One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Thanksgiving,another American myth
Page <<first <prev 9 of 27 next> last>>
Nov 26, 2013 13:09:42   #
Hungry Freaks
 
"Centuries" is certainly a stretch. Maybe a 100 years at the outside. The Native Americans died off in large numbers due to illness the Spanish brought over with their livestock. It was something that had weakened the Native American population significantly. It was 50 to 100 years alter that English colonists came here in an great numbers, if I remember the book's contents. They found the Native American population that had already adjusted to the loss of numbers. So it was a least a few generations.

There's a great book called "North America as seen by it's Earliest European Settlers". A great original source book. The Spanish came looking for gold. The French wanted to discover the new foods and has sex with the natives. The English wanted to classify and organized everything. A broad generalizations, but kind of what the book indicates.

It is amazing what hardships these people put up with. The Spanish in what is today Florida wrote of alligators so numerous that they had to sleep in trees to be safe from the reptiles. Heat, bugs, no Interstate or even two-lane blacktop. Must have been tough hombres.



DennisDee wrote:
Sorry but he said " other Europeans and Africans had been here for centuries" doesn't add up to the math. The oldest Portuguese settlement was in 1532. Jamestown was 1607

Reply
Nov 26, 2013 13:13:45   #
Hungry Freaks
 
ginnyt wrote:
I would agree with this conditionally. Those caveats , if they are given their reparations then they become like everyone else. No special programs for education, no priority treatment for employment, no special government financing for housing, no special head start programs for their children that is beyond what everyone else receives, no special treatment in any form. This would include, but not limited to, abusive language and the use of the word raciest to define or otherwise connote other Americans would be eliminated from casual use. The hyphenated ethnic designation would be necessarily deleted. And no FUTURE claims for new generations. A one time payment to those who can "prove" through documentation (ship records, census, or other reliable means which would not include hearsay or family legends; but limited to empirical proof) that they are true decedents from slaves; being a person of color would not automatically qualify an individual. The claimant would have to prove they are at least a quarter descendent.

Now for the payment. Cost of a mule was approximately $20 in the 1700s, 40 acres of land was approximately $300 during the same period. Inflate that to 400 percent. Add for pain and suffering $1 million each. Grand total of $1,409,000.00. The latest estimate of slave decedents still living in the US is 40 million http://activistteacher.blogspot.com/2013/01/calculated-minimum-reparation-due-to.html. I believe with the projected savings from special programs that the initial outlay would be off set within two years after payment.
I would agree with this conditionally. Those cave... (show quote)



It would be a mess-everyone trying to prove their claim. At $1.4 seems a little high-how about $500,000. I'm not sure it would work. The problems would still exist afterwards, but it is an idea worth looking into. Many books written about the subject, pro and con. As Ringo Starr once said: "anything the government touches turns to crap." Hard to argue with that one.

Reply
Nov 26, 2013 13:16:22   #
Loki Loc: Georgia
 
Hungry Freaks wrote:
Three billion + dollars a year for the past 30 years, when adjusted for inflate, is a significant pile of money.


And, yes, reparations for any African American who can prove one 1/4 or 1/2 slave as a descendant. Pay the money and be done with it. They were promised 40 acres and a mule and didn't get it. Time to make good on it.


How are you going to collect from the Blacks and Arabs who did the original enslaving? While we're on the subject, I had ancestors die in battle freeing slaves. How about their descendants pay ME some reparations? Forget 1/4 or 1/2 descent. how about direct descent? Get this through your head: Whites DID NOT ENSLAVE BLACKS, except rarely. BLACKS and ARABS ENSLAVED BLACKS. Period. Whites simply bought the slaves. As a matter of fact, more than 90% of the slaves from Africa went to South America and the Carribean, not to the US. I don't hear any calls for reparations from Spain, or Portugal, or Holland, or, for that matter, England. More slaves went to Brazil than the US. How about you try your spiel on Portugal? Or Spain? Both are responsible for more slavery than the US. My ancestors did far more to free the slaves than they did to free themselves. Why shouldn't I be just as entitled as them? Oh yes, in addition to the money, I'll take the forty acres and a mule, (which was never promised to anyone, in reality), as soon as I figure out how to adjust, as you so quaintly put it, "for inflate."

