This section features two articles. One in favour of reperations for slavery, and another against. The article against, which is featured first, was selected from a number of letters which regard the raising of the issue of reparations for slavery as an uninformed movement, to say the least. Mukazo Vunda's comment to this letter follows after that.

Reparations issue bogus
COMMENTARY - RON WOODGEARD

By Ron Woodgeard

Having been born on the Fourth of July in Ohio, I don't figure I owe anybody reparations for slavery. Naturally, I can't speak for the the rest of ya'll.

If my ancestors fought for anybody during the Civil War, they fought for Mr. Lincoln. Since most of my early relatives were lacking an education, I doubt they gave much thought to the South's insistence on keeping slaves. If they had lived in the South, they certainly could not have afforded slaves. They were so poor and ignorant, and their standard of living was not much better.

I am not going out on a limb to say that the vast number of Southerners were in the same boat as my ancestors. A simple meal of home-grown vegetables was just about all they ever had to be thankful for. Meat, mostly chicken, was something that was never on the table except maybe on Sundays. They farmed and hunted the hills in southeastern Ohio, not terribly far from the West Virginia line.

When I first heard the idea that the ancestors of slaves ought to be compensated, I honestly thought that if it weren't a joke, it was a theoretical proposition.

I was wrong. The reparations movement is out there and getting more serious every minute. The Rev. Jesse Jackson plans to make it his number one issue this fall. During one of what will be many press conferences, Jackson has said, "We must make crooked ways straight."

I've lived in Georgia for about 45 years. I can say without equivocation that Southerners have an instinctive desire to "do people right." But the baloney that passes for an argument in favor of reparations strains the patience of even the most saintly Caucasian.

"We have fewer services and less education," Jackson told Reuters during the U.N. racism conference in Durban, South Africa. "We are disproportionately jailed and killed by the state. We have shorter life spans. We have less access to capital."

Civil-rights lawyers are preparing lawsuits on behalf of African Americans. The amount has yet to emerge, but is said to be more than $1 trillion. Part of their argument is that a major reason America got fat, dumb and happy was because of slavery.

No one in his or her right mind is defending slavery, trying to make it less horrific than it was, or excusing the thousands of needless deaths caused by trading in human lives. Those proposing monetary reward for slavery try to equate more recent examples of reparations to bolster their argument.

No matter how many times one uses the word "holocaust," what happened to European Jews during World War II isn't even remotely similar. The Nazis are appropriately paying reparations to descendants of Jews. In that case, they are able to identify specific people and to show that their inheritance was denied. Wealthy and middle class Jews were stripped of their property, if they were lucky enough to live, and their descendants were demonstrably worse off.

The same is true for the Russian survivors of Nazi concentration camps. Germany is paying about $6 million to two million survivors of slavery and forced labor.

It is also appropriate for the United States to pay Japanese Americans who were herded into camps during World War II. They were taken out of their neighborhoods, houses and property. They lost wages. They had less to pass along to their families. It's possible to follow the money.

None of that is true when it comes to African slaves. A key factor in deciding any reparations question is establishing guilt. The people of modern day America may appropriately feel regret that a handful of their European ancestors profited from slavery. But that's not the same as owing somebody a living for something that happened hundreds of years ago.

Not only that, but this whole sense of victimhood on the part of some people, including Rev. Jackson, is not useful or worthwhile to anyone. America is the greatest country on earth, a place where everyone has an opportunity to have a happy, productive life. That includes the distant relatives of African slaves.

Ron Woodgeard may be reached at 744-4319 or at HYPERLINK "mailto:Woodgeard@aol.com" Woodgeard@aol.com .

Mukazo Vunda's comment

Firstly, Mr. Woodgeard leads us through the poor background of his ancestors, which, to me, without seeming to state that I think the family Mr. Woodgeard stems from were actually a guilty party, seems to be an emotional attempt to equate poverty with innocence. It is as such impertinent to the matter he aims to involve himself in, short of saying that this is the art of the demagogue.

In the tenth paragraph, Mr. Woodgeard refers to the people paying the owed money, present day Germans, as Nazis. Is this a slip of the pen, or a lack of worldly knowledge, a euphemism for dumbness, if you like. Let us look carefully at some facts of history, and then understand what this means:
Nazis were crushed and forced either to surrender. Those who survived capture fled into exile, mostly to south America, or roamed, and still roam Europe as fugitives, on false identities, always on the go, always afraid to have their true identities known. By calling the present German people Nazis, Mr. Woodgeard shows his racism, and proves that the common defense that Germans use today to describe the world's attitude towards them is true. The present day Germans are not Nazis. They, like Mr. Woodgeard's ancestors whom he is obviously proud of, mostly have nothing to do with what happened in the past. Calling them Nazis is blaming them of things they, the descendants, could do little about, except, as the German government is doing, to clear their name, to break the connection with the past by showing they are prepared to give back what was taken by force. They are distancing themselves from this past by this act, and should be commended.

The fact of the matter is that the German government, knowing full well that funds and valuables robbed from Jews have seeped into their present cash and profit boxes, have taken the responsibility to pay the money back to the survivors, or their families, rather than shove the issue under the carpet and hope the rest of the world will not know they are ridding on bloody money. It is actually a cleansing act, a freeing of the conscious, and it doesn't really matter whether the world is watching or not. This act should come out of a well-meaning person's heart. He should take the initiative. This is a healing process. Such acts build better people. This is what healing the world is all about. Apart from this is the right any wronged party has to claim property, or resources that rightly belong to them, or, as is the case with Africa, to call solely for reparations, which should not be confused with compensation, even though, ultimately, value in the form of money or services changes hands.

There is general acceptance today that it is right that Germans compensate the survivors of the holocaust and their families for the loses they suffered. This is a good step for mankind. It can be compared to an international tribunal bringing a war crimes suspect to trial in an international court. If people can be punished, or made to see and accept the existence of circumstances that actually tie them to this past, and then start the process of distancing themselves from such heinous acts, others can be deterred from perpetrating them. Mankind can in this way spare itself from such horrors in the present, and in future. There should however be no double standards with regards to this issue. All of mankind has to be included, whether they are black, white or yellow; whether they are articulate or dumb, for this to make any sense. All of recent history has to be taken into consideration, especially that whose effects are still being lived. The fact that the effects are being lived, or experienced makes this a current issue which should advisedly not be pushed under the carpet, but confronted now before it is too late.

The thirteenth paragraph uses terms that are useful for those who wish to push the matter of reparations forward. Unfortunately, despite all the evidence out there, some of which you will read about in the following article, Mr. Woodgeard denies that guilt can be established with regards to the issue of African slaves. This, to me, is similar to claims today that the holocaust never happened. It is either that people like Mr. Woodgeard are extremely uninformed, or that they are right wing extremist who will go to any lengths to prevent others from doing the right thing. I wouldn't like to live in their world, because, you see, I am a different breed. I would prefer to clear my conscious, if I was the guilty party, than to live with the knowledge that my success is a result of robbery, murder, and destruction of families, societies, and nations.

Mr. Woodgeard doesn't seem conscious that he is separating the common wealth of a nation from the constituent members of the nation; the families, with regards to his situation, and doing the opposite with regards to the Nazis. He accepts that the wealth owned in common by Germans should be taxed for the Jews, or that the common wealth owned by Americans should be used to compensate the Japanese, and blatantly rejects this when it comes to the issue of African slavery. Here, his family becomes the all important factor. If he is conscious of this fact, then he is simply a sorry individual out to get an advantage by whatever means necessary, including the testing of the intellect of Africans.

That the American treasury reserves, even European reserves, have benefited from slavery is not a secret. That, to a large degree, present day Americans are living prosperous lives because somebody in another part of the world had to lose his family, and his freedom, and eventually, his life, is known. This is a very sensitive issue which tells a lot about what the West really is.

There are many sides to the slavery issue, involvement by Africans themselves included. Complex as this issue is, concession can straiten out many facts, and possibly, heal many wounds. There are millions of people out there who are living the lives of refugees, suffering daily in impoverished climes, or are living or feeling like prisoners wherever they are on this planet because of this issue. The opening of the issue, and eventually, the showing that people are prepared to make amends for harm done to the victims, will ultimately be the long awaited step that will start the healing process that all parties need, and for much of mankind, the clearing of the stigma that they have acquired by acceptance of a rich heritage from savage times.

All in all, it is sad that the most powerful nations on earth have so far failed to be a party to, or, at first notice, stand up to this call. Ironically, the nation Mr. Woodgeard calls a Nazi state has shown a more positive response. The avowed "best democracy" in the world (a contradiction in terms), the supposed world police, has failed to see the truth of the African call for reparations, while the descendants of Nazis didn't need much convincing to see this.

Is this a case of "who feels it knows it"?

The following article gives a few facts regarding this issue, and some facts which actually establish guilt. There is more evidence out there than this article gives, or can be put down in an article this size.

The drawback to the following article is the author's need to prove that Africans were not content with slavery. The need to be free is not a condition that only Europeans have, but all of mankind, and, for that matter, all animals. A caged bird will always want to escape when the chance arises. When an animal is content to stay domesticated it has always been battered into this state. After repeated attempts to escape, the animal settles to the new situation, and, most often, its brain can no longer think of freedom, or anything useful, as a result of the constant battering.

If not used for utilitarian purposes, the approach shows a weakness in the writer's psyche. If such an educated mind can show this complex, then it should be accepted that it is very widespread. It is as a result a useful approach which should be adopted by all who deal with such issues, and should only be dropped when we are sure we have freed all our minds from mental slavery, for the sake of the demoralized many whom we should never forget, whose pride we need to restore if we are going to get any positive input from them. This approach ignores the fact that this is already a given. The need to be free is not a condition that only Europeans have, but all of mankind, and, for that matter, all animals. A caged bird will always want to escape when the chance arises. Animals that are content to stay domesticated have almost always been battered into this state. They know no better.

This cruel lie is inculcated into the conscious of the subjugated to make them accept the status of inferiority. It makes it easier to control them.

Slavery: What the West Owes Africans

September 9, 2001
Posted to the web September 9, 2001

Dennis Onyango

The UN World Conference against Racism (WCAR), Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance in Durban, South Africa, ended with disagreements on what mattered most to the African hosts; slavery, the slave trade and whether the beneficiaries should pay for it.
Africans were demanding a formal apology from the West. But the beneficiaries, the richest states on earth, are reluctant to go beyond expressions of regret for fear that a formal apology may trigger centuries of litigation.

Even the expression of regrets was not easy to get. Only Germany apologised to the African states that were victims to slavery. Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer told the conference that recognition of guilt was the way to restore to the victims and their descendants "the dignity of which they were robbed".
The United States of America essentially boycotted the meeting because it did not want to discuss Israel's treatment of Palestinians and whether the North owes reparations and apology to Africa over slavery.
The European Union and other rich states side-stepped the issue and instead offered to boost aid to "well-managed" African states.
The storm that has gathered over this touchy issue for years only got darker with this "racist" anti-racism conference. African states continued to demand reparations paid on the basis of how seriously a country suffered from slave-trading or colonialism.
That demand got even stronger with Nobel peace laureate Archbishop Desmond Tutu throwing his moral weight behind Africa's demands for reparations.
"Reparations is saying: 'We are sorry, we are sorry for what happened'. The language that is used is reparations not compensation. How do you compensate me, I mean, for the loss of freedom? How do you compensate me for a loved one?" he said.
African delegates argued that the affluence enjoyed by many in the developed world today was built on slave labour, and that racism and poverty were entrenched by slavery and colonialism.
Legacies of colonialism
They argued that the slave trade destroyed Africa's human resources and the lack of those human resources weakened the continent. They reasoned that in the 16th Century there was not such a great economic difference between Europe and Africa. Today there is because of the legacies of colonialism and slavery which helped to build the West's economies at Africa's expense.
For Archbishop Tutu, reparations would help soothe some of the wounds caused by slavery. To apologise or not remains a contentious issue. But the amount of data scholars and activists have gathered leave no doubt that the slave trade was as destructive as it was dehumanising and painful.
The actual number of men, women and children who were snatched from their homes in Africa and transported in slave ships across the Atlantic, either to the Caribbean islands or to North and South America, will never be known. Researchers vary in their estimates. But all are agreed the numbers run into millions.
Papers presented at a 1978 Unesco-sponsored meeting in Port-au-Prince, Haiti, gave scary figures.
The African Slave Trade from the 15th -19th Century meeting which looked at the trade between 1666 and1800 disclosed that slaves imported only by the English for the English, French and Spanish colonies numbered 3 million, 250,000 of whom died on the voyage.
Between 1680-1786, slaves imported for the English colonies in America reached 2,130,000. Jamaica alone absorbed 610,000. The average annual number of slaves imported for the American colonies reached 3.5 million while Jamaica imported 71,115 slaves during 1752 - 1762.
An average of 74,000 slaves were imported each year for the American colonies, or a total of 1,850,000; this yearly average was divided up between the English (38,000), French (20,000), Portuguese (10,000), Dutch (4,000), and Dane (2,000).
The manner in which the slaves were sold was traumatic. A search into centuries-old US newspapers indicates that the slaves were advertised and displayed as livestock, property or belongings. On July 25, 1774 one advert appeared announcing: "To be sold . . . a cargo of 170 prime, young likely healthy Guinea slaves."
The slave trade was a contested issue even while it lasted. In November 1841, according to accessible US papers, some 135 African slaves on board the ship Creole overpowered the crew and murdered one man, while sailing from Hampton Roads, Virginia, to New Orleans, Louisiana.
