Either Alan Keyes has lost his mind, or he’s getting back at The Man. You may have heard of The Man. He’s responsible for all that ails the black community.
Keyes is now a slave reparations proponent. A commenter at Ramblings’ Journal suggested (tongue-in-cheek?) that Keyes may be taking revenge on the Illinois GOP for using him as a token. I wasn’t following this story because frankly, I couldn’t care less about Keyes or the race in Illinois; however, now that I’m thinking about it, I can’t figure out why else Keyes would support such nonsense.
This is why I’m not a liberal, and I thought it was the reason why Keyes wasn’t a liberal. Without the ability to read his mind, I have no idea why he’s supporting reparations. The possibility that gets top billing is his desire, subconscious or otherwise, to mock the GOP while garnering publicity for himself.
According to the Chicago Tribune (registration req.):
Speaking at a news conference at the Hotel InterContinental in Chicago, Republican Keyes added to his now familiar talking points his stance on slavery reparations.Prompted by a reporter’s question, Keyes gave a brief tutorial on Roman history and said that in regard to reparations for slavery, the U.S. should do what the Romans did: “When a city had been devastated [in the Roman empire], for a certain length of time — a generation or two — they exempted the damaged city from taxation.”
Keyes proposed that for a generation or two, African-Americans of slave heritage should be exempted from federal taxes — federal because slavery “was an egregious failure on the part of the federal establishment.” In calling for the tax relief, Keyes appeared to be reaching out to capture the black vote, something that may prove difficult to do, particularly after his unwelcome reception at the Bud Billiken Day Parade Saturday.
Keyes released a statement to “clarify” his position:
I have consistently opposed the effort to extort monetary damages from the American people. As I have argued in the past, the great sacrifices involved in the Civil War represented the requital in blood and treasure for the terrible injustices involved in slavery. In this form the so called “reparations” movement represents an insult to the historic commitment that many Americans made to the end of slavery, which included the sacrifice of their lives.I have also consistently maintained that the history of slavery, racial segregation and discrimination did real damage to black Americans, left real and persistent material wounds in need of healing….
The idea I have often put forward to address this challenge involves a traditionally Republican, conservative and market-oriented approach: removing the tax burden from the black community for a generation or two in order to encourage business ownership, create jobs and support the development of strong economic foundations for working families.
This has the advantage of letting people help themselves, rather then (sic) pouring money into government bureaucracies that displace and discourage their own efforts. It takes no money from other citizens, while righting the historic imbalance that results from the truth that black slaves toiled for generations at a tax rate that was effectively 100 percent.
Mr. Keyes, why stop at a generation or two? Why not remove the tax burden in perpetuity? The statement is akin to Justice Sandra Day O’Connor’s in Grutter about how we pitiful, low-achieving black folks need skin color preferences for 25 more years so we can catch up with regular Americans.
Let’s talk about the “righting” assertion. The first “righting” we did was dismantling slavery. My goodness, wasn’t that enough? What wouldn’t present-day slaves in the Sudan give to see the same happen for them and their children? Freedom, precious freedom, is worth its weight in gold.
The second “righting” was erasing Jim Crow from the books. Rightly or wrongly, America created a “protected class” of people whose skin color, once used against them, now works in their favor to bestow all kind of government goodies. And blacks want more? At whose expense?
Keyes tries to eat his cake and have it, too. He sounds so much like a liberal it’s scary. While using free market terms and concepts to “trick” conservatives, he’s really pandering to a certain race of Americans, something I and many conservatives speak out against daily.
If this makes whites angry, it should. It makes me angry, too, especially when I see a bunch of limousine liberals (and one conservative?) serving up this jive. It’s all a scam, nothing more. Who will pay? The descendants of Arabs who sold Africans into slavery? Other Africans who sold their countrymen and women into slavery? How do we parse the ethnic make-up of individuals in order to calculate how much they owe/are owed?
But of course, proponents know this is un-workable, so the plan is to scam…I meant, skim off the top of the U.S. Treasury rather than figuring all that out. Clever. Fallen man is always trying to get more unearned and undeserved stuff. Nothing new under the sun. In fact, Rep. John Conyers, who I think should retire, introduces a “reparations study” bill every year that goes nowhere. Yet. As long as he’s living (in or out of office) I suspect he’ll keep trying.
