• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Should Native Americans receive reparation paychecks?

Status
Not open for further replies.
tommy_ed

tommy_ed

Android Expert
Personally, I think they should at least receive something after the way we did them.

The reason I ask this is because of an ongoing debate I've had with my mother. Her reasoning is that because of how long it's been, the people receiving the reparations weren't directly affected by what the government did to their culture. I disagree, on the grounds that had the the US Government not taken all their land/resources, life could be much different for them right now. I'm really into the history of native americans and that time period in general, so I know a lot of the ins and outs of the way we treated them. If you've ever read The Frontiersmen or Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee, you've gotten a taste of what I'm talking about.

I don't think money will ever be enough to repay them for the horrible things we did to their existence. This can be attested to by the fact that the US Gvt finally admitted in 1999 that we literally stole the Black Hills from the Sioux. Most of the other treaties we found some type of loophole to justify breaking agreements, but this one was legitimately theft. The government keeps building the settlement money for them (i believe it's up to 1.3 billion), but the Lakota won't claim it. They want their land back. And they should!
 
Here is the problem, the native americans entered into hundreds of thousands of contracts with the americans government. To this date the american government has never fulled or upheld one of those contracts, ever. Even current contracts are openly dismissed by the current american government.

If the american government broken one contract with any american company, the universe would crack open and all hell would spill forward.

Once again, all americans are not equal.

If you are a whole company, you are more important then a white male. If you are a white man you are more important then a minority male. If you are a minority male you are more important then a white female. If you are a white female you are more important then a minority female.

Once the government strips a liberty from a group of people, you can never, ever expect it back.

So to answer your question, yes they should upheld the contracts they signed. But the history with the native americans had their liberties stripped away to the point where they will never get anything out the government.

Which is a point for the rest of us. Every day, the united states government strips away your freedoms and right. Everyday they break promises and contracts with the american people. Every time we just accept it, the closer we all are to being down graded.
 
If you're going to open up that can of worms then you can argue that blacks should receive reparations as well. You can extend that argument to Asians (my grandfather won a Medal of Honor in WWII but was denied several jobs after the war because he was Asian) and any number of other ethnic groups.
 
If "reparations" mean affirmative action in providing education, yes. The U.S. government did destroy the culture of Native Americans, that is not retrievable, but the least that could be done is focus on them educationally right from the beginning, pre-school all the way through higher education and trades.

As far as superimposing the plight of African Americans over this issue, it's a complicated issue because they were removed from their culture centuries ago and enslaved in the U.S. back then. I'm thinking that we should stop speculating on what should be done and listen to them. Some do say reparations are in order. Some reject that notion. Again, it's very complicated.
 
When I hear things like this it reminds me of growing up in Anchorage Alaska. When we drove from Spenard to downtown Anchorage to pick my mom up at work, we'd regularly pass homes owned by Native American's and Eskimo's. Most of their homes looked like squatter shacks that could likely be blown over in a strong breeze. What always struck me as odd was that parked in front of these homes were brand new Cadillacs, motor homes, high end snow mobiles, and other expensive toys.

Now this is not to say that all Native Americans and Eskimo's in Alaska had these things but many did. Why? Because they'd been receiving "free money" from the Federal Government for years.

And for anyone wondering, I saw this back in the late 1960's/early 1970's which was well before the Alaskan oil pipeline was even installed. This money was compensation provided by the Federal Government to the native people of the state of Alaska.

In a more modern context I have a friend who belongs to a Native American tribe in Northern Oklahoma. His family owns acreage that was given to them by the tribe. The tribe, in turn, received the land from the U.S. Government.

The moral of this story... Native Americans, in many cases, have been receiving reparations. In many cases the money makes its way to the people... Maybe the question to be asked is should Native Americans receive MORE money in reparations from the U.S. Government?
 
There are two big, big problems with reparations - Who pays and who gets paid.

There is no question that the Native Americans got screwed over ten ways to Sunday in this country. There's no argument there. The problem is that the people who got screwed have died decades ago. Not only that, but their children and grandchildren have died out as well. So who do you pay? Only those who are "pure blooded"? What of those who are not full blooded but have some portion of Native American blood in their veins?

Who pays is problematic as well. I'm a 3rd generation American. My Grandfather came to the States in the late 20's. My ancestors did not screw over the Native Americans. They weren't even in the country at the time. Should I have to pay my tax dollars into these reparations? If so, why? I certainly did nothing. My ancestors had nothing to do with it either. Even if they did, why should I pay for what my ancestors did? If my grandpa kills someone, no one would argue that I should go to jail for it.
 
Im not in favor of cash reparations because it does little in the long run however I think an education fund would work. Higher education in the long run would benefit them far mar than cash.
 
Opens up another can of worms, what about those that inherited wealth based on what was unlawfully, by today's standards, appropriated by their ancestors ?
 
