You are not responsible for the Crimes of your Ancestors.

These are all great comments! Everyone gets a Star. I don't agree with everyone, of course, but these are the discussions I like. There are opinions from every direction here.

originally posted by: vNex92
I suppose by their logic we should be blaming our first human Ancestor who threw a rock upon another human.

I was going to start with the Romans.

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
Who is saying that you are responsible for other's crimes?

Evanston, IL is.

abc7chicago.com...#:~:text=The%20city%20council%20voted%20in,no%20longer%20a%20fringe%20issue.

originally posted by: rickymouse
I am not aware of any crimes my ancestors did.

Doesn't mean you won't be accused of any.

originally posted by: ntech
Ex post facto laws.
- You cannot make an action illegal after the fact. Like it or not Slavery was legal up to the 1860s. You can't write a law now declaring the act of slavery illegal in 1860.

Bills of attainder. - is confusing. But I'll take your word for it.

The 14th Amendment which says.

Section 4.
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Any reparations over slavery on either side of the argument were bundled up with Confederate war debt and repudiated.

Reparations are Unconstitutional.

Thank you for posting this. I needed to see it.

originally posted by: Cambury
Do you believe you should be able to reap the benefits of something that was stolen by your ancestors in perpetuity?

So what do we owe the Native Americans then?
What do the Brittish owe my Scottish and Irish Ancestors?
What do the Italians (Romans) owe my British Ancestors?
What you are suggesting is economically impossible.

originally posted by: JBurns
I am not interested in judging the past by modern standards.

I don't think anyone can, really.

originally posted by: ntech
According to the Constitution there are several legal concepts at play here based on the title of the thread.

First off would be Ex post facto laws. You cannot make an action illegal after the fact. Like it or not Slavery was legal up to the 1860s. You can't write a law now declaring the act of slavery illegal in 1860.

Bills of attainder. You can't hold the children responsible for the crimes of their parents or ancestors. Crimes of blood end at the lifetime of the person accused.

Lastly the post civil war Congress got the emancipation clause added to the 14th Amendment which says.

Section 4.
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Any reparations over slavery on either side of the argument were bundled up with Confederate war debt and repudiated.

Reparations are Unconstitutional.

I would also add there is NO ONE SLAVE still alive.

so unless you were a slave you dont get "reperations" for your great great grandparent.

scrounger

Architectural law is about the only place I am aware of where someone can seek compensatory damage restitution against a family post mortem. I think part of the argument of the Exchange Towers was designed to withstand airplane collision in the architectural design meaning the architectural firm and the families of those architects employed for the twin towers would be financially responsible for the collapse of them since it would be considered a design failure.

One of my college professors had an architectural degree and for such reasons he'd always ask his students what they wanted to be any if any of them said architect he had some very good reasonings and stories as to why that career path was a bad idea... even if the city and planners etc stamp and approve and say it matches code the architect and their family for however many generations they can trace direct lineage too is still considered responsible.

a reply to: Crowfoot

very well stated and questioning comment..

i would add the concept of a "family member" who can collect a penalty, decision, ect from someone who has since passed away has been twisted beyond all recognition in the case of reoperations, what happened to the native american claim, ect.

the idea is solid and has legal precedence..

where it goes off the rails / twisted is in the concept of TIME, DEGREE OF SEPERATON (aka how far down the line they fall) and holding THOSE DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE.

for example

if say i was killed by neglect or outright criminal activity from Widget corporation my children could collect on the settlement/penalty..

but not my great or great great, ect children decades or more down the line

if i was promised by same corporation as compensation for them taking my land and they didnt pay up and i died
yes my children could go after them for it..

but not my grand children and great great grandchildren.. they are owed nothing and after oh say multiple generations you cant say that all (ex) 50 of my decedents get a piece of it much less each gets the whole amount.

now take alot of these claims are not 100 plus years old the VERY PEOPLE like the widget corporation are LONG GONE.. there is no one who ACTUALLY COMITTED THE CRIME or OWED THE DEBT left .

just because (ex) my great great great ancestor owned widget corporation or just because i share the same skin color (yes going there) does not make me guilty of their crimes or owe their debt.


now lets take the reparation's claim to an "inconvenient truth" .
if you feel that due to slavery the USA and every one living today who is white is responsible for the debt and everyone gets money what about this?

how much percentage (given there is NO DIRECT SLAVES STILL LIVING TODAY) "black " do you have to be to get it?

even more uncomfortable that unlike the film "roots" portrays alot of those sold into slavery were done BY TRIBES IN AFRICA.. in short BLACKS SELLING OTHER BLACKS INTO SLAVERY.
so should the descendance be also demanding money from the tribes (or their descendance) that did that?
how about the muslims who were the traders to the "White men"?
should they not demand money from say saudia arabia?
ect ect ect?

how about the tribes that now claim the "white man" owes them something?
should not the descendance of the previous tribe that lost their land to war from that tribe then demand money /benefits from them?

