DOES THIS ESTABLISH PRECEDENCE FOR THE EVENTUAL PAYMENT OF REPARATIONS? - Taking a closer look at three lines in the Senate's anti-lynching bill
There's been much in the way of heightened rhetoric aimed at pursuing another blatant Leftist transfer of wealth from one subgroup of our population to another. In particular, it would be a direct transfer ultimately sourced from taxpayer funds to African-Americans whose ancestors were enslaved and all in the name of financial restitution to redress slavery.
Here are three clauses from the Booker, Harris, et al. group's legislation, which is sponsored by Harris, that give rise to concern as to what they may portend:
1. "(13) Only by coming to terms with history can the United States effectively champion human rights abroad."
- This frames the topic rationally - no reasonable person believes slavery is good - and then hinges it on the broader responsibility of championing human rights. That's the bait and people's vulnerability to guilt makes them take it. It then gets locked into absolute terms with "only," which when coupled with "coming to terms" leaves only one remaining direction. That direction is that it's time to do something. Critical point - once this is established as precedence in one bill, it can be used to justify another.
2. "(14) An apology offered in the spirit of true repentance moves the United States toward reconciliation and may become central to a new understanding, on which improved racial relations can be forged."
- The "apology offered" and "true repentance" only MOVES the US towards reconciliation - it doesn't get us there. This is clever, it's intentional and it does three critically important things: a) requires the US to atone and apologize in the form of an offering, b) moves the US towards reconciliation and c) purposefully leaves the US short of full reconciliation. This is where room is specifically created for reparations to be introduced in the future. Such a future measure would launch from this bill and bridge the gap between progress towards reconciliation and achieving full reconciliation. Sidebar - even if reparations did occur, their pursuit of this agenda would be far from over. The Left NEVER relents.
3. "(15) Having concluded that a reckoning with our own history is the only way the country can effectively champion human rights abroad, 90 Members of the United States Senate agreed to Senate Resolution 39, 109th Congress, on June 13, 2005, to apologize to the victims of lynching and the descendants of those victims for the failure of the Senate to enact anti-lynching legislation."
- In short, with 13 as the intro and 14 as the body, this is merely the conclusion with a brief recapitulation and a show of force.
When viewed through a particular lens and when considering what is not said, this bill reeks of a congressional effort to lay the foundation for the eventual legislative transfer of wealth known as slavery reparations.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/488/text
There's been much in the way of heightened rhetoric aimed at pursuing another blatant Leftist transfer of wealth from one subgroup of our population to another. In particular, it would be a direct transfer ultimately sourced from taxpayer funds to African-Americans whose ancestors were enslaved and all in the name of financial restitution to redress slavery.
Here are three clauses from the Booker, Harris, et al. group's legislation, which is sponsored by Harris, that give rise to concern as to what they may portend:
1. "(13) Only by coming to terms with history can the United States effectively champion human rights abroad."
- This frames the topic rationally - no reasonable person believes slavery is good - and then hinges it on the broader responsibility of championing human rights. That's the bait and people's vulnerability to guilt makes them take it. It then gets locked into absolute terms with "only," which when coupled with "coming to terms" leaves only one remaining direction. That direction is that it's time to do something. Critical point - once this is established as precedence in one bill, it can be used to justify another.
2. "(14) An apology offered in the spirit of true repentance moves the United States toward reconciliation and may become central to a new understanding, on which improved racial relations can be forged."
- The "apology offered" and "true repentance" only MOVES the US towards reconciliation - it doesn't get us there. This is clever, it's intentional and it does three critically important things: a) requires the US to atone and apologize in the form of an offering, b) moves the US towards reconciliation and c) purposefully leaves the US short of full reconciliation. This is where room is specifically created for reparations to be introduced in the future. Such a future measure would launch from this bill and bridge the gap between progress towards reconciliation and achieving full reconciliation. Sidebar - even if reparations did occur, their pursuit of this agenda would be far from over. The Left NEVER relents.
3. "(15) Having concluded that a reckoning with our own history is the only way the country can effectively champion human rights abroad, 90 Members of the United States Senate agreed to Senate Resolution 39, 109th Congress, on June 13, 2005, to apologize to the victims of lynching and the descendants of those victims for the failure of the Senate to enact anti-lynching legislation."
- In short, with 13 as the intro and 14 as the body, this is merely the conclusion with a brief recapitulation and a show of force.
When viewed through a particular lens and when considering what is not said, this bill reeks of a congressional effort to lay the foundation for the eventual legislative transfer of wealth known as slavery reparations.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/488/text
Write a comment...
Recent PRO gabs
• • •