I would argue that there has been substantial "metanoia" on the part of the federal (and state and local) governments on his issue - the voting rights act, Brown v. Board of Education, affirmative action, etc.

And that "metanoia" has been fought tooth-and-nail, especially by the political right. Doing so has even gotten people elected.

Posted by: Rick | August 8, 2008 10:38 AM

This author gets something right - the apology passed by the House is 95% meaningless and should be exposed as the blatant political tool it is. The primary sponsor is a white Democrat who was elected in a minority-majority district and faces a tough re-election battle against a black opponent (who's run a pretty despicable campaign, I might add). Again, it’s nice to apologize, but it’s pretty cheap grace.

Posted by: Eric | August 8, 2008 10:46 AM

Rick -

"The comments by "big guy" prove the point I made in my post above. The issue was not really money but power."

I don't get your point. Please elaborate.

Posted by: Gordon | August 8, 2008 11:04 AM

Rick, that's pretty convoluted.

Posted by: Gordon | August 8, 2008 11:35 AM

Rick, that's pretty convoluted.

I admit it sounds so, but that drove (among other things) the opposition to the repeal of Jim Crow laws in the South and, distantly related, the rise of the "religious right" in the 1970s. It also explains "white flight" from major cities -- on the Federal government's dime -- beginning in the 1950s. People just don't realize the pervasiveness of American racism or its long-lasting effects, which will take lots of cash to reverse (but not just cash).

Posted by: Rick | August 8, 2008 11:46 AM

that's pretty convoluted.

Most amateur psycho-analysis is.

Posted by: Wax | August 8, 2008 11:54 AM

This is why I never really understood why so many pushed for an apology. Talk can be bought. Even in the best case scenario, those apologizing for slavery didn't do it, so the words have to be somewhat empty. I am extremely sorry that slavery ever happened -- but I can't really say that in a way that doesn't sound like cheap grace. I also realize that just hearing the words does help somewhat. We have repented of slavery as a nation in that we don't allow it any more. It's always surprised me that Lincoln never apologized for it.

We have repented as a nation for many of the racism sins -- we've made discrimination illegal, but since you can't really legislate morality -- we're far from correcting all those problems. So yes, I hear you. It's still a huge issue.

I also know that vindication of any kind is a very small comfort. Restoring a relationship lets you truly enjoy that relationship for years to come, but just vindication is surprisingly empty. I think it originated the phrase, "Too little too late."

Posted by: frankie | August 8, 2008 12:02 PM

It's always surprised me that Lincoln never apologized for it.

He had enough on his plate as it was and figured that the nation needed to heal first from the Civil War -- remember, that's why he ended up being shot.

Restoring a relationship lets you truly enjoy that relationship for years to come, but just vindication is surprisingly empty.

I agree. That's why the heart of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is reconciliation.

Posted by: Rick | August 8, 2008 12:11 PM

I agree that the apology is a cheap political act. If it had been spearheaded by a Republican, Sojo would be quick to decry it.

My great great great grandfather fought for the north in the civil war. The idea that I need to open my wallet to atone for the sin of my ancestors is unbiblical. The gospels specifically say that I am not.

The idea that I need to atone for a family who came here from Canada and risked their lives to fight the pro-slavery cause is absurd. Flatly absurd. My parents were poor and the government didn't help me a lick because I don't fit their model of a needy race (I have some Indian blood, but not quite enough to be considered put upon, alas).

Of course, this begins with the premise that a current iteration of an elected government can repent of the sins of a previous iteration. Again, that isn't in the Bible either.

Rick can throw all the 1970s "religious right" rhetoric he wants, but it will not change that fact one iota.

"You see, you as an Asian were never considered as much a threat to the social order as I as an African-American, especially at the time your parents came over."

Oh please. How did films like Do The Right Thing depict Korean store owners?

Posted by: kevin s. | August 8, 2008 12:35 PM

Rick, you said, "but talk to them about how the world perceive them -- that they got into school only due to affirmative action, for openers -- and you will realize that society judges you differently on that basis."

You and I had this debate on another thread recently. Actually, it was YOU who told ME that blacks can't succeed without affirmative action. I strongly disagreed and you reiterated your position by saying that no successful black in America would be successful without the help of "affirmative action."

Sounds like YOU are the one who belittles the achievements of blacks. You should be ashamed.

Posted by: Bradley | August 8, 2008 12:46 PM

My great great great grandfather fought for the north in the civil war.

Big deal -- the Civil War didn't start out over slavery.

Rick can throw all the 1970s "religious right" rhetoric he wants, but it will not change that fact one iota.

For you, of course it won't because you agree with it on almost evey issue. Besides, what I said is historically true, and nothing you say will change that one iota.

How did films like Do The Right Thing depict Korean store owners?

Asian store owners have often been viewed as predators who gave nothing back to the communities in which they were located. That has little to do with Spike Lee.

Posted by: Rick | August 8, 2008 12:52 PM

I think everyone who is not a White Anglo-Saxon Protestant has experienced prejudice, racism, or xenophobia of some sort.