You will never read or hear me argue that slavery and segregation did no damage to black Americans. That educated people come up with ideas like slavery reparations over a century after the fact is enough evidence of how racial divisiveness, real victimhood and degradation are manifested in misplaced guilt of whites who weren’t even alive during slavery and manipulation by blacks seeking more government perks to avenge the bondage of ancestors who rest in their graves. That was a long sentence. Tired now.
My take on reparations is that blacks already receive reparations in the form of welfare, skin color preferences (government perks for “minority-owned businesses, lower admissions standards, protected class status, etc.) and white guilt that still exists among descendants of whites who lived during slavery whether they owned slaves or not.
Early in my “career”, I wrote a scathing anti-reparations piece that I sent to several major newspapers. An editor at the Baltimore Sun wanted to publish it. He called me to verify that I was the person who sent in the op-ed, and he gave me a target date for publication.
A week or so later I e-mailed him to confirm the date, and he told me the piece wouldn’t be published after all. He implied that it was too “rant and rave.” I asked why he wanted to publish it in the first place if it was too “rant and rave.” What changed? No response. I have reason to believe his boss was a black woman (long story) who didn’t like the piece, so she nixed it when he brought it to her. It was a little incendiary. 
I may dig it up and post it for your enjoyment.
In conclusion, as the descendant of African slaves, I’d opt out of any reparations program, whether it be a full tax-exemption, a big fat check or one received at the first of every month, like welfare. I want no part of government guilt schemes.
Consider this Part I. I have much more to say.
Check out these articles: David Horowitz’s “Ten Reasons Why Reparations for Blacks is a Bad Idea for Blacks — and Racist Too” is a classic. It will anger you black liberals, so be warned.
Does America Owe Reparations?, by Walter Williams.
A Conservative Slave Reparations Plan?
Bloggers:
Brian Scott, Outside the Beltway, Michelle Malkin, Blogs of War, Evangelical Outpost, The World Wide Rant, The Moderate Voice, Nykola.com, Avery Tooley, Booker Rising
{ 3 trackbacks }
{ 40 comments }
tongue-in-cheek?
You win the prize of the day!
I’ve pleased DarkStar.
What we need now, is a Walter William/ Alan Keyes exchange … wouldn’t that be delicious?!? I await the further rant/vent. This whole issue just boggles the mind.
“Keyes proposed that for a generation or two, African-Americans of slave heritage should be exempted from federal taxes…”
If this brand of reparations went into effect, the results would be comical. What about the millions of blacks of slave heritage who pay no taxes? Wouldn’t they deserve reparations as much as tax-paying blacks? How would it be fair for some descendents of slaves to be compensated and not others?
It wouldn’t. Everybody would apply to receive reparations, whether they were taxpayers or not. And the guilty white folks would pay up, too! Guilt is goofy that way…
I am quite disappointed in Keyes for spouting out this nonsense. I realize he’s doing it to steal thunder from Obama, but it’s quite frankly a sleazy way to do it. I know I (as a white male) have absolutely no guilt in regard to slavery: none of my ancestors owned slaves, and more importantly, I haven’t (and do everything in my power to live a truly “color-blind” life). Anyone who tries to make me feel guilt for something I had no part of immediately earns a heaping helping of my scorn and derision. Bad form, Mr. Keyes! >:
I think he’s trying to get elected. It is quite a surprising statement, but he is trying to appeal to Illinois voters.
This tax-scheme will earn Mr. Keyes the rep of advocating “tax breaks for the rich–rich blacks, that is,” which I’m thinking won’t impress Illinois black voters much.
I am still trying to figure out why we are focused on helping blacks & don’t focus on the other people groups that have been oppressed in American history… Irish immigrants, Japanese in WWII… How come we never worry about making reparations to them? Why is it always the Poor Blacks Who Were Wronged 150 Years Ago And For Whom We Have Done So Much Already?
