I think of historical events as contributing factors from which karma, or consequences, can be observed in the present day. No phenomena arises from only one factor, so any problem we tackle will have multiple contributing factors that are defined by the human minds pointing at them.

Slavery is a word (concept, symbol) that can be pasted onto many situations, including the institutionalized?slavery so famous in U.S.?history, the experience of Irish indentured servants, the subjected?status a females in much of U.S.?history and the experience of some European captives by indigenous?American tribe members. Not everyone will agree with every use of the word, but that is inherent in our use of?symbols.

Stepping?back from emotional social issues, any mistreatment of one human?being by another, whether singular or group, is likely to influence events downstream from its happening. The impact of the slavery period may have influenced (and been influenced by) the perspectives of social groups of that time and then all these factors influenced the evolution of today's class and racially-related issues. To distill the problem(s) into one cause and then drive solutions from that oversimplification?is a thought process bound to result in fallacies. Indeed, I feel from my personal?experience that many 'disadvantaged' people likely contribute to?their own ongoing misfortunes?by buying into the stereotype applied to them.

This is just my opinion, but I feel that solutions are generally more effective when they focus on how?to improve rather than on causes. The latter can be useful, of course, but in this case as an example, the original?question asked if the forgivable loans were a distracting token used as a political election gambit. (Assuming I understood the question correctly!) I sidetracked with my pet peeve rant. I do believe it is a political ploy and while I also believe that subsidizing?worthy recipients from poverty into self-supporting financial success is a valid use of social common funds, I would not even have thought of slavery or related history in the consideration?of the question.? To me, the p[roblem is social success today?despite or because of our individual?histories.

Everybody in the discussion has valid points. My support for the $20k loans is on the fence because I do not know the details of the oversigt. To clarify my position (not that Kamala or anyone else in government will care!), no, I do not believe any social segment?alive today is owed reparations for any historic wrongs done to their ancestors. I do?believe that a society which invests in continuous improvements?to poverty and related issues in wisely nurturing the fundamental potential of its citizen base to carry the communal well being higher in the future.

I will support targeted improvements using?common resources because it makes sense as a solution to a present?problem, not because of any emotional political flag-waving?about historic events.

On Oct 30, 2024, at 00:50, Celeste wrote:

? Ed,

Nobody was owned by one of my ancestors. Sorry to disappoint you.

On 10/29/2024 9:50 AM, Ed Lomas wrote:

So you are sure that you understand slavery and discrimination better than I do, so you feel you have to tutor me on the basics so that I'll agree with you?

If my question makes no sense to you there is an alternative reason other than I'm not making any sense to anyone.?

I feel no guilt whatsoever over how someone else's ancestors treated another someone else's ancestors.? Guilt does not transcend generations. We don't inherit guilt or obligation, nor do I expect someone to pay me because their ancestor wronged my ancestor.

If you believe that reparations should be considered on a societal level, ?then you should believe reparations should be considered on a personal level. If you ran into someone whose ancestor was owned by one of your ancestors, how much should you, as a descendent, be willing to pay that other person to alleviate the damage that your slave-owning ancestor did to that other person?? Just give me a rough figure- would $20,000 square things up?

On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 8:35?AM Celeste wrote:

Ed,

I've already explained how the disadvantages of slavery (destroying families) and a couple of centuries of segregation and discrimination have put black Americans at a disadvantage. I guess you skipped over that because you don't want to acknowledge that.

Your question about how big a check I would write makes no sense whatsoever. You keep going back to feeling guilty even though you don't want to admit it.

On 10/27/2024 12:09 PM, Ed Lomas wrote:

The former slaves are all long gone.? Why should their descendants deserve compensation for the suffering of their great grandparents?? If it could be proven that your ancestor had owned a slave, would how large a check would you personally be willing to write to that slave's descendants?

On Sunday, October 27, 2024, Celeste wrote:

Ed,

No, I don't think it's a bell that can't be unrung. The only people who were ever enslaved and actively segregated were African-Americans. If they have African-American ancestry then that's the group that would be eligible to get the subsidy. There is no blame needed for this to happen.

On 10/27/2024 9:15 AM, Ed Lomas wrote:

How can unfairness be quantified, who is to blame, and how far back do we have to go?? Slavery in the USA ended five generations ago.? Second, how do you handle mixed-race people, especially those who are unaware that they are of mixed race?? How about the Irish, Jews, Italians, and those who suffered discrimination due to their religious or political beliefs, like Mormons, Huguenots, and Communists.

What about handicapped people, including stutters, those with autism, and aspergers, and what about those with multiple sources of impairment?

Doesn't it seem to you that this is just a bell that can't be unrung?

Celeste wrote:

Darrell,

It really doesn't matter if their ancestors are alive or not. When you've been discriminated against (as I have, for example) it is fair to try to make up for that unfairness. Nobody (except perhaps you) is condemning those who are alive now as being responsible for that unfairness. That doesn't mean it didn't happen and shouldn't be rectified, though.