Crude said:
No. The world is full of conquered people. Should we pay the south for what we did to them during the civil war? Reparations are a joke.
Click to expand...
Let us break this down.

Slavery was over turned and outlawed. The people that suffered under slavery where allowed voting rights, citizen rights, and even allowed to return back home, if they wanted too. When a problem occurred that involved law and contracts with ex-slaves, the law, over time, repetitively upheld the rights, ideas, and individuality of the ex slave.

Once again. Not a single paper signed by a leader of the Native American group and official government has ever been correct carried out or upheld. NEVER.

Today, the rights of a the native americans are under attack. They are not allowed to vote, be represented in the legal or political fashion, nor allowed any protection from abuse by outside sources.

Martimus- The really funny part about your story is this. If I take you into a desert 100 miles and drive off, I am a bad person right? But if I take you into the desert, give you a liter of water, I am now a good person? Because that is what you are saying. The government has made promises in the past, those promises where never, ever met. If I tell you that I am going to pay you 100,000 dollars for your house, you get only 20,000 dollars for that house, is it ok for me to say, you have enough money, quit complaining.

I did promise you 100,000 dollars for your house, you did get 20,000 dollars which you bought a good car with, so stop complaining.

This is not about what they already have gotten, it is the fact that we have not full filled 1 contract with them, ever.
 
RiverOfIce said:
Today, the rights of a the native americans are under attack. They are not allowed to vote, be represented in the legal or political fashion, nor allowed any protection from abuse by outside sources.
Click to expand...

Wait a minute here. This is the first I've heard of this. You're telling me that if a Native American goes down to the polls in November he's not allowed to vote? He's not allowed to register to vote? Since when? Can you link to a source please? Also, how is it that Native American's are not allowed to be represented legally or politically. If I remember correctly (and I'm likely wrong) Oklahoma had a Native American Senator or Congressman they elected recently to Congress. Maybe it was Alaska. How does that not qualify as political representation? You're telling me that I can legally break into a Native American's home, run off with his stereo and no law has been broken because they have no legal protection? Can you cite a source for this? It's the first I've heard of it.

Edit: Looked it up. Ben Nighthorse Campbell was the guy I was thinking of. Full blooded Cheyenne Indian. Senator from Colorado from '93-'05.
 
RiverOfIce said:
Let us break this down.

Slavery was over turned and outlawed. The people that suffered under slavery where allowed voting rights, citizen rights, and even allowed to return back home, if they wanted too. When a problem occurred that involved law and contracts with ex-slaves, the law, over time, repetitively upheld the rights, ideas, and individuality of the ex slave.
Click to expand...
The civil war wasn't about slavery. That's just what we are taught in school to justify the North forcing their views on the south. History is written by the winner.

Once again. Not a single paper signed by a leader of the Native American group and official government has ever been correct carried out or upheld. NEVER.

Today, the rights of a the native americans are under attack. They are not allowed to vote, be represented in the legal or political fashion, nor allowed any protection from abuse by outside sources.
Click to expand...
Actually that is the result of a contract....one that we are upholding. Their territories are essentially sovereign land. The fed does not tax them for earnings made on their property. Isn't that why casinos are on Indian land. Aside from that gambling is also not regulated on their land. In return they have no representatives.
There are some very rich Indians. The massive failure rate among Indians can we directly linked to the federal assistance they already get.
 
The problem with reparations is determining eligibilty. Do you give it to all people of respective descent or just those "full blooded"? Same issues arises with "african-americans"
 
What do you suggest we do for them? Give them a senator and a few congressman? They are such a minority that it wouldn't be exactly fair the the other people that are loosing their representatives. I'm just not sure what people think it will take to make it up to the Indians or african americans for that matter. I mean I did not benefit in any way from all these wrongs. Why should I pay taxes to fund reparations for something I didn't do?

Maybe Europe should pay? I mean the reason America was settled was because of religious persecution in Europe. It probably would have happened eventually anyway but there's a direct link to people being mistreated in Europe that caused the Indians to loose their land.
 
Knewz said:
The problem with reparations is determining eligibilty. Do you give it to all people of respective descent or just those "full blooded"? Same issues arises with "african-americans"
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm 1/32 Sioux!
 
RiverOfIce said:
Martimus- The really funny part about your story is this. If I take you into a desert 100 miles and drive off, I am a bad person right? But if I take you into the desert, give you a liter of water, I am now a good person? Because that is what you are saying. The government has made promises in the past, those promises where never, ever met. If I tell you that I am going to pay you 100,000 dollars for your house, you get only 20,000 dollars for that house, is it ok for me to say, you have enough money, quit complaining.
Click to expand...

River - My story was simple... 40 years ago, before the Alaskan oil pipeline was built and provided annual checks to all Alaskan citizens, Native Americans and Eskimo's in Alaska were receiving money from the Federal Government. And more recently someone I know who is a member of a Native American tribe in OK did receive land from the Federal Government.

