Politically Correct or Incorrect Bullshit Of The Day

[Decadence]

Today, Georgetown University is a thriving, elite university with a substantial endowment. But that wasn't always the case.

In 1838, the school was struggling and couldn't pay their bills. As a solution, the school sold off 272 slaves and used the money to pay off its debts.

In the time since, the school has made attempts to address its history with formal apologies, the renaming of buildings, admission consideration, and help with college readiness, genealogy, memorials and reunion projects.

As you may suspect, this isn't good enough for some people. There's a group out there called the Issac Hawkins Legacy Group which is made up of supposed descendants from these 272 slaves. Their council, Georgia Goslee, says they do not believe Georgetown has fully atoned for the wealth it unjustly accumulated off the back of unpaid slave labor. The group, which Goslee said includes 200 people, has asked for a direct benefit for descendants.

Dee Taylor, a descendant of Isaac Hawkins, a 65-year-old slave whose name was first on the bill of sale from 1838, said she appreciates the symbolic gestures the school has taken. “But in my heart, deep down, I don’t feel whole,” she said. “I believe Georgetown has the means to do much more.”

So, 7 or 8 generations later the school is supposed to pay off these descendants. What about the generations in between? What about future generations? Are they able to claim the same hardship 50 years from now? In any court I've ever heard of, damages are awarded based on demonstrable proof the victim has been directly harmed. Rather than embracing the outreach programs the university proposes, something that could enhance education and actually help future generations improve their standard of living, it seems they'd rather just be dissatisfied that they aren't getting money.

I've heard of sins of the father, but sins of the great great great great great great grandfather is ridiculous. Learn to say "no" because if you don't then no matter how long in the past a transgression was, someone is going to come along and demand they be paid.

[Arturo2nd]

Originally Posted by Decadence

So, 7 or 8 generations later the school is supposed to pay off these descendants. What about the generations in between? What about future generations? Are they able to claim the same hardship 50 years from now? In any court I've ever heard of, damages are awarded based on demonstrable proof the victim has been directly harmed. Rather than embracing the outreach programs the university proposes, something that could enhance education and actually help future generations improve their standard of living, it seems they'd rather just be dissatisfied that they aren't getting money.

Do you suppose a "Georgetown Sold My Ancestor and All I Got Was a T-Shirt" will do?

I checked around for a T-shirt that says "VICTIM" on the front, and "Kick Me" on the back, but couldn't find one. This is the best that I could do.

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by Decadence

Today, Georgetown University is a thriving, elite university with a substantial endowment. But that wasn't always the case.

In 1838, the school was struggling and couldn't pay their bills. As a solution, the school sold off 272 slaves and used the money to pay off its debts.

In the time since, the school has made attempts to address its history with formal apologies, the renaming of buildings, admission consideration, and help with college readiness, genealogy, memorials and reunion projects.

As you may suspect, this isn't good enough for some people. There's a group out there called the Issac Hawkins Legacy Group which is made up of supposed descendants from these 272 slaves. Their council, Georgia Goslee, says they do not believe Georgetown has fully atoned for the wealth it unjustly accumulated off the back of unpaid slave labor. The group, which Goslee said includes 200 people, has asked for a direct benefit for descendants.

Dee Taylor, a descendant of Isaac Hawkins, a 65-year-old slave whose name was first on the bill of sale from 1838, said she appreciates the symbolic gestures the school has taken. “But in my heart, deep down, I don’t feel whole,” she said. “I believe Georgetown has the means to do much more.”

So, 7 or 8 generations later the school is supposed to pay off these descendants. What about the generations in between? What about future generations? Are they able to claim the same hardship 50 years from now? In any court I've ever heard of, damages are awarded based on demonstrable proof the victim has been directly harmed. Rather than embracing the outreach programs the university proposes, something that could enhance education and actually help future generations improve their standard of living, it seems they'd rather just be dissatisfied that they aren't getting money.

I've heard of sins of the father, but sins of the great great great great great great grandfather is ridiculous. Learn to say "no" because if you don't then no matter how long in the past a transgression was, someone is going to come along and demand they be paid.

There is no legal basis for a claim for damages, as you say; and if any of these 200 descendants are in difficulty today it will not be due to the events of 1838 and they should look a little closer to home.

Cassius: The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars
But in ourselves, that we are underlings.
~ Julius Caesar - William Shakespeare.

But on the other hand it is fair enough that Georgetown University should be made to wear their scarlet letter and should not be simply allowed to sweep this shame out of sight and out of mind.

[Arturo2nd]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

But on the other hand it is fair enough that Georgetown University should be made to wear their scarlet letter and should not be simply allowed to sweep this shame out of sight and out of mind.

I have a bit of an issue with the concepts of guilt and shame here. Slavery was legal in the United States of 1838, as it was in most of the rest of the world. African slaves were being sold to Arab slave traders and marched across the Sahara into the 20th century, just as peoples from Eastern Europe had been sold as slaves to the Byzantines, Arabs, and Turks for centuries before that.

It is not fair to judge people of the past by today's standards of morality. Slavery was widespread at the dawn of our history and persists, albeit illegally, to this day. If it were up to me, the slaves freed after our civil war would have received compensation of at least land, livestock, and farm implements, but they weren't. Moreover, every human being alive today probably has slaves in their ancestry. I know African Americans who are adamant that the single biggest obstacle holding back their communities today is the attitude that they are owed something because their ancestors were slaves.

[scoundrel]

We British used to trade in slaves and we got rich from it. We cannot deny it and we do not try to. We were also the first ones to abolish the slave trade on humanitarian and moral grounds and we used brute force to suppress this trade when our European neighbours thought they would like to continue with it.* People do change and moral views do evolve, hopefully for the better. But while it is fair to point out that people saw things differently in 1838 and cannot be judged by the morality of today, there was already a strong body of opinion against trading in human beings and against slavery in 1838 and the authorities at Georgetown University were not living in a vacuum. I think they deserve their scarlet letter and that the University should wear that letter today and be open and above board about the past, just as Britain has to be.

*A little known fact: the US Congress outlawed the maritime slave trade in 1819 and the tiny fledgling US Navy was energetic in anti-slave trade operations, regarding this trade as mere piracy and by 1860 the anti-slavery patrol of the US Navy in West Africa, never more than one or two smaller ships, occasionally backed up by a serious warship such as the USS Constellation, had destroyed over 100 slave ships and set their prisoners free. In some cases where the crews and officers were US citizens, the US Navy would summarily try them and hang them for piracy, as the British sometimes did for British citizens after 1827, when slave trading by British subjects became a capital offence.

[Arturo2nd]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

But while it is fair to point out that people saw things differently in 1838 and cannot be judged by the morality of today, there was already a strong body of opinion against trading in human beings and against slavery in 1838 and the authorities at Georgetown University were not living in a vacuum. I think they deserve their scarlet letter and that the University should wear that letter today and be open and above board about the past, just as Britain has to be.

Why are you claiming that the university is not doing so, when in fact, it is?

Originally Posted by Decadence

Today, Georgetown University is a thriving, elite university with a substantial endowment. But that wasn't always the case.

In 1838, the school was struggling and couldn't pay their bills. As a solution, the school sold off 272 slaves and used the money to pay off its debts.

In the time since, the school has made attempts to address its history with formal apologies, the renaming of buildings, admission consideration, and help with college readiness, genealogy, memorials and reunion projects.

Let us not forget that chattel slavery was introduced into the North American colonies because of the labor shortage caused by neglect and abuse that had 60% of indentured servants dying before the end of their contracts. One has to wonder if Britain would have been so keen to end slavery in the absence of the American Revolution.

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by Brian249x

Why are you claiming that the university is not doing so, when in fact, it is?

I didn't make such a claim. I merely pointed out that it owns the scarlet letter and it is right and proper that the letter should be worn.

Originally Posted by Brian249x

Let us not forget that chattel slavery was introduced into the North American colonies because of the labor shortage caused by neglect and abuse that had 60% of indentured servants dying before the end of their contracts. One has to wonder if Britain would have been so keen to end slavery in the absence of the American Revolution.

Interesting question. It is ironic that setting slaves free was a military tactic used by the redcoats, over 80 years before the Union army used it against the CSA.

[Arturo2nd]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

Interesting question. It is ironic that setting slaves free was a military tactic used by the redcoats, over 80 years before the Union army used it against the CSA.

It was recurring threats by colonial governors to free the slaves that had the Carolinas, Virginia and Georgia hooking up with the Massachusetts crazies in the revolution project.

[movieman88]

Questions Blacks have for SJWs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_WinXlct9s
So much win.

[ellpieski]

Originally Posted by movieman88

Questions Blacks have for SJWs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_WinXlct9s
So much win.

OMG this is great! thanks for posting!