who's owed more? natives for stolen land or blacks for forced free labor?

2stepz_ahead
2stepz_ahead Guests, Members, Writer, Content Producer Posts: 32,324 ✭✭✭✭✭
Had a convo last night about who was owed more.

started from reparations from the free kaborvrhat built huge businesses that was paying limited overhead until someone asked about the value of kand that was taken then privatized to be resold at a profit.

both set white America up real nice....but they claim to work so hard for their lifestyle....but anyway

if you took a tally....while would be owed more?
«134567

Comments

  • 2stepz_ahead
    2stepz_ahead Guests, Members, Writer, Content Producer Posts: 32,324 ✭✭✭✭✭
    5th Letter wrote: »
    Indians been getting reparations for years, black people have yet to receive anything..

    follow the title bruh...

    it's not about who's getting what...its about who's owed what.

    if natives are owed 2 billion just because they was pain 209 mil...there debt was still 2bill

    get my point
  • 5th Letter
    5th Letter Members, Moderators, Writer Posts: 37,068 Regulator
    5th Letter wrote: »
    Indians been getting reparations for years, black people have yet to receive anything..

    follow the title bruh...

    it's not about who's getting what...its about who's owed what.

    if natives are owed 2 billion just because they was pain 209 mil...there debt was still 2bill

    get my point

    I get what the title means. And I did answer the question. Black people are owed more because black people haven't gotten anything. Whereas Indians have already been receiving resources. I don't know how else to explain it.
  • blackgod813
    blackgod813 Members Posts: 9,577 ✭✭✭✭✭
    5th Letter wrote: »
    5th Letter wrote: »
    Indians been getting reparations for years, black people have yet to receive anything..

    follow the title bruh...

    it's not about who's getting what...its about who's owed what.

    if natives are owed 2 billion just because they was pain 209 mil...there debt was still 2bill

    get my point

    I get what the title means. And I did answer the question. Black people are owed more because black people haven't gotten anything. Whereas Indians have already been receiving resources. I don't know how else to explain it.

    He mean from the start pretend natives didnt get anything now tally it
  • blackgod813
    blackgod813 Members Posts: 9,577 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Cant put a number on hell they had we had hell but ours lasted for longer
  • playmaker88
    playmaker88 Members Posts: 67,905 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 2017
    why?.. (rhetorical)
  • The Lonious Monk
    The Lonious Monk Members Posts: 26,258 ✭✭✭✭✭
    5th Letter wrote: »
    5th Letter wrote: »
    Indians been getting reparations for years, black people have yet to receive anything..

    follow the title bruh...

    it's not about who's getting what...its about who's owed what.

    if natives are owed 2 billion just because they was pain 209 mil...there debt was still 2bill

    get my point

    I get what the title means. And I did answer the question. Black people are owed more because black people haven't gotten anything. Whereas Indians have already been receiving resources. I don't know how else to explain it.

    You still don't seem to understand what he's saying. Let's put numbers to it. Say the Natives are owed 2 billion and have gotten 500 million, they are still owed 1.5 billion. Say blacks are owed 1 billion and haven't received anything. That means they are still owed 1 billion, and that's still less than the Natives.

    I'm not saying that's right, but that's the logic of his argument and your stance doesn't really address that.

    On topic, I'd say blacks are owed more. The thing about is that we like to say America stole the land from the Natives, and to some extent they it did. However, it's not really that simple. First, the Natives didn't really have the same concept of land ownership that America does. Think about it, the settlers came here with no claim to the land but still set up communities. No one refers to that as stealing because no one really had a problem with it, not even a lot of the Natives at the time. Then when America expanded, it actually went to war with the various Native tribes and won. Like it or not, that's how the world has always worked. To the winner goes the spoils. America was wrong for the way it did the Natives, but technically it doesn't really owe them anything. The lost.

    However, when it comes to slavery, America has officially admitted that slavery was wrong. If the country has taken the official stance that slavery was wrong, then there should be some restitution for the wronged party. So America, quite literally does owe the descendants of slaves.
  • gns
    gns Members Posts: 21,285 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Negros win the 'who got it worse' Olympics 10 outta 10 times
    Even in the holocaust we some how found a way to get our ass killed over ? we aint een involved in
    Aint no ? suffered during slavery
    And indians had slaves themselves(so did other ? but u get my point)
  • northside7
    northside7 Members Posts: 25,739 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Blacks.

    North and South America and the carribean islands. European empires and nations. All built on the backs of African men, women and children.
  • The Lonious Monk
    The Lonious Monk Members Posts: 26,258 ✭✭✭✭✭
    gns wrote: »
    Negros win the 'who got it worse' Olympics 10 outta 10 times
    Even in the holocaust we some how found a way to get our ass killed over ? we aint een involved in
    Aint no ? suffered during slavery
    And indians had slaves themselves(so did other ? but u get my point)

    I don't think any of the Natives had a system of Chattel slavery though just to be clear. So the Native slavery and American slavery aren't really comparable.
  • CapitalB
    CapitalB Members Posts: 24,556 ✭✭✭✭✭
    ? got this by a long shot..

    the "pain and suffering" by itself is more then what the Natives are owed..
    we aint go even get on the labor..
  • Crude_
    Crude_ Members Posts: 19,964 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Objectively speaking this is very subjective depending on whom you're asking.

    The Natives were done pretty damn ? too and they were nearly eradicated by the disease and warfare the Europeans brought.

    We as Black folks suffered for a much longer sustained period and we are still almost universally looked down on and discriminated against by other races even though we are mostly superior to all of them despite being smaller in numbers.

    I won't say which was worse because both were terrible times in this country's history but I will say that both atrocities speak volumes about the Europeans and their humanity.
  • 2stepz_ahead
    2stepz_ahead Guests, Members, Writer, Content Producer Posts: 32,324 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Crude_ wrote: »
    Objectively speaking this is very subjective depending on whom you're asking.

    The Natives were done pretty damn ? too and they were nearly eradicated by the disease and warfare the Europeans brought.

    We as Black folks suffered for a much longer sustained period and we are still almost universally looked down on and discriminated against by other races even though we are mostly superior to all of them despite being smaller in numbers.

    I won't say which was worse because both were terrible times in this country's history but I will say that both atrocities speak volumes about the Europeans and their humanity.

    good post ..

    but it's not about who had it worse...it's about who would be owed more between stolen land or free forced labor
  • gns
    gns Members Posts: 21,285 ✭✭✭✭✭
    gns wrote: »
    Negros win the 'who got it worse' Olympics 10 outta 10 times
    Even in the holocaust we some how found a way to get our ass killed over ? we aint een involved in
    Aint no ? suffered during slavery
    And indians had slaves themselves(so did other ? but u get my point)

    I don't think any of the Natives had a system of Chattel slavery though just to be clear. So the Native slavery and American slavery aren't really comparable.

    U aint ?
    U aint know how they treated us
    Shut up
  • Olorun22
    Olorun22 Members Posts: 5,696 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Native are owned more because it's their land and their numbers are low.

    Black people are all over the world and we have a chance to turn it around but for the native they're done.

    They can never recover
  • The Lonious Monk
    The Lonious Monk Members Posts: 26,258 ✭✭✭✭✭
    gns wrote: »
    gns wrote: »
    Negros win the 'who got it worse' Olympics 10 outta 10 times
    Even in the holocaust we some how found a way to get our ass killed over ? we aint een involved in
    Aint no ? suffered during slavery
    And indians had slaves themselves(so did other ? but u get my point)

    I don't think any of the Natives had a system of Chattel slavery though just to be clear. So the Native slavery and American slavery aren't really comparable.

    U aint ?
    U aint know how they treated us
    Shut up

    No but other people are injuns and know how they treated us and wrote books. Try picking up one from time to time.
  • 2stepz_ahead
    2stepz_ahead Guests, Members, Writer, Content Producer Posts: 32,324 ✭✭✭✭✭
    fortyacres wrote: »
    fortyacres wrote: »
    why would you compare historical genocides ? thats silly

    is it really?

    I guess you skipped Jew class.

    they bring the ? up over anything..

    but ? must keep silent?

    not even a discussion?

