America would still be slaves...They would not enjoy the greatest freedoms and the most thoroughly protected individual rights anywhere. Where is the acknowledgment of Black America and its leaders for those gifts?” Although he opposes reparations for the descendants of slaves, he is in agreement of restitution for direct victims of injustices.(Haley, 11)

The debate over reparations for American slavery and segregation is not a recent phenomenon. Rather, the idea that America owes a debt for the enslavement of Africans is a notion whose origin came out of the Civil Rights movement or the Emancipation Proclamation. The first mention of reparations was in 1829 in Walker’s Appeal, published by David Walker which commented on the, “lack of compensation for the labor of the slaves.” Reparations lawsuits have also been considered prior to the ones of recent years. In 1915, the first known reparations lawsuit was that of Cornelius Jones in Johnson v. MacAdoo. Mr. Jones sued the United States Department of the Treasury, “claiming that the government’s taxation of raw cotton produced an enrichment from the labor of African Americans.” Unfortunately, the courts ruled agains Mr. Jones finding that the government was no capable of being sued due to the protection set forth in sovereign immunity. Sovereign immunity is still an issue with lawsuits today which in effect now have the challenge of not being able to sue the government without its consent as well as the issue of statute of limitations. Moreover, former slaves also made efforts to receive redress from their former masters. A perfect example is that of a letter written by Jourdon Anderson, a runaway slave, to his “master” Colonel Anderson shortly after the Civil War:

To my old Master. Colonel P. H. Anderson, Big Spring, Tennessee,

Sir. I got your letter, and was glad to find that you had not forgotten Jourdon, and that you wanted me to come back and live with you again, promising to do better for me than anybody else can. I have often felt uneasy about you...Although you shot at me twice before I left you, I did not want to hear of your being hurt, and am glad you are still living...I would have gone back to see you all when I was working in the Nashville Hospital, but one of the neighbors told me that Henry intended to shoot me if he ever got a chance.
I want to know particularly what good the chance is you propose to give me. I am doing tolerably well here. I get twenty-five dollars a month, with victuals and clothing; have a comfortable home for Mandy,–the folks call her Mrs. Anderson, and the children...go to school and are learning well....We are kindly treated. Sometimes we overhear others saying, “Them colored people were slaves” down in Tennessee. The children feel hurt when they hear such remarks: but darkeys would have been proud, as I used to be, to call you master. Now if you will write and say what wages you will give me, I will be better able to decide whether it would be to my advantage to move back again.

As to my freedom, which you say I can have, there is nothing to be gained on that score, as I got my free papers in 1864 from the Provost-Marshal-General of the Department of Nashville. Mandy says she would be afraid to go back without some proof that you were disposed to treat us justly and kindly; and we have concluded to test your sincerity by asking you to send us our wages for the time we served you. This will make us forget and forgive old scores, and rely on your justice and friendship in the future. I served you faithfully for thirty-two years, and Mandy twenty years. At twenty-five dollars a month for me, and two dollars a week for Mandy, our earnings would amount to eleven thousand six hundred and eighty dollars.
Add to this the interest for the time our wages have been kept back, and deduct what you paid for our clothing, and three doctor’s visits to me, and pulling a tooth for Mandy, and the balance will show what we are in justice entitled to. Please send the money by Adam’s Express, in care of V. Winters, Esq., Dayton, Ohio. If you fail to pay us for faithful labors in the past, we can have little faith in your promises in the future. We trust the good Maker has opened your eyes to the wrongs which you and your fathers have done to me and my fathers, in making us toil for you generations without recompense....Surely there will be a day of reckoning for those who defraud the laborer of his hire.

In answering this letter, please state if there would be any safety for my Milly and Jane, who are now grown up, and both good-looking girls. You know how it was with poor Matilda and Catherine. I would rather stay here and starve—and die, if it come to that—than have my girls brought to shame by the violence and wickedness of their young masters.

Say howdy to George Carter, and thank him for taking the pistol from you when you were shooting at me.

From your old servant,
Jourdon Anderson
Former slaves like Jourdon were also not the only advocates of reparations for slaver. The first post-Civil War attempt by the United States government to make restitution to the former slaves for their unpaid labor was characterized by the establishment of the Freedmen’s Bureau by the War Department during Reconstruction. On Jan. 16, 1865, Gen. William T. Sherman issued Special Field Order No. 15, which was a simple order to provide the lands of the Sea Islands in Charleston, S.C., and “a significant portion of coastal lands to newly freed slaves to homestead...now made free by act of war.” In the order, each freedman was allotted 40 acres of tillable ground as reparations for years of unpaid servitude. According to Deadria Farmer-Paellman, “by June of 1865, about 40,000 freedmen had been allocated 400,000 acres of land.” The order later became popularly known as the 40 Acres and a Mule Proclamation Although the order was ratified by the Congress without funds to support it, it did not last long. After the assassination of Abraham Lincoln, President Andrew Johnson vetoed the bill although it passed both houses on Feb. 10, 1866 and “began the process of rescinding title to the land from the freedmen and returning it to its previous plantation owners.”
That was the last time, the U.S. government thought seriously about compensating the African-American offspring of enslaved Africans for nearly 300 years of slave labor. Unfortunately since, the, U.S and some White citizens have formed a shocking sense of denial over the issue of slavery and the subsequent injustices as a result of slavery such as Black Codes, and Jim Crow. Why has the United States government avoided the topic of slavery in this country for so long despite the fact that it is an entity that recognizes the need for redress of past wrongs? This shows an ironic stance since the government has accepted accountability for previous grievances to other group wronged groups. For example, in 1990 the United States paid $ 1.2 billion and issued a Letter of Apology to resolve the issue of internment of Japanese Americans who had been illegally detained during World War II for three years as a result of the Civil Rights Redress Act. Furthermore, in 1986, the United States paid:

“$32 million to honor the 1836 treaty with the Ottawas of Michigan; in 1985, the United States gave $105 million to the Sioux of South Dakota; in 1980, the United States gave $81million to the Klamaths of Oregon; in 1971, the United States gave $1 billion plus 44 million acres of land to honor the Alaska Natives land settlement.”

