What's past is prologue

Those who "cuss and discuss" the War Between the States are often accused of living in the past. "Get over it," people say. "Dixie lost; move on."

But in the next breath, many of these people then want to force today's generation to pay reparations to the descendants of former slaves. So which is it...bury the past and move on, or deal with ALL the thorny issues from that time period (to include unconstitutional usurpations of power by the Federal Government)?

The concept of reparations is ludicrous. On a practical level, identifying eligible recipients and distributing the loot (let's call it what it would be) would be a phenomenally bureaucratic task, ripe for unprecedented corruption and abuse. But more importantly, on a moral level it is simply wrong. Restitution, to be genuine, must take place between the one who gave offense and the one who received it. Our system of law cannot stand if the great-grandchild can be held liable for the sins of his or her ancestor. And what of those whose family arrived in America after the Late Unpleasantness? Are their tax dollars immune from confiscation?

EVERY ethnic group in history has suffered abuse at the hands of some other. If these grudges are perpetuated down through history in an attempt to seek financial gain, reconciliation will NEVER be possible. Even the attempt will only serve to restoke the fires of resentment. The fact some Americans used others 150 years ago does not lessen the fact the decendents of both groups now live in a nation with much wider access to great prosperity. The poorest in America may complain how far they are behind Bill Gates. Few stop to think how far ahead they are of those who live in the various countries their ancestors once called home. A little perspective, please.

If these groups really need something to be fired up about, maybe they could attack the issue of slavery in THIS generation. Of course, that isn't likely to be as lucrative, and it might just take genuine instead of faux moral courage.