Funny you bring that correct fact up. Guess who is a member of the Brazillian Caucasus? A..O.C.,The average democrat has dumb as a rock.
Who owes reparations?
- Thread starter Diogenes
- Start date
In the official 119th Congress Congressional Member Organizations (CMOs) directory compiled by the Committee on House Administration, the Congressional Brazil Caucus registration specifically lists Dory Finney as the designated staff contact under Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's name. In House administrative tracking, assigning a staff designee to a registered CMO serves as a primary logistical indicator of active office participation.
On her official government web portal under the Committees and Caucuses | Representative Ocasio-Cortez page, she explicitly lists the Congressional Brazil Caucus among her active legislative group memberships.
Indubitably.
Then dig them up and make them pay.
You want reparations, no? There's the only place you'll get them.
Who buries someone with their valuables?
Well, guess what?
The Ministério Público Federal (MPF) — Brazil's Federal Public Ministry — launched a landmark civil inquiry spearheaded by federal prosecutors. The primary target is Banco do Brasil, the country's oldest financial institution. Historians and prosecutors formally petitioned the bank to finance structural reparations due to historical records proving the institution was funded by capital generated directly by illegal transatlantic slave traders in the 19th century.
In response to the MPF's legal filing, Banco do Brasil issued an official public apology to Afro-Brazilians, explicitly acknowledging its historical complicity and entering negotiations to fund public racial equality initiatives as a form of non-cash reparation.
In the Brazilian Legislature, lawmakers introduced PEC 27/2024 (Proposta de Emenda à Constituição), popularly known as the PEC da Reparação. This proposed constitutional amendment demands the creation of a permanent National Fund for Economic Reparation and Racial Equality to systematically compensate the descendants of enslaved populations.
Demands have simultaneously shifted to international human rights frameworks:
Because the UN resolutions are non-binding and the domestic legislative proposals are pending, there is a total absence of data proving how the Brazilian state would logistically enforce compliance or distribute assets if the legal or constitutional mandates succeed.
On the federal level, the U.S. model is characterized by the repeated introduction of H.R. 40 (Commission to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African Americans Act). This legislation explicitly does not mandate financial distribution; it merely funds data collection regarding the historical impacts of slavery and Jim Crow laws
The Ministério Público Federal (MPF) — Brazil's Federal Public Ministry — launched a landmark civil inquiry spearheaded by federal prosecutors. The primary target is Banco do Brasil, the country's oldest financial institution. Historians and prosecutors formally petitioned the bank to finance structural reparations due to historical records proving the institution was funded by capital generated directly by illegal transatlantic slave traders in the 19th century.
In response to the MPF's legal filing, Banco do Brasil issued an official public apology to Afro-Brazilians, explicitly acknowledging its historical complicity and entering negotiations to fund public racial equality initiatives as a form of non-cash reparation.
In the Brazilian Legislature, lawmakers introduced PEC 27/2024 (Proposta de Emenda à Constituição), popularly known as the PEC da Reparação. This proposed constitutional amendment demands the creation of a permanent National Fund for Economic Reparation and Racial Equality to systematically compensate the descendants of enslaved populations.
Demands have simultaneously shifted to international human rights frameworks:
- In April 2026, the United Nations voted on a non-binding resolution urging global reparatory justice for the transatlantic slave trade.
- Brazil’s Ministry of Racial Equality formally utilized the UN platform to provide international legitimacy for domestic reparative policies, emphasizing that the modern state must confront its legacy of structural anti-Black racism.
Because the UN resolutions are non-binding and the domestic legislative proposals are pending, there is a total absence of data proving how the Brazilian state would logistically enforce compliance or distribute assets if the legal or constitutional mandates succeed.
On the federal level, the U.S. model is characterized by the repeated introduction of H.R. 40 (Commission to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African Americans Act). This legislation explicitly does not mandate financial distribution; it merely funds data collection regarding the historical impacts of slavery and Jim Crow laws
TL;DR.
Summary please.
Summary please.
U.S. municipal procurement laws governing local reparations programs operate at a highly contentious intersection of local administrative authority, corporate set-aside rules, and federal constitutional constraints.