The Italians, the Polish, Catholics, Hispanics, Muslims, the Jews etc. Although I believe "repentance" of the government should be investment in inner-city schools and reform of the public-school system altogether, in terms of payments towards blacks, like everyone asks, who pays? Should people who come from immigrant families be responsible? Those who experienced xenophobia and had to climb to the top as well?

Perhaps we should strive to eliminate prejudice in all forms not just against blacks, but against everyone. Wasn't it in Martin Luther King's speech that we should all be colorblind? What about the racism that exists between the blacks and the Hispanics and the Koreans? Aren't we all guilty of racism despite our backgrounds?

We have come a long way from the past - Brown vs. Board, The Voting Rights Act - to say we have not improved is simply a slap-in-the-face to all the people who have led the way to moral and social progress. However, it's not over yet. Unfortunately, the United States suffers from implicit forms of prejudice and racism, a problem with every nation - France has it with the Algerians, Israel has it with the Arabs, tribalism exists within the Arab world, etc.

The truth is we all need to improve. Unfortunately, all the posts by Sojo regarding racism are very ambiguous. Jim Wallis calls for repentance in both of his books and the "truth telling of race," but in what specific ways can we do that?

As I am white and I cannot relate the the status of the blacks, for all the African-Americans out there, forgive me from sounding simplistic, but I humbly ask, could you elaborate on the problems that you have personally experienced or that you have witnessed within the black community? What specific goals do you believe would help the black community or any disenfranchised community progress further?

Posted by: Drew | August 8, 2008 1:14 PM

I know Rick is African-American; are any of the rest of you? I'm Anglo and my five children are African-American. We lived in the Deep South for 18 years.

During that time, blatant racism was a regular occurence. We came out of a movie theater to find recruitment notes tucked under our windshield wiper -- from the Alabama White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. Included in their pitch was the assurance that new folks could be regular members or "secret" members.

My son was with a group of white friends, late at night in Gulf Coast tourist town. He was arrested for loitering; the others weren't. Basically being arrested for being black in Gulf Shores, Alabama.

At another time, his car was blocked on a country road by a pickup full of young adults, who pulled him out of the car, held a broken beer bottle to his neck; one of them said, "You'd sure look pretty swinging from a tree."

In our town, blacks are still expected to live in one of three black neighborhood. In all of the county, the largest one east of the Mississippi, there is not one black professional person. There, as in many places, black and white students congregate at school in opposite ends of the cafeteria, different places on school grounds.

(Lincoln also signed the Emancipation Proclamation; most Union soldiers weren't all that excited about ending slavery -- they wanted to put the Rebs in their place, and they were largely responding in loyalty to Lincoln.)

So your families didn't get here till after slavery, after Jim Crow, after the Civil Rights legislation. What are you doing now to put things right? What do you do to advance the understanding between white, Asians, Latinos and blacks? Doing something rather than feeling indignant and hostile to work with others can go a long way toward healing what is still a serious rift between races.

Folks from one group can look from outside at another group and judge, by their own standards, what the experience of another race has been. You don't get it. Whites will never understand what it means to be black in America today -- or at any time (the opposite is also true, but not completely, for reasons that are too long to explain in what's already an over-long post).

The news today carried a story about the hopes of white supremacy groups that Obama will win the election -- because they believe that whites will then see how inferior, and how much a threat, blacks are. There will then be a race war, whites will win, and the proper government, with proper values, will be established.

So you don't want to give money? Are you willing to do anything to heal the breech? Sins can be committed by omission, and letting self-righteousness determine our whole position must make God cry.

Posted by: openeyes | August 8, 2008 1:20 PM

When my brother-in-law researched my roots we found out that my great-great-great grandfather owned a few slaves. They were listed in his original will as 3 boys and 2 girls. My Dad said, "those would be slaves." I was appauled. "Did he treat them badly?"

My dad laughed a bit and said, "How would I know? That was long before my granddaddy was born."

I've tried to imagine it many times since. The only thing I know about slaves are from huge plantations. I hope it was a little better for them on a small farm in Texas, but I doubt it.

I was born in the North -- and I've always been proud of that fact. But my family has been here since the Revolutionary War. I could feel guilty about those killed by my family, but I don't -- since I don't even know that happened. They were probably on the wrong side in the Civil War too. I don't know, since it wasn't documented with the will.

So -- do you want me to pay because of what my ancestors did? It sort of makes me way worse than an illegitimate child, doesn't it? I can tell you right now that I can't begin to pay for what those lives were worth. Even if you took my life it wouldn't begin to right the wrong. You could take my childrens' lives, but they're all step kids, so they have nothing to do with my roots. In fact, they're minorities, so they've been wronged on a whole different level.

I can't pay for my sins -- let alone for those of all of my ancestors. Can you?

Say your brother robbed a bank and fled the country. Would anything be gained if the courts put you in prison to serve out his crime?

Please understand, I'm not saying that racism and slavery were not crimes. I'm just saying that I don't think restitution can be made for it in this way.

Posted by: frankie | August 8, 2008 1:26 PM

Bradley
You are just arguing with Rick. The dialog here just exemplifies the problem. Trying to understand would be a better idea and by the way also be an act of repentance.

Posted by: wayne | August 8, 2008 1:40 PM

I'm just saying that I don't think restitution can be made for it in this way.

Which is why it's more than an issue with cash -- reconciliation needs to take place.

White men are not born with "contacts." Maybe I just missed out, but I was not given a roladex when I left the hospital with names and numbers of other white men who were looking to bestow upon me wealth and privelege. And I certainly don't get any "preferential treatment." I've had more doors slammed in my face than most people my age.

Sorry, but I'm not impressed. Realistically speaking, through such things as your parents or other relatives, school, church and neighborhood you likely had more opportunities than I did (which is what I mean by the kind of "contacts" that most people aren't even aware of). I mentioned on another thread about the then-teenage son of a woman I dated some years ago, and though his work history was spotty he always managed to get jobs. How? "Well, I know someone."

And as for Condi Rice, her only claim to fame is that she's a conservative Republican, rare for blacks, and she proved a disaster in the National Security Agency. As bad as she was there, if she were a liberal Democrat we'd have never heard from her again.

Posted by: Rick | August 8, 2008 1:46 PM

Why don't you give the same word of advice to Rick as you did to Bradley? He's just arguing with people too, with no attempts made to actually understand the other side.

No need -- I do understand the other side, quite well, and I think its argument has serious flaws.

Posted by: Rick | August 8, 2008 1:59 PM

"White privilege" if it exists at all, is clearly not a uniform blessing. It should be obvious that many whites lack the "contacts" Rick seems to think we all have, and it should be equally obvious that some members of minority groups do have such contacts. If it was ever true that white individuals were given advantages simply because of their race, it's not at all likely that such a thing will happen now. All in all, I view the idea of white privilege as an urban myth.

Posted by: Gordon | August 8, 2008 2:15 PM

"Big deal -- the Civil War didn't start out over slavery."

It was a big deal, and the Civil War certainly did start out over slavery.

"Asian store owners have often been viewed as predators who gave nothing back to the communities in which they were located. That has little to do with Spike Lee."

I didn't say it had anything to do with Spike Lee. He merely depicted existing prejudice, which you had falsely claimed does not exist, but now concede that it does.

Posted by: kevin s. | August 8, 2008 3:01 PM

kevin s: "It was a big deal, and the Civil War certainly did start out over slavery."

You're both right. It started out as a fight to get the seceded southern states back in the union, i.e. to preserve the Union. The reason they left was they felt that Lincoln and the Republicans threatened their "peculiar institution," slavery.

Lincoln's famous words early in the war (paraphrased): "If I could preserve the union by freeing all the slaves, I'd do that. If I could preserve the union by freeing none of the slaves, I'd do that. If I could preserve the union by freeing some and not others, I'd do that too."

Most of his biographers agree that as the war progressed, he came to believe that slavery had to be abolished. Both idealistic and pragmatic reasons lay behind his change of heart. Not least was that slaves were "freeing themselves"; as the Union army moved through the South large numbers of slaves began leaving their plantations. It would have been very difficult to reconstruct the institution of slavery after the war, given these circumstances.

Posted by: carl copas | August 8, 2008 3:13 PM

All in all, I view the idea of white privilege as an urban myth.

Which makes it all the more dangerous. Remember, one of the tenets of "white privilege" is that you don't have to think about it -- where you live, where you shop, which organizations you join. I was a member of a white fraternity when I was in college, and a couple of white sorority women praised me as a pioneer!

It was a big deal, and the Civil War certainly did start out over slavery.

False, kevin. Lincoln, who did oppose slavery, nevertheless simply wanted to save the Union and was at first willing to compromise on the slavery issue. Only later down the road did he decide that slavery itself had to go.

He merely depicted existing prejudice, which you had falsely claimed does not exist, but now concede that it does.

I said no such thing. What I said is that Asians were not seen as a danger to the established social order in the same way that blacks are, which is true.

Posted by: Rick | August 8, 2008 3:19 PM

"False, kevin. Lincoln, who did oppose slavery, nevertheless simply wanted to save the Union and was at first willing to compromise on the slavery issue. "

No. He wanted to abolish slavery, but argued the merits of his case on constitutional grounds, and wanted to achieve the result in a manner that would preserve the union. That the preservation of the union was of greater import to Lincoln (at certain intervals) is not evidence that the civil war was not about slavery.

"Only later down the road did he decide that slavery itself had to go."

Later down what road? The civil war was fought over the slavery issue. If the primary goal was to preserve the union, the north simply would have acquiesced to southern demands. The civil war was about slavery.

"What I said is that Asians were not seen as a danger to the established social order in the same way that blacks are, which is true."

Your hedging. You said that they were not considered "as much a threat", but since you conceded that shopkeepers were considered to be contributing nothing to the community, it's hard to see how this point stands.

The idea that an Asian person should have to repent for the actions of an entirely different race dispenses with any scriptural notion of repentance. Repentance purely means payoff in the framework of this discussion. This is a money grab, not a call for reconciliation.

Posted by: kevin s. | August 8, 2008 3:34 PM

You said that they were not considered "as much a threat", but since you conceded that shopkeepers were considered to be contributing nothing to the community, it's hard to see how this point stands.

Because we're talking about two different issues. Relatively speaking, Asians have not faced as much racism as African-Americans; while certainly economically exploited, primarily on the West Coast in the 19th Century, they were never chattel slaves nor were (to my knowledge) laws passed to deny them access to the greater society. In fact, recently there was a movement to set quotas in the number of Asians who were admitted to the top colleges in California -- places that, by any standard, they earned! I see no comparison to the shopkeepers who arouse ire in the black community for not participating in neighborhood activities.

Posted by: Rick | August 8, 2008 4:00 PM

As a white middle aged, middle class British Christian my sympathies tend to be with the American descendants of the slaves and native American Indians who were treated so badly in the past both in the North and the South and, with some notable exceptions, continue to be marginalised in US society both socially and politically, as are many Hispanics.

Whether public apologies achieve anything I really don't know. The Southern Baptist Convention took until 1995 to renounce it's foundation on the right to own slaves and belief in white supremacy. Has this made the Southern Baptist denomination any less racially biased ? I was greatly shocked to read the recent remarks of Billy and Franklin Graham re the late Senator Jesse Helms as beong a great Christian and patriot when he oppossed civil rights legislation so vehemantly and for so long.

In Australia white Christians have much to be ashamed about over their and their ancestors treatment of Aborigines, the black South African experience under apartheid ( which was supported by many US evangelicals including Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson )are well documented. In India the massacre at Amritsar in 1919 is a blot on the British military which I feel should be acknowleged publically.

Posted by: Patricia (UK) | August 8, 2008 4:06 PM

Perhaps I misread his words, but from where I sit Ben Sanders comments tell me that for the apology to be accepted -- in other words, for him to extend forgiveness -- there needs to be an outlay of funds.

Now I can understand that position, there's no right to cheap grace, but once we get into that realm, I think its fair for those who will be shelling out the money (initially Congress, but behind that stands the American public) to make sure that we get some sort of value for our money. In other words, the funds that get passed out actually are met by good will.

At which point, this looks less like the usual Christian process of confession and forgiveness, and more like settlement negotiations. Now that isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it is a different thing and a riskier thing because at some point either side can decide that the price is too high or too low and we're all right back where we started.

This isn't a criticism, just an observation.

Wolverine

Posted by: Wolverine | August 8, 2008 4:09 PM

At which point, this looks less like the usual Christian process of confession and forgiveness, and more like settlement negotiations.

This is where steps 8 and 9 of the Christian-oriented 12-Step recovery program bring some understanding:

8) Made a list of all persons we have harmed and became willing to make amends to them all.

9) Made direct amends to such people wherever possible except when to do so would injure them or others.

I also refer to Matthew 5:23 and 24, which speaks of a similar concept.

See, it's not just, or even primarily, about the money -- such represtent a good-faith effort not only to rectify the past but to make sure it doesn't reoccur. Thing is, true repentance always costs, which is the hang-up.

Posted by: Rick | August 8, 2008 4:20 PM

There are two questions being posed on this forum: Is the African-American experience really that bad? And why should I do something about it?

The first question is a resounding yes, on so many levels. From a historical perspective, the treatment of blacks in America is unique. From being considered subhuman in the Constitution (3/5s compromise) to being ushered into a ‘separate but (not really) equal’ shadow society (Jim Crow laws), African-Americans have been systematically and blatantly oppressed like no other group in this nation. (The only thing that can compare in the history of this country is our massacre of the native tribes here, which is a ghastly episode in our history that we can never properly pay for). The socio-economic impact of this treatment is pretty clear; African-Americans make up a disproportionate percentage of the low income community, prison population and many other negative statistics. Possibly even worse is the psychological damage that has been done to the black community. In his book ‘Blink’, Malcolm Gladwell shares a study that looked into the impact of race on testing. What the study found was that there was a marked drop in performance by African-American students when they were asked to identify their race before the test. Not only did the test scores drop, but in the post-test interviews, those asked to identify their race were noticeably more despondent and often made remarks like ‘I don’t feel smart enough to be here’. The negative images and ideas about black people have become so internalized that when forced to confront their race, black students perform worse. Imagine what that is doing on a national scale, in schools and businesses across the country. (I suspect that part of the reason that this negative imagery has had such a profound impact on the African-American community is because, unlike other immigrant groups to the US, African-Americans were forcibly cut off from their history, so they have only the short narrative of their existence here in the US to fall back on, which is decidedly negative).

So yes, the African-American experience is as different and serious as people talk about. But still, why should I have to do something about it. As a US citizen, there are two reasons you should be willing to pay (financially and otherwise) to repair some of the damage done to the black community. (1) From a practical standpoint, prevention costs far less treatment. So you pay taxes that go to help low-income folks to prevent the plethora of problems that occur in marginalized communities. And you pay a little extra to help black communities because they have more going against them then just being low-income. (2) As a person living in the US, you enjoy many pleasures that are the direct result of slavery and oppression. The financial superiority that the US often has can be traced back to the economic boon provided by free slave labor. So while you may not own slaves and your family may have never owned slaves, by living here and enjoying the freedoms that are more prevalent here than in almost any other country, you are enjoying the labor of generations of slaves. Paying taxes that go to social programs that benefit African-americans or even sending your child to a slightly less prestigious school so that an African-american student might have the opportunity to go there is just a small way that you can repay for abuses that you have benefited from. (This would be similar to the way that federal money goes to Native American tribes, pays for social services for immigrants, including boat people and provides classes to teach people English. And yes, all these are good things).

More importantly, as a Christian, this should be a no-brainer. It is my fervent hope that all of these posts asking why they should help the black community are from non-Christians. Not only should Christians understand better than anyone else that we need to help those who have suffered, we should be the first ones to suggest that we reach for our wallets. What would have happened if Jesus took your attitude? ‘Hey, I didn’t commit those sins, so why should I pay for them.” We serve the most selfless, compassionate man that ever lived and we should be looking for ways to emulate him, not embarrass him. This attitude of “I’m willing to help as long as it doesn’t hurt” is decidedly un-Christ-like. If the black community needs help and needs help in special ways because of special abuses, we should be willing to provide that help. Sure, we can debate what strategies will work best, but not doing anything is not the best answer. And if providing that help means you tighten you belt a little bit and get your pride dinged a little bit, then that’s what you do. This is how the early church cared for its own and the community around it. They did what was unpopular and hard to care for those in need. Because that’s what Christ told them to do; Care for the poor, feed the hungry, cloth the naked, etc. As followers of Jesus, we need to look for the poor and hungry and naked and help them however we can. And when we run across people that need our help and we don’t want to give it immediately, we need to ask ourselves why.

Posted by: Dave | August 8, 2008 4:23 PM

The 12-step program isn't in the Bible.

It certainly is, but not explicitly. It came from the Oxford Group, which was a product of the Wesleyan revival of the late 19th century.

It calls for MUTUAL reconciliation BEFORE offering a gift to GOD.

"If you brother has something against you ..."

Posted by: Rick | August 8, 2008 4:38 PM

"Is the African-American experience really that bad? And why should I do something about it?"

No. It would be convenient if those were the questions, but the questions are more "whether" than "what".

Posted by: kevin s. | August 8, 2008 4:41 PM

Out of all the comments and the article, I found it interesting that no one is asking restitution from the very ones who sold the black people into slavery. Mainly, other tribes in Africa.

I agree, that we cannot ask restitution from those who were not a part of the crime or the era.

Posted by: Dede | August 8, 2008 4:58 PM

OOPS! Sorry about the all of those type-o's
Larry

Posted by: Larry | August 8, 2008 5:17 PM

Maybe it's just me, but I won't be losing sleep at night thinking about whether Ben Saunders will forgive the US government. I also don't think the US government is losing sleep at night thinking about whether he will forgive it or what it can do to earn his forgiveness.

The question of whether we should increase funding for schools is an important one and should be considered in light of the fact that there is no correlation between school expenditures and student performance (eg, see schools in Wash DC). With that said, I think everyone is in favor of improving schools and even spending more money on them (for the benefit of all students--hispanics, whites, and asians included), as long as the money isn't wasted.

I read Cornel West's "Race Matters." It was filled with wild speculations and not a single reference. It's sad that his book counts for scholarship these days.

Like others here I think it is nice for Saunders to acknowledge that a congressional apology doesn't mean much.

Posted by: jesse | August 8, 2008 6:07 PM

"OH sure, tribes in Africa sold sold other blacks into slavery."

Putting "oh sure" in front of it doesn't make it false.

"Have you ever heard of the concept
"supply and demand"?"

This doesn't change any of the facts here.

"If the English and the Spaniard slave traders weren't there to ask for slaves there wouldn't have been slaves coming to America..."

Neither does this.

"Why did you go there?"

Probably because it helps demonstrate the futility of the concept of collective repentance via economic redistribution.

Posted by: kevin s. | August 8, 2008 6:55 PM

I think it is silly to ask anyone currently living to atone for slavery and I am a black man. But on the other hand race is still such a loaded subject even into the 21st century. I sometimes get frustrated when people make the comparisons with other racial and ethnic groups and ask why don't blacks get over it and move on? I think we have "gotten over it" and have moved on for the most part. But 299 years of official slavery and another 100+ years of Jim Crow enforced by the full power of the US Government and most of polite society is unique to the American experience wouldn't you say?

Affirmative action and those such remedies have only existed for about 50 years and were fought by some every step of the way. Now some say that it has gone to far. Of course white women entering the workforce and immigrants from other countries were also large beneficiaries of affirmative action instead of the intended target.

Some of the less fortunate are still dragged down by the legacy of slavery that manifests itself in broken down neighborhoods across the country. Poverty is not because of racism but usually goes along hand in hand. Drug usage, crime, out-of-wedlock babies are just symptoms of greater societal problems and these problems know no race.

A wise old man once told me "If black people were the primary beneficiaries of welfare and affirmative action would it still exist today?" Makes you think doesn't it? God Bless.

Posted by: Ron Tee | August 8, 2008 7:12 PM

So do these same criteria apply to all races, in your opinion? Does it depend on each individual's situation whether or not they owe reparations to African Americans?

Reparations are never "owed" in the classic sense because you simply can't put a dollar amount on official injustice. Rather, they are given as a good-faith effort to make things as right as possible. (In this I oppose those radicals who demand specific amounts; they're after only a pound of flesh.) That's why there's no easy answer to your question -- my goal is not humiliation but reconciliation.

Posted by: Rick | August 8, 2008 7:45 PM

Regardless if you are white but poor, Asian, Hispanic, or American Indian, it was only Africans or black people who forced slaves. As a result of that slavery from in the US from 1640-1875 and the ensuing oppression from Jim Crow from 1875 until 1964, only blacks have truly been denied the same economic opportunities available to the rest of Americans. It was a slap in the face to African Americans that Congress apologized but gave no reparation. They gave Japanese Americans a token $20,000 each in the 1980's for their internment during WW-II. So why not Blacks?
By the way, I am a white who grew up middle class and live in Suburbia. I am also, a Christian who believes strongly in the teaching of Christ. He would or perhaps is aghast at some of the responses in this forum. I will pray that he shows mercy to the non-compassionate views stated here. Peace.

Posted by: Ricco | August 8, 2008 8:17 PM

Gordon (I apologize for the length of these posts),
I agree that the congressional apology issued was probably motivated by political concerns more than actual concern for African-Americans, but it still raises a good question. Does the US government or the citizenry of the US owe anything to the African-American community?
I would argue that by trying to equate the African-American experience to other immigrant groups or to someone’s individual negative experiences, we are minimizing and invalidating the African-American experience and implying that the answer to the above question is no. The posts in this thread ask why there is a need to pay, implying that no wrong was done and even if there was, that they shouldn’t be asked to help. It’s part of our cultural perception of African-Americans as lazy and shiftless and mostly to blame for their own problems, a perception that has done almost as much damage to the African-American community as slavery. That perception fuels arguments that other immigrant groups have made it (so why didn’t you), that other people are hurting too (so stop your whining) or that it’s not just slavery that accounts for all of the ills in the African-American community (it’s your poor judgment). As someone stated earlier, the extent of racism in this country is far more prevalent that some are aware of or are willing to admit.
I agree that reparations are probably not feasible (although I think it’s interesting that congress refuses to even put together a commission to study what it would take to pay reparations to African-Americans, even though they were able to put together a committee that advised on and oversaw distribution of reparations to Japanese Americans in the 90’s), but I get the impression from some of these posts that even an apology was too much. If we agree that there was drastic damage done to the African-American community for hundreds of years and that the government benefited from that damage, why would we turn around and claim that it doesn’t make any sense for the government to apologize for that damage and find ways to repay that damage? When Virginia issued its apology last year, they also setup special funding for students who went to schools that had been deprived of resources in the wake of white flight. Not a perfect solution, but certainly better than sitting around saying “I don’t own slaves, I shouldn’t pay anything”.

And to the comments about Africans selling their neighbors to the slave traders, I think that falls apart for three reasons (1) While their actions are sad, those Africans are not US citizens and couldn’t be held accountable even if we wanted to do that. We’re talking about the US holding itself accountable and paying for its own actions. (2) Just because the Africans’ actions were deplorable does not make the actions of the Europeans who were buying slaves any less reprehensible. (3) The actions of the Africans had no impact on the US policy of slavery here, Jim Crow laws, government sanctioned segregation, etc. While your statement is true, it falls into the category of statements that try to minimize the African-American experience and excuse this country of any wrong doing or responsibility.

…and that comment about how African-Americans should be thankful they’re here because Africa is such a horrible place…that is one of the singularly most ignorant comments I have ever heard in my life. Can you imagine going to a Holocaust Survivors convention and telling them that they should be sending thank you notes to Hitler? After all, it’s because of the Holocaust that the rest of the world agreed to the formation of Isreal. Or maybe you’d like to go to home for victims of rape and tell them they should be thanking the rapists for the beautiful child they are about to have. The idea that victims should be thankful to their attackers if they manage to find some good from the scraps of their life is just…asinine. Oh, and let’s not forget that part of the reason that Africa is such a horrible place to live is that because while some Europeans were so graciously carting off slaves to the safety of the Americas, other Europeans were dividing Africa and stripping it of all its resources.

Posted by: Dave | August 8, 2008 9:24 PM

Gordon,
I agree that the African-American situation has steadily improved in this nation, much of that improvement due to the hard work and even sacrificed lives of many people who weren’t black. I’m not trying to minimize gains made by those freedoms fighters who came before us. I’m suggesting that as inheritors of their legacy, we’re doing a pretty poor job. Abolitionists and civil rights champions fought to remove the physical and legal forms of oppression. They fought to get this country to stop harmful actions. But trying to remove forms of mental and spiritual oppression and getting this country to take steps to take helpful action has been very difficult. This country has fought hard against changes that would really level the playing field and set right the injustices of our forefathers. The ship that you suggest takes a long time to change course could be moving a lot faster and I think that’s what fuels so much of the anger coming from African-Americans. It’s not that we don’t think anything is being done; it’s that we don’t think enough is being done and we think it’s patronizing to tell us to just be patient and that things will change.
But why are we so slow to change? I think part of the problem is that we don’t realize that we all bear the scars from the mistakes of this country. The problems that plague the African-American community aren’t just their problems; they’re everyone’s problems. Instead of seeing helping the African-American community as an act of healing for the entire nation, some choose to see it as stealing their resources to give to other people and fight to oppose it.
Another part of the problem is that we’re a nation of whiny buck-passers. This is just one of many issues that we’re trying to pawn off on our grandchildren because we think it’s ‘too hard’. We have the same attitude towards the environment. Yes, these issues are complex and will require lots of work (and capital), but if we don’t start making serious head way, they will be exponentially harder for our children to deal with.

Posted by: Dave | August 8, 2008 10:50 PM

Dave,

I'd be interested in your list of helpful actions.

Posted by: Gordon | August 8, 2008 11:06 PM

Gordon,
I’d advocate first that people take action on a personal level. Get out and about and meet with people that don’t look like you or talk like you. Expand your community. We need to challenge the unwritten rules of who can talk to whom and who can live where if we want to continue this march forward. And from a Christian perspective, it makes sense to start with community. That’s our approach. (The one thing that saddens me about the emergent/new monastic movement is that it is largely perceived as a suburban white phenomenon.) African-Americans need to participate in this process too, taking any olive branches that are offered in genuine love.
From a policy perspective, there are a ton of things that could be done. And that’s the point. Because we’ve allowed ourselves to become so segregated and isolated, there’s very little authentic dialogue about what can happen. Once we shift the dialogue from an ‘us vs. them’ to just us, we’ll get more things done. It could be as simple as starting a tutoring program for kids at the local school to something as grand as advocating for an early troop withdrawal and using already pledged funds to set up scholarships.
The point is that it’s not enough to just say we’ll stop actively racist policies. Even if everybody in the US suddenly had all vestiges of racist thoughts removed from their head and all forms of racism were outlawed, the resources in this country would be heavily skewed in the direction of the group that has been dominant for so long. Things like Affirmative Action and bussing started to address this problem. But already, less than 50 years later, they are meeting with serious backlash. The problem is not that people want to stop these things, it’s that they advocate for them to be eliminated and replaced with nothing. I know people don’t want their resources shifted, but in the end, that’s what has to happen for true parity in this country.

Posted by: Dave | August 9, 2008 12:03 AM

" I sometimes get frustrated when people make the comparisons with other racial and ethnic groups and ask why don't blacks get over it and move on? "

For the record, this is not my stance, and I don't see people adopting this stance here.

"If a poverty stricken person in Indonesia makes it to college that person has much higher chance of not get confronted with racial indifference."

In Indonesia, the bias is along religious lines, which is the same thing.

"They gave Japanese Americans a token $20,000 each in the 1980's for their internment during WW-II. So why not Blacks? "

It was given to those interned, for starters.

"As a white male, I have profited, been preferenced by, privileged by, the standards of our society at every step of the way. "

Not unless you are 80 years old. My experience has been precisely the opposite, and the statistics suggest my experience is typical.

Posted by: kevin s. | August 9, 2008 1:04 AM

OK - to sum it up.

Japanese - the people that caused them to enter the consentration camps were still alive. In retrospect - they saw the error of what they did. Hind-sight is always 20-20. The people that caused slavery are all dead - even thoughs who faught for their freedom over the centuries are dead. You can't talk with them about the 'whys' of their belief that this institution was approved by many - they're dead.

So - are we sorry that it happened - yes we are. We wish it had never happened - but we had nothing to do with it. Do we believe in reperations - yes. But the people who were at the root of this are dead. The slaves that lived under these conditions are dead. Most if not all of their children and grand-children are dead. So - who is going to pay who and how much? I am sorry for slavery and I will help people today to move on in any manner that I can. I will not talk about money as those who were the cause of the problem and the victims are all dead. It is just as unlawful to make people that had nothing to do with the situation pay people that were not the victims of the institution.

All the Time - God is Good
.

Posted by: Bug guy | August 9, 2008 10:05 AM

I really appreciate peolple like Big Guy, Kevin S, and Gordon commenting. they obviuously know a lot about what it's like to be black in America.

Thank you all!

Posted by: Jade | August 9, 2008 12:29 PM

"I really appreciate peolple like Big Guy, Kevin S, and Gordon commenting. they obviuously know a lot about what it's like to be black in America."

I am not required to be black in order to have an opinion on this issue.

Posted by: kevin s. | August 9, 2008 5:43 PM

I was hesitant to ask whether that was an ironic comment

Posted by: Gordon | August 9, 2008 5:49 PM

Let no man despise your youth. I'm one who worked hard to earn respect when I was young, but now that I've lived a bit longer I realize that though I had no reason to be ashamed for my youth, I was ignorant. I did not have enough of life's experience behind me to evaluate certain things. I had not lived long enough to see the shallow from the deep.

I had not lived long enough to realize yet that there are no blacks or whites or orange. Those concepts don't mean anything. Girard came into my office when I was substituting for the boss. He asked if he should handle a piece of business one way or another. As I evaluated the situation and realized that it really made no difference, rather glibly I replied, "You're free, white, and 21. Make up your own mind."

Girard, by the way, was one of the darkest complexoined men I have ever known. If we must use these labels, he is African-American. I only thought of him as fellow-worker, an American, and Christian man. Oh yes, I have Scotch-Irish-English-Dutch heritage and am fairly light complexioned.

I believe slavery is abominable, but I see people selling themselves into slavery every day. I realize that the slave trade of a few generations ago was atrociously abominable. I'm sorry, but I don't believe I owe anyone an apology over that. I'm not convinced that the blood shed over the Civil War was not a great apology. I know that the blood that was shed on the cross was adequate. Those who insist that it was not are abominably and arrogantly ignorant of what God did in Christ.

The very idea that money can somehow "pay for," or "redeem," or somehow "recompense" for what was done to previous generations is nothing more than a greed grab on the part of the present generation. I have degrees in seminary and other universities, too. What I have learned since, will not allow me to make the kind of judgments my brother, Sanders, makes. Yet, I acknowledge him as my brother.

You see, if God is my Father and if God is Ben's Father, that makes us brothers whether we agree, like each other, or even acknowledge it or not.

Now, if I have offended you, Ben, I can apologize and do. My representatives cannot and frankly should not make a mockery of the process of apologizing by making the sort of "resolution" that was made. It's meaningless and is only calculated to pick up a few votes. That is unless they really are guilty of practicing slavery...now there's a thought.

Posted by: Sam | August 9, 2008 6:37 PM

What happens if you listen (as we have all listened to Rick's well-conceived arguments) and still aren't persuaded?

Posted by: Gordon | August 9, 2008 7:12 PM

Racism can really thrive in a society in which there is a wide disparity between the haves and the haves nots which must be explained, justified, and institutionalized. Racism becomes one way of 'making sense' of a reality which is constructed to keep some people at the bottom for the benefit of others, and to keep the majority of people distracted and feeling a little better off. The slave era of the U.S. is a perfect example of this - landowning slaveholders perpetuated racist thinking, behavior, and institutions in order to justify the forced unpaid labor of black people, thereby enriching themselves beyond measure. These landowners needed the loyalty of the majority of poor, working, non-slave-owning and landholding whites, whose conditions weren't great. What better way to protect yourself than to create a scapegoat - through the system of racism. Have the majority of whites blame their problems on blacks instead on of the minority of whites exploiting everyone - brilliant. That was a particular moment in history but that legacy remains as deeply coded into our country as the legacy of racism has impacted black people and our psychology. Our world has evolved a lot since then and I think what is becoming ever more apparent, if we care to acknowledge it, is that we're seeing that the majority of people of all colors are facing some of the same stark realities when it comes to poor quality education, lack of job opportunities at living wages, lack of quality healthcare and housing, among other issues. It is so necessary to understand the history of racism, its legacy and incredibly traumatic effects, as well as to uncover its true underpinnnings and the other untold histories and realities of poor and working people across the country so that we can finally overcome this horrible constructed barrier that has driven a wedge between the majority of our society for so long.

Posted by: Nijmie | August 9, 2008 8:17 PM

The majority of the American population enjoys excellent education, good wages, lives in decent housing, and has access to the best healthcare on earth.

The majority? And for how long?

Posted by: Rick | August 9, 2008 9:32 PM

To address the title itself... How can those long dead repent? No person now living in the US has owned slaves. How could any person presume to repent to God for another's sin? Especially one who is now dead?

Posted by: Watcher | August 9, 2008 9:48 PM

"I don't think we should allow the politics of liberalism and other elements in this apology being made stop us from being sincere in reaching out to God , to people of color , and saying we are sorry ."

I'd agree with that. We ought to do what we can to assist disadvantaged people, however they got that way. And I personally think we need to find some way to end this endless discussion about who did what to whom.

Posted by: Gordon | August 9, 2008 10:40 PM

A typo -- I should have written "...what is now Israel" in the second paragraph.

Posted by: Rick | August 9, 2008 11:29 PM

"What happens if you listen (as we have all listened to Rick's well-conceived arguments) and still aren't persuaded?"

Then you dismiss the argument.

"The Catholic Church made apologies for what it did in its past."

Apology is not repentance, as the title of this post suggests. That said, I don't think the apologies of the Catholic Church accomplished much either.

Posted by: kevin s. | August 10, 2008 1:27 AM

I rather resent the notion that, as the child of the child of immigrants, I am somehow guilty for actions of people long before my ancestors arrived on these shores. What possible healing is accomplished with that? I'd say it rather poisons the well, instead.

Some of the most racist people I've known were the "children of immigrants." See, many could (and did) change their names or church affiliations and in order not to be seen as differ