...the lawsuits brought by descendants of slaves against current companies that have realized any benefit at any past time from slavery.
2006-10-10 15:27:04 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
The whole idea is preposterous if you know the facts.
Who are you going to enforce a judgement against?
The descendants of slaveowners? Guess what, the money and land they had was taken away after the war, so the fruits of slavery, whatever was left in 1865, was taken by the US Government.
Should the US Government pay it? They'll just increase taxes. Of course, if you tax personal income, you'd not only be taxing descendants of slaves, but also descendants of people who came to the US after the Civil War, some who maybe came last year. The percentage of the population that is descended from people in the US in 1865 is small, and if you narrow it to those that actually owned slaves, smaller still. Maybe if you totally exempt Hawaiians it might pass for an illusion of fairness.
Okay, so how about we just tax corporations? Except that many US corporations happen to have black CEO's and boardmembers, and I doubt you'll find a single one without at least one black shareholder.
2006-10-10 16:11:11 · answer #1 · answered by open4one 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
None of them. There is no real way to substantiate which persons family was victimized. Anyway, slavery was declared illegal in the United States. The Confederacy no longer exists, so their are no deep pockets. This is another example of demogogues like Jackson and Sharpton trying to make a buck. Also, slavery would not have existed without the complicty of African Tribes kidnapping other tribesman and selling them to the French, British or Portugese.
2006-10-10 22:33:17 · answer #2 · answered by S. M 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If I was a juror on all of these cases, than none would succeed. Can I sue Italy for making my ancestors slaves back in the Roman times? How about the indentured servants who did more of the dangerous work in the South because if they died before their seven years was up than who cared there was always more Irish coming in that met the same requirements. How about the people up North in the factories and mines that were paid slaves?
2006-10-10 22:32:17 · answer #3 · answered by andy 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You'd' open it up to law suits from Indians, already being bilked out of billion in "trust" funds that now can't be accounted for. Big surprise there.
More than that, during the Civil war, prior to the proclamation of emancipation, the Federal Government (North) was the biggest single slave owner in world history except perhaps the Egyptian Pharaohs.
2006-10-10 22:50:39 · answer #4 · answered by Gaspode 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
none because this is the card they always play and it is usually you do not know what it is to be in chains, all I can say is grow up and get over it they also do not know what it is like to be in chains never having been in them I seriously doubt that there are any alive now that do know, just like the Mexicans saying they built this land and it was stolen from them also get over it one can not live in the past if you care to check history books you will find that the tribal chiefs in Africa sold their own people into slavery so to really get to the bottom of it then you would have to go to the source and file law suit against Africa.
2006-10-10 22:32:54 · answer #5 · answered by billc4u 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I was just discussing this earlier with some friends, actually. None of them should win. If they do, I will lose any faith that I may now have in the American legal system.
No one can blame me for something my ancestors did (mine were actually still in Europe then, but anything they did there wasn't my fault). I'm not them.
Likewise, no one should be compensated for something that never happened to them. They shouldn't take advantage of their ancestors suffering. That's low.
"Now men with purple hearts, carry silver guns/ / /And they will kill a man for what his father has done/ / /But what my father did, you know it don't mean ****/ / /I'm not him."
-from "Don't Know When, But a Day Is Gonna Come" by Bright Eyes
2006-10-10 22:40:35 · answer #6 · answered by K-Rex 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
None. Because all they would have to do is prove how crappy the descendants of slaves lives would've been had they not been born in the USA of slave ancestry. And that wouldn't be hard to do.
2006-10-10 22:35:02 · answer #7 · answered by Chris J 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I'm responding to previous comments because of racist overtones.... our country have paid the Japanese for attacking them, the Vietnamese and more for less yet no comments like these
how cold can we be to a people who were forced into slavery so that their descendants don't know who they are..... who after slavery was beaten and killed for the color of their skin
my question to those who hate is "what would God think"
2006-10-10 22:42:04 · answer #8 · answered by ladyqueenbeeee 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
None, they are just another example of how douchebags like Al Sharpton and Jessie "Da Baby Daddy" Jackson exercise control over their own people to make a buck!
2006-10-10 22:33:52 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
None should, infact to earn the money they want the people suing should have to become salves, get beaten down with whips and chains, sold at auction (they still have them in Africa, go figure). Hell, why not just let us evil white massa's rape a few of the more comely females so at least if I have to pay them for something, it will be something that really happened by me to them.
2006-10-10 22:29:53 · answer #10 · answered by Meow the cat 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