Do you think the slaves were owed reparations?

One thousand a month for redress of grievance purposes.

Unemployment compensation for those who are simply unemployed.

And, means tested welfare can cover the rest.

 

we have a First Amendment for political purposes.

 

Another one that will of course ignore my request and we will just have to guess why.

Explain the Trans Sahara Slave trade, and the Barbary Coast slave trade.

I am still waiting for one of you liberals to explain it.

 

Ya I'm sure those cowboys working for beans and a bunk felt the same way! In the words of a cattleman "Cowboy up" and get to work

 

The owners were owed in that case, rent, cost of food and clothing as offsets.

 

let me save my brother the time since your "opener" has already invalidated the entirety of your post and as such relegates it to the dustbin with its proudly stated false premise.
your wiki [lmao] link states that "the enslaved people were not treated as chattel slaves and were given certain rights in a system similar to indentured servitude elsewhere in the world" in no less, than the 3rd sentence

did you know that indentured servants were what the irish were in america? yes! they were WORKERS, EMPLOYEES and not slaves. the irish were practically identical status as most other european immigrants. its only because of the chip on the shoulder of irish ppl that plastic paddies in america like to pretend they were slaves to the the english, due to a bitter, local, religious rivalry in briton and sought sympathy by using so called african american REAL tragic status as comparative state. that is a real blight on the irish and itruly dont believe any irish person would do so, so please, dont speak for them.

 

the irish were free to leave, go back to ireland if they wished. Native Americans and so called africans should be paid, the WJE's were paid $74Billion for 2 years of being in concentration camps.

 

There were many different kinds of slavery but black slavery as it was practiced among African tribes was brutal and absolute. Two tribes would make war on each other and the losers became slaves. You know to be different? Tell us all. We aren't talking about the Irish. We are talking about whether anybody should be given money for doing nothing. Who deserves to get money for anything that happened to other people they weren't even related to over 150 years ago? This reparatons thing is just a big scam being run by Democrats to get black votes and everybody knows it including the blacks.

 

It doesn't work that way, when people are given money like that, they learn how to depend on it, and live on it.
That is a huge problem we face with the never ending cycle of welfare, generation after generation.

 

The Africans are free to go back. In fact, if a fund was started I am sure they could do it for free.

 

Too late for them.

 

I don't know if free is the exact word, but I'm sure they could eventually obtain citizenship.

For anybody interested, I'm always willing to help...
http://lis.gov.lr/index.php/naturalization-2/

It's truly a beautiful country filled to overflowing with the treasures for any black Americans who wish to become African.

 

no one has mentioned the STUPID right wing version. If we gave them all a million bucks, and took it away from Caucasians, then in a generation, them blacks would all be poor again, and the Caucasians would have all that million plus.

 

are there any slaves still around?

 

Not many in America, but Africa and the Mid-east, still has slavery.

 

You may have missed other parts of the admittedly not-all-inclusive article (it was only intended as an 'intro' to a person who doesn't seem to know anything at all about slavery in Africa through the millennia). The added emphasis is mine:

"Chattel slavery is a specific servitude relationship where the slave is treated as the property of the owner. There is evidence of long histories of chattel slavery in the Nile river valley and Northern Africa."

"Slavery was a part of the economic structure of African societies for many centuries".

" In many African communities, where land could not be owned, enslavement of individuals was used as a means to increase the influence a person had and expand connections. This made slaves a permanent part of a master's lineage."

"Human sacrifice was common in West African states up to and during the 19th century. Although archaeological evidence is not clear on the issue prior to European contact, in those societies that practiced human sacrifice, slaves became the most prominent victims."

Again, this is by no means an exhaustive article, nor is it the most scholarly. I was using it as the basis for a discussion, because my antagonist didn't provide ANYTHING, and frankly, neither have you. Therefore it stands that slavery was widespread, and long before White Europeans started buying them. By the way -- did YOU know that slavery was not ended in England until 1833! It did not end in France until 1848!

But in any event, we're miles off topic by now. The cental issue is "reparations", and NO, there is not one single logical reason why any American Black person should be given "reparations" by the government because of the practice of slavery -- WHICH ENDED IN THIS COUNTRY 154 YEARS AGO, in 1865! This "reparations" ploy is nothing but a slimy attempt by hyperliberal Democrat politicians to BUY Black votes... and anybody who supports this nonsense is just as slimy as the scumbags who are pushing it!

 

My strong suspicion is that you won't get a coherent answer to your question.

They cherry-pick, nit-pick, and manipulate strands of paragraphs to suit their viewpoints... and, simply ignore others. It has been said that arguing with such people is like wrestling pigs in mud that is as opaque as their mentality, and as shallow as their level of education....

 

then I suppose they should get the reparations!

 

They don't need them, they are still slaves.

 

even slaves can buy bling!

 

I am not familiar with these slave trades; I will check them out. I have read up on the Trans Atlantic slave trade quite a bit.

 

In the Islamic raids on Europe, a prize was a blond haired virgin.
One Calief ordered 10,000 of them.

 

Well, the Trans Atlantic slave trade came out of the Trans Sahara slave trade, which was a well established 700 year INDUSTRY.



Started in the 7th century, and lasted really till the 19th century, some say still going on.

 

Simple. You missed the salient point. Both of those came well after Ancient Kemet had decayed into the moral morass brought upon it from outside Invaders and Colonizers who had been destabilizing the foundations of Ancient Kemet for over 3,000 years prior. My dear friend, by the time you get to the Trans Saharan Slave Trade and the Barbary Coast Slave Trade, you are so far down the Colonial rabbit hole of moral decay in the region that even cannibalism was considered acceptable.

You'll be waiting for the education you never got in "skool." There is no link between the cultural depravity that existed in those regions subsequent to Alexander and Hellenism, and that of the moral tower which was Ancient Kemet, Ancient Nubia and Ancient Kush. You are looking at the foundations of the current corrupt Western Paradigm for answers to questions that didn't even exist during the peak of Civilization thousands of years prior. My contention was that Institutional Slavery was never indigenous to the Mother Continent. It migrated through Invasion and Colonization of its People, before it became even remotely acceptable socially. That was my point.

You refer to the Arab Slave Trade by another name. Were you aware of that fact? These were no longer Indigenous Black People of the Mother Continent engaging in the selling of their beloved People. These were previously infiltrated outsiders to the former Kingdoms that stood long before the major invasions took place. So, you are talking about so-called "Black People" who had already been through many generations of Arabization, Asiazation and Caucazation (my words don't bother looking them up with the exception of the Arab derivative). So, these were not Original Humans from the Motherland anymore. These were a number of admixtures with highly different Moral Values than those they were replacing on the Continent.

The part you are sorely missing here is how Nations change. Kemet, did not become Egypt, overnight. Egypt, is the new kid on the block in this part of the world relative to the kingdoms that came before it. Once a nation has been successfully invaded and colonized, it takes a while before internal customs, mores, values and belief systems change. Again, this was done over the span of 3,000+ years in the part of the world you are now talking about.

Black People sold Black People into slavery? Like hell they did. The people you are referring to don't even know their own true History in this world. The People you refer to are NOT Original Indigenous People of the land. These are the descendants of the Conquered that you refer to. Their true History wiped from their memories. Their true Identity wiped from their culture or severely disrupted over thousands of years. When you look at "Africa" today, you are in no way looking at my Original Ancestors.

Got it?

Good. Your move.