For once, I agreed with an Obama idea.
Blacks aren't the only ones who came to the "Land of Dreams" only to be persecuted, abused, ... murdered. As a Catholic, I am appalled at the way some people think that they deserve special treatment because someone in their family tree might have been the victim of slavery in the American colonies and in the early years of the country. I am sure that many think me racist for saying something like that but it's quite the contrary. I think it racist for anyone -- white, black, red, or green -- to think that they deserve special treatment because of their color. (I feel the same way about gender wars ... men are no better than women and vice versa.)
Let's not forget either that in many cases it was black Africans who sold other black Africans into slavery. Nor should we forget that, while atrocious as it was, those Africans that came here and endured the hardships really did give their future generations a better life. Compare life in America, even life in poverty here, to life in Africa today. I bet you'd chose government housing, welfare, even the shoddy school system to life living in a mud hut, being hunted by lions, and having your kids die of famine and/or disease.
And let's not forget the heritage of non-Protestants in our Nation's history. As a Catholic, should I picket the government for the treatment of my ancestors who came here due to the potato famine of 1845? Honestly, out of the 13 original colonies, only one was Catholic. Even then Catholics only made up like 1% of the population. Do you know which colony was the Catholic one? MARYland. The other 12, and later most of the new country, were vehemently anti-Catholic. Really, it mattered not that it was a group of Catholics who FOUND the New World (Christopher Columbus, a Spaniard, was Catholic afterall, as was the country's namesake, Amerigo Vespuci) or that the first Christian service ever celebrated on American soil was a Mass in Pensacola, Florida.
Then there is the treatment of Jews that fled to America for one reason or another. Groups like the Ku Klux Klan viewed blacks, Jews, and Catholics in the same firelight and persecuted them all the same. Really, is there any shock that there has only been ONE Catholic president ... or that he only shot and killed? As a Catholic, where is my John F. Kennedy day? I mean, really, there's a Martin Luther King, Jr. day!
Protestants were wary of anyone who looked different or believed differently and therefore saw them as a threat. If you weren't a W.A.S.P. (white anglo-saxon protestant) you were not deserving of even the most basic freedoms. Ever heard of the book "Our Country" by Josiah Strong? In it, he lists his "Seven Perils" facing the New World (America). They were:
- Immigration
- Romanism
- Mormonism
- Intemperance
- Socialism
- Wealth
- The City
Gosh, and don't even get me started on the treatment of the Native Americans! (My maternal family comes from Ireland, my paternal was Cherokee Indian.) Good gracious, if anyone has a reason to be pissed off about the treatment of their ancestors, it's the Native Americans!
Am I saying this to be racist? Of course not! I think that slavery was atrocious, an embarrassment in our Nation's past. But I also think that other groups such as the Indians, the Catholics and the Jews who were persecuted and killed because they weren't W.A.S.P.s should be remembered, too. It wasn't just blacks who were ill-treated. I'm not standing in a government hand-out line because my maternal great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandparents *might* have received ill treatment when they landed in America or because my paternal great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandparents were herded off their land and/or slaughtered during the rape and pillage of America by the settlers.
If the government starts handing out paychecks to people for nothing more than being born with a certain skin color, then I think that I should get one, too, for being of both Cherokee Indian and Irish heritage, and for being a Catholic. Fair is fair.
Anyway, the kiddo is running around so I need to go. She and I have a lot to do today. In ending, here is that story that I began my post talking about.
from: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080802/ap_on_el_pr/obama_slavery_reparations
Obama says he opposes slavery reparations, apology
By CHRISTOPHER WILLS, Associated Press Writer
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama opposes offering reparations to the descendants of slaves, putting him at odds with some black groups and leaders.
The man with a serious chance to become the nation's first black president argues that government should instead combat the legacy of slavery by improving schools, health care and the economy for all.
"I have said in the past — and I'll repeat again — that the best reparations we can provide are good schools in the inner city and jobs for people who are unemployed," the Illinois Democrat said recently.
Some two dozen members of Congress are co-sponsors of legislation to create a commission that would study reparations — that is, payments and programs to make up for the damage done by slavery.
The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People supports the legislation, too. Cities around the country, including Obama's home of Chicago, have endorsed the idea, and so has a major union, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.
Obama has worked to be seen as someone who will bring people together, not divide them into various interest groups with checklists of demands. Supporting reparations could undermine that image and make him appear to be pandering to black voters.
"Let's not be naive. Sen. Obama is running for president of the United States, and so he is in a constant battle to save his political life," said Kibibi Tyehimba, co-chair of the National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America. "In light of the demographics of this country, I don't think it's realistic to expect him to do anything other than what he's done."
But this is not a position Obama adopted just for the presidential campaign. He voiced the same concerns about reparations during his successful run for the Senate in 2004.
There's enough flexibility in the term "reparations" that Obama can oppose them and still have plenty of common ground with supporters.
The NAACP says reparations could take the form of government programs to help struggling people of all races. Efforts to improve schools in the inner city could also aid students in the mountains of West Virginia, said Hilary Shelton, director of the NAACP's Washington bureau.
"The solution could be broad and sweeping," Shelton said.
The National Urban League — a group Obama is to address Saturday — avoids the word "reparations" as too vague and highly charged. But the group advocates government action to close the gaps between white America and black America.
Urban League President Marc Morial said he expects his members to press Obama on how he intends to close those gaps and what action he would take in the first 100 days of his presidency.
"What steps should we take as a nation to alleviate the effects of racial exclusion and racial discrimination?" Morial asked.
The House voted this week to apologize for slavery. The resolution, which was approved on a voice vote, does not mention reparations, but past opponents have argued that an apology would increase pressure for concrete action.
Obama says an apology would be appropriate but not particularly helpful in improving the lives of black Americans. Reparations could also be a distraction, he said.
In a 2004 questionnaire, he told the NAACP, "I fear that reparations would be an excuse for some to say, 'We've paid our debt,' and to avoid the much harder work."
Taking questions Sunday at a conference of minority journalists, Obama said he would be willing to talk to American Indian leaders about an apology for the nation's treatment of their people.
Pressed for his position on apologizing to blacks or offering reparations, Obama said he was more interested in taking action to help people struggling to get by. Because many of them are minorities, he said, that would help the same people who would stand to benefit from reparations.
"If we have a program, for example, of universal health care, that will disproportionately affect people of color, because they're disproportionately uninsured," Obama said. "If we've got an agenda that says every child in America should get — should be able to go to college, regardless of income, that will disproportionately affect people of color, because it's oftentimes our children who can't afford to go to college."
One reparations advocate, Vernellia Randall, a law professor at the University of Dayton, bluntly responded: "I think he's dead wrong."
She said aid to the poor in general won't close the gaps — poor blacks would still trail poor whites, and middle-class blacks would still lag behind middle-class whites. Instead, assistance must be aimed directly at the people facing the after-effects of slavery and Jim Crow laws, she said.
"People say he can't run and get elected if he says those kinds of things," Randall said. "I'm like, well does that mean we're really not ready for a black president?"
No comments:
Post a Comment