Nowhere in either of these anecdotes did I mention specific commitments by the government... only that money was received from the Federal Government. As such, and in each of these cases, Native Americans AND Eskimo's did receive reparations from the Federal Government. Once again no mention was made as to whether or not it was the agreed upon amount... only that they received monies from the Federal Government.
 
Crude said:
Yeah, I'm 1/32 Sioux!
Click to expand...

Well, as Jerry Seinfeld said to the white guy who just got his hair curled, "having a collection of 'Pat Boone Sings Sammy Davis, jr' record albums does not make you a soul brother."

;)
 
A.Nonymous said:
Wait a minute here. This is the first I've heard of this. You're telling me that if a Native American goes down to the polls in November he's not allowed to vote? He's not allowed to register to vote? Since when? Can you link to a source please?
Click to expand...

If he is on a reservation, he has no rights, but has to follow American laws. You can google it your self. No reservation is allowed representation, political leaders, or authority. If he chooses, he can leave his life, his people, and his culture to go outside of the reservation, like the examples you pointed out, but can not represent his own people, culture, and way of life. But to do so, he has to leave his people. How would you like to be forced to leave your home town/state to get elected to office, only to know that what ever you do, will never have any reflection back to the community you came from?

Crude said:
The civil war wasn't about slavery. That's just what we are taught in school to justify the North forcing their views on the south. History is written by the winner.
Click to expand...

I never said civil war, I said slavery. I never said they where not paid, I said they where not paid what they were promised. As for the pipeline. There was a thousand lies behind them. The native americans where told the line where temporary. They where told that they would get a percentage of profit from the oil. They where promised high paying jobs. They where promised anything to get the pipes built. But now are forced to take a pay check for what ever the oil companies say it is worth, regardless of what was promised in the past. Once again, not about giving money, but fulling a contract, every line, every word. No Indian contract has ever been full filled like it would be if it was a company, none.

As for gambling and casinos. They bring higher crime rates, murder rates, alcoholism, and drug use. They do bring money, but at a higher cost that most of western civilization would not pay. But the natives are forced to do.

Once again, not defending the Indians here, but the writing is on the wall. Allow the government to take one right, and you are screwed.
 
i don't really think they should be getting money specifically, education would be nice or even better, GOOD land like the land we took.

there is a big difference comparing the slaves to native americans. for one, the government didn't make slaves, private citizens and companies did. two, and this could sound bad i suppose, but that kindddda worked out in the end for them didn't it? I mean would they rather be in Africa running from lions right now? lol :p

they also can't be compared to most of the conquered peoples of history. the reason I say that, is because the situation is a little unique. We didn't just invade and conquer them, we made agreements. We signed documents agreeing to certain terms, and we broke them. In our country, when you sign and agree to a contract, you are bound by its terms. The problem is our government's holier-than-thou attitude. They finally admit they broke at least one of those contracts and rather than fix it, they are just trying to throw money at it.

As far as the reparations, I feel like they should get their land back. All the current businesses/people should pay at least a portion of their existing tax rates to the tribe, not individual members. That seems like a reasonable solution to me, there's definitely a lot more complex issues involved with it, but it's an idea to start from.
 
tommy_ed said:
As far as the reparations, I feel like they should get their land back.
Click to expand...

Man.. that would be a toughy.. Manhattan Island? Most of the Mid-West? I'd hate to be the one to try to figure it out, with all of those tribes/nations.. let alone relocate all those non-native Americans from all the cities built on former native American land.
 
NO! There are no native Americans that were alive back then. Just as african Americans should not get reparations. There are no AAs alive today that were ever slaves, there are no whites alive today that were ever slave owners and there is no one in government today that was in government then.

Native Americans get lots of tax brakes rights and privileges that no other Americans do so they should be happy with it.
 
A note to the moderators.
I just wanted to say thank you for letting a thread like this run. There are other forums out there that would have shut this down straight away. Not letting the members share their thoughts or opinions.

It shows that mods here are open to politically incorrect thought which increases my opinion of this forum many times over.
 
Well, here we go complicating it further with the African American analogy (and I do that, too).. they are two different issues, with only the thing in common of both being victimized by (mostly white) American society, etc.

The descendants of slaves seem to have been continually discriminated against by (mostly white) Americans; they did not get off to the same start as most white Americans did, and they continue to not be able to get off to a good start unless some affirmative action laws are in place.

^^^^^^^^Some of them say^^^^^^^^

"Indians" were run off their land and defeated as a people, right in their own country; they were conquered and over run by (mostly white) Americans.

Some of them say there should be a payback of sorts.. again, it's complicated, but I think it should be in education facilities and job training.
 
Crude said:
The civil war wasn't about slavery. That's just what we are taught in school to justify the North forcing their views on the south. History is written by the winner.
Click to expand...

Beg to differ, resistance to the expansion of slavery to new territories was the major factor for the secession. Resistance was expanded to abolition in those states in rebellion and further expanded to all states.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom