Posted on 04/18/2022 6:25:38 AM PDT by artichokegrower
Reparations = Dane-geld
And that is called paying the Dane-geld;
But we’ve proved it again and again,
That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld
You never get rid of the Dane.-Kipling
Reparations were paid in 1861-1865 in the form of blood sacrifice. 700,000 dead, tens of thousands gave arms, legs, eyes in the settlement of that matter of slavery.
Democrat Party should pay - the party of slavery, Jim Crow, segregation, KKK, etc.
What about the genes of Africans who were slaveholders in Africa?
“… and no black man alive in America today ever picked cotton.”
You need to qualify that phrase.
My neighbor across the street picked cotton as a child and used a mule to plow the fields. He’s in his 70s.
This is a shakedown to pay their black pets and move us farther towards Zimbabwe and South Africa.
doesn’t matter
they are now unidentifiable and historically irrelevant
There is no equality gene demonstrating superiority.
Wrong, both Union Generals Ulyesses S. Grant and George Thomas owned slaves. Grant freed the one slave he owned in 1858. Thomas didn’t free the slave he owned until the XVIII Amendment was ratified.
Reparations do not apply here.
So that means the slave descendants of John Wayles would not be entitled to reparations?
Interesting questions.
One could argue that the objectives of ending slavery and saving the union were interdependent. Also, whether conscripts or volunteers, they fought bravely and the outcome was, after a tragically high number of dead and wounded, union victory.
The left understands, as do the blactivists, that on average blacks will be far behind non-blacks economically - most likely forever. This is about attaining “equitable outcomes” without acknowledging the failure of assimilation or cultural shortcomings.
Not sure about Thomas but Grant wasn’t a Republican when He owned a slave (that was gifted to him).
67% of blacks are in the federal government, I’m sure more are in the state and local govts (especially the DMV!)
They didn't die to free the slaves. The died to make certain that an Independent South would never be a financial threat to the powerful corrupt wealthy elite that controlled Washington DC in 1861 and still controls Washington DC today.
They died to protect rich men in the Northeast's money. "Freeing slaves" didn't become a goal until nearly two years into the war.
They weren't. One of Lincoln's first efforts to "preserve the Union" was to call for the passage of the Corwin amendment which would have made slavery permanent.
This amendment passed both houses of Congress and was sent to the states for ratification. Five Northern states did vote to ratify this permanent slavery amendment. Lincoln personally wrote to the governors of the seceded states telling them that the Corwin Amendment was in the process of being ratified.
Again, this amendment made slavery permanent.
Here is more information, including the actual text of the amendment.
Also, whether conscripts or volunteers, they fought bravely and the outcome was, after a tragically high number of dead and wounded, union victory.
When you have four times the population and you even supplement that with grabbing Irish of the boat and forcing them into the army, it's pretty hard to lose.
Somebody should explain that to the Ukrainians and let them know they don't have a chance against the Russians. Except for the BS about the Irish of course.
The Southern states got some help from the British, but it was covert and they didn't get nearly so much help as would have made a difference.
Probably because the Ukraine is a sovereign nation and the Confederacy wasn't.
So I have been often told by their enemies.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.