The only response to the aforementioned question is that the United States and White Americans are blatantly willing to ignore demands for justice by people of color. It is apparent
that the simple mention of the word “slavery” in the United States can be counted on to generate a plethora of comments from: “Slavery is over. Get over it ” to “You should be happy the White man made you slaves so you could live in America. If you are not happy go back to Africa ” Although the World Conference Against Racism held in Durban, South Africa declared the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade a “crime against humanity, the United States government has openly ignored its injustices to her citizens. Nowhere was this more evident than with the U.S. walkout on the conference on September 3, 2001. In The Popularization of the International Demand for Reparations, Roger Wareham reports “Three days after the WCAR convened, the United States and Israel walked out. This was no surprise to the non-governmental organizations who had been involved with the preparatory meetings leading up to the WCAR, since veiled threats of the walkout, including promises to eliminate foreign aid to Africa if the reparations issue was pressed by delegates in Durban.”(234) Yet this is the same government where officials make no qualms to honor the victims of the Holocaust in the nations capital with the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in this nations capital. Meanwhile, the project for the United States Slavery Museum Project has much difficulty receiving acknowledgment from Congress.
Furthermore, Wareham states, “Although the official reason give for the walkout was the debate over the Zionism-equals-racism issue, it was clear that the United States’ real concern was the issue of crimes against humanity, reparations and the ensuing flood of lawsuits that would emerge if the United States...supported these three critical issues.” Despite great reluctance by the European Union and the WEO group, people of African descent were still victorious in having the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade and slavery seen as crimes against humanity as this opens the door for further activity for pursuing reparations as the United Nations declared there is no statute of limitations against crimes upon humanity.
At present, several lawsuits have set claims in the United States. According to Professor Charles Ogletree, “The Oklahoma litigation, filed by the Reparations Coordinating Committee and local counsel in Tulsa, Oklahoma is not a slavery lawsuit but instead focuses on the violent
repression African Americans suffered under” the policies of Jim Crow. He asserts, that the calims “ are relatively recent and easy to identify.”
Often referred to as the Black Wall Street, Greenwood, was an extremely prosperous section in Oklahoma. So much so that W. E. B. Du Bois “referred to the neighborhood as the ‘finest example of ***** self-sufficiency.” The Tulsa Race riots were a result of a young black man accused of assaulting a white woman in 1921. As a result, the white community burned property, lynched and murdered several black residents resulting in a property damage that “amounted to $16, 752, 600 in 1999 dollars.” Ironically, restitution was only paid to the white citizens even though it was declared that the white mob was unjust in their actions. Many residents lost homes and various other forms of property but received no restitution. In 2004, Senior District Judge James Ellison dismissed the case against the city and state by 150 citizens finding that, “plaintiffs’ claims are barred by the statute of limitations and does not speak to the tragedy of the riot or the terrible devastation it caused.” Although the states’ claim to have the case dismissed due to the two-year statute of limitations for civil cases was granted; Dr. Charles Ogletree, the attorney for the case, appealed.
Another recent development in the slavery reparations litigation is that of Cato v. United States in 1995. In this case the plaintiffs, unsuccessfully sought redress against the United States for the unjust enslavement and the ensuing discriminatory practices against them. Despite not
receiving the acknowledgment of discrimination or the apology that was originally sought, the case still proved to be significant for advocates and future litigants for the reparations cause. The strategy for Cato was to make suit based on the Federal Tort Claims Act. However, it was found that the United States enjoys sovereign immunity. In addition, the United States can only be sued if it waives its’ right to sovereign immunity for a case. Unfortunately, the failure for Cato was the
United States is not held to the FTCA for “constitutional tort claims” and thus cannot be sued (Afrik, Elijah).
Also, the FTCA only allows a six-year statute of limitations claim period. Since slavery ended in 1865, it was declared that the statute of limitations already passed for the case. Once the claimants argued that the vestiges of slavery are still grounds for restitution, it was then declared that the FTCA did not have the authority to try offenses of “slavery, kidnapping” and the like because these things fell out of the FTCA’s jurisdiction (Afrik, Elijah, 364).
Seven years after Cato, “plaintiffs in Obadele v. United States...filed claims under the Civil Liberties Act.” However, the Office of Redress Administration denied restitution referrring the claimants to pursue “legislative remedies” (Afrik, Elijah 365). In that same year, Deadria Farmer-Paellman, an attorney and staunch advocate of reparations, filed suit against Aetna, Fleetboston and CSX as a result of her research finding that these companies as well as New York Life Insurance, Brown Brothers Harriman and Company, Northfolk Southern and CSX were involved with and benefited from slavery which was declared a “crime against humanity.”
In 2002, Farmer-Paellman filed the first class action lawsuit, “in the Eastern District of New York seeking redress for crimes of enslavement, kidnapping and discrimination against” the former slaves. The redress sought included a report by the corporations for profits made from the slave trade. Although the courts agreed that the “discrimination is a continuing act” in the United States as a result of slavery, it failed to provide restitution in each of the cases.
Although the struggle for reparations up to this point has not been successful in the cours, it is garnering much support and momentum. In order for equality and justice to prevail and be truly expressed in the United States, government officials must stop hiding behind the smoke scre4en and pull th issue of slavery from under thrug. The american gvoernment must apologize for its paraticipation in the Atlantic Slave Trade and make amends for the Black Holocaust that took place in the country. Refusing to acknowledge the very people whose “inalienable rights” were disregarded in building this country is not the answer. Once the United States admits its wrongs, only then can we move on as one America. As of late, the historic disdain exhibited by the American government has and will continue to have lasting damage to the social and economic well being of African Americans.