Reparations, while just, may not be owed to all.

Some background information is necessary.

First, the word "gulag" is a Soviet acronym from 1919, but it could be a backronym.

There was a Lithuanian presence in the early American colonies.

"Gulet" is their word for "to be lying down." "Lageris" is a German loan word for a prison. "Gulejimo lageris" would mean the prison in which one lies down. Perhaps it was a term for a slave prison and perhaps it was abbreviated to "gulag." Perhaps the Soviets who created the labor camp system wanted to jokingly name them after obscure slang for a slave prison.

Wooden sailing ships would wear out. These hulk ships could be used to warehouse cargo even when no longer safe to sail across oceans. The British definitely used hulk ships to store American rebel POWs during the Revolution. Perhaps the slave trading companies which imported the slaves used hulk ships to warehouse the slaves. It is well known that slave trading ships had only enough room for the slaves to lie down, alternately facing opposite directions. Perhaps the slave companies' hulk ships, then, were the "gulejimo lageris" or gulag.

Now, the point:

If you wanted to say "the people of the gulag, the gulagites, the gulagians," you would say............gulagiečiai. Gulag is pronounced like gulag, the -ie- sound is pronounced like "yeah" without the y, and "čiai" is pronounced like "chase" without the -se. Emphasis on -ie. GulagIEčiai. Gulag-EAH-tchay.

But who were those "people of the gulag?" Were they the people who spent a few weeks there waiting to be sold? Or could they have been the staff who were there all the time?

Staff makes more sense. Why aren't all slave descendants called gulagiečiai?

The slave trading companies which were often Portuguese could have created African slave-trading auxiliaries by having their personnel take African wives, in order to raise children who would be trustworthy to run the family business. To my eye, very many American blacks look Portuguese. They would have provided fiercely loyal security because there would be no place for them anywhere if the slave trading company broke down, because they'd be too Portuguese for Africa and too African for Portugal. They could also travel deep inland to buy up condemned prisoners because they would be more used to tropical diseases than white Europeans. They would also be less of a kidnapping risk on their voyages of procurement.

What did the black slave trading company staff do when the US Civil War put an end to slave smuggling into the US? What did they do when the Brazilian planters voluntarily ended slavery in 1868? Where did they go?

When Sherman signed his famous General Field Order #15 which mandated that freedmen recieve 40 acres,what land did the South give him to be given to freedmen? The coasts of Georgia, Northern Florida and parts of the Carolinas. Perhaps they were trafficked out by sea while still disorganized and uneducated? That area is now the Gullah homeland. I had heard a gentleman from Africa say once that Americans shouldn't judge them by our Blacks because the people they sent us were "good only for eating." Since most US Blacks aren't so useless, it strongly implies they could have been replaced after the Civil War. The South had been impoverished by the war and parts had been wrecked by Sherman's march so maybe it was possible to pay people off to look the other way.

Interesting, S&F for you.

I think reperations might be used as a way to get people off their land. They'll say it belongs to the natives

Give the money to everyone, including the dark tanned white people.

a reply to: Solvedit

Not just and not owed to anyone.

No city, county, state or country owes anyone anything.

a reply to: Solvedit

here let me fix that for you,


Reparations, are not just, and not owed to any.

fact is at some point in time the majority of people on earth ancestors have been slaves or your words "the people of the gulag, the gulagites, the gulagians." or answered to the control of the few with power.

time to get over it and stop whining.

a reply to: Solvedit

It's not for us to judge. That's the job of the Cultural Marxist Elites. The Government Party will be informed by them as to who is owed reparations and as to the form and method of making the reparations. Obviously, the tribal lands stolen from the indigenous populations should be returned to them, including, but not limited to all of the Natioal Park Lands, the BLM Lands and the State Parks.

As to monetary reparations owed the Black's, I have no clue how they will work that out. But keep an eye on California for a hint of how it will go.

originally posted by: dragonslayer83
I think reperations might be used as a way to get people off their land. They'll say it belongs to the natives

Which natives? How far back do you go?

The entire notion of 'reparations is a seriously delusional joke.

originally posted by: BernnieJGato
a reply to: Solvedit

here let me fix that for you,


Reparations, are not just, and not owed to any.

fact is at some point in time the majority of people on earth ancestors have been slaves or your words "the people of the gulag, the gulagites, the gulagians." or answered to the control of the few with power.

time to get over it and stop whining.

You got it!

Well, after the disaster 40 acres and a mule created and almost reignited the Civil War the Congress of 1865-69 decided to put in the Emancipation Clause of the 14th Amendment.

Quote
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.

In exchange for giving the slaves their freedom the Congress banned all slavery reparations. They didn't want former slave owners to try to get recompense for the loss of their former slaves. Either from the slaves themselves or the Federal Government. But...They also extended that ban to the former slaves as well.

As the soup Nazi would say...NO REPARATIONS FOR YOU!!!!

Agreed anyone still alive who was put out during by the Civil War era should get $5 million

I was hoping this thread would be about the replacement theory not whether we should have reparations.

originally posted by: BernnieJGato
a reply to: Solvedit

here let me fix that for you,

You didn't read the thread.

