Let's Give Reparations to White People ⋆ Politicrossing
Connect with us


Let’s Give Reparations to White People



The notion of awarding reparations to blacks as compensation for slavery has been floating around for years without anyone taking it seriously. The idea of reparations is predicated on the anti-white canard that contemporary whites are responsible for the social and economic condition of blacks, a view that has been refuted by influential black thinkers such as Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, and Bob Woodson.

Support for reparations was given a boost in 2014 by an article in The Atlantic, “The Case for Reparations” by Ta-Nehisi Coates. Coates himself admitted that he didn’t expect it to come to fruition. Thanks to the racial hurricane set off by the George Floyd incident, Coates’ idea was given a shot in the arm.

Evanston, Illinois, became the first American city to fund reparations. The State of California is contemplating a cash award of $360,000 to each black resident, which would undoubtedly lead to a flood of black people from all over the country into California. Not to be outdone, an advisory committee in San Francisco has recommended $5 million payouts to black individuals, together with guaranteed annual income of $97,000 for 250 years and personal debt forgiveness.

The US is experiencing an outbreak of anti-white racism, in which white people are demonized as oppressors of everyone else. The Left, says author Ben Shapiro, wants to portray America as “an incurable mass of bigoted whites.” This offers an opportunity for blacks to make unreasonable demands. “Whites are hungry for a way to prove that they’re innocent of racism,” says black author Shelby Steele, while black anger and militancy have become “the best means to opportunity and power for blacks.” Black rage, he says, “is a response to perceived opportunity, not to injustice.”

Asking all non-blacks to fund reparations ignores the fact that as few as five percent of today’s whites have a generational connection to slavery. “How can all Americans in the 21st century be held financially responsible for the actions of a subset of Americans hundreds of years ago?” asked Armstrong Williams in The Hill.

“The reparations argument is based on the unfounded claim that all African-American descendants of slaves suffer from the economic consequences of slavery and discrimination,” says author David Horowitz. “No evidence-based attempt has been made to prove that living individuals have been adversely affected by a slave system that was ended over 150 years ago.”

“Maybe I live in a box,” said black activist Candace Owens, “but I’ve never met a single black American who was a slave or a single white American who was a slaveowner. I’ve only come across lazy people who believe that those of us who work ought to support them.”

Once the reparation floodgates are opened, there is no limit to what may be demanded by black activists. Denver councilwoman Candi CdeBaca proposed taxing white-owned businesses and redistributing the wealth to minorities. Some blacks in California argue that $5 million per person is not enough. They want $200 million!

A black woman at Target refused to pay for her purchases, amounting to more than a thousand dollars, on the grounds that she was entitled to them as reparations for what she suffered because of her skin color. Target would not accede to her demand, so she assaulted the store manager and had to be restrained by a security guard.

And what about the Irish, Jews, Hispanics, and Chinese, all of whom were subjected to severe discrimination? Should they pay reparations or receive them? If reparations represent the new face of racial politics, we ought to apply “equity” and give every aggrieved racial and ethnic group a piece of the pie.

In particular, we should consider reparations for whites paid for by blacks as compensation for decades of massive violence against the white population. Black violence has brought the civil society to its knees. “Black crime and violence against whites, gays, women, seniors, young people and lots of others is astronomically out of proportion,” said Colin Flaherty in Don’t Make the Black Kids Angry.

In 2015, according to Heather Mac Donald in The War on Cops, blacks were responsible for 62 percent of all robberies, 57 percent of murders, and 45 percent of assaults in the 75 largest US counties. Blacks in New York City committed 75 percent of all shootings, 70 percent of robberies, and 66 percent of all violent crime. “The bulk of responsibility,” said former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, is on blacks who “commit murder eight times more per capita than any other group in our society.”

“Episodes of unprovoked violence by young black gangs against white people chosen at random on beaches, in shopping malls, or in other public places,” said black economist Thomas Sowell, “have occurred in Philadelphia, New York, Denver, Chicago, Cleveland, Washington, Los Angeles, and other places across the country.”

