Reparations should be taken from individual wrongdoers (or their estates) and given to their individual victims (or their estates)

Any group identity in such an operation is injustice, whether it's taking funds from the public generally via State apparatus, or selecting "victims" to reimburse based on skin tone

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I don’t think so.

This is another example of industry colluding with government to deprive individuals of just compensation for labor, of breaking contracts, and of later violating the constitution. There is no statute of limitations for these crimes.

In the same way that Native American nations should sue the federal government for treaty violations, there is a

strong argument for a class action suit against the federal government for slavery reparations.

Interestingly, Murray Rothbard made a strong argument along these lines 50 years ago.

The Federal government has no money of it's own, the only outcome of such a suit is to empower the State to more greatly rob perfectly innocent people to "pay back" the aggrieved party

Interesting argument.

By this metric, the State (which is the problem) should be able to argue that it is never liable for any of its crimes since it "has no money of its own"

There is no State - only individuals behaving in a certain way

Hold these men responsible for their own conduct

There is something to be said for not going through the State for this, in terms of group against State.

It would make more sense to keep it isolated to the decedents of plantation owners, and the decedents of slaves. But there still is the need for recourse against the State. And its of interest to me that you reduced this to a matter of "skin tone" and not labor theft.

I'm saying restitution should flow from actual criminals to actual victims, not psuedo-victims that merely share a skin tone with actual victims or psuedo-criminals who share a nationality with actual criminals

fair.

This is the concept of "collective guilt" and is why a lot of people in North Korea are persecuted because their ancestors had the audacity to own property.

It's also currently being employed in the US but along racial lines, a good example is the Biden admin denying covid relief and treatment to whites in favour of POC/women (even though covid killed WAY more men).

One group gets targeted for collective sin while ignoring those of every other group, even though the individuals had nothing to do with any of it, regardless of which group they belong to.

There is literally *zero* legitimate reason to base any policy on race or gender, ever. Any things they claim to want to "right" can be done by prioritizing by economic class. But that's not the point nor intent.

I 100% agree with you.

The stoking of racial tensions and old wounds is a favorite tactic of revolutionary Marxists to destabilize cultures and weaken them.

My initial point in all of this, which continues, is that after removing racial arguments, the argument for legal recourse against both the State and those who profited directly from labor theft, property theft, and violations of constitutional rights, has standing that exists outside of racial arguments.