hell how long should say jews demand the german people pay them for the holocausts?
that was alot more direct and recent?

where does it stop?

look if you have DIRECT person/family that was wronged and the DIRECT people responsible.. by all means hold them accountable.. that is HOW THE LAW IS WORDED

but because your great great great (or more) relative was a slave does not mean you get a damn thing today nor that you were IN ANY WAY DIRECTLY (key word DIRECTLY) effected by it.
nor does because say someone is white do they owe you a damn thing due to the color of your skin..
hell even if their great great great (or more) grandfather was a slave owner.

scrounger

a reply to: scrounger

The architect law is one of the oldest ones and obviously written because of the possible loss of life from failure and damages to the family in also what it housed as some things in the form of heirloom were and in many cases still are considered priceless to the heart same as a loved one that is irreplaceable. The psychology of "projecting" stems from such losses where one is continually looking for a replacement as some ideal that cannot ever be matched; but in honestly looking those very same people out of some survivor's guilt refuse to look at the faults of the person they keep trying to make or have others "replace" such a thing is nearly everywhere in blatant and in subtle forms, such a form of restlessness turns into abuse trying to force whomever into that role of the one that's missing and in some cases murder of those that have bent to that will and have become selfless and willingly have tried to fill that role.

Different countries have different laws there are some that do not even sell property it has to be inherited even though you could rent it until your dying day also some countries have a form of slavery as an indentured servitude as that family works for that family to cover some debt owed to one or the other those two typically arise in what get termed third world countries or countries that are not liberated from a crown, from a church, and in some cases both.

Language being a barrier also happens as well as illusions of stereotypes that come across as gross generalizations when encountered words like all men, all women, all blacks, all jews etc and of course such generalizations are the very root of sexism, racism, classism etc. one example of middle east trading... tariff it means to haggle price but when free trade occurred that word was confusing because in english tariff mean a set tax or set price that cannot be haggled... so same word same spelling not at all the same meaning... quite a few words like that in the world where when they cross culture? Lose all sort of translation or meaning... some learn the language through idioms or the language of local yokels or TV/entertainment venues that comes off as very insulting and rude when they thought it was a normal, friendly, and nice talk... and it's difficult to say in a way that the person comprehends that calling every woman you meet a slut is a gross generalization especially when there's a silly grin to match it like is it in jest or not in jest and even in jest you don't know that person well enough to just say that in the same manner as one of her closest female friends might and say that.

The depth of the thing people think of as reparation is very deep as many go by name and not just ethnic origin so if you have some famous last name where can we dig to get some out of you cause we have some of those last names and slaves got their names from slave owners I'm seriously not joking sorry dude my family were irish/scottish/native/german mining and railroad slaves in the North maybe you owe me... hey where you going I thought we were family!

In my personal opinion trying to formulate some law around that concept of reparation sort of nonsense is a protective one to try to prevent the greedy just out to make an make an easy buck and family is tired of you bumming off them and now just on the streets harassing people looking for a little something something and try to blame or guilt others in coercion when that individual honestly does not and never will owe you anything any more than your family does unless they think you deserve it or are due it. likely it wasn't ever the spiel or hussle story someone went on as the why that bummed money was given to them it was likely here take this shut up and get out of my face money I dont have the time for it... or they felt threatened and cornered by the person asking worried it will turn into a demand or violence.

As far as I am concerned street wise is looking both ways and knowing what those signs on it are.

No one is to take guilt from crimes of the past ...

It is however a crime not to learn these historical facts.

"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it " churchill

Some history....

"The truth of the matter is that England arrived relatively late to the slave trade. Slavery had existed for thousands of years before England engaged in the Transatlantic Slave Trade. Ancient Egypt relied on slave labour for construction projects, notably the pyramids, and ancient Greece likewise made use of slaves – Herodotus claimed slaves, known as helots, outnumbered free people by as many as seven to one in ancient Sparta. The Roman economy heavily relied on slaves too. Viking raiders enslaved people in any area they targeted, while Arabs began enslaving people from Africa from about the ninth century, establishing the trans-Sahara slave trade. Arab slave traders continued to be prolific in East Africa throughout the 19th century, and pirates from North Africa enslaved at least one million European people between 1500 and 1800. Slave labour provided the power source for the galleys deployed by Italian city states and the Ottomans for centuries and proved crucial in the Battle of Lepanto in 1571. Roughly 6.5 million people were enslaved and shipped across the Black Sea from 1200 to 1760.

English people were themselves subjected to the terror of slavery as the coastline of Britain was frequently targeted by Barbary pirates. So severe was the problem that it was stated in the Calendar of State Papers in May 1625 that “the Turks are upon our coasts. They take ships only to take the men to make slaves of them”. Raids by Barbary pirates became so problematic that Parliament established the Committee for Algiers in December 1640 to deal with the ransoming of those who had been taken into slavery. Edmund Carson was sent to Algiers by Parliament in 1645 to negotiate the release of English people taken captive and he ended up spending the final years of his life trying to secure the liberty of further English slaves. Yet, despite Parliament’s efforts, North African pirates continued to terrorise England’s coast until combined British and Dutch military forces finally stamped the problem out in 1816 and freed 4,000 slaves in the process.