Because municipal governments cannot simply issue unrestricted race-based corporate contracts, they must design local programs using specific legal workarounds. The legal, structural, and procurement data below tracks how these local programs are engineered and challenged.
All municipal procurement programs touching race—including local reparations—are governed by the landmark Supreme Court ruling in City of Richmond v. J. A. Croson Co. (1989).
The Court held that municipal race-conscious public contracting programs violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause unless they pass strict scrutiny.
Because of the Croson barrier, municipalities bypass traditional direct cash procurement payouts by utilizing three primary legal workarounds:
1. Third-Party Intermediary Disbursal (Nonprofit Pipelines)
To insulate municipal procurement from direct constitutional challenges, cities transfer public funds to independent, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to manage construction, housing, or economic development procurement.
Because municipal governments cannot simply issue unrestricted race-based corporate contracts, they must design local programs using specific legal workarounds. The legal, structural, and procurement data below tracks how these local programs are engineered and challenged.
All municipal procurement programs touching race—including local reparations—are governed by the landmark Supreme Court ruling in City of Richmond v. J. A. Croson Co. (1989).
The Court held that municipal race-conscious public contracting programs violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause unless they pass strict scrutiny.
Because of the Croson barrier, municipalities bypass traditional direct cash procurement payouts by utilizing three primary legal workarounds:
1. Third-Party Intermediary Disbursal (Nonprofit Pipelines)
To insulate municipal procurement from direct constitutional challenges, cities transfer public funds to independent, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to manage construction, housing, or economic development procurement.
- The Data: In Evanston, Illinois—the first U.S. city to implement municipal reparations—the city did not give cash directly to recipients to hire contractors. Instead, the municipal Reparations Committee partnered with Community Partners for Affordable Housing (CPAH), a local housing nonprofit. CPAH vetted and procured third-party construction contractors to perform home repairs, directly paying the vendors or banks rather than putting cash into the hands of citizens, minimizing direct state-run procurement vulnerability.
- Municipalities allocate public project procurement or grant criteria to specific historically segregated geographic zones. For example, eligibility is tied to proof that an individual or business was present within city limits during periods of documented discriminatory zoning laws (e.g., Evanston's 1919–1969 historical residency baseline).
Another TL;DR.
Why not? They owe a lot. Dig up!
I'm not asking for reparations, dumb fuck!
I didn't say that.
No, you just said dig up Egyptian graves and rob them to pay for black's reparations.. Stupid. Very stupid.....but you were never thought of as intelligent...
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
Bottom line: Americans are about the AMERICAN slave trade and history.
As far as reparations go; IMHO only people who can actually trace their family history to the family/company that owned their slave ancestors THAT STILL FUNCTIONS TODAY UNDER THE SAME OR OTHER NAME, then those particular people should get reparations. Case in point:
View: https://youtu.be/3ovJpblBXTU
Why not? The slave owners got theirs after the Civil War for lost income from their "property". The Japanese Americans illegally put in detention camps during WWII got theirs after YEARS of petitioning. Italy, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria and Finland had post WWII reparations in their countries. Hell, Native Americans are STILL waiting for theirs after getting screwed on their treaties. Fair is fair .... or at least it should be.
As far as reparations go; IMHO only people who can actually trace their family history to the family/company that owned their slave ancestors THAT STILL FUNCTIONS TODAY UNDER THE SAME OR OTHER NAME, then those particular people should get reparations. Case in point:
Why not? The slave owners got theirs after the Civil War for lost income from their "property". The Japanese Americans illegally put in detention camps during WWII got theirs after YEARS of petitioning. Italy, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria and Finland had post WWII reparations in their countries. Hell, Native Americans are STILL waiting for theirs after getting screwed on their treaties. Fair is fair .... or at least it should be.
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
Stop acting dumber than you are ... if that's possible. How about implementing the tax rate on the wealthy we had 60 years ago? No shortage of millionaires then, wouldn't be now. Got that gumby?
U run one life....not mine and not Diogenes.