This may be an attempt to put out there the dialogue of non-taxation of personal income which seems to be gaining steam as of late. I heard on the radio that he believes that all Americans should not have their personal income taxed and in lieu of the current tax system the government ought to revert to a taxation of consumption method. Putting the pieces together, it would seem that his current approach is to somehow win over support of the Black community first by pushing for tax exemption for them specifically and then eventually all groups could potentially become exempt as other minority groups will surely cry foul if Blacks were given such a pass on taxation.
I think Keyes is crazy like a fox. The trick is to START exempting people from taxes, and then continue it until EVERYONE is exempt. These things steamroll. First blacks. Then Hispanics for Texas and California. Then Asians because of WW2. Then the Irish because of the railroad and indentured servitude, and so on, until everyone is exempt.
Breaking a crack in the wall and then pounding a spike into it is something that the left has been doing for a while. I’m not sure if I agree with the method, but I recognize it when I see it.
He sure is going to get Obama elected, that’s for sure.
I never considered he had an ulterior motive. I wish he’d find a better way to introduce the issue of non-taxation of personal income. I’m all for it, but why frame it around something as divisive as slave reparations?
For a better idea on reparations, check out our page that involves the transfer of land:
http://groups.msn.com/AAEA/reparations.msnw
Keyes is great. And putting reparations on the conservative table is the right thing to do. Such restoration will come from the right before it comes from the left.
You know, this is what’s wrong with the GOP. People in the Democratic party are generally trained to say certain things — “women’s rights” to murder their children (pro-choise), “non-discriminatory” marriage, “social equality” (communism), and so on. But people in the Republican party seem to be widely scattered in what they believe — ranging from John McCain who wants everybody to be “friends” and moderates who believe in abortion to hard conservatives who want to abolish abortion and income tax. You’re never quite sure what you’re going to get. And Alan Keyes certainly isn’t saying anything that anyone else in the GOP believes, is he?
I really think the Republicans need to streamline themselves and figure out what they really want to say, and then go and do it. I don’t like all this floundering around.
I’ll echo an earlier commenter by saying that lots of black (and white) people don’t pay income taxes. Will they still get their earned income credit? Oprah would get much greater relief than poor black people in my city. That’s fair? How could it be that no one has to pay, if all non-black people have to be taxed more to pick up the slack?
La Shawn, thanks for mentioning the Union soldiers who died fighting the Civil War. We visit Shiloh from time to time and to see the vast cemetary where Union soldiers are buried is a real eye-opener. I think their sacrifice gets glossed over too often in this kind of discussion. Check out the verses we don’t usually sing of “Battle Hymn of the Republic” which was written to shore up support in the Union for continuing the war. They include these words:
In the beauty of the lilies Christ was born across the sea
With a glory in His bosom that transfigures you and me.
As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free….
For those who “died to make men free”, who made the ultimate reparations (and who obviously didn’t themselves even own slaves) I’d really like to have it explained to me how their descendents still owe anything.
That’s a good question, Laura. Does anyone have the stats on how much taxes black people pay now?
I mean, the top half of income earners in the U.S. already pays over 95% of the taxes, so if we went along with this stupid plan, precisely how many black people would truly be affected?
That was my point. I think that the voters he’s trying to reach wouldn’t be the beneficiaries of his reparations program, as he’s described it currently, because a significant percentage of them pay little/no income tax. So what would be their motivation to vote for him?
If only folks like Walter and Mrs. Williams would end up benefitting by skipping out on their taxes for a couple years, wouldn’t that create a pretty divisive situation (class envy) between have and have-not blacks? And how could it be considerered reparations unless all descendents of slaves are repaid?
If Rome would exempt a generation or two from taxes if their city had been destroyed, wouldn’t the conclusion from Keyes’ argument be that residents of Atanta shouldn’t pay federal taxes from 1865-1945?
Helluva article. The IL “race” has been an easy one to ignore. But Keyes turns chameleon? Too many loose wing nuts on the political scene today.
What about my cousins, with black mother and white father? Do they pay themselves? Do they get only a half-break? Heck, I come from a Scottish-Irish background - that should be good to extort some money out of WASPs… and there was lots of anti-Catholic legislation in this country…
Anyway, Keyes doesn’t have a chance of winning, so I guess he’s trying out the craziest things he can think of — or try to get Obama to respond. And think of Obama’s background - he’s black, but not the descendent of American slaves. Would he get a tax break just due to a racial classification? There have been plenty of African immigrants since the end of slavery (see this every day here in NYC) - skin color wouldn’t be enough, ne?
