It’s a no-brainer; Democrat politicians and their constituencies would naturally support reparations for blacks, given their quasi-religious belief system, which views all nonwhites as perpetual victims, to whom we, the designated ‘victimizers’ are perpetually bound by our supposed guilt.
But now, Elizabeth Warren says Native Americans should also receive monetary reparations for their historical defeat by White settlers.
This raises some complicated questions, even where blacks are concerned: for instance, many White people ask, how can we determine which people, exactly, are descendants of former slaves? Who was legitimately enslaved and who was not? Many Americans are not even aware that there were blacks who came to Louisiana, for example, from the Caribbean, having never been enslaved, or certainly not enslaved in the U.S.A. Some came to the U.S., or to Louisiana when it was still under French rule, as free blacks. Ironically many of these blacks were slaveholders themselves, and many were wealthy landowners. Would descendants of such people be due ‘reparations’?
Many American Indians often practiced slavery, if not most. Sometimes the slaves were subject to being sacrificed. Few people know, or at least admit that. If you search on the subject you find biased results, slanted toward how Cherokees victimized blacks or how White people (according to the Al Jazeera website) taught slavery to the Indians. Wrong; slavery existed among Indians long before Europeans came. They enslaved other Indians and White men also when they encountered and captured them, as with this man.
So how would reparations to any people who enslaved others, or were enslaved, work? Victim or victimizer?
And how much documentation would be needed to establish who would win the victim sweepstakes? Would such documentation be available to verify this? If not, would we just issue blanket reparations to every black person? Would descendants of more recent black immigrants (of which there are many) be entitled?
Many White Americans, in their usual soft-touch effort to be excruciatingly “fair” say they would support reparations payments if the disbursement was strictly a one-off thing, not ongoing or recurring. But what are the odds that one payment would lead to demands for continuing reparations, because Jim Crow and because The Legacy of Slavery, etc., etc.?
But now that we have at least 50 million or so Hispanic ‘new Americans’, most of whom claim that they, too, are ‘victims of discrimination’, are they just as entitled to the payments? You might say: but they’ve never been historical victims of discrimination in this country, but they claim, absurdly, that they are ‘Native Americans’, exactly like the tribal members with whose ancestors our government made treaties. I’ve heard this from many Hispanics; evidently they believe that this country is theirs by rights. Apparently the school textbooks in Mexico expound that idea. So it’s likely Hispanics, particularly Mexicans, would expect reparations. Other immigrant groups — most immigrants today being nonwhites — would clamor for ‘equality’ in reparations.
Speaking of entitlements, many White Americans widely, but erroneously believe that Indians receive regular payments just for being Indian. Not true, according to this website. Some Americans will say Indians get ‘reparations’ via casino money, but not all tribes pass casino profits on to members. Apparently the tribes are not required to pay out a share of the profits. So Indian income levels are lower than other ethnic groups, similar to those of blacks. However, poverty itself does not constitute entitlement to reparations such as those proposed for blacks, or those for which many Hispanics feel entitled.
Incidentally it seems passing strange that many White Americans apparently have infinite patience and sympathy for special treatment for blacks and other nonwhites, except for Indians. Now, this may be because the Indians were “merciless”, as Thomas Jefferson said, towards Whites in the days when they and the White colonists and settlers were at war. But look at Reconstruction and see how relations were between Whites and blacks, keeping in mind that White Southrons were in subjugation to the Northern occupation government and the freed blacks. Yet blacks find legions of defenders, even on the ‘right’, while Indians find few, except for the anti-White Whites, who defend nonwhites in knee-jerk fashion. In fact, though the xenophiliac left feigns friendship for Indians, as Liz Warren of the Wannabee Tribe does, somehow they lose their warm affections for Indians hunting whales, for instance. Then they take a hostile stance toward their erstwhile Native ”friends”. What was the phrase from the old Westerns, ‘speak with forked tongue’? That’s the antifa type, to a ‘T.’ “Forked Tongue” is the native language of the ‘antis.’
But back to the reparations question. I think it will happen. I think, unfortunately, that Trump would sign off on such a bill. The fulsome praise he lavishes on blacks , as in his recent tweet in tribute to their ‘talents’, saying that from the ‘very earliest days of this nation’ , African American ‘leaders, pioneers, and visionaries’ have ”uplifted and inspired our country.” This president also speaks glowingly of the ‘beautiful, beautiful’ Hispanics, but then I suppose pandering and smarmy praise are the stock-in-trade of the politician.
There can be no way of proving that Hispanics or other immigrants are due reparation for people ‘discriminating’ against them. The aggressive Brazilian immigrant woman who attacked a White customer (in a Mexican restaurant, no less) claimed that she had been ‘ “discriminated for so many times in my life,”that the man’s MAGA hat touched her off. But what constitutes ‘discrimination’? Imagined ”dirty looks” or supposed slurs? Does that call for monetary payments for hurt feelings? How likely is it that some would invent instances of discrimination as their ticket to a share in the jackpot? See the list of ‘hate hoaxes’ that’s to be found on the Internet.
And I am sad to say that there are probably many sorry white folk [lower case ‘w’ deliberate here on my part] who would claim to have some small quantum of black ancestry — or Native American, since there are millions of whites like Liz Warren who claim Indian ancestry, even the tiniest amount, without any corroboration. Lots of court cases would ensue as people vie to get their share of the loot. Enmity might result, with the vying minority groups pressing their claims and the blacks would resent other ethnicities getting a share of the pie.
This part could be useful if the mask of brotherhood would drop, and we would see how flimsy the façade of cooperation between the various claimants might really be. Think: Steve Sailers ‘Coalition of the Fringes’, at odds with each other. And whose side would the anti-White ‘whites’ choose?
Victimhood pays in many ways in our strange era: it brings attention, sympathy, and a chance to be in the spotlight — and the prospect of big money in the case of lawsuits — or a multi-billion dollar jackpot for the successful victims.