Thursday, March 28, 2019

No one owes "reparations"

Because it seems all the Left Statists who are wanting to be the next U.S. godfather of politics are jumping on the "reparations" bandwagon, I thought it might be a good time to repost something from last year.


The odds are almost certain that some of my ancestors were enslaved by the ancestors of someone else sometime in the past. When do I get my "reparations" for this slavery?

Of course, the odds are just as good that some of my ancestors also enslaved the ancestors of someone else sometime in the past. I guess any "reparations" cancel out.

And I'm OK with that because I have never personally been enslaved (if you don't count the attempts to govern me) nor have I ever personally enslaved anyone. I'm against enslaving anyone for any reason... and always have been. Even the kinds of slavery the "majority" approves of.

Abolitionists like me carry no guilt over slavery which was committed in the past-- long before we were born-- and can't owe anyone for krimes (which were then legal and "moral", but never ethical) of the past which I didn't commit and don't support. It's ridiculous that anyone could believe otherwise.

Reminder: I could really use some help.

Writing is my job.
YOU get to decide if I get paid.


  1. If someone enslaves you, and your descendants are thrown into the streets or enslaved also, what chance do they have for success/survival? ...and their children/grandchildren?

    While white people were establishing farms and businesses, building residual wealth and passing it down through generations to be further expanded, black people were the ones doing all the free labor and getting nothing but violated. Black people earned it for generations while white people reaped the rewards.

    How many working poor/blue collar black people would be executives and business owners, farmers, etc, if several generations of their ancestry weren't ripped off and enslaved?

    I don't like niggers any more because they're just another group of people fucking with me. But I cannot say that I blame them a bit for wanting reparations. Nor can I say their position is without merit.

    Disclaimer: My ancestors didn't own any slaves. They were either opponents of slavery or too poor to own much of anything.

    1. I'm looking back a lot further in history (and prehistory) than you are. Pre-"civil war" [sic] slavery in America is just one example. Slavery has been going on for millennia-- you have ancestors who were slaves and you have ancestors who were slave "owners".

      My American ancestors were dirt poor. My grandmother was living a 19th century life (no electricity, no plumbing, and using horses for transportation) well into the 20th century-- right up until about the time of my mother's birth. In fact, they picked cotton by hand until their fingers bled exactly like the 19th century slaves had done (at the direction of their parents instead of a slavemaster).

      I don't know if any of my ancestors opposed slavery. None were famous for it, anyway. The only famous ancestors I've been told of (if it's even true) were horrible people, though.

      Yes, people have routinely treated other terribly throughout history. But robbing people who have never owned a slave, to give their money (after a bureaucratic fee is subtracted, of course) to someone who was never a slave is wrong. At some point you've got to wipe the slate clean and start from scratch. I'll never enslave anyone.

    2. So people can reap the rewards of their grandparent's crimes, but shouldn't have to pay for them with whatever they gain from it?

      You steal a car, give it to you descendants, then die. The owner dies soon after. His son shows up one day with his daddy's will giving him the car. He demands the car back.

      By your logic, since your descendants didn't steal the car, taking it back is wrong. How did it become not his rightful property? His dad earned it, bought it new, gave it to him. How is it not his? ...because someone took it?

    3. Here is something I wrote concerning the Bundy Ranch situation, which I believe applies here:

      That land belonged to the Native tribes before being stolen by some "white" settlers or a "white" government. Then it was bought or leased from the thieves.

      Yeah, and before that the Native tribe who lived there at that time stole it from some other Natives who lived there and who had probably stolen it from someone before them and so on since the first humans came to North America. The story is the same world wide.

      It's sad, and WRONG, to take land (or any other property) which doesn't belong to you. But, Mr. Bundy* didn't steal that land. No one who originally owned that land before someone stole it is still alive, and some undoubtedly left no descendants whatsoever, having been wiped out in the process of having their land stolen.

      Sometimes there is just no way to fix a past wrong. What are you going to do? Obsess over it and hate everyone and everything until perfection is achieved?

      As I have said multiple times in the past, at some point you just have to wipe the slate clean and forgive past offenses and say "Never again!" That, or you'll never have any peace.

      The same goes for slavery. If you can accurately identify an individual who has been harmed by past slavery, accurately quantify the harm, accurately identify an individual who benefited from that individual's enslaved ancestor, accurately quantify that benefit, assign an objective restitution, then MAYBE I'd be OK with it. In fact, in your example with the stolen car, it's clear who owes what to whom. Reality doesn't often work that cleanly. It's too many ifs and maybes for me to be comfortable with.

      I understand that some people are going to feel that they are owed. But why stop with slavery? I am owed reparations for the governing my ancestors were saddled with. And it's not just human actions and choices which have held me back. Nature surely owes me something, too.

    4. I'm arguing according to principle and you're arguing in terms of the utilitarian.

      In principle, black people have a right to search their ancestry, find out who 'owned' their grandparents, then dig into it and tally a total financial loss over x number of generations, then go find the benefactors and take it back. However impractical or difficult does not negate a wrong or a right to restitution.

      And if you want to talk about accurately calculating the loss, just consider the value of life. If your grandfathers stole the lives of 3 generations of a family, then your family owes the lives of 3 generations.

      Your enslaved family members didn't do any more to deserve it than the black slaves, which is why it's fair. White people set the price of their legacy when they stole black people. Think of it like a forced trade.

    5. "And if you want to talk about accurately calculating the loss, just consider the value of life. If your grandfathers stole the lives of 3 generations of a family, then your family owes the lives of 3 generations."

      I disagree. If person A murders person B, person A's descendants are not responsible for the crime in any way, especially if they weren't alive at the time. Holding people responsible for the crimes of other people (where they had no involvement) is wrong. Being related to someone does not make you responsible for their actions.

      The concept of reparations only makes sense in terms of stolen property being given to someone else. If I steal your watch and give it to Kent as a gift, you can legitimately take it back from him. If I steal $100,000 from you and later die leaving $50,000 to my kids, the most they would owe has to be $50,000 plus a small amount of interest from the date they received the money. Anything more makes my kids victims (assuming they were unaware that the money was stolen). When making reparations, it's important not to create new victims in addition to existing victims. It's also often impossible to make complete restitution when massive amounts of time have gone by. Since the thief and their descendants will have managed the property differently than the victim, the current value will almost never be exactly correct.

    6. "I disagree."

      Apparently not.

      "If person A murders person B, person A's descendants are not responsible for the crime in any way, especially if they weren't alive at the time. Holding people responsible for the crimes of other people (where they had no involvement) is wrong. Being related to someone does not make you responsible for their actions."

      You recognize that it's wrong to violate people, that it's wrong to hold people responsible for the actions of their family. What is slavery then?

      What is being born into slavery? How were black kids 200 years ago responsible for anything to owe their lives?

      How do you repay a life? What is the value of life?

      My position is that white people set the terms and conditions of their relationship with black people. The white slave owners apparently wanted to be indebted to black people with lives of their children/family.

      If they didn't want to pay in life, they shouldn't have stolen lives.

    7. Maybe there ought to be a law that descendants of slaves can force the grandchildren of slave owners into slavery.

      Can you imagine that? ...seeing half the white people with collars and chains, loading trucks and boats, getting castrated like livestock, getting tortured for a bad attitude about it, ..the pretty blond haired blue eyed teenager getting gang-banged by multiple great big black penises, forced to have children with who they're told, having to give their babies to their masters, etc... ... ..?

  2. If someone can come up with an accurate way to determine exactly how much is owed and to / from whom, then and only then would it be moral to start some kind of reparations program. Otherwise, you're just redistributing the harm done and adding more harm for good measure.

    A moral reparations program would determine how much a particular slave owner made from a particular slave, calculate how much of that money remains in their descendant's hands (adjusting for inflation) and then transfer it to the slave's descendants equally.

    However, the thought just occurred to me... statists have exactly zero moral right to demand reparations. Slavery was legal, and therefore moral according to their religion. Remember they will always tell us that we must comply with the law, and if we don't like it, just obey and work to change it.

  3. People have been stalking me and harassing me with weird games and BS for a long time, my whole life. It has forced me to go way out of my way and accept major losses in order to circumvent or cope, has caused me some MAJOR life management issues, has effectively cost my life and negated my descendants, prevented me from accumulating wealth or stability and the ability to function normally, has costed me my sanity and happiness.

    The whole time, I have been using asymmetrical and obscure methods as to identify and map out their people/networks and methods, studying them with the ultimate goal of identifying the core group and confronting them. I've finally busted a bunch of them. And I have taken all reasonable peaceful measures to rectify and correct and resolve. They have not been cooperative and no one will help.

    As far as I am concerned, the damage is done, is irrecoverable, and I own each and every one of them, their children, grandchildren, the remaining years of their lives, and all of their property.

    (...and that is not to mention the right to defense, the right to neutralize them by any means necessary or available.)

    I doubt I will be able to collect all of that. But I can at least prioritize targets and collect/kill some of them.

    If they don't want their daughters abducted and sold, their sons testicles removed, then they should have allowed me to live my life, prepare for fatherhood and make children. They set the price of children, thus they pay with their children.

    If they don't want to be shot in the face, then they should have not been a threat to my welfare well being and sanity.

    If they don't want their shit taken, they should have allowed me to get an education so I could increase my income and buy my own shit.

    If they don't want to be tortured in my basement for the remainder of their lives, then they shouldn't have harassed me and drove me nuts for decades.

    If they expect me to be nice about it, then they should have been nice and minded their own god damned business, or at least confronted me honestly and peacefully many years ago.

  4. and how much will the "victim gtoup" pay the descendants of those who fought and died to end your tribes "injustice" [which existed everwhere throughout history and still does for other groups]??

    lotsa folks died to end your victimhood status. be thankful. repay your debt by being moral going forward (eg, do not initiate aggression you complain about, but then seek to impose).

    welcome to history.

    1. I presume you mean the union army. And they didn't end anything for my very white tribe.

      They volunteered or were drafted. If volunteered, they accepted the terms and conditions. If drafted, government is the violator, isn't much different than slave owners. If anyone owes them, it's government.