As a white guy on the forum,,,

[C-D-P]

I do not understand something.

Blacks are angry at whites because of their enslavement years ago. I can understand why they would be ticked off. It was a horrid thing that was done, and should have never happened.

What I do not understand is how a black guy can go after a rich white person because his ancestors had slaves. But can be totally fine with a black guy that more than likely has ancestors that directly profited from selling slaves.

Can someone explain this to me.

[justsayn]

http://www.caribbeanworldnews.com/mi...l.php?mid=1003

Jamaican Sues For Slavery Reparations

Clive Campbell


CaribWorldNews, NEW YORK, N.Y., Tues. July 1, 2008: A Jamaican activist is suing Barclays Bank, demanding reparations for its alleged role in the slave trade.

Brooklyn resident Clive Campbell is demanding $5 billion in the suit filed earlier this month in Brooklyn’s state court.





Clive Campbell


CaribWorldNews, NEW YORK, N.Y., Tues. July 1, 2008: A Jamaican activist is suing Barclays Bank, demanding reparations for its alleged role in the slave trade.

Brooklyn resident Clive Campbell is demanding $5 billion in the suit filed earlier this month in Brooklyn’s state court.

‘It’s time for the black race to make a stand, or our children, grandchildren, great grandchildren etc. will still be on the corners selling crack, while all the businesses and properties will be owned by white settlers. And our children will still be in the penitentiaries around the country,’ said Campbell in a statement on his MySpace page explaining the lawsuit.

Campbell, 25, is a member of the group Da Black Defense League, which in February called for the boycott of the New Jersey Nets, which have been sponsored by Barclays.

Campbell, citing research, is accusing Barclays of being built “on the profits” of the slave trade.

In the suit he says the bank was complicit in genocide, ‘with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, my national or ethnic group.’

The bank has denied Campbell’s allegations.

‘We have been unable to substantiate these charges,’ said a spokesman. ‘That said, Barclay’s has been in business for over 310 years and, while it is possible that some organizations acquired by Barclays may have had some linkage to the slave trade, our founders, by virtue of their very strong Quaker connections, were members of the abolitionist movement.’

[C-D-P]

How does this answer my question?

[Ziggae_6]

If you're really open minded about this, you need to have more of a knowledge of US history that goes further than just slavery. Think about how this country was formed with the claim that all men are created equal, yet didn't see Africans as even being human. In order to make slavery succeed in this country, the methods that were developed to keep slaves from revolting was extremely cruel. It took a war to actually made slavery go away in the United States. Most of the founding fathers thought slavery would end much earlier.

Even then, blacks were still seen as beneath whites in this country. There was no attempt after the civil war to apologize or even out the inequality. There was the so called "40 acres and a mule" concept in which freed slaves were to receive land in the south from former slaveholders, but this was never truly implemented.

Post slavery days were not exactly proud days for this country. The famous separate but equal decision allowed blacks to be segregated in inferior jobs, neighborhood and educational opportunities. Look at the number of lynching that have occurred in the 20th century that was used to take care of the uppity ones. There was also this cruel stereotype in which blacks were portrayed in Aunt Jimema (the original) modes, like monkeys. All of this was quite open. There was a point in history where blacks were not allowed in the same hotels or same restaurants or on the same floor of a theatre (if allowed at all). We're talking about all the way to the beginning of the 1960's. (can you image that?) They couldn't even use the same toilets or drink from the same water fountains.

If you want a feeling of all this, study how the famous Brown vs Board of Education decision actually occurred. The NAACP which included future Supreme Court judge Thurgood Marshall (and first black Supreme member) had a plan to fight segregation and started cases in the 1930's in order to overcome segregation. It took until 1954 to actually win this crucial case and then it took another 10 years before Congress actually passed laws that would enforce this NO MORE separate but equal (which wasn't very equal!).

So if you think slavery is the only part of mistreatment of African Americans in this country, you have a task to research this to have a better understanding. This isn't the time for you to jump up and defend this "I don't understand" attitude. Not if your goal is to really understand.

Study the history of African Americans and perhaps you will slowly begin to realize what there is such a negative feeling about white people among many African Americans in this country. Especially when they come in contact with people who say,

"Why is this my fault? I never owned a slave." Study the history with an open mind and you'll see it.


Just as a side question, Why aren't we still angry at England? They wronged us back in the 1700's and went to war with us again in the 1800's. How come we now view England as an ally and one of our favorite countries. Why are we alright now with this country that caused American deaths in the past?

[justsayn]

Originally Posted by C-D-P

How does this answer my question?

It doesn't, I just thought that it was relevant. That guy certainly has an opinion on the subject and it's a really current article.

[justsayn]

Interesting summary Ziggae. I got a comment though. In the state where I live schools are still segregated all over the state. There are public schools in my state that white kids have never stepped into. I'd just like to point out that the indignation towards blacks in the state of Mississippi didn't halt in the early 60's.

And then there's this: http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...,00.html?imw=Y

To this day, Jerry Kennedy only does laundry when it rains. For the first 54 years of his life, he lived without running water, and rainstorms were the only way he could collect enough water to wash his clothes. But Kennedy isn't from some far-off rural outpost. He was born and raised in the Coal Run neighborhood of Zanesville, Ohio — a former coal-mining center of 25,000 in the eastern part of the state — just a few hundred feet from a municipal water line. Kennedy, now 58, is black. His neighbors, who did not have running water for more than 50 years, are also black. On July 10, the U.S. District Court of Ohio awarded them almost $10.9 million, ruling that they had been denied access to public water because of their race.

continued in link...

[C-D-P]

Originally Posted by justsayn

It doesn't, I just thought that it was relevant. That guy certainly has an opinion on the subject and it's a really current article.

Ok thanks.

Zig, that does not answer my question either.

[Ziggae_6]

Originally Posted by C-D-P

Ok thanks.

Zig, that does not answer my question either.

What I do not understand is how a black guy can go after a rich white person because his ancestors had slaves. But can be totally fine with a black guy that more than likely has ancestors that directly profited from selling slaves.

Can someone explain this to me.

Ok, you're looking for specifics here. So let me ask you some questions.
What example are you talking about? Who is this "a black guy" and who is this "rich white person" you are talking about? Who is this "can be totally fine" person? Are you're looking for legal advise here? Or moral responsibility?

You're a little vague, but then wanting specific answers. What answer do you want?

[catzmeow]

Originally Posted by justsayn

There are public schools in my state that white kids have never stepped into. I'd just like to point out that the indignation towards blacks in the state of Mississippi didn't halt in the early 60's.

And where harm is ongoing, lawsuits are justified.

However, think about someplace like Camden, New Jersey. A totally black community with the highest murder rates in the U.S. right now. Black government, black school officials, black leadership.

So, whose fault is it, exactly, that Camden NJ is in the crapper?

[Ziggae_6]

Originally Posted by catzmeow

And where harm is ongoing, lawsuits are justified.

However, think about someplace like Camden, New Jersey. A totally black community with the highest murder rates in the U.S. right now. Black government, black school officials, black leadership.

So, whose fault is it, exactly, that Camden NJ is in the crapper?

How are the economics there?