I know Alan (we serve on the BAMPAC board of directors together), and can tell you that he’s held this view for many years. He told me perhaps half a dozen years ago that he spoke about this way back when affirmative action and quotas were really getting established, as an alternative to that. As I recall it (it has been a while), his logic was that the gesture would simultaneously address the grievance issue while (and this was the far more important factor) get the black community invested (in the literal sense) in our capitalist system. He envisions the birth and growth of many black-owned businesses, and a resulting development of a greater appreciation for the low-tax, low regulation point of view among black Americans as a result.
At the time, Alan seemed to think the time had passed for such a program, but maybe he’s re-thought that part, or maybe he was just throwing out an idea, as intellectuals tend to do.
By the way, La Shawn, David just tried to call you to see if you’d like to do a CNBC interview (on your impressions of how well Bush fulfilled the promises he made in 2000) but you weren’t at your phone numbers. He’s got it covered now, but maybe next time, if you are interested.
Thank you Amy for your input!
It is important to remember that many ideas that could be good if implimented are considered political losers so aren’t discussed. Since so many people give Keyes no chance of winning, at least he can get an ascendant Obama to articulate his message so the voters know what he believes on as many issues as possible. Coming off the Democratic convention, many people may believe Obama is moderate, but he is not. Let’s see how white Democrats feel about Obama’s position on reparations.
As to what Shayne suggests about the Republican party streamlining itself, I don’t know if that would help me in my voting. The “religious right” is not a monolith, and if the Republican party became a conservative party, there would still be some candidates that I wouldn’t want to vote for. The all-inclusive Democratic Party is to the left, but not left-enough for the Greens, and their delegates perfectly mirror the population. Excluding too many people from the Republican party is probably not wise.
One last thing…woohoo, La Shawn on CNBC. Maybe we can engineer a ratings spike for the interview.
Thanks, Amy. Sorry I missed out!
So keyes would pay no taxes, but Obama would be taxed up the ying-yang! Huh, what a deal!
The first thing that came to my mind when I read Keyes’
idea was the phrase “enterprise zone” — in effect, this
would make all areas inhabited mostly by African-
Americans into tax-advantaged enterprise zones. It would be
interesting to see if that brought about an economic boom
in those areas, and if it did, then that might (as others
on this thread have suggested) cause the no-personal-
income-tax idea to spread.
I agree that there is not really a moral case for
reparations (I had nothing to do with slavery of course,
and my ancestors came from Eastern Europe in the
1920s) — but the idea of not taking taxes from some
people is certainly a lot more appealing than taking
taxes from me to give out as reparations.
Just my thought.
However, there is a strong moral case for reparations of survivors of Jim Crow.
Good job putting up warrants to your claim, Darkstar.
There is no moral case when you view people as individuals. Too many people would be given reparations that have no reason to receive them, others would be taxed excessively in order to pay them, despite having nothing to do with them (ancestrally or otherwise), and there would be a large group of people whose beneficiary or payee status would be questionable.
The only entities we can really expect to pay reparations are corporations, since some of them really did benefit obviously and directly from slavery and still exist today. This is already rectified through the court system and in established law, so nothing new is necessary in this avenue. For example, newspapers that ran ads for slaves have had to pay reparations because they obviously benefited from slavery.
Ayep. And by saying that “corporations” end up paying for something, it’s just another way of saying that everyone ends up paying for it, since corporations pass their costs on to consumers (many of whom, ironically, would be those the “reparations” ostensably help…).
MBM, you would still probably have your taxes increased to make up for the taxes not collected from black people.
Citizens vote and they pay taxes. I think it’s a bad idea to encourage the disconnect that already exists between some black Americans and the idea of being a full-fledged, patriotic citizen.
On the other hand, I live in a majority black city, so the tax-advantage enterprise zone mights help me too. Woohoo, reparations for a white Southerner. Gotta love it.
