Inter-generational culpability and compensation

Have philosophical discussions about politics, law, and government.
Featured Article: Definition of Freedom - What Freedom Means to Me
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Posts: 789
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Inter-generational culpability and compensation

Post by Pattern-chaser » June 19th, 2020, 10:41 am

Sculptor1 wrote:
June 18th, 2020, 4:10 pm
Steve3007 wrote:
June 18th, 2020, 3:35 am
"The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son."
- Ezekiel.18:20.

In most circumstances it seems reasonable to adhere to the principle that descendants are not responsible for the actions of their antecedents. To what extent ought we to stick to this principle of inter-generational individuality in the cases of both culpability for wrong-doing and compensation for past harm? If my recent ancestors were wronged by your recent ancestors, am I due recompense for this?

Wealth and poverty have a tendency to flow down generations. Does the answer to that last question depend on the extent to which this happens?
If the son is living of the illegal drug money of the father, then I beg to differ.

If whole generations of British aristocrats continue to benefit from the money their ancestors made from kidnapping and selling black slaves, permanently uprooting them from their lives, homes and family , then I beg to differ.
I can't argue with your sentiment (so I won't). But how far back should we go? Arthurian (I.e. Celtic) Britain was invaded by Angles and Saxons, and they stole our lands and wealth. The Romans did the same before them, and the Vikings and the Normans followed. All empires perpetrate crimes of all sprts, but mainly theft and oppression. So how far back do we go? Or is there another criterion than how many years ago something happened? Does the nature of what happened have an influence...?
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 3356
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Inter-generational culpability and compensation

Post by Terrapin Station » June 19th, 2020, 11:01 am

Papus79 wrote:
June 18th, 2020, 12:22 pm
If one or both of your parents were bank robbers, thieves, or were responsible for thousands of opioid deaths across a country and your sitting on top of those ill-gotten assets then those assets are something that the nation you live in should be able to file a lawsuit against.
I see that as problematic because it sets a precedent that as long as there are folks who have moral issues with how your family's "fortune" was gained, they can sue to take your "fortune" (and do what with it?) That's a problem because there are always going to be folks who have moral issues with any arbitrary actions.

User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 1935
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Inter-generational culpability and compensation

Post by Sculptor1 » June 19th, 2020, 3:42 pm

Steve3007 wrote:
June 19th, 2020, 5:23 am
Sculptor1 wrote:As a whole??
In general.

As a British citizen who is not an aristocrat I am more wealthy (have more access to various goods) than the citizens of lots of other countries. This is partly due to the legacy of slavery and of empire (which itself is a form of slavery).
And do not think that because you are American it is any different for you. Your aristocrats were just not honest enough to carry a title.
By saying "you" here are you referring specifically to me?
Are you American? I tend to assume most here are.

User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 1935
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Inter-generational culpability and compensation

Post by Sculptor1 » June 19th, 2020, 3:48 pm

Pattern-chaser wrote:
June 19th, 2020, 10:41 am
Sculptor1 wrote:
June 18th, 2020, 4:10 pm

If the son is living of the illegal drug money of the father, then I beg to differ.

If whole generations of British aristocrats continue to benefit from the money their ancestors made from kidnapping and selling black slaves, permanently uprooting them from their lives, homes and family , then I beg to differ.
I can't argue with your sentiment (so I won't). But how far back should we go? Arthurian (I.e. Celtic) Britain was invaded by Angles and Saxons, and they stole our lands and wealth. The Romans did the same before them, and the Vikings and the Normans followed. All empires perpetrate crimes of all sprts, but mainly theft and oppression. So how far back do we go? Or is there another criterion than how many years ago something happened? Does the nature of what happened have an influence...?
It does not matter how far back you go. This is systemic exploitation, in waves, one after the other. I was never anyone's land in particular.
I don't think the colour of your skin can define what recompense you get nor what compensation you are forced to pay. Such a process simply re-enforces racial stereotyping.
Systemic exploitation of people had led to inequality the world over, and any changes should pay regard to evening up the score regardless of colour.

