U.S. News

2242 readers

12 users here now

News about and pertaining to the United States and its people.

Please read what's functionally the mission statement before posting for the first time. We have a narrower definition of news than you might be accustomed to.

Guidelines for submissions:

Post the original source of information as the link.
If there is a paywall, provide an archive link in the body.
Post using the original headline; edits for clarity (as in providing crucial info a clickbait hed omits) are fine.
Social media is not a news source.

For World News, see the News community.

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

alyaza@beehaw.org

rs5th@beehaw.org

Powderhorn@beehaw.org

First-of-its-kind reparations panel issues report in California (www.aljazeera.com)

submitted 1 year ago by soiling@beehaw.org to c/usnews@beehaw.org

5 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] goryramsy@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ironic coming from aljazeera. Wonder what the Qatari government thinks of reparations, they did use slavery to build the FIFA World Cup stadium.

Also, is CA ok? Did they ever even have slavery there?

[–] soiling@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There can be a discussion about Aljazeera as an organization, but that has nothing to do with the content of this article.

And reparations is not only about slavery. This panel wrote 1,075 pages on the subject and it doesn't sound like you even read one article about it before trying to dispute the validity of a reparations program. Again, there can be discussion about how reparations should be handled, but it should start by acknowledging that colossal amount of work that has already gone into the conversation.

[–] Rekorse@beehaw.org 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

There should be a name for the type of post you replied to. It's like top of the mind stuff that you just spit out without much analyzing. Speaking without thinking. To be fair this is a conversation platform and you essentially replied with "read a thousand page document". Maybe you could sum up some of the main points yourself?

[–] soiling@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

I could, but the article I linked already has.

[–] rs5th@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They didn’t reply with “read a thousand page document”, they said “it doesn’t sound like you read one article.”

Soiling’s reply is about as much conversation is warranted by what is effectively a shitpost.