“Whites are the overwhelming target of interracial violence,” Heather Mac Donald wrote in City Journal. “Between 2012 and 2015, blacks committed 540,360 felonious assaults on whites.” Whites are suffering from black criminality and anti-white hate in the here and now, not 50-100 years ago. The economic cost to whites and white businesses from black racial violence has amounted to billions. The cost of welfare and other government programs designed to help blacks has amounted to trillions, with very little to show for it.

What makes more sense? Compensating blacks for injustices experienced by their ancestors 200 years ago, or compensating whites for the pain and suffering that is being inflicted on them right now.

I am not in favor of any kind of reparations, but if we are going to move in that direction, let’s be fair and equitable and compensate everyone who has a claim. A better solution might be not to move in that direction at all. Instead, we can cease government protection of particular groups altogether.

Ed Brodow is a conservative political commentator and author of ten books, including No. 1 Amazon Best Seller THE WAR ON WHITES: How Hating White People Became the New National Sport. His website is www.edbrodowpolitics.com.

We'd love to hear your thoughts about this article. Please take a minute to share them in the comment section by clicking here. Or carry the conversation over on your favorite social network by clicking one of the share buttons below.

Ed Brodow (www.edbrodowpolitics.com) is a conservative political commentator and author of ten books. His new book is THE WAR ON WHITES: How Hating White People Became the New National Sport, available at Amazon.com.


Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.


Will Democrats Do What They Must?



On a warm August evening in 1974, President Richard M. Nixon said from the Oval Office that he was resigning, becoming the first president to do so. He confessed that he no longer had “a strong enough political base in the Congress” to finish his term.

Sen. Barry Goldwater, Ariz., the 1964 GOP presidential nominee, was a respected conservative leader in a Senate whose Republican ranks were less conservative than now. In a May 1973 interview with Time magazine, Goldwater had given an early warning, “If it can be proved that he (Nixon) lied, resignation would have to be considered. It would be quick. Everything would be over, ended. It wouldn’t drag out like impeachment.”

At a regular Senate Republican Conference lunch on august 6 of 1974, Goldwater had fumed: “There are only so many lies you can take, and now there has been one too many. Nixon should get his ass out of the White House today!” When he went to see President Nixon, Goldwater confided, “There’s not more than 15 senators for you.” After that showdown, the curtain on President Nixon’s presidency came down three days later.

In this challenging time in our history when President Biden’s competency is under serious question, will Democrat leaders have the courage to do the same? With this report, more Democrats and Independents will be less inclined to vote for Biden. That may very well impact the future of many Democrat politicians whose own election could be impacted if their voting base stays home. After his Wednesday night address, the evidence that Biden is in trouble is plainly obvious.

President Biden’s poll numbers are now at an all time low. The shocking Department of Justice Special Counsel Robert Hur report suggests that Biden should not be indicted because Biden is “a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” that a jury would be unlikely to convict. The Special Counsel also noted that Biden “willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency when he was a private citizen;” he noted that such actions “present serious risks to national security.” It is clearly a risk for Biden to remain in office.

When President Biden addressed the country after the report was disclosed, he asserted that his memory was fine, and the report confirms that he was not indicted and did nothing wrong. His comments to the press questions were combative and defensive. He took no personal responsibility, blaming his staff for the faulty storage of classified documents. His message was strident and clear-Trump is guilty, and I did nothing wrong.

If he is not competent to stand trial for his actions, how can he be confident enough to remain president? It’s time for a private confrontation by Democrat leadership. If Biden does not listen, it is time to exercise the 25th amendment option to remove him from office.

It is not easy to use that 25th Amendment option. It is even more difficult with only 9 months before a critical national election. Waiting until the Democrat Convention in August leaves little time to right the ship and promote a replacement candidate.

Democrats, do your job to clean out your own house. President Biden is not competent to meet the challenges of our time. Do it now or pay the price in November. As Republicans, we hope you let Biden remain your candidate, but that is selfish. President Biden is our current leader and his decisions impact all of us and a world in turmoil. This isn’t about politics. We can’t afford even eleven more months of a mentally incompetent President.

Continue Reading


Claudine Gay, Ex-Harvard President, Will Strike it Rich in 2024

Gay will be a hot ticket at conferences leading up to the 2024 election.



If she were a straight white male, Claudine Gay’s career in academia would have been completely finished weeks ago. Along with the presidents of MIT and (then) University of Pennsylvania, as a result of Gay’s anti-Semitism and her disastrous testimony before Congress in December, much of the country was in an uproar.

Pretzel Logic

Days later, when it was discovered that Gay had plagiarized or inappropriately paraphrased and lifted passages from other authors, from a variety of academic works, that would have sealed her fate. In this utterly illogical age of unreason, just the opposite of what ought to happen actually did happen. The Harvard bigwigs backed her!

Gay punched all of the intersectionality buttons: Black, gay, female, and what else you want to throw into the mix. So was she not terminated from her widely visible, high-profile position. Luckily for Harvard, she quit as president! She retains her cushy post as professor, however, at $900,000 per year. And more amazing good fortune likely is in store for her. She may well reap an income bonanza unlike most other college presidents in the U.S. or around the world.

You have to understand that Gay is actually a hero to many factions on the Left. Let’s see … she stood up to the man! She let Congress have it with both barrels. She defended her academic turf. She stuck with what she believes in. She didn’t kowtow to the U.S. pro-Israeli faction. She spoke her truth! My goodness, what a leader, what a noble soul, what a speaker we might have at our convention!

Media Darlings

A variety of questionable figures on the Left have become darlings to groups who lap up their every word. If you think this won’t happen with Ms. Gay, think again.

Unbelievably, the parents of Trayvon Martin became media darlings. Martin was a violent teenager who punched a bus driver in the face, stole money and other items at school, and was suspended from school at the time of his death. He met his fate while pounding George Zimmerman’s head into a sidewalk.

Democratic groups have celebrated the Martins ever since then. Their public appearances were considered to be special. In another minute, with a cracked skull, Zimmerman might have bled out and died, making Martin a murderer.

Honored at the DNC Convention

The parents of Michael Brown also made the rounds and were accorded celebrity status. The super-sized 18-year-old from Ferguson, MO had stolen cigars and choked a small Asian convenience store clerk just 10 minutes before he had tried to wrestle a gun away from an officer sitting in his police car.

Had Brown, whose fingerprints were all over the officer’s car, successfully taken the officer’s gun, Brown, too, might have been a murderer. At the Democrat National Convention attendees couldn’t get enough of Brown’s noble mother. Sadly, the city of Ferguson, MO, paid Brown’s family an extorted $1.5 million, largely due to fears of more mob violence.

If parents who’ve raised career criminals are celebrated, what are Claudine Gay’s prospects?

Prospects Aplenty

Presumably, she has no violent incidents in her past. Prior to her resignation as Harvard president she may have already, privately signed on with one of the top speaker’s bureaus from either in Boston, New York, or Washington, D.C. Bureaus value having partisan speakers in their lineup when they can book such individuals at large conferences and conventions. Gay will be a hot ticket leading up to the 2024 election.

She will be featured as the head liner at many conferences.

How much can she glean from such appearances? The floor is 20 to 40 thousand per outing, but 50 to 75 thousand is within reach, of which the bureau takes 25%. At that level of earnings for a speech, she could easily exceed another $900,000 by the end of the year. Will you earn $1,800,000 in the next ten years?

Knowing No Bounds

As one audience after another offers her special treatment, her already outsized, over-privileged ego will know no bounds, and all of her past sins will be long forgotten. The groups to whom she speaks will consider themselves to have done their part in promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion. Gay’s intersectionality seals the deal, so by any measure, it’s a win-win-win (bureau, speaker, and audience) for Leftists.

To those on the Right, such developments are sickening, but we’ve come to accept that this is the world as it is currently. With all the devastation and destruction promulgated by the Biden administration, we have much bigger fish to fry.

– – – – –


Continue Reading


Our Newsletter

Become a Politicrossing insider: Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Sites We Like

Jesus, Master of Influence

Chris Widener, speaker and best selling author of The Art of Influence, teaches that Jesus is the master of influence. In sixteen sessions you will learn from one of the most influential communicators how the life and teachings of Jesus Christ is the best model for how to become an effective influence that can change people’s thoughts, beliefs and actions.


Our Newsletter

Become a PolitiCrossing insider: Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.