Better Late than Never...I Guess

[3113]

They waited a few hundred years and till the very end of Black History month...but they did apologize. That's gotta count for something. And as a cherry on top, they're going to have a commemorative holiday.

Virginia apologizes for role in slavery

RICHMOND, Va. - Meeting on the grounds of the former Confederate Capitol, the Virginia General Assembly voted unanimously Saturday to express "profound regret" for the state's role in slavery.

Sponsors of the resolution say they know of no other state that has apologized for slavery, although Missouri lawmakers are considering such a measure. The resolution does not carry the weight of law but sends an important symbolic message, supporters said.

"This session will be remembered for a lot of things, but 20 years hence I suspect one of those things will be the fact that we came together and passed this resolution," said Delegate A. Donald McEachin, a Democrat who sponsored it in the House of Delegates.

The resolution passed the House 96-0 and cleared the 40-member Senate on a unanimous voice vote. It does not require Gov. Timothy M. Kaine's approval.

The measure also expressed regret for "the exploitation of Native Americans."

The resolution was introduced as Virginia begins its celebration of the 400th anniversary of Jamestown, where the first Africans arrived in 1619. Richmond, home to a popular boulevard lined with statues of Confederate heroes, later became another point of arrival for Africans and a slave-trade hub.

The resolution says government-sanctioned slavery "ranks as the most horrendous of all depredations of human rights and violations of our founding ideals in our nation's history, and the abolition of slavery was followed by systematic discrimination, enforced segregation, and other insidious institutions and practices toward Americans of African descent that were rooted in racism, racial bias, and racial misunderstanding."

In Virginia, black voter turnout was suppressed with a poll tax and literacy tests before those practices were struck down by federal courts, and state leaders responded to federally ordered school desegregation with a "Massive Resistance" movement in the 1950s and early '60s. Some communities created exclusive whites-only schools.

The apology is the latest in a series of strides Virginia has made in overcoming its segregationist past. Virginia was the first state to elect a black governor — L. Douglas Wilder in 1989 — and the Legislature took a step toward atoning for Massive Resistance in 2004 by creating a scholarship fund for blacks whose schools were shut down between 1954 and 1964.

Among those voting for the measure was Delegate Frank D. Hargrove, an 80-year-old Republican who infuriated black leaders last month by saying "black citizens should get over" slavery.

After enduring a barrage of criticism, Hargrove successfully co-sponsored a resolution calling on Virginia to celebrate "Juneteenth," a holiday commemorating the end of slavery in the United States.

I think Hargrove there was an idiot for saying something like that...but I do wonder if there's much benefit in an apology exchanged between people who didn't even participate in such things toward people who didn't even experience such things. I'd rather hear apologies from people for sins they've actually committed (in the past or currently) toward those they actually wronged.

 

[drksideofthemoon]

They waited a few hundred years and till the very end of Black History month...but they did apologize. That's gotta count for something. And as a cherry on top, they're going to have a commemorative holiday.

I think Hargrove there was an idiot for saying something like that...but I do wonder if there's much benefit in an apology exchanged between people who didn't even participate in such things toward people who didn't even experience such things. I'd rather hear apologies from people for sins they've actually committed (in the past or currently) toward those they actually wronged.

To me, it rings rather hollow...How can I apologize for something my ancestors did? It's only words with no real meaning.

 

[impressive]

To me, it rings rather hollow...How can I apologize for something my ancestors did? It's only words with no real meaning.

There may not be substance to the words, but they do have meaning in the sense that they will make someone, somewhere, feel something -- be it peace, vindication, satisfaction, safety -- whatever.

Words are powerful tools. They can be used for good or ill. (I often wish I had a better filter on my own.) It costs nothing to say them, and they could make a difference.

 

[cloudy]

There may not be substance to the words, but they do have meaning in the sense that they will make someone, somewhere, feel something -- be it peace, vindication, satisfaction, safety -- whatever.

Words are powerful tools. They can be used for good or ill. (I often wish I had a better filter on my own.) It costs nothing to say them, and they could make a difference.

Exactly.

When our government finally, finally issued an apology for the near-genocide, etc., of NA's, it was as if I thought, "Finally, they admit they were wrong; that they were money/land hungry assholes who decimated an entire race of people."

Not that it changes anything. The situation on reservations didn't change, and it probably won't, but getting an acknowledgment of wrongdoing does start the healing process, at least.

 

[Remec]

To me, it rings rather hollow...How can I apologize for something my ancestors did? It's only words with no real meaning.

More importantly, as a Virginian with no history of slavery among my ancestors (just the typical anti-Irish, anti-Catholic sentiment throughout central Pennsylvania at the time my ancestors settled here), how can they presume to apologize for something my ancestors never did?

Hargrove was wrong to say it in a public venue due to his position, but he's right; they need to get over it. Slavery is not, and has never been, the source of all the imbalances between blacks and the rest of America.

 

[matriarch]

More importantly, as a Virginian with no history of slavery among my ancestors (just the typical anti-Irish, anti-Catholic sentiment throughout central Pennsylvania at the time my ancestors settled here), how can they presume to apologize for something my ancestors never did?

Hargrove was wrong to say it in a public venue due to his position, but he's right; they need to get over it. Slavery is not, and has never been, the source of all the imbalances between blacks and the rest of America.

How can you possibly make such a statement? There were no blacks in America until the slaves were brought in. How can any race ever hope to achieve equality, when their history shows them as chattels to be bought and sold over and over, with no respect, no say in their own fate, in who fathered their children, whether they lived or died. They were considered, from day one as inferior, lesser beings, in some cases, animals, less than human, and of less value than their 'owner's' horses.

That's a hell of lot of 'worthless, valueless history to overcome.

 

[impressive]

More importantly, as a Virginian with no history of slavery among my ancestors (just the typical anti-Irish, anti-Catholic sentiment throughout central Pennsylvania at the time my ancestors settled here), how can they presume to apologize for something my ancestors never did?

They do so, I assume, because they know it will make a difference to some people and (as cloudy noted) perhaps start a healing process.

I don't subscribe to the notion of "original sin" ... so I sure as hell don't feel responsible for the actions of my ancestors. I do, however, feel a sense of responsibility for what happens from this day forward. If I can use my words to heal, I will do so. It costs me nothing.

 

[cloudy]

How can you possibly make such a statement? There were no blacks in America until the slaves were brought in. How can any race ever hope to achieve equality, when their history shows them as chattels to be bought and sold over and over, with no respect, no say in their own fate, in who fathered their children, whether they lived or died. They were considered, from day one as inferior, lesser beings, in some cases, animals, less than human, and of less value than their 'owner's' horses.

That's a hell of lot of 'worthless, valueless history to overcome.

Indeed.

It never ceases to amaze me when someone says that another group of people need to "just get over it."

You disappoint me, Remec. My opinion of you just went downhill at the speed of light. Your ancestors may not have owned slaves; may not have participated in the genocide of the natives, but they, and you, sure as hell benefited from it, didn't you? You did, or you wouldn't be here.

"Get over it." Yeah, right.

I never had you pegged as a bigot. I suppose I was wrong.

Shame on you.

 

[Guest]

On the other side of this, Kansas was always a free state, and they boast and celebrate that fact to this day. One of my favorite bars in Lawrence (where the University of Kansas is located) is the Free State Brewery.

But isn't this entire thing positive? Virginia is attempting to bring legitimacy to the wronged via legislation.

It's not just lip service anymore.

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

Useless as this Apology seems it really is rather important in that it is an acknowlegement that THE SOUTH WILL NOT RISE AGAIN because nobody gives a shit about the Civil War anymore.

(Not to mention the fact that the Civil War was never about slavery to begin with.)

 

[cloudy]

Useless as this Apology seems it really is rather important in that it is an acknowlegement that THE SOUTH WILL NOT RISE AGAIN because nobody gives a shit about the Civil War anymore.

(Not to mention the fact that the Civil War was never about slavery to begin with.)

One has nothing to do with the other.

What have you been smoking lately?

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

One has nothing to do with the other.

What have you been smoking lately?

You are correct, Cloudy. Slavery and States Rights had nothing to do with each other. The Civil War was fought for States Rights. The Northern press touted it as a war of independance from slavery. In the end neither issue was settled. Congress is still fighting over States Rights and Black Independance wasn't achieved to any great extent until the 1980's. End of lesson.

 

[cloudy]

You are correct, Cloudy. Slavery and States Rights had nothing to do with each other. The Civil War was fought for States Rights. The Northern press touted it as a war of independance from slavery. In the end neither issue was settled. Congress is still fighting over States Rights and Black Independance wasn't achieved to any great extent until the 1980's. End of lesson.

How dare you presume to give me a history lesson, you arrogant little twit. I have news for you: I'm very well-educated, hold two degrees, and halfway to my master's, and guess what? I can fucking spell.

Several of your posts lately have been so damn bigoted that I've had a hard time not saying anything. No more.

Put me on ignore if you like, it doesn't matter, but don't assume you're more intelligent than I. You're not. Get it?

 

[R. Richard]

The problem with public apologies is that they are a matter of form only, with no substance. They may make some people feel good, but they accomplish nothing. Instead of a beau geste, why not do something positive that actually addresses the problem?

JMHO.

 

[3113]

Time out! Time out!

Whoa, whoa, whoa!

Ladies. You're both smart, brilliant, sharp, and wickedly humored ladies. I'd rather read the comicbook where you team up instead of fight each other...although I'm sure a few of the guys would appreciate it if it involved mud wrestling.

I *think* what Jenny is pointing out is that Lincoln, et al, was not going to outlaw slavery in the South if the South hadn't tried to go independent. If the South had stayed in the Union, they could have kept their slaves. The Government wasn't going to fight a war over that.

BUT, I *think* Cloudy has a point in that, as I recall, what the North was insisting was that no NEW states be slave states. Which meant that the non-slave states would have outnumbered the slave states and had more weight and power. So the South did fear they were going to lose their slaves and economy. Hence, their desire to succeed from the Union.

Did I get it right, or have I just gotten the two of you to team up and come after me? (Shit! Where'd I leave the key to my secret hideout?)

 

[3113]

Instead of a beau geste, why not do something positive that actually addresses the problem?

Well, first, sometimes an apology is all you've got. If you run over the nieghbor's dog...there's no bringing the dog back or even really replacing the beloved pup. So all you've got is an apology. It may not be of much substance, but it does indicate an acknowledgement that you were in the wrong and that you'd undo it if you could...and will try to do better in the future.

Which is certainly something.

Now the problem with that in this case is that it does seem to be too-little-too-late. ALTHOUGH, as pointed out, it does say to people that Virginia is not going to maintain historical pride over the actions of their ancestors.

As Cloudy pointed out, if it's going to alter anything, it'll alter it in that regard. Little white kids won't play cowboys and indians with the indians being the bad guys deserving of being killed. And, in this instance, maybe there will be less inclination to glorify the old South. Which does have some benefits as we do try to immulate heroes of old.

But in the end, doing something other than just apologizing requires that people agree on what the problem is and what can be done to rectify it. If the problem's slavery...well, that's been taken care of. What more can be done?

 

[Remec]

But isn't this entire thing positive? Virginia is attempting to bring legitimacy to the wronged via legislation.

It's not just lip service anymore.

I'm sorry if I was unclear. And. let me clarify, I view the main source of the inequalities faced by *anyone* no matter what colour, race, nationality or religion to be a matter of society condoning them being put down or oppressed strictly for one or more of those factors.

Having said that, let me say that, yes, I think slavery has a great deal to do with how blacks have been kept down or denied an equal chance in many areas of society; but that I feel, especially after over a hundred years have passed, that for them to continue to say they need or merit special considerations or privileges simply because there used to be a slave trade is an affront to all those who actually stood up for themselves and made something of themselves in spite of how they were treated.

I like to think that I'm unbigoted, but I will admit to having some biases based on things that have happened to me and people I knew growing up. I can be resentful and grudge holding, and maybe there's a spark of paranoia that comes to my mind. All I can do is keep it to myself and push it aside (sort of the way you do with a phobia or other irrational response), and treat any individual, group, or situation on its/their own merits.

Oh, and it may be just my cynicism speaking, but from what I've seen and heard in this state, lip service is exactly what this is. Appeasement legislation that does nothing but make those who sponsored it and those who voted for it look good with their constituencies. But, I will concede, that perhaps there's been something going on that I've not been aware of and relations between the descendants of slave owner and enslaved need something like this--official, governmental acknowledgement of wrongdoing--to, as it was said, begin healing.

At least, until someone restarts the debate about restitution.

 

[R. Richard]

Well, first, sometimes an apology is all you've got. If you run over the nieghbor's dog...there's no bringing the dog back or even really replacing the beloved pup. So all you've got is an apology. It may not be of much substance, but it does indicate an acknowledgement that you were in the wrong and that you'd undo it if you could...and will try to do better in the future.

Which is certainly something.

Now the problem with that in this case is that it does seem to be too-little-too-late. ALTHOUGH, as pointed out, it does say to people that Virginia is not going to maintain historical pride over the actions of their ancestors.

As Cloudy pointed out, if it's going to alter anything, it'll alter it in that regard. Little white kids won't play cowboys and indians with the indians being the bad guys deserving of being killed. And, in this instance, maybe there will be less inclination to glorify the old South. Which does have some benefits as we do try to immulate heroes of old.

But in the end, doing something other than just apologizing requires that people agree on what the problem is and what can be done to rectify it. If the problem's slavery...well, that's been taken care of. What more can be done?

If you accidently run over the neighbor's dog, you dont wait for years and years to apologize, you do it at least the next time you see the neighbors. Also, you run over the neighbor's dog by accident, the slaves were not brought here by accident.

An apology does not train little kids not to play cowboys killing Amerinds. The kids need to be trained in school classes that someone is not good or bad because of their race, religion or national origin. People need to be dealt with as individuals, not as members of a group.

I don't try to justify slavery. However, the Negroes brought over as slaves have ancestors who mostly have it a lot better than those Negroes who still remain in the old country. As to the Amerinds, instead of an apology governments could see that at least the current Amerind population is compensated as per government contracts. The excuse that decades of neglect and mismanagement have resulted in records so confused that no one knows exactly what the Amerinds have coming is in itself a crime that can be addressed. The best place to start is to eliminate the BIA people who caused and are still causing the problem. That last is a positive step that will go a lot further than an apology toward healing past misdeeds.

 

[R. Richard]

How can you possibly make such a statement? There were no blacks in America until the slaves were brought in. How can any race ever hope to achieve equality, when their history shows them as chattels to be bought and sold over and over, with no respect, no say in their own fate, in who fathered their children, whether they lived or died. They were considered, from day one as inferior, lesser beings, in some cases, animals, less than human, and of less value than their 'owner's' horses.

That's a hell of lot of 'worthless, valueless history to overcome.

The first Negroes in what is now the United States were brought in in 1526. They were abandoned by their Cuban owners and they established the village of Chikora [spelled many. many different ways.] They were undoubtedly absorbed, over time, by the Amerinds who lived in the South Carolina/Georgia area where they lived [Cloudy has some background in this matter.]

The mass importation of Negroes into the US started much later. The Negro slaves were indeed chattels who coud be bought and sold. However, a prime age field hand was worth a year's wages for a skilled free man and was a very valuable chattel. Of course, the Negro slaves were mistreated. But the idea that they were routinely tortured or put to death is absurd. If you killed a Negro slave, other than for very good reason, you might as well kill US currency in the amount of a years wages for a skilled free man.

It is true that the slave master frequently fathered children by Negro women. The situation was 'good farming practice.' It was believed that whites were superior to blacks, so the introduction of white genes was beneficial and would result in the improvement of the Negro slaves [of course the idea is insane.]

The Negro slaves, despite an almost total lack of formal education, were not all that stupid. Young Negro children were frequently presented to the slave owner as his children so that they could become house slaves, rather than field hands [sometimes the statement was a fib!]

The Negro slaves were considered to be inferior. After all, the argument went, they let themselves be enslaved. [There is an island in South Carolima called 'Ibo Island.' A shipment of Ibo tribesmen were captured by African enemies, sold into slavery and delivered to Ibo Isalnad in SC. They had no weapons, so they marched into the sea and drowned themselves rather than serve as field hand slaves. If people with the spirit of the Ibo are inferior, I missed a point or so somewhere.]

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

The Negro slaves were considered to be inferior. After all, the argument went, they let themselves be enslaved.

This is a situation that was reinforced by the "scientific" community. The early Anthropologists based their study on antropometry, which is the collection of data on cranial size, meant to prove the black race had smaller brains and were therefore less intellegent, maybe even less "human" than whites. It's all silliness, of course.

 

[R. Richard]

This is a situation that was reinforced by the "scientific" community. The early Anthropologists based their study on antropometry, which is the collection of data on cranial size, meant to prove the black race had smaller brains and were therefore less intellegent, maybe even less "human" than whites. It's all silliness, of course.

If you set out to prove something, you can frequently find evidence to prove what it is you set out to prove. Of course, you may have to ignore a lot of evidence that disproves what you set out to prove.

When Caucasian explorers found 'Great Zimbabwe,' they presented it as proof that there had been a Caucasian civilization in ancient Africa, since the local Negroes could not have built such a grand structure.

 

[BlackShanglan]

I think that R. Richard is entirely right that practical actions carry the most weight. If we're genuinely serious about righting past wrongs, we might start by levelling the playing field - say by greatly improving education in impoverished areas whose disproportional representation of minorities tends to suggest that there is a continuing issue to be resolved. I say this as someone whose ancestors are about as far from being involved in slavery as possible; no one in my ancestry came to the continent earlier than the 1920's, and all of them were initially heartily disliked for their own ethnic, national, and religious identities. Despite that fact, I don't consider Native Americans or African Americans to be people whose fates are irrelevent to me. Whether my ancestors did it or not, someone did them a terrible injustice, and it should be righted. We're not a collection of city-states or armed enclaves, or at least not theoretically. We're meant to be a country, a society, and if we're to be a good one, we must object to a wrong done to any of us - whether their enslavement in the past or their difficulties in the present.

With that said, however - let me say a word in favor of lip service. It's not a solution, of course, but it's not nothing, either. What we say can't always change or control what we do, but it is part of who and what we become. A generation of lip service can genuinely reshape peoples' minds and behavior. One of the more cheering things I've seen in my life was a young relation by marriage - a sweet, respectful girl of perhaps ten - worriedly but repeatedly correcting her mother's use of a racial slur by saying, "Mom, that's not a nice word. Nice people don't say things like that." What a lovely child. And what a slow but genuine victory for lip service. I can't say that her home town was a beacon of racial tolerance and equality, but she was at least being told, clearly and repeatedly, what it ought to be like - and she was working to make it that way.

Shanglan

 

[cloudy]

I think that R. Richard is entirely right that practical actions carry the most weight. If we're genuinely serious about righting past wrongs, we might start by levelling the playing field - say by greatly improving education in impoverished areas whose disproportional representation of minorities tends to suggest that there is a continuing issue to be resolved. I say this as someone whose ancestors are about as far from being involved in slavery as possible; no one in my ancestry came to the continent earlier than the 1920's, and all of them were initially heartily disliked for their own ethnic, national, and religious identities. Despite that fact, I don't consider Native Americans or African Americans to be people whose fates are irrelevent to me. Whether my ancestors did it or not, someone did them a terrible injustice, and it should be righted. We're not a collection of city-states or armed enclaves, or at least not theoretically. We're meant to be a country, a society, and if we're to be a good one, we must object to a wrong done to any of us - whether their enslavement in the past or their difficulties in the present.

Thank you, Shang.

I'm told rather frequently that I have a chip on my shoulder, and I suppose I do.

I don't expect to be paid reparation; I don't want every person I come in contact to apologize; I just want it acknowledged, and to stop hearing "get over it already."

 

[usemeplease28]

Thank you, Shang.

I'm told rather frequently that I have a chip on my shoulder, and I suppose I do.

I don't expect to be paid reparation; I don't want every person I come in contact to apologize; I just want it acknowledged, and to stop hearing "get over it already."

how come there isnt any Turkish history month?

 

[cloudy]

how come there isnt any Turkish history month?

fuck off.