I feel, based on what I learned over the years through genealogy that the question of Reparations for the bad deeds of ancestors is at best complicated and unworkable. To be fair I believe that DNA tests as well as genealogies of all would be necessary and math would have to be applied. That's because you cannot know by looking at a person if they are Black or have Black ancestry, and even when this seems quite apparent, you cannot know other details such as how long the family line has lived in, say, the United States, or had citizensip.
I currently have a friend who was born in Britain, whose mother took the family to New York but who still has a grandmother in England, who comes from this Island - sugar plantation - heritage of slavery. However, she now has American citizenship as do her children. So I ask you, how would we figure out just how much money, if any, she is owed? Would she, because she is visibly Black, also get California money? The fact is it would probably cost as much to do this type of program fairly as the payout, and to me that is unworkable.
In this article, by Sue Reid for Daily Mail, discusses the slave owning heritage and mixed race ancestors of the family of actor Benedict Cumberbatch, not only is there a reveal about race but also that historically there have been payouts that benefited the family.
DAILY MAIL : REPARATIONS DEBATE by Sue Reid
I first encountered the historical reality that went against assumptions - and even classroom learning - when in a genealogy search for a client I found that his ancestors were both those who were marched during the Trail of Tears as well as those who forced the marching. His early ancestors had mixed race families with Native Americans and on census some children in some families were listed as B - Black - but they were actually part Cherokee. Also, a few of his cousins a few times removed married Cherokee and moved from the settlers to the tribe so very likely today those relatives are members of the tribe. There were also Native American slave holders in the area. Though most people who owned slaves had one or two and those slaves lived in with the family (yes, believe it or not) this particular Native American had a couple dozen slaves farming for him.
There are no absolutes when it comes to history and as a genealogist I'm concerned that the documents lead to history, not a reworking of it.
Like the author of this article, I too believe that at least in some of the mixed race unions, in which marriage was not legally possible, there was love or at least the possibility of love. That said, the role of women in general was so not equal to that of the men, and genealogy has reinforced my feminism. (As an example as President, Thomas Jefferson had to obey the law, and the law forbid him to marry Sally Hemings.)
This article, especially considering that it was published by Daily Mail, which is a a tabloid rather than a hard news venue, does an excellent job of showing why there is controversy.
***
All that said, being against Reparations does not mean that I'm against giving a hand up to those who need it. This is best done in a quiet and personal way. One should not assume, however, that a person needs help simply because they are a certain race, or that they do not need it because they are a certain race.
C 2023 Ancestry Worship - Genealogy BlogSpot