Led by rebel Madison Washington, they sailed to Nassau, Bahamas, where the British declared most of them free. The US protested that the escaped slaves remained the property of their US owners and should be protected in foreign ports. A diplomatic controversy followed and Ohio Congressman Joshua Giddings argued that once the ship was outside the US territorial waters, the Africans were entitled to their liberty and any attempt to re-enslave them would be unconstitutional.
Slaves liked their status
Giddings was censured by the House of Representatives. He resigned, but his constituents quickly re-elected him and sent him back to Congress.
There have been claims that the African slaves liked their status. But newspapers of the day and recently published texts refute this. Details recently made public by the Historical Society of Pennsylvania revealed thousands of newspaper advertisements on escaped slaves, an indication that the Africans always tried to get away.
In Blacks Who Stole Themselves, Billy G. Smith and Richard Wijtowicz trace thousands of advertisements for runaways in the Pennsylvania Gazette between 1728 - 90.
The writers compile numerous examples of advertisements that appeared in just one newspaper during the eighteenth century. Such notices contradict the argument that enslaved people were content with their condition.
The slave owners' determination to protect their investment is demonstrated by their zeal in pursuing the runaways. One 1847 advert read: "US$200 Reward. Runaway from the subscriber... Five Negro Slaves."
One of the strongest indications of the Africans' hatred for slavery was seen in what became known as the 'Amistad Mutiny'. A Portuguese slaver purchased slaves in West Africa and transported them to the Caribbean. The captives found themselves in the hands of Cuban slave dealers on board the Spanish schooner Amistad.
During the voyage from Cuba, the Africans rebelled, killed the captain and three crewmen and ordered the rest to sail to Africa. By day the crew complied, but at night they sailed west and finally landed near Long Island, New York, where the vessel was seized by US authorities.
The New York Sun reported in 1839 that the leader of the slaves was a "brave Congolese chief . . . who now lies in jail in arms at New Haven, Connecticut, awaiting his trial for daring for freedom." The Congolese, whose name was given as Cinqu , is quoted as saying: "Brothers, we have done that which we proposed . . . I am resolved it is better to die than be a white man's slave."
To its credit, the US government appealed the case to the Supreme Court where President John Quincy Adams argued that it was the Africans, not the Cubans, who should be treated sympathetically because they were free people illegally enslaved.
President Adams argued the appeal on behalf of the Africans before the Court. He stated that they "were entitled to all kindness and good offices due from a humane and Christian nation". President Adams won the case in January 1841 and the Africans were returned to Africa.
In his book, The Debt; What America Owes to Blacks, Randal Robinson argues that slavery was a "great still unfolding massive crime of official and unofficial America against Africa, African slaves and their descendants in America."
Robinson argues that many rich families in the former slave trading territories owe their wealth to the slave trade. He points to people who built slave ships and some went ahead to build universities. He singles out Brown University in the US.
The history of slavery recently caught up with America's prestigious Yale University. As it marked its 300th anniversary with the theme of "long history of activisim in the face of slavery", three doctoral candidates at the university revealed that Yale is ignoring the murky side of its history.
Staunch defender of slave trade
In a story published in leading US newspapers, the scholars said Yale relied on slave-trading money for its first scholarships, endowed professorship and library endowment. Yale honoured slave traders when choosing figures to list as "Worthies" on a tower at the centre of its campus in New Haven, Connecticut. Only 40 years ago, it chose names of slave traders when it was naming some colleges. One man it honoured was John C.Calhoun, a former US Vice-President. According to the scholars, Calhoun was a staunch defender of the "good" of slavery.
Of the phrase "all men are born free and equal", Calhoun wrote: "It is utterly untrue."
Others have indicated that Spain had built a lucrative sugar empire by importing slave labour. Bristol and Liverpool in England developed into prosperous slave ports. Much of the wealth of Bristol was gained by exploiting African peoples, transporting them across the Atlantic Ocean in horrific conditions. Bristol is still in some denial about the facts and horrors of the slave trade. By the 1780s, when Britain shipped a third of a million slaves to the New World, the national economy depended on the trade.
In an article commemorating 150 years since France abolished slavery, Le Monde said: "The course of human history is marked by appalling crimes. But even the hardened historian is filled with horror, loathing and indignation on examining the record of African slavery. A tragedy of such dimensions has no parallel in any other part of the world."
"The African continent was bled of its human resources via all possible routes. Across the Sahara, through the Red Sea, from the Indian Ocean ports and across the Atlantic." The newspaper said the European Atlantic trade "was the form of slavery that indisputably contributed most to the present situation of Africa. It engendered the racism and contempt from which Africans still suffer".
The intractability of these issues - along with the unresolved question of how to describe Israel's treatment of the Palestinians - leaves the achievements of the Durban conference unclear and the human race probably more polarised than before.