Reparations, are not just, and not owed to any.

fact is at some point in time the majority of people on earth ancestors have been slaves or your words "the people of the gulag, the gulagites, the gulagians." or answered to the control of the few with power.

time to get over it and stop whining.

No, time to read the OP before commenting on it.

"If you wanted to say "the people of the gulag, the gulagites, the gulagians," you would say............gulagiečiai. Gulag is pronounced like gulag, the -ie- sound is pronounced like "yeah" without the y, and "čiai" is pronounced like "chase" without the -se. Emphasis on -ie. GulagIEčiai. Gulag-EAH-tchay.

But who were those "people of the gulag?" Were they the people who spent a few weeks there waiting to be sold?Or could they have been the staff who were there all the time?

Staff makes more sense. Why aren't all slave descendants called gulagiečiai?"

Last, consider taking a look at this page: en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: ntechIn exchange for giving the slaves their freedom the Congress banned all slavery reparations. They didn't want former slave owners to try to get recompense for the loss of their former slaves. Either from the slaves themselves or the Federal Government. But...They also extended that ban to the former slaves as well.

Can you cite any authoritative source which claims the validity of public debt clause refers to reparations to slaves as opposed to compensation to slave owners?

a reply to: Solvedit

Any evidence that Reparations were even seriously considered after the adoption of the 14th amendment until recently?

Language of the 14th is all inclusive. Any claim. All such debts, obligations, and claims. The Congress of the 1860s wanted to put slavery in the rear view mirror. Period. Along with any claims that could be raised in conjunction with the Confederacy. That's why a Confederate dollar is worthless except as a historical oddity. These claims were quashed.

Even if they didn't plan on excluding the slave's reparation claims this language did so anyway. Why?

The mess the 40 acres and a mule created at the end of the Civil War. Illegal seizure of land and incitement of the Southern Whites to restart the Civil War. At the very least it would have been the KKK on steroids if 40 acres and a mule had become permanent. A terrorist army in the south attacking the blacks and the federal armies sent to put them down.

But after the Civil War the populace was sick and tired of the issues raised by it and they all wanted it to go away. The emancipation clause of the 14th Amendment made it so.

originally posted by: ntech
The mess the 40 acres and a mule created at the end of the Civil War. Illegal seizure of land and incitement of the Southern Whites to restart the Civil War. At the very least it would have been the KKK on steroids if 40 acres and a mule had become permanent. A terrorist army in the south attacking the blacks and the federal armies sent to put them down.

The Southern leadership may have deliberately wanted to put the freedmen on the coast.

The slave traders in Africa were their allies.

The South was partially wrecked and had spent its money on war. They were very low on food.

The Africans who were in the business of trading slaves must have been concerned for their future. The loss of the Confederacy meant they could no longer illegally import slaves to the US. Brazilian planters voluntarily ended slavery in 1868 and it was a global trend.

The African slave traders must have seethed with envy for the people they had exported to America because those people were getting free in a nation with land to give away.

Maybe the Southerners took some of the African slave traders' money to let them secretly emigrate and replace some of the freedmen. The freedmen could have been sold abroad or scuttled while still disorganized and uneducated.

originally posted by: BernnieJGatofact is at some point in time the majority of people on earth ancestors have been slaves...

On that note, the travelling bards of pre-colonial Africa were called Griots. It sounds a little like the Lithuanian word "grot" which means "to play music." Perhaps they were descendants of Europeans who had been trafficked to Africa?

Reparations is a horrible concept it is separation-ist in nature; In the way there is some expectations higher than the social and public systems available to everyone where they already exist... Not using them or creating them where they do or do not exist is one's own fault as a country and individual.

Since such a thing as reparations already developed the social and public system where they exist? The argument is moot. Everyone in those places where they exist have used and benefited from them existing... Not using them to their greatest potential is simply laziness or lack of interest in going further having followed others into a culdesac of not going further with them as an individual.

Ex. Public school is something all have benefited from where it exists etc etc family as some reason to not have completed that means they didn't use the services available to cease any dispute or distraction to that gaining an education and neither did the individual(s) knowing it.

Having grown up in dysfunction it was always up to me to lift myself out of it despite whom was trying to be a distraction or a limit... The frustrating part of that is when someone is known to be a source of constant trouble to more than one individual and allowed to continue being a source of trouble instead of removed from the situation where others are free from that individual that keeps being a source or cause of trouble for one-self and those others. Having sentimentality for such individuals to keep allowing them back for more trouble is not healthy and the excuse always is that they may somehow magically change and be someone else other than who they are. The realty is someone else isn't them and that's the only way that would ever work no change required...

Be that change is what some people say and just be happy with that instead of feeding the co-dependency of two or more people that wont.

a reply to: Solvedit

Sorry but the term reparations makes me laugh uncontrollably.

NOBODY ALIVE today owes a damn thing to anyone else for what happened in the PAST! Give me a break.