    *in trump voice*

    sad

    Its silly from them (jews) and its silly from you

    you get nowhere by comparing tragedies. You can make a strong intelligent argument on what kind of reparations should or would African Americans receive without talking about other minority groups, its weak and counter productive.

    silly?

    unlike you. I can turn a "silly " discussion into a learning experience.

    you debating me about a question that can spark debate and lead elsewhere without thinking of a bigger picture is counter productive.

    even taking it smaller...

    why can't a simple question be asked without a high horse ? coming in?

    why does this question bother you?
    why didn't you just ignore it?

    who's comparing tragedies? I said what was owed from what was stolen for free.

    Jews still want money from Nazis from what was stolen, am I right?

    so, what's your point again?
  • playmaker88
    playmaker88 Members Posts: 67,905 ✭✭✭✭✭
  • gns
    gns Members Posts: 21,285 ✭✭✭✭✭
    gns wrote: »
    gns wrote: »
    Negros win the 'who got it worse' Olympics 10 outta 10 times
    Even in the holocaust we some how found a way to get our ass killed over ? we aint een involved in
    Aint no ? suffered during slavery
    And indians had slaves themselves(so did other ? but u get my point)

    I don't think any of the Natives had a system of Chattel slavery though just to be clear. So the Native slavery and American slavery aren't really comparable.

    U aint ?
    U aint know how they treated us
    Shut up

    No but other people are injuns and know how they treated us and wrote books. Try picking up one from time to time.

    So i should get my history from the enemy
    U musta got all A's in school.
    Olorun22 wrote: »
    Native are owned more because it's their land and their numbers are low

    Black people are all over the world and we have a chance to turn it around but for the native they're done.

    They can never recover

    Low?
    U see all these ? messicans runnin around?!
  • jono
    jono Members Posts: 30,280 ✭✭✭✭✭
    5th Letter wrote: »
    5th Letter wrote: »
    Indians been getting reparations for years, black people have yet to receive anything..

    follow the title bruh...

    it's not about who's getting what...its about who's owed what.

    if natives are owed 2 billion just because they was pain 209 mil...there debt was still 2bill

    get my point

    I get what the title means. And I did answer the question. Black people are owed more because black people haven't gotten anything. Whereas Indians have already been receiving resources. I don't know how else to explain it.

    You still don't seem to understand what he's saying. Let's put numbers to it. Say the Natives are owed 2 billion and have gotten 500 million, they are still owed 1.5 billion. Say blacks are owed 1 billion and haven't received anything. That means they are still owed 1 billion, and that's still less than the Natives.

    I'm not saying that's right, but that's the logic of his argument and your stance doesn't really address that.

    On topic, I'd say blacks are owed more. The thing about is that we like to say America stole the land from the Natives, and to some extent they it did. However, it's not really that simple. First, the Natives didn't really have the same concept of land ownership that America does. Think about it, the settlers came here with no claim to the land but still set up communities. No one refers to that as stealing because no one really had a problem with it, not even a lot of the Natives at the time. Then when America expanded, it actually went to war with the various Native tribes and won. Like it or not, that's how the world has always worked. To the winner goes the spoils. America was wrong for the way it did the Natives, but technically it doesn't really owe them anything. The lost.

    However, when it comes to slavery, America has officially admitted that slavery was wrong. If the country has taken the official stance that slavery was wrong, then there should be some restitution for the wronged party.
    So America, quite literally does owe the descendants of slaves.

    Considering a large contingent of African slaves were BOUGHT (not stolen or kidnapped) from Africa that changes everything. Its calle the slave TRADE for a reason.

    You can't deny the rights of people who don't have rights in the first place.

    Also Natives DID have rights (property rights) which make this an unequal argument. The Trail of Tears is literally the demolishing of their rights as legal contracts stated they had a right to the land they were forced from.

    Also Blacks DID have organisations set up by the government to assist post-slavery. The Freedman's Bureau is just one such organization, and it failed. The point being that freed slaves had an opportunity and it didn't work out.

    ? isn't nearly as cut and dry as folks are claiming it to be.

  • AZTG
    AZTG Members Posts: 7,598 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Its really hard to call it. Just economically speaking, free labor for 400 years probably compounded more than what the land would have cost.

    Speaking of lost potential though? Black people have been turning things around economically despite the odds. The media wont speak on it, but black people have been growing faster than average when it comes to economic growth. Natives though? They been almost all wiped out so they have almost no potential.

    Before yall come and destroy this point, its really hard to call. Either way its not easy to fully pick one side cause they both been ? .