User avatar
Papus79
Posts: 771
Joined: February 19th, 2017, 6:59 pm

Re: Inter-generational culpability and compensation

Post by Papus79 » June 19th, 2020, 4:51 pm

Terrapin Station wrote:
June 19th, 2020, 11:01 am
I see that as problematic because it sets a precedent that as long as there are folks who have moral issues with how your family's "fortune" was gained, they can sue to take your "fortune" (and do what with it?) That's a problem because there are always going to be folks who have moral issues with any arbitrary actions.
Yeah, so on the opposite end of that is using the legal system against the 'Kulaks'. Anything that could be a slippery slope needs tight definitions.
People aren't fundamentally good or fundamentally bad, we're fundamentally trying to survive. It's the environment and culture which tells us what that's going to be.

User avatar
Steve3007
Posts: 7615
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Dolly Parton
Location: UK

Re: Inter-generational culpability and compensation

Post by Steve3007 » June 20th, 2020, 3:39 am

Sculptor1 wrote:Are you American? I tend to assume most here are.
I always find this phenomenon a bit strange. To me, talking to someone for more than a couple of posts and seeing their uses of spelling conventions, idioms and cultural references usually quickly gives clues as to the culture from which they come. I find it difficult to just ignore or not notice those things. Terrapin Station, to pick one example, frequently says "folks" instead of "people". That (as well as him explicitly saying so) makes it obvious that he's from the US. It's certainly obvious that you're from the UK (or are doing a good impression of someone who is) without you having to explicitly say so.

viewtopic.php?p=343729#p343729

User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Posts: 789
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Inter-generational culpability and compensation

Post by Pattern-chaser » June 20th, 2020, 1:24 pm

Sculptor1 wrote:
June 19th, 2020, 3:48 pm
Pattern-chaser wrote:
June 19th, 2020, 10:41 am


I can't argue with your sentiment (so I won't). But how far back should we go? Arthurian (I.e. Celtic) Britain was invaded by Angles and Saxons, and they stole our lands and wealth. The Romans did the same before them, and the Vikings and the Normans followed. All empires perpetrate crimes of all sprts, but mainly theft and oppression. So how far back do we go? Or is there another criterion than how many years ago something happened? Does the nature of what happened have an influence...?
It does not matter how far back you go. This is systemic exploitation, in waves, one after the other. I was never anyone's land in particular.
I don't think the colour of your skin can define what recompense you get nor what compensation you are forced to pay. Such a process simply re-enforces racial stereotyping.
Systemic exploitation of people had led to inequality the world over, and any changes should pay regard to evening up the score regardless of colour.
Yes, we can't undo history, and there is little point in trying. But we can look at where we are now, and see what we can do to even up the present circumstances of those parts of the community that have suffered from any and all forms of prejudice or discrimination. Not as payback for history, but as a recognition of that history as it continues to apply in the present day.
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 1935
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Inter-generational culpability and compensation

Post by Sculptor1 » June 21st, 2020, 6:37 am

Steve3007 wrote:
June 20th, 2020, 3:39 am
Sculptor1 wrote:Are you American? I tend to assume most here are.
I always find this phenomenon a bit strange. To me, talking to someone for more than a couple of posts and seeing their uses of spelling conventions, idioms and cultural references usually quickly gives clues as to the culture from which they come. I find it difficult to just ignore or not notice those things. Terrapin Station, to pick one example, frequently says "folks" instead of "people". That (as well as him explicitly saying so) makes it obvious that he's from the US. It's certainly obvious that you're from the UK (or are doing a good impression of someone who is) without you having to explicitly say so.

viewtopic.php?p=343729#p343729
I'm dyslexic so do not always notice different Speeelengs

User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 1935
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Inter-generational culpability and compensation

Post by Sculptor1 » June 21st, 2020, 6:40 am

Pattern-chaser wrote:
June 20th, 2020, 1:24 pm
Sculptor1 wrote:
June 19th, 2020, 3:48 pm

It does not matter how far back you go. This is systemic exploitation, in waves, one after the other. I was never anyone's land in particular.
I don't think the colour of your skin can define what recompense you get nor what compensation you are forced to pay. Such a process simply re-enforces racial stereotyping.
Systemic exploitation of people had led to inequality the world over, and any changes should pay regard to evening up the score regardless of colour.
Yes, we can't undo history, and there is little point in trying. But we can look at where we are now, and see what we can do to even up the present circumstances of those parts of the community that have suffered from any and all forms of prejudice or discrimination. Not as payback for history, but as a recognition of that history as it continues to apply in the present day.
Helping out predominately "ethnic" communities should never include a colour bar to benefits. If there are white people in need to help through poverty then they ought to have the same chance of getting help. Some people find that idea difficult to swallow. I submit that they are already racist, and first need to unpack their inherent prejudice. The world shall never achieve equal opportunity regardless of "race" (whatever the F that is), unless you are effectively colour blind.