Why not just encourage “voluntary reparations”? Let prosperous, guilty white people give some more of their money every tax season to minorities that they feel have been disadvantaged by history. They can choose the most deserving groups and individuals themselves, and will probably come up with interesting and novel ways to do it (scholarships based on performance, capital to set up small businesses, creative incentives to study harder in school, etc.) What do you know? There’s nothing to stop them from doing that now!
Dave - That’s one of the best reparations ideas I’ve heard yet. White liberals with slaveowner’s guilt can give their money to angry blacks who demand to be paid. And the rest of us — non guilt-ridden whites and blacks with common sense can have some peace!
Of course we know the “most deserving” wouldn’t see a dime of that money. But you’d better believe Jesse Jackson and his limousine cronies would get their cut.
Hi Lashawn,
You are someone I should know, looks like. Appreciate your stances and postings. What do you think about Keyes tax-rep’ns issue now? How in the world could people provide evidence. People could make fortunes in the family tree research business, I suppose.
Also, please… would you go like to…
1. go to this URL:
http://www.unspun.info/supportkeyes
…and e-sign this petition?
2. then, if you would like, I’d encourage you to forward it to those you know and ask them to take those two steps too!
Arlen Williams
West Chicago, IL
I applaud Alan for taking this courageous stand. This is why despite some of his views I am opposed against, one thing is for sure, he always speak his mind about what he feels despite what YOU think.
I think his idea of reperations doesn’t go far enough though. But I am tickled to death that so many of you so quickly turn your back on the brother
By the way, I would love to see these two ultra sharp brother engage in multiple debates. I still have the video tape where Keyes destroyed Alan Dershowitz on the issue of moral relativity.
http://dellgines.blogspot.com/
Sorry, HiRez. It’s not working. I’m not learning a thing.
HiRez: just because some of us don’t go along with your views of socialistic redistribution, doesn’t mean we “quickly turn your back on the brother”. Nice try there you race baiting poverty pimp!
La Shawn,
Nice site. Wish I had something positive to say about Keyes. I was ready to vote for him simply because I thought he was a good alternative to Obama. Since the reparations comments, I have decided to vote for the Libertarian candidate, whoever that might be, just as a protest. For your readers who would like to see another conservative web site that combines politics, satire, commerce and music, they might check out http://www.boycottdanblather.com.
La Shawn, forgive me if I’m repeating what someone else has already written, because I haven’t read all of the comments. But it looks to me like all Keyes is doing in this campaign is trying to create publicity for his radio show/columns or whatever he’s doing these days. The best way to do that is by saying off the wall nonsense. Let’s face it: now he’s saying he thinks blacks should be exempt from the income tax for a couple of generations. But remember, he also says he wants to abolish the income tax — for EVERYBODY — and replace it with a sales tax.
Uhhh… which one is it?? Obviously, blacks can’t be exempt from a sales tax. So he’s proposing two completely contradictory ideas at the same time. Answer: he spouts off-the-wall ideas to make a living, and this Senate campaign is just his advertising platform.
Short version:
My mother was alive during Jim Crow and suffered economically from it. Today, she gets a social security check. It is based on the amount she earned. The amount she earned suffered because of Jim Crow.
So, she’s still paying for it.
In her golden years, it’s my honor to help her out financially when it is needed. Today, my personal net worth is negatively affected by Jim Crow.
Jim Crow was supported by the government.
Like many, I am dissapointed as Alan Keys’ flip-flop on this issue, as well as the ‘carpetbagging’ issue he lambasted Hillary Clinton over in 2000. It’s always sad to see a conservative like Ambassador Keyes attempting to pander to folks who will never even consider what he has to say.
Even so, Barack Obama is a genuinely evil individual. Despite all of the appearances of reasonableness and moderation, Obama was one of the few Illinois legislators to oppose a bill protecting the lives of infants born alive in the course of a failed abortion attempt. (Such unfortunate infants are usally left to die from exposure, or stabbed in the head with a scalpel by abortionists.) As a Christian, I find this to be utterly abominable. A poster at FreeRepublic stated it very aptly when they commented that Barack Obama has all of the moral compass of Osama Bin Laden. As an Illinois resident, I will vote for Keyes - failings and all - because a person who is so utterly amoral as Obama is completely unfit for public office of any sort.
Comments on this entry are closed.