2
0

Ohio U. S. Senate candidate proposes reparations for white descendants of Union Civil War soldiers


 invite response                
2023 Apr 22, 8:04pm   484 views  6 comments

by RayAmerica   ➕follow (0)   💰tip   ignore  

Ohio GOP Senate candidate Bernie Moreno proposed at a campaign event this week that white descendants of Northern Civil War soldiers be eligible for reparations.

"We stand at the shoulders of giants, don't we? We stand on shoulders of people like John Adams, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, George Washington. That this group of people took on the largest empire in history. They said no, we will not stand for this. And won," Moreno said earlier this week, according to the New York Post.

"That same group of people later, white people, died to free black people," he continued. "It's never happened in human history before, but it happened here in America. That's not taught a lot in schools much, is it?”

The Republican entrepreneur is the second GOP candidate to throw his hat into the race. Ohio state Senator Matt Dolan is his opponent in the primary.

“They make it sound like America is a racist, broken country," Moreno continued in his speech.

"You name a country that did that: that freed slaves, died to do that," he stated. "You know, they talk about reparations. Where are the reparations for the people in the North who died to save the lives of black people?”
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/ohio-senate-candidate-proposes-reparations-white-descendants-union-civil-war

Comments 1 - 6 of 6        Search these comments

2   richwicks   2023 Jun 5, 8:04pm  

RayAmerica says

"That same group of people later, white people, died to free black people," he continued. "It's never happened in human history before, but it happened here in America. That's not taught a lot in schools much, is it?”


That's all that is taught, at least in the north, and it's not true.

The American civil war was over taxation. If it was about slavery, the North would have abolished slavery before the war began, but they didn't. There were 5 border states that were slave states that fought for the North. I wish history was taught instead of modern propaganda.

After the civil war, slaves were freed in the South first, and you know what happened? Millions found themselves unemployable, and unable to work, so they starved to death. Not like the local business owner was going to give a sharecropper a job and the north didn't want them either.
3   HeadSet   2023 Jun 6, 8:06am  

richwicks says

Millions found themselves unemployable, and unable to work, so they starved to death.

That is just as false a history as the part about the war being about slaves. There were about 4 million slaves in 1860, so you think half of them (you did write "millions") starved to death? That all plantations disappeared and did not need to be worked? No railroad work? No mines? No westward expansion? No migration to cities like Chicago? Slaves were experienced field hands, blacksmiths, livery handlers, cooks, seamstresses and other skills, but just were not paid.
4   Onvacation   2023 Jun 6, 9:36am  

richwicks says

The American civil war was over taxation. If it was about slavery, the North would have abolished slavery before the war began,


When our country was founded a majority of states were slave states. Throughout the early 1800's a balance was maintained between free and slave states. By 1858 free states were a majority and it was just a matter of time before the 3/5 compromise was amended away.

Before the civil war America was about personal and state's rights. Lincoln's term federalized the country.

Was John Brown's raid about abolition or taxes? Was "Bloody Kansas" A fight over taxes or slavery?

I know the victors write the history but it seems to me that the civil war was at least a little about slavery and fixing the constitutional 3/5 compromise.
6   AmericanKulak   2023 Jun 6, 9:46am  

richwicks says


The American civil war was over taxation.

When Calhoun tried to start something over Tariffs, everybody else in the South was lampooning him.

The South did fine off Tariffs, because the formula used to calculate how the Tariff got spent was disproportionately spent in southern states for dredging, lighthouses, ports, and other infrastructure.

The war was over Slavery. Bleeding Kansas wasn't Tariff activists attacking each other; the big fights in Congress over which states should be created/admitted weren't about which ones were likely to support the Tariff, but which were conducive to plantation agriculture.

This is what I mean when I say "In times of demoralization, expect the GOOD of the past to come under attack and discredit attempts, as well as the lies."

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions