mjak, would you mind if I posted your post at another forum? It is a good post and I like that you are actually from NJ.
If you don't want me to ,that is totally fine.
NJ Lawmakers Consider Slavery Apology
- Thread starter Linda7NJ
- Start date
If you don't want me to ,that is totally fine.
I agree with your priorities, but if this apology takes much time, whose fault is that? It would be over and done with by now if some legislators didn't feel an odd need to fight an apology for what we all know (or should know) is wrong.
The resolution specifically states it cannot be used as legal justification for claims of monetary damages (which may not stop somebody from trying, but which will make it much more difficult for such claims to succeed).
And just to put things in context, it was only 10 years ago that a black actor got death threats in New Jersey for appearing as Jesus in a play.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_n18_v91/ai_19255967
This isn't to say NJ is especially racist, only to say it isn't always perfectly tolerant. No more than any other state.
I don't always agree with the tactics of Jackson and Sharpton (neither of whom lives in New Jersey, as far as I know), but I'm sure you don't mean to equate their activism, however extreme, with 400 years of institutionalized slavery.
Nova, in those terms, of course not.
However, I think apologizing for something *most* people did not take part in, or their ancestors did not take part in, but for probably benefitting overall, equates quite nicely with the shenanigans we all (black and white) put up with from Jackson and Sharpton.
Where did we get this notion that the legislators of New Jersey are proposing to apologize on the personal behalf of each resident?
The actions specifically listed include abolishing slavery very late in the game (for a non-Southern state) and delayed ratification of a constitutional amendment. These are official acts of the State of New Jersey as a political entity and it is the State of New Jersey as a political entity that would apologize in the proposed resolution.
Now I know we Americans like to say "we" are the government, but in that sense, the current citizens of NJ ARE responsible for the acts of their government, past, present and future. (Just as we all are responsible.)
Either way, an apology still makes sense, even if only as a symbolic act.
I'm not arguing against an apology from NJ. I'm arguing FOR an apology from asshats like J and S. I think an apology from them makes sense, too. You know, sort of like "Hey, we're sorry for accusing whites for some things that maybe they didn't do. Let's start with the Duke boys."
Personally, I'd still rather see the US gov't apologize to Native Americans if they're going to do any apologizing.
There have been many apologies to Native Americans, they're called "casinos."
But seriously, why is it a matter of "rather"? Why would we choose one over the other?
As for Sharpton and Jackson, frankly, I'm shocked that you think they belong in this conversation. They did what, exactly? Took the word of the Durham district attorney that a woman had been raped by a bunch of athletes? Rather as we believe D.A.s all over the country every day? (Particularly here at WS!)
And that is somehow the moral equivalent of institutionalized slavery for centuries? With all due respect, I do not understand the ethical system you are employing.
Well, without get too much off topic, DA's are not infallable. This guy tried to burn these kids at the stake without so much a scrap of evidence, and J and S fell for it hook, line, and sinker.
We shouldn't necessarily believe the charges of a D.A. until he has presented the evidence in court to support his claims.
I think J and S belong in this conversation because as ridiculous as my arguments sounds, it's about as ridiculous as the notion that taxpayers of the state of NJ need to waste their money on this. It doesn't take an apology to recognize that slavery is wrong, and that many African Americans were wronged. Is an apology going to suddenly make people feel better? Who then? Whites in NJ because they've owned up to their mistakes and are now absolved of it? Or blacks in NJ who had a chip on their shoulder, specifically for NJ because they abolished slavery later than sooner? Will race relations improve as a result because the apology suddenly just erased decades of resentment, or will it just further divide us by serving up an apology that may not be good enough in the eyes of many African Americans?
Also, I didn't mean "rather" when I spoke of Native American's vs. African Americans, because I forgot to remove the "rather" when editing my post for clarity, which I'm sure makes it look like I'm all for apologizing to NA's and not AA's which isn't the case at all.
Nova, the casino thing is way off mark.
Jeana (DP)
Former Member
Why can't they apologize to both Native Americans and slaves? Both groups deserve an apology.
When America's leaders can say honestly that slavery is a tarnish on our heritage and a completely dark period of our history, I don't think its a huge stretch that the government should be willing to apologize that it happened. That's not to say that THEY DID IT, simply that they're sorry that it happened.
Ah, come awn, Paladin. The "casino" thing was funny. And just a joke. (For the record, I live 1 block from reservation land and 3 blocks from a huge casino, which saved this town. I certainly have no objection to Indian gaming.)
Your remarks on how we should all be suspicious of district attorney pronouncements are right on. But why do Sharpton and Jackson have a special obligation in this regard? Why is their trust in what a D.A. said so much worse than that of the 75% of the country who believed (and still believe) what the L.A. district attorney said about O.J. Simpson? (ETA: just to be clear, I too believe Garcetti was right about Simpson. I'm just saying we all rely on D.A.s.)
Why is the Duke case--in which the system worked (albeit too slowly) and the charges were dropped--deserving of such special outrage? Particularly when compared with the countless cases of black defendants wrongly charged and CONVICTED in this country?
And what does any of that have to do with slavery or the NJ resolution? I wouldn't blame an African-American lurker for reading this thread and thinking, "Yes, it's always them v. us with some people."
As for your comments on the limited effect of apologies, couldn't the same be said for ALL apologies? Yes, it could and has been. But somehow, for some people, it isn't enough to shrug and say, "Well, everybody knows it was wrong." Some people want it said aloud. And what's so wrong with that?
As for exacerbating racial tensions, the folks who will think black people are getting special treatment already think so, as we see in posts here.
Your remarks on how we should all be suspicious of district attorney pronouncements are right on. But why do Sharpton and Jackson have a special obligation in this regard? Why is their trust in what a D.A. said so much worse than that of the 75% of the country who believed (and still believe) what the L.A. district attorney said about O.J. Simpson? (ETA: just to be clear, I too believe Garcetti was right about Simpson. I'm just saying we all rely on D.A.s.)
Why is the Duke case--in which the system worked (albeit too slowly) and the charges were dropped--deserving of such special outrage? Particularly when compared with the countless cases of black defendants wrongly charged and CONVICTED in this country?
And what does any of that have to do with slavery or the NJ resolution? I wouldn't blame an African-American lurker for reading this thread and thinking, "Yes, it's always them v. us with some people."
As for your comments on the limited effect of apologies, couldn't the same be said for ALL apologies? Yes, it could and has been. But somehow, for some people, it isn't enough to shrug and say, "Well, everybody knows it was wrong." Some people want it said aloud. And what's so wrong with that?
As for exacerbating racial tensions, the folks who will think black people are getting special treatment already think so, as we see in posts here.
Yeah, I didn't mean rather even though I typed it. Finger flub by me.
Your tongue-in-cheek remarks are usually followed by a smiley, I was thrown for a loop!
I believe they have special obligation in this regard because they have the influence and reach to effectively ruin careers and public images. Nifong is the facilitator of this, but J and S's involvement certain helped make this case a media circus, a full fledged 3-ringer instead of maybe 1.
What I remember most about the case is before ANY evidence was handed down they were literally giving press conferences denouncing these men directly in front of the house where the supposed events took place. As a result angry mobs were placing signs that spewed hateful remarks towards them. Again, all without a shred of evidence.
J and S's involvement made it special outrage. They certainly weren't quite as vocal when coming to the aid of the Jena 6, or at least from what I saw from the media's perspective. It made it appear like J and S were more interested in convicting a bunch of seemingly guilty white kids rather than defending the rights of seemingly innocent black kids.
It doesn't. Your logic and rationality will always smite my illogic and irrationality. I'm an emotional person.
I think there are better things to do with the taxpayer's money. I also think it's going to set a precedent in an already too politically-correct society. Every group that feels they were slighted in some way will want an apology.
My bad. Sorry.
You are right, in the sense that their responsibility is greater than mine as a private citizen who commands no media attention. But they were hardly the only public figures who spoke out about this case, early and often.
You keep saying "without a shred of evidence," which we now know to be true. But at the time, we were all told testimony had been given by the victim, and many years in which female victims of sexual crimes were commonly disbelieved has conditioned most of us to give greater credibility to any woman's claim that she has been raped. In most cases, that has proved a good thing, though not, of course, in this case.
Still, I find it odd that Sharpton and Jackson are now defamed for standing up for a woman who said she had been raped (given the information Nifong gave out at the time).
If the reverends seemed to pay special attention to this case, we shouldn't be surprised. Initially, it was spun (by Nifong and others in Durham) as a case of privileged white men abusing a much less privileged non-white woman, and so it seemed to follow traditional paradigms of inequality in this country.
Yes, of course, it is to be hoped we have all now learned not to assume. But Jackson and Sharpton did nothing at the time that most of the media weren't doing as well.
I'm not under the impression that such a resolution is particularly expensive. Legislatures (and executives such as governors and mayors) pass (or decree) all sorts of symbolic resolutions, which cost roughly the paper on which they are printed. I don't see why apologizing for institutionalized slavery isn't at least as worthwhile as "Synthetic Carpet Day" and the like.
Again, this is the State of New Jersey apologizing for official acts by the State of New Jersey. This isn't a government apologizing for every personal wrong done by one of its residents. I doubt this resolution will usher in a wave of apologies, but if it does, what would be so wrong?
I'm sure we can all think of worse ways our officials spend their time.
I do think it's a time and money issue, otherwise if the apology was no more costly than the piece of paper it was written on then it would have been said already, don't you think? Why should there be a vote on it?
Um, I think this thread should tell you why the matter is at all contentious. But time and money are not the issue.
The bottom line is that symbols do matter. It's just easier to say they don't when you aren't the one affected.
Nope, time and money aren't the issue. They're just what is being spent to discuss this resolution in the NJ government.
If the time is at all significant, it's only because individual legislators are busy grandstanding for the media. Which they do all the time anyway.
As for money, yes, there's is some small cost. But like I said above, resolutions of one sort or another are passed nearly every day. Most of them have so much less meaning, they don't get much media attention.
ember
~*~ Tree hugging dirt worshipper ~*~
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2005
- Messages
- 1,341
- Reaction score
- 9
I hope I don't get flamed for saying this because I mean it in the most pure way.....but I have to wonder why some people always focus on the negative. Yes, slavery was awful for the most part...and I only say for the most part because I know for a fact that some "slaves" were loved like family...but for the rest it was awful. But that was our ancestors, not us. Everyone of our ancestors had to go through toils and troubles to prosper here. The alternative for the people who weren't sold by their kings as slaves was to stay in Africa. So then, what are the chances that alot of the good people who are here as a result of slavery would now instead be in a third world country, living in a hut, drinking filthy water and dying of some horrible disease that we can fix over here with the right shot or antibiotics? If you ask me, very very good. SO...I say, thank your ancestors for the trials and tribulations they endured to make it possible for you to be here in this great nation. Everyone of us owe a big thank you to our ancestors for making the journey. Yes, it was worse for some, but I'm sure each had their own individual hell to deal with at the time, regardless of race. I don't mean to sound rude, but I just don't think you can apologize for the history of life. We all have had life to deal with it. Find the positive!
Besides, if anyone should get an apology...it's the Native Americans. Their whole way of life was destroyed on their own turf. Greed raped thier most prized possession, Mother Earth. They were told how to worship, how to live. Our debaucherous ways rubbed off on them and weakened their minds...then our government finished off what was left of them. And to this day, they live were they have been allowed... when they used to be free to roam and they gave back so much more than they took. I know I sincerely apologize to them. The world would be better off today if we had taken their way instead of pushing ours on them.
JMO!
Besides, if anyone should get an apology...it's the Native Americans. Their whole way of life was destroyed on their own turf. Greed raped thier most prized possession, Mother Earth. They were told how to worship, how to live. Our debaucherous ways rubbed off on them and weakened their minds...then our government finished off what was left of them. And to this day, they live were they have been allowed... when they used to be free to roam and they gave back so much more than they took. I know I sincerely apologize to them. The world would be better off today if we had taken their way instead of pushing ours on them.
JMO!
Maybe African Americans should get some compensation if they can prove that their relatives were slaves. The U.S. claims to be founded on such good, but it has done or allowed some horrible evil things to be done to other peoples all in the name of making money. The Indians were treated horribly, especially the Trail of Tears and so were Black people. Even other races were dehumanized at times, such all the Hispanics being sent back to Mexico at one time even though their families had been here for years and years. The country can really never make up for all the damage they did though.
Guardians Monthly Goal
Our goal for the month is 50 new Guardians members to sign up. Have you been thinking about becoming a member?
Click here to find out how!
Online statistics
- Members online
- 88
- Guests online
- 1,858
- Total visitors
- 1,946