Reply
 
 
Nov 26, 2013 13:18:42   #
VladimirPee
 
They should collect from former slave owners. My Family came after the civil war and never owned a slave. I reject any such payment


Hungry Freaks wrote:
It would be a mess-everyone trying to prove their claim. At $1.4 seems a little high-how about $500,000. I'm not sure it would work. The problems would still exist afterwards, but it is an idea worth looking into. Many books written about the subject, pro and con. As Ringo Starr once said: "anything the government touches turns to crap." Hard to argue with that one.

Reply
Nov 26, 2013 13:27:21   #
Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone
 
Hungry Freaks wrote:
It would be a mess-everyone trying to prove their claim. At $1.4 seems a little high-how about $500,000. I'm not sure it would work. The problems would still exist afterwards, but it is an idea worth looking into. Many books written about the subject, pro and con. As Ringo Starr once said: "anything the government touches turns to crap." Hard to argue with that one.


I do not think that it would work, even if we paid them off they would never live up to the agreement. I still think that the best idea is to offer them the money and pay them as they board ships to go elsewhere and revoking their citizenship. That way the true Americans, whether black, white......etc., would remain in the US as citizens where they can continue a good life, not hampered by the hate filled ones who would be fighting with their new government and asking for whatever they can "score."

BTW, Ringo Starr....who could argue with that?
:thumbup:

Reply
Nov 26, 2013 13:38:47   #
jonhatfield Loc: Green Bay, WI
 
Hungry Freaks wrote:
I don't know it that's a good thing or a bad thing-we can't agree 100% 100% of the time.

Some of content of that post is fact but much is just conjecture. I live in an extremely diverse community and see the interactions between different groups the dynamics of the talk and actions made by each group.

The issue of the African Americans' desire to have their past recognized and possibly financially reimbursed for past wrongs seems to get the the crawl of some white people. I was merely pointing out the American Jews, who used the long history of anti-Semitism in general and the Holocaust of European Jews by the Nazis, have used the collective guilt of Europe and, strangely, the United States, to be a lion's share of US foreign aid, military and civilian as well as statehood for land that they claim is historically Jewish. How does the American Jewish population exert so much power of US politics? Why do some remain silent on Israel's money and power grab but yet will go up the walls should any African American even mention reparations. .

Why? Because of a slick pubic relations campaign and the collective power lobbying efforts by AIPAC. We have acted against our own self-interest in the Middle East to please a small segment of the US population. Starting with Suez in 1955, Israelis have been a disruptive force in Middle Eastern geo-politics. Now Israel claims it will not abide by any agreement we make with Iran despite the fact that Israel refuses to acknowledge it's own nuclear arsenal.

Iran has never gone to war with Israel. (it has used proxies) Iran has had it's democratically elected government overthrown by the US and Britain. The Shah, who was the choice for taking the place of Mossedgec ( a secular liberal who was elected in free and fair elections) was the Shah, who ruled with terrible cruelty. The Iranians threw the Shah out and we punished them buy holding billions of Iranian funds in US banks, some of the money we still hold today. And we wonder why the Iranian's hate us. Or why Iran wants a a nuke, with neighbors like Pakistan (nuclear armed) for Soviet states on it's north border (which may have nuclear weapons,) and Israel, which holds nuclear weapons and has taken considerable effort to sabotage anyone else in the region with a nuclear aspirations, who can blame them?.

Our hypocrisy is so obvious-Israeli's have a deep abiding fear of being overrun by more populous Arab neighbors, or anyone else, a fear that is well founded. But if Israel is allowed to skip out on international conventions prohibiting development of a nuclear weapons, and engage in significant nuclear espionage here in the US, why are we so hard on the Iranians, who do belong to the UN Nuclear Proliferation Convention ? Iranians are also afraid of their Arab neighbors (Iran is Persian, not Arab) . They were nearly overrun by a US-supported Iraq not 30 years ago. How do we justify giving more than 25% of all foreign aid to a nation that is an international nuclear scofflaw? Nothing against the Jews, but the right wing over there is just as crazy and immoveable as the right is here. Compromise is seen as a weakness. And Israelis left and right, have a fear of being exterminated, something that does have a solid historical context. I doubt if Israel will ever give up its nukes.

Hey, Israel can do whatever it wants. It's a free country, at least until the Orthodox rabbinical is considered. But why my tax dollar is being used to prop up an increasingly theocratic nation that refuses to abide by any rule of law on what it does. This is a debate the goes on in Israel; the Israeli left is a REAL left-wing group unlike the left is here. The Israeli left has a peace effort that would put to shame anything here in the US. Some in Israelis see the US aid as something that puts them in a difficult place and there is actually a movement to refuse further US aid. But, hey, three + billion bucks is three+ billion bucks. Hard to turn that down.

Maybe African Americans should hire the same pr firm the early Zionists used in lobbying the UN for statehood.
I don't know it that's a good thing or a bad thing... (show quote)


Israel is the nation in the Middle East with government and practice like ours. That is the reason we back the security status of Israel.

It is my understanding that the population in Israeli lands have been in considerable part Jewish all along...not the total dispossession of Palestinians we tend to think of. Not sure of the population proportions involved before the civil war that led to the Jewish state. I think that is understood in the Middle East and one reason for the Israel-Egyptian detente.

Hopefully the two state arrangement that should have been agreed to long ago will be negotiated soon. It's in everyone's interests. To achieve this Israel will have to stop developing the Palestinian lands on the borders, but we might understand the situation as similar to when we were developing the Indian wilderness lands...nothing so aggressive & inevitable as modern civilization moving into new undeveloped frontiers.

While on subject of Middle East, negotiated end of Iran nuclear armament preferable to war but we should be clear with ourselves and the Iranians that if negotiations fail or they cheat we will send in drone attack after drone attack on all nuclear and military targets. If Europe, the Russians and Chinese are on board on Iranian nuclear control, as it is their interest to be, attack probably will be unnecessary. With Syria Europe and Russia have reason to impose peace in the ongoing religious war there. Iraq will move along in self-government if peace negotiations in the Middle East are successful. It is in our interest to push negotiations toward settlements so the middle east can get on in its move away from feudalism and toward self-government.

Reply
Nov 26, 2013 13:39:09   #
VladimirPee
 
And the fact that other Europeans were settled in South America or Central America makes Thanksgiving a " myth"? I don't see the relevance of his claim.


Hungry Freaks wrote:
"Centuries" is certainly a stretch. Maybe a 100 years at the outside. The Native Americans died off in large numbers due to illness the Spanish brought over with their livestock. It was something that had weakened the Native American population significantly. It was 50 to 100 years alter that English colonists came here in an great numbers, if I remember the book's contents. They found the Native American population that had already adjusted to the loss of numbers. So it was a least a few generations.

There's a great book called "North America as seen by it's Earliest European Settlers". A great original source book. The Spanish came looking for gold. The French wanted to discover the new foods and has sex with the natives. The English wanted to classify and organized everything. A broad generalizations, but kind of what the book indicates.

It is amazing what hardships these people put up with. The Spanish in what is today Florida wrote of alligators so numerous that they had to sleep in trees to be safe from the reptiles. Heat, bugs, no Interstate or even two-lane blacktop. Must have been tough hombres.
"Centuries" is certainly a stretch. Mayb... (show quote)

Reply
 
 
Nov 26, 2013 13:49:33   #
Loki Loc: Georgia
 
ginnyt wrote:
I will no longer dignify your attempts to anger me or belittle me with comments, so I encourage you to forget about me and move on. But, I am flattered that I have occupied so much of your thoughts.


So jonhatfield "maintains" that the only reparation is respect and understanding? Too bad he is so lacking in reparations himself, yet so willing to point out what he perceives to be such a defect in others. Have a nice Thanksgiving, and "non estis vos hodie et tenebrescere."

Reply
Nov 26, 2013 13:56:03   #
jonhatfield Loc: Green Bay, WI
 
ginnyt wrote:
I do not think that it would work, even if we paid them off they would never live up to the agreement. I still think that the best idea is to offer them the money and pay them as they board ships to go elsewhere and revoking their citizenship. That way the true Americans, whether black, white......etc., would remain in the US as citizens where they can continue a good life, not hampered by the hate filled ones who would be fighting with their new government and asking for whatever they can "score."

BTW, Ringo Starr....who could argue with that?
:thumbup:
I do not think that it would work, even if we paid... (show quote)


"who could argue with that?"

Maybe we should adapt to a similar plan and pay-off illegal immigrants as they exit? Me, I want a plan to pay certain "hate-filled" malcontents on OPP to be emigrants to a new colony on the moon. Who knows what ideal society might emerge after 300 years of moonland? After all, 300 years later the denominations direct from the Pilgrims are the Congregationalists and the Unitarians.