On 10/27/2024 5:27 AM, Darrell King wrote:

I can agree with that statement, Celeste, as it is formatted as verifiable and objectively present-moment. Your reference to "...discriminated against and haven't had the same advantages as others..." would, in my mind, address people alive now?who are being treated in a manner at odds with my values.?

Not only people...this past week we rescued a small dog shivering in the mountain cold at a state park in New Mexico. I do not condemn all campers using the campground nor do I assess whether?society at large should be condemned?for animal abuse since I do not know if all members of society were involved in losing or abandoning the pup. I simply rescued?the critter?and did what I consider proper (he is safely with a protective advocate now.)

I am a Caucasian?middle class male U.S. citizen. I use the male pronouns I was taught apply to me in grade school English classes. I feel protective of women and children (and lost puppies!), and I try to respect those around?me. Even other drivers!? Despite all this, I do not consider myself as advantaged. I grew up very poor in a backwoods rural?community with social anxiety, bullying?and the strike of being from "the wrong side of the tracks." For the most part, I have earned any positive changes I benefit from, although?I acknowledge having help from others (including social breaks) whenever such benefited me.?

I did not get any free rides due to my disadvantages, nor do I expect to be lifted up or reimbursed by the descendants of any who abused my ancestors--those people currently breathing were not part of those historical stories. This is an accepted fact in a culture where time travel?or common extreme longevity are not likely truths. Basically, I deal with today and do not try to atone?for the sins of my ancestors.

I agree that it is likely that many citizens, regardless of belonging to groups noted for historic mistreatment, have the potential to become successful entrepreneurs. Hell, I did it in software despite?not initially believing?I could succeed at such a lofty ambition. I am fine with supporting an entrepreneur if I can and approve of society stimulating such resources for the benefit of all. I simply think we need to be aware that there is (in my judgement) an ongoing effort to twist the story of historic treatment into a manipulative and demonstrably logically invalid behavioral lever of guilt.

With all respect, I never mistreated anyone in the 1700's or 1800's and therefore, if the figurative and generic 'you' want my support for some modern-day effort, you had better use a more clearly and rationally expressed argument than that of emphasizing my nonexistent complicity with whatever trials your ancestors went through!

Thank you for the sensible discussion, Celeste!

Celeste wrote:

Darrell,

I don't feel guilty about their mistreatment either. I just don't understand why anyone would be against helping those who have been discriminated against and haven't had the same advantages as others. Africans who were brought to America suffered a lot of loss and then weren't allowed to even try to make up for it. I think there were plenty around who would have liked to become entrepreneurs.

On 10/26/2024 12:59 PM, Darrell King wrote:

I believe you mean to say you are in favor of helping the descendants?of people who were mistreated in the U.S. before your parents arrived, Celeste. Therein lies my quibble: we have been conditioned to ignore this distinction as though I was port?of that mistreatment. I was not and I hope that even if I had been alive and adult back in that day, I would?not have contributed to mistreatment.

I often help people on an individual basis. I share frequently when able. This?is not out of any sense of guilt or responsibility?related to the behaviors of my social?or biological ancestors, however, but rather?originates on my personal?values on the subject. I admit to feeling a little put out when somebody insists I owe?some person or group because some predecessor?acted a certain way. Even if I disapprove of some historical behavior, such as the treatment uf North American indigenous people by European immigrants, I am still not personally liable for those immigrants' behaviors.

Doesn't mean I am against helping them or anyone. Just means that?rationally I may deal with the fallout (karma?) from history but I do not feel guilty about someone else's actions!

D

On Sat, Oct 26, 2024 at 11:56?AM Celeste wrote:

Darrell,

Your response sounds incredibly bigoted. My ancestors weren't even in the U.S. until the 20th century and I'm still in favor of helping peoples who were mistreated in the U.S. before they arrived. And, of course, that includes the indigenous peoples. You, however, I am disappointed in.

On 10/26/2024 7:27 AM, Darrell King wrote:

And Darrell wondered: I am curious how many eligible?black entrepreneurs were around during the "slavery and discrimination eras" to lose time thusly??

Sorry, Celeste! It is a pet peeve of mine that the sins of the fathers?are carried to the sons! While I do believe in continuous improvement?on a social level, I consider myself as bearing absolutely no personal responsibility for any alleged sins my forefathers may have been involved?in! I certainly do not oppose?entrepreneurism in any group and so I am wary of this constant effort to make amends?for those sins to a generation that had no exposure to said sins.

I suppose social assistance for deserving entrepreneurs no matter ethnicity or other social factors. Base such support?on the validity and value of the business plan, sure. I suppose I lean rightward on the idea that I should make up for the idea that a given population deserves to be lifted out of their woes simply because of historical mistreatment?of a population with similarities. I try to treat people decently as part of my personal morality, but I am not responsible for how others have treated people.

Having vented all that, I would support forgivable loans for ideas assessed solely?on their business plans and ongoing monitoring of their use without consideration of ethnicity or similar?'disadvantaged' factoring..?

Celeste Answered to?Is Harris's offer of forgivable $20,000 loans to black men the equivalent of shiny beads to Indians??with "No, not in any way. It's for black entrepreneurs. It gives them a chance to make up for lost time during the slavery and discrimination eras."