User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Posts: 789
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Inter-generational culpability and compensation

Post by Pattern-chaser » June 21st, 2020, 12:48 pm

Sculptor1 wrote:
June 21st, 2020, 6:40 am
If there are white people in need to help through poverty then they ought to have the same chance of getting help.
Yes, but doesn't this assume that poverty-stricken people are roughly equal in their poverty? What if a white family are in poverty, and finding great difficulty in earning, while a similar black family are in poverty, and finding greater difficulty in earning because of racial prejudice against hiring black people? In such a case, some affirmative action might seem appropriate, don't you think, as the two families are not actually in the same situation, although their level of poverty is the same? 🤔🤔🤔
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 1935
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: Inter-generational culpability and compensation

Post by Sculptor1 » June 21st, 2020, 3:31 pm

Pattern-chaser wrote:
June 21st, 2020, 12:48 pm
Sculptor1 wrote:
June 21st, 2020, 6:40 am
If there are white people in need to help through poverty then they ought to have the same chance of getting help.
Yes, but doesn't this assume that poverty-stricken people are roughly equal in their poverty? What if a white family are in poverty, and finding great difficulty in earning, while a similar black family are in poverty, and finding greater difficulty in earning because of racial prejudice against hiring black people? In such a case, some affirmative action might seem appropriate, don't you think, as the two families are not actually in the same situation, although their level of poverty is the same? 🤔🤔🤔
Depends what part of the country you live in. White kids can also suffer discrimination where many businesses are run by non-whites.
The key has to be education against arbitrary racial stereotyping. This has to start young. But there also has to be moves away from multiculturalism, which fosters and encourages the normalisation of differences due to race, creed and colour so that with every generation people stay defined by their ancestors' attitudes in culture and religion.
Integration should be promoted over multiculturalism. Multiculturalism tends to validate and encourage differences. And when people cling to those group differences then it is perfectly valid to judge a member of a group by those differences.
If black kids listen to gangsta rap then you can't blame white employers from not wanted to employ them.
When people chose to identify themselves with a group, be that white kids being chavs or supremacists, of others following the radical teaching of Islam, then they will be judged.

I say we need to eject the luxury of group think and move on as individuals. The colour of a person's skin or the original location of their ancestors genes should be of minor interest only.
Until then people will discriminate.

GE Morton
Posts: 1664
Joined: February 1st, 2017, 1:06 am

Re: Inter-generational culpability and compensation

Post by GE Morton » June 23rd, 2020, 10:26 am

Marvin_Edwards wrote:
June 18th, 2020, 6:43 am

In cases of the crimes of a nation, state, or institution, the same entity continues to exist from generation to generation. Crimes such as slavery, racial discrimination, and prejudice need to be addressed by those entities.
Nations, states, institutions are not moral agents and do not commit crimes. Any crime committed in the name of a state or nation is committed by particular individuals. No person, whether a public official or a private citizen, is responsible for crimes committed by other individuals.

Slavery is a crime because it involves force and violations of natural rights. Prejudice and discrimination involve neither and thus are not crimes in any morally relevant sense --- though of course they can be declared crimes by any despot with the power to impose punishments for them.

Alfie is not responsible for the sins of his ancestors (much less someone else's ancestors), and Bruno cannot excuse his own bad behavior today by citing wrongs done to some ancestor of his.

User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Posts: 789
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Inter-generational culpability and compensation

Post by Pattern-chaser » June 23rd, 2020, 10:37 am

GE Morton wrote:
June 23rd, 2020, 10:26 am
Nations, states, institutions are not moral agents and do not commit crimes.
For practical purposes, in our real human world, they are, and they do.

In theoretical, hypothetical, philosophical ways we can dispute definitions and so forth. But the practical, functional, observation remains. All social groupings of humans are capable of acting together as a single entity, and they often do. Nations, states and institutions are semi-permanently organised co-operating networks of employees who act as a single entity, for moral (and legal?) purposes. They regularly commit crimes.
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"

User avatar
Marvin_Edwards
Posts: 485
Joined: April 14th, 2020, 9:34 pm
Favorite Philosopher: William James
Contact:

Re: Inter-generational culpability and compensation

Post by Marvin_Edwards » June 23rd, 2020, 10:53 am

GE Morton wrote:
June 23rd, 2020, 10:26 am
Nations, states, institutions are not moral agents and do not commit crimes. Any crime committed in the name of a state or nation is committed by particular individuals. No person, whether a public official or a private citizen, is responsible for crimes committed by other individuals.
If the individual is acting outside of the authority granted him then he alone is responsible for his crimes. But if he is acting within the authority that the people of the nation have granted him, then the nation as a whole is morally responsible for his crimes.

Authority of public officials is granted by the constitution, which is an agreement among the people as to how and when their individual authority is to be passed to their elected representatives.
GE Morton wrote:
June 23rd, 2020, 10:26 am
Slavery is a crime because it involves force and violations of natural rights.
Slavery is literally a crime because we agreed to make it illegal. All legal rights and wrongs are matters of agreement.

Slavery is morally wrong because it inflicts an unnecessary harm upon those who are enslaved.
GE Morton wrote:
June 23rd, 2020, 10:26 am
Prejudice and discrimination involve neither and thus are not crimes in any morally relevant sense --- though of course they can be declared crimes by any despot with the power to impose punishments for them.
Prejudice is a morally wrong, because it embraces false beliefs. It is an unnecessary harm to one's self.

Discrimination based solely upon prejudice is morally wrong, because it is based in a lie. Discrimination in public necessities, like housing, employment, public accommodation, etc. is legally a crime, because it violates the right of citizens to be treated fairly.
GE Morton wrote:
June 23rd, 2020, 10:26 am
Alfie is not responsible for the sins of his ancestors (much less someone else's ancestors), and Bruno cannot excuse his own bad behavior today by citing wrongs done to some ancestor of his.
Your father stole my car. I want it back.

GE Morton
Posts: 1664
Joined: February 1st, 2017, 1:06 am

Re: Inter-generational culpability and compensation

Post by GE Morton » June 23rd, 2020, 11:12 am

Pattern-chaser wrote:
June 23rd, 2020, 10:37 am
GE Morton wrote:
June 23rd, 2020, 10:26 am
Nations, states, institutions are not moral agents and do not commit crimes.
For practical purposes, in our real human world, they are, and they do.
I assume that by "for practical purposes," you mean that nations, etc., are believed to be moral agents and treated as though they are. Which is of course true. But that belief is false, and that treatment immoral, as it imposes punishments upon individuals who have committed no crimes.
In theoretical, hypothetical, philosophical ways we can dispute definitions and so forth. But the practical, functional, observation remains. All social groupings of humans are capable of acting together as a single entity, and they often do.
That is never the case. It never happens that all inhabitants of a nation or state "act together" to do anything. All "official" acts of governments, or of any other individual or organization claiming to speak and act for some group, are always the acts of particular individuals, and are perhaps favored or supported by other particular individuals. But in every case there will be many who had no part in those actions, who were ignorant of them, or if aware would disavow them.

That belief --- that nations or other organized groups are moral agents in their own right, distinct from the individuals who comprise it, rests on a false understanding of the structure of modern civilized societies. The latter are not tribes, "teams," giant co-ops or communes, or "big happy families." They are not collectives of any kind. They are only collecTIONS of unrelated, independent, autonomous individuals who happen, by accident of birth, to occupy a common territory. The have no natural bonds, no shared personal histories, no common interests, and no a priori obligations to one another. Absent some sort of agreement or contract to which they may have freely and expressly entered into, all of them are responsible for their own welfare and the consequences of their own actions only, not for anyone else's.

Post Reply