Reply
Nov 26, 2013 14:01:58   #
Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone
 
banjojack wrote:
So jonhatfield "maintains" that the only reparation is respect and understanding? Too bad he is so lacking in reparations himself, yet so willing to point out what he perceives to be such a defect in others. Have a nice Thanksgiving, and "non estis vos hodie et tenebrescere."


I too wish you a wonderful Thanksgiving! :thumbup:

As for Jonhatefull, (misspelling was on purpose) I do not understand him, his attitude, or why he is so bitter toward me. He just does not like me for whatever reason.... I so wish I could care!

Reply
Nov 26, 2013 14:05:03   #
jonhatfield Loc: Green Bay, WI
 
Hungry Freaks wrote:
I don't know it that's a good thing or a bad thing-we can't agree 100% 100% of the time.

Some of content of that post is fact but much is just conjecture. I live in an extremely diverse community and see the interactions between different groups the dynamics of the talk and actions made by each group.

The issue of the African Americans' desire to have their past recognized and possibly financially reimbursed for past wrongs seems to get the the crawl of some white people. I was merely pointing out the American Jews, who used the long history of anti-Semitism in general and the Holocaust of European Jews by the Nazis, have used the collective guilt of Europe and, strangely, the United States, to be a lion's share of US foreign aid, military and civilian as well as statehood for land that they claim is historically Jewish. How does the American Jewish population exert so much power of US politics? Why do some remain silent on Israel's money and power grab but yet will go up the walls should any African American even mention reparations. .

Why? Because of a slick pubic relations campaign and the collective power lobbying efforts by AIPAC. We have acted against our own self-interest in the Middle East to please a small segment of the US population. Starting with Suez in 1955, Israelis have been a disruptive force in Middle Eastern geo-politics. Now Israel claims it will not abide by any agreement we make with Iran despite the fact that Israel refuses to acknowledge it's own nuclear arsenal.

Iran has never gone to war with Israel. (it has used proxies) Iran has had it's democratically elected government overthrown by the US and Britain. The Shah, who was the choice for taking the place of Mossedgec ( a secular liberal who was elected in free and fair elections) was the Shah, who ruled with terrible cruelty. The Iranians threw the Shah out and we punished them buy holding billions of Iranian funds in US banks, some of the money we still hold today. And we wonder why the Iranian's hate us. Or why Iran wants a a nuke, with neighbors like Pakistan (nuclear armed) for Soviet states on it's north border (which may have nuclear weapons,) and Israel, which holds nuclear weapons and has taken considerable effort to sabotage anyone else in the region with a nuclear aspirations, who can blame them?.

Our hypocrisy is so obvious-Israeli's have a deep abiding fear of being overrun by more populous Arab neighbors, or anyone else, a fear that is well founded. But if Israel is allowed to skip out on international conventions prohibiting development of a nuclear weapons, and engage in significant nuclear espionage here in the US, why are we so hard on the Iranians, who do belong to the UN Nuclear Proliferation Convention ? Iranians are also afraid of their Arab neighbors (Iran is Persian, not Arab) . They were nearly overrun by a US-supported Iraq not 30 years ago. How do we justify giving more than 25% of all foreign aid to a nation that is an international nuclear scofflaw? Nothing against the Jews, but the right wing over there is just as crazy and immoveable as the right is here. Compromise is seen as a weakness. And Israelis left and right, have a fear of being exterminated, something that does have a solid historical context. I doubt if Israel will ever give up its nukes.

Hey, Israel can do whatever it wants. It's a free country, at least until the Orthodox rabbinical is considered. But why my tax dollar is being used to prop up an increasingly theocratic nation that refuses to abide by any rule of law on what it does. This is a debate the goes on in Israel; the Israeli left is a REAL left-wing group unlike the left is here. The Israeli left has a peace effort that would put to shame anything here in the US. Some in Israelis see the US aid as something that puts them in a difficult place and there is actually a movement to refuse further US aid. But, hey, three + billion bucks is three+ billion bucks. Hard to turn that down.

Maybe African Americans should hire the same pr firm the early Zionists used in lobbying the UN for statehood.
I don't know it that's a good thing or a bad thing... (show quote)


Israel is the nation in the Middle East with government and practice like ours. That is the reason we back the security status of Israel.

It is my understanding that the population in Israeli lands have been in considerable part Jewish all along...not the total dispossession of Palestinians we tend to think of. Not sure of the population proportions involved before the civil war that led to the Jewish state. I think that is understood in the Middle East and one reason for the Israel-Egyptian detente.

Hopefully the two state arrangement that should have been agreed to long ago will be negotiated soon. It's in everyone's interests. To achieve this Israel will have to stop developing the Palestinian lands on the borders, but we might understand the situation as similar to when we were developing the Indian wilderness lands...nothing so aggressive & inevitable as modern civilization moving into new undeveloped frontiers.

While on subject of Middle East, negotiated end of Iran nuclear armament preferable to war but we should be clear with ourselves and the Iranians that if negotiations fail or they cheat we will send in drone attack after drone attack on all nuclear and military targets. If Europe, the Russians and Chinese are on board on Iranian nuclear control, as it is their interest to be, attack probably will be unnecessary. With Syria Europe and Russia have reason to impose peace in the ongoing religious war there. Iraq will move along in self-government if peace negotiations in the Middle East are successful. It is in our interest to push negotiations toward settlements so the middle east can get on in its move away from feudalism and toward self-government.

Reply
 
 
Nov 26, 2013 14:11:05   #
Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone
 
jonhatfield wrote:
Israel is the nation in the Middle East with government and practice like ours. That is the reason we back the security status of Israel.

It is my understanding that the population in Israeli lands have been in considerable part Jewish all along...not the total dispossession of Palestinians we tend to think of. Not sure of the population proportions involved before the civil war that led to the Jewish state. I think that is understood in the Middle East and one reason for the Israel-Egyptian detente.

Hopefully the two state arrangement that should have been agreed to long ago will be negotiated soon. It's in everyone's interests. To achieve this Israel will have to stop developing the Palestinian lands on the borders, but we might understand the situation as similar to when we were developing the Indian wilderness lands...nothing so aggressive & inevitable as modern civilization moving into new undeveloped frontiers.

While on subject of Middle East, negotiated end of Iran nuclear armament preferable to war but we should be clear with ourselves and the Iranians that if negotiations fail or they cheat we will send in drone attack after drone attack on all nuclear and military targets. If Europe, the Russians and Chinese are on board on Iranian nuclear control, as it is their interest to be, attack probably will be unnecessary. With Syria Europe and Russia have reason to impose peace in the ongoing religious war there. Iraq will move along in self-government if peace negotiations in the Middle East are successful. It is in our interest to push negotiations toward settlements so the middle east can get on in its move away from feudalism and toward self-government.
Israel is the nation in the Middle East with gover... (show quote)


I have friends who are technically impaired... I have to tell them a few times; so I will do you the same service. You only need to press "Send" one time; and only press "Send" when you are sure you want to commit your submission.

Reply
Nov 26, 2013 14:18:50   #
jonhatfield Loc: Green Bay, WI
 
ginnyt wrote:
I have friends who are technically impaired... I have to tell them a few times; so I will do you the same service. You only need to press "Send" one time; and only press "Send" when you are sure you want to commit your submission.


Thanks, Ginny. I have a Dell computer. Cheap (like me, I'm 5/8 Scotch) but handicapped (again like me).

Reply
Nov 26, 2013 14:25:21   #
slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas
 
ginnyt wrote:
I have friends who are technically impaired... I have to tell them a few times; so I will do you the same service. You only need to press "Send" one time; and only press "Send" when you are sure you want to commit your submission.


:lol: You may, unequivocally, add me to your list of "technically impaired" friends! I am pathetic. :cry:

Reply
Nov 26, 2013 14:27:13   #
Hungry Freaks
 
I don't know where the term "Thanksgiving myth" came up, but it really don't matter what the truth is about it's origins. Washington, Adams in Jefferson made annual "Thanksgiving Day" proclamations, but they were a one-time deals, usually in early December.

Abraham Lincoln made what we celebrate as "Thanksgiving Day" an annual, regular holiday, every year in the last Thursday of November, in 1863. There's always some wiggle room between the myth and the truth of any history. I don't see how that denigrates the Thanksgiving Day holiday any more or less.


DennisDee wrote:
And the fact that other Europeans were settled in South America or Central America makes Thanksgiving a " myth"? I don't see the relevance of his claim.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 9 of 27 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.