• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

$5M Reparations to individual Blacks living in San Francisco

JLB50

Full Member
Reaction score
688
Points
790

Get this. First read this about six weeks ago, San Francisco is evidently seriously considering a proposed plan to pay $5,000,000 to each and every eligible Black citizen living there to atone for slavery and the injustices they’ve faced. Other financial benefits would also accrue. Upwards of 50,000 Blacks currently live there. Not sure how they would determine who is eligible. Typical West Coast mentality. To Canadianize it, would that mean we should pay $10,000,000 for each First Nations person here in Canada?

Maybe if fancy socks Justin, (remember Justin? The guy with the Black minstrel face?) moved there he could lay a claim to 5 mil as well. Survey mandatory if it fits the political narrative; otherwise, John Q. Public, go take a walk off the Victoria docks.
 

Get this. First read this about six weeks ago, San Francisco is evidently seriously considering a proposed plan to pay $5,000,000 to each and every eligible Black citizen living there to atone for slavery and the injustices they’ve faced. Other financial benefits would also accrue. Upwards of 50,000 Blacks currently live there. Not sure how they would determine who is eligible. Typical West Coast mentality. To Canadianize it, would that mean we should pay $10,000,000 for each First Nations person here in Canada?

Maybe if fancy socks Justin, (remember Justin? The guy with the Black minstrel face?) moved there he could lay a claim to 5 mil as well. Survey mandatory if it fits the political narrative; otherwise, John Q. Public, go take a walk off the Victoria docks.

You’re presenting it as “[the city] is seriously considering” this. They aren’t. A committee appointed for the purpose of considering what reparation would look like has come up with this, but that’s essentially a municipally appointed interest group saying they want a thing. This is a number of steps shy of being something that the city could honestly claim to be entertaining.

I hope nobody seriously thinks this has any prospect of moving forward. It’s an absurd proposition.
 
I was going to say, I didn’t know California or Sam Francisco were slave jurisdictions. …
 
I was going to say, I didn’t know California or Sam Francisco were slave jurisdictions. …
I believe the Blacks were saying that, although they were technically non slaves, they were still treated harshly and discriminated against for all their lives going back to the 1800s.
 
You’re presenting it as “[the city] is seriously considering” this. They aren’t. A committee appointed for the purpose of considering what reparation would look like has come up with this, but that’s essentially a municipally appointed interest group saying they want a thing. This is a number of steps shy of being something that the city could honestly claim to be entertaining.

I hope nobody seriously thinks this has any prospect of moving forward. It’s an absurd proposition.
It is an absurd proposition. The city should not have even considered it at all.
 
To Canadianize it, would that mean we should pay $10,000,000 for each First Nations person here in Canada?
By the way, the famous Mohawk Chief Joseph Brant, who was on the side of the British in the American Revolution (as the Americans term it) himself owned 20 some black slaves. So should the Mohawk nation have to pay reparations to the descendants of Brant’s slaves? Not sure how many other First Nations bands practiced slavery.

In other word, this whole compensation business can get very messy and convoluted. Not to say though that reparations should not be made to First Nations peoples. They have suffered greatly.
 
I believe the Blacks were saying that, although they were technically non slaves, they were still treated harshly and discriminated against for all their lives going back to the 1800s.
There was also a secessionist movement of pro slavery types in Southern California. They tried a few times to split from California.
 
None of my relatives owned slaves or contributed to those industries that did. However almost every Hereditary FN Chief had relatives in the last 200 years that did own slaves here in Canada. In fact I will argue that the majority of slaves in Canada from the time of first contact onwards were owned by Indigenous people.
 
Looks like slavery was present in California, but under the Spanish and before statehood.
Then sue the Spanish. See how far that gets in court - I can imagine Spain sobbing "We're not worthy" to a bunch of money grubbers....right before they are reminded "We are the Spanish Inquisition - and not the Monty Python variety either"
 
It’s just the hypocrisy of it all that really irks me. Yes, not only FN chiefs. Slavery was allowed for centuries by many African tribes. Also, Saudi Arabia and Yemen abolished slavery only in the 1960s. If I recall correctly, long after Britain abolished slavery in the early 1800s, it still persisted in some of the other Gulf states. Asia has long been a place where slavery was well established, with many slavery experts today saying that it still exists, in various forms in India, Thailand and elsewhere.

So are we going to see everybody suing everybody else for compensatory damages? Where does it stop?
 
There is a podcast called "Real Dictators". There is a three or four episode series on Idi Amin Dada of Uganda. It has some background on the slave trade in and near Uganda and Kenya.

Id Amin Dada was such a motherf*cker
 
40 acres and a mule.

Any discussion of (American) slave reparations will usually mention the 'shorthand' for Special Field Orders No. 15 and make a comparison of the value in today's dollars. Surprisingly, however, the draft report from San Francisco's African American Reparations Advisory Committee makes no mention, nor uses it as a yardstick for one of the 111 recommendations in the report. But a more detailed, less sensationalized reporting wouldn't have increased clicks or outrage (which doesn't surprise me in a Sun paper, though I was more surprised that the article originated as an AP piece).

As previously mentioned . . .
This document is intended to elevate policy and program recommendations for a comprehensive
Reparations Plan for Black San Franciscans. It is important to note that the AARAC serves as an
Advisory Committee, and is only empowered to make recommendations; the body has no authority
to implement these recommendations, and City officials are not required to implement any part
.

And even the members of the AARAC recognized that reparations should be limited.
VIII. Eligibility for Reparations
Checklist for eligibility:
❏ REQUIRED:
❏ An individual who has identified as ‘Black/African American’ on public documents for at least 10 years
❏ 18 years or older
❏ You must meet at least TWO (2) criteria from the following list (must have supporting documentation):
❏ Born in San Francisco between 1940 and 1996 and has proof of residency in San Francisco for at least 13 years
❏ Migrated to San Francisco between 1940 and 1996 and has proof of residency in San Francisco for at least 13 years
❏ Personally, or the direct descendant of someone, incarcerated by the failed War on Drugs
❏ Record of attendance in San Francisco public schools during the time of the consent decree to complete desegregation within the school system
❏ Descendant of someone enslaved through US chattel slavery before 1865
❏ Displaced, or the direct descendant of someone displaced, from San Francisco by Urban Renewal between 1954 and 1973
❏ Listed, or the direct descendant of, a Certificate of Preference holder
❏ Member of an historically marginalized group that experienced lending discrimination in San Francisco between 1937 and 1968 or, subsequently, experienced lending discrimination in formerly redlined San Francisco communities between 1968 and 2008
 
You’re presenting it as “[the city] is seriously considering” this. They aren’t. A committee appointed for the purpose of considering what reparation would look like has come up with this, but that’s essentially a municipally appointed interest group saying they want a thing. This is a number of steps shy of being something that the city could honestly claim to be entertaining.

I hope nobody seriously thinks this has any prospect of moving forward. It’s an absurd proposition.
It is San Francisco. And it is California. Never discount the amount of ridiculousness that comes with that territory. Absurd or not.
😉
 
Back
Top