The Transatlantic Slave Trade itself simply could not have functioned had a vibrant slave trade not already existed from within Africa. For a start, slavery existed in West Africa even before Europeans arrived and even then European slave traders struggled to survive for long in the African interior until the advent of modern medicine. Malaria, various other diseases and ailments to which Europeans had little or no immunity and logistical issues meant European slave traders relied on African slave traders to provide them with a supply of captives. As David Brion Davies put it, “Europeans had little contact with the actual process of enslavement.” African people enslaved other African people. The Masai in East Africa were heavily involved in enslaving other African people, as were the Manyuema, who themselves were targeted by Arab slave traders. Tribes like the Ibo who lived further inland were preyed on by African people who lived in coastal areas and Abyssinian slave traders were still active in enslaving other African people into the early 20th century."

dailysceptic.org...

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
Who is saying that you are responsible for other's crimes?

Who is saying that you are responsible for crimes of your ancestors, relatives, or friends?

I hear this a lot, but I've NEVER heard anyone say that.

And please point to ONE COURT CASE that brings charges against someone who's ancestor committed a crime.


a reply to: CryHavoc

No one has haha, we just have another classic Republican thread orchestrating left outrage when there is none. It's so hilarious and entertaining. What kinda white person in 2022 is worried they'll be thrown in jail for slavery 160 years ago when it was legal. LOL

originally posted by: game over man

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
Who is saying that you are responsible for other's crimes?

Who is saying that you are responsible for crimes of your ancestors, relatives, or friends?

I hear this a lot, but I've NEVER heard anyone say that.

And please point to ONE COURT CASE that brings charges against someone who's ancestor committed a crime.


a reply to: CryHavoc

No one has haha, we just have another classic Republican thread orchestrating left outrage when there is none.

the Left has orchestrated this by itself.

It's so hilarious and entertaining. What kinda white person in 2022 is worried they'll be thrown in jail for slavery 160 years ago when it was legal. LOL

jail, no. forced to pay$, yes.

normally I don't feed the trolls but I made an exception today cuz I bored.

The argument is that we all benefitted from it. And people will believe in that nonsense if they don't know better.

The reality is that 90% of all hereditary wealth is gone by the third generation.

www.yahoo.com... AQAAACXZGsF1b8MwUN8zKb7YZ5ufhVY99ptgZUExwOlfHpWbGJ_Zm4GySJf9DNvmMWAdQRZgl4F710P2cw3AfDas7GaTmogdqWLKI275dzXldFHbybCpGBcN2WBwdJIrSTflg02SJFMunAqypB_TDg yIk_gZmRx3B_OiM3YRbLGFsmQR#:~:text=A%20staggering%2070%20percent%20of,passing%20along%20to%20their%20heirs.

So it's very unlikely you are still benefitting from anything your ancestors did 160 years ago. When slavery became technologically obsolete due to farm machinery, and Northern textile makers realized cotton would not rise in price if the practice were put to a stop.

a reply to: truetrigger

You forgot to mention a big set of slavers; Vikings.

originally posted by: game over man
No one has haha, we just have another classic Republican thread orchestrating left outrage when there is none.

You missed my reply. There's a link you'll want to read. Also, I'm not a Republican.

originally posted by: truetrigger

It is however a crime not to learn these historical facts.

Well said.


Pic

I basically agree with the OP on this one.

Still...

What if you are benefiting economically from the sins of your ancestors, and the descendants of the victims of your ancestors are still suffering economically from those sins? This line of thinking applies to more than just slavery.

Almost 100% of the wealthy would have to redistribute wealth and power to the working class and the poor to undue thousands of years of discrimination.

But I don't think there's a way to really prove to what extent the wealthy benefit, and to what extent the poor / working class suffer, from past sins specifically, so ultimately don't think anything can/should be done.

Consider that, at the moment of the US Civil War, more than two thirds of the population of the USA was in the North, fighting on the side of abolition. (Indeed, giving their lives to end slavery....)

So 2/3 of white people, even at that time, were innocent.

Most white American people today have incredibly mixed ancestries. So probably at least one ancestor, in most white peoples' lineage is from the South. But not necessarily very many.

I know at least 1/4 of my lineage is innocent, because they immigrated from Europe in the 1900's.





... I should add that the outcome of the Civil War drove the Southern states' economies into a terrible recession. Any wealth they had accumulated prior from slavery was surely lost in that time.

It might even be fair to say : they already paid their reparations.

a reply to: truetrigger

The thing is that despite the claims of the modern left, somehow I learned about all this stuff in school without having to be made to think that my country was bad, wrong, racist, and evil even today for it.