• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

I pledge . . . .

Griz882

Livin' On the Right Side of the River From Pags!
pilot
Contributor
Inheritance...

It's not going to happen, I know that. But dismissing it out of hand...those slaves had real value and they saw none of it.
If an inheritance is owed it is from the empire that stripped them from their villages...today we call that Mali, Ghana, and Guinea. As for the rest, yes, yes, and yes. The toils, labor, an suffering of slaves was real and the economic impact was indeed generational. A check won’t fix that just like the official apology made no one happy. What will fix it it is a concerted effort to improve schools and education in blighted areas (not teachers unions and school boards...but actual schools and education), find ways to bring grocery stores and like businesses to black beighborhoods and see that they become black owned and operated. Support HBCUs or other programs that help poor students get into and through school. Push toward a future of actual inclusivity (e.g. skin tone is meaningless) that respects other cultures willing to mainstream with a broader American culture.

If you need a grievance to make it through life that is a personal failing, not a race issue.
 

RandomGoat1248

Well-Known Member
Inheritance


Only people who were other's property, or descendants.

Again, the average slave was being sold for around $1000. Like a horse or a mule. Real property with real value. It'd not be a feel-good gesture, it'd be a payment for their worth. Inheritance.

You think someone who had a claim on land property established in 1850 through their family wouldn't be exercising their right to it now? Getting payment for it?

It's not going to happen, I know that. But dismissing it out of hand...those slaves had real value and they saw none of it. Their owners kept it all, except for what they lost when their property was freed.
I never jump into these threads, but going to make an exception to make this point.

I whole heartedly agree with your post Taxi, and just want to expand on it. If someone thinks the 1850s was too long ago, how about we attempt to make right polices such as redlining or unfair access to the GI Bill that restricted black family's ability to build wealth within our nation's living memory.

These were choices out nation made in the past that still have effects today. It is worth at least considering what can be done to level the playing field.
 

Griz882

Livin' On the Right Side of the River From Pags!
pilot
Contributor
I never jump into these threads, but going to make an exception to make this point.

I whole heartedly agree with your post Taxi, and just want to expand on it. If someone thinks the 1850s was too long ago, how about we attempt to make right polices such as redlining or unfair access to the GI Bill that restricted black family's ability to build wealth within our nation's living memory.

These were choices out nation made in the past that still have effects today. It is worth at least considering what can be done to level the playing field.
This is a good point. You don’t think there have been attempts to level the playing field?
 

RandomGoat1248

Well-Known Member
This is a good point. You don’t think there have been attempts to level the playing field?
I do not think the attempts have been large enough or anywhere close to successful. And I think disparities in home ownership, education, and continued segregation along traditionally redlined areas shows that.
 

Mos

Well-Known Member
None
I'm picturing a bunch of people saying, "But you could at least try."

Slaves generated huge value with their work, and were treated and traded like livestock, with a going price in the 1850s of around $1000 each. I'm pretty sure they never saw a penny of the selling price. What would $1000 in 1850 dollars be worth now?

Contemplate this...what would be the disaster in deciding to pay every slave's ancestor some sort of inheritance for the value generated by their toils? Along with a formal apology from the government? $10K?

We've never come close to anything like this.
$1k in 1850 is closer to $30k today. Giving $30k to 44 million people would cost over $1.2 trillion. I don't think the country would support this.
 

Griz882

Livin' On the Right Side of the River From Pags!
pilot
Contributor
I do not think the attempts have been large enough or anywhere close to successful. And I think disparities in home ownership, education, and continued segregation along traditionally redlined areas shows that.
I agree, so, just toss them $10 to $100 grand and say...”good luck?”

Racism, in areas that you mention, is not systemic, it is regulatory, and should be cast entirely out of the law. Money is easily and often foolishly spent...good policy has a lasting impact.
 

robav8r

Future performance not guaranteed . . .
None
Contributor
I am becoming more and more convinced, that the real problem with Naval Aviation, and Navy Leadership writ large, are the attitudes and opinions of people like you. You disparage those that you think aren't as smart as you, aren't as woke as you, aren't as hip as you on every level. You disrespect and try to humiliate those that have served honorably and faithfully, but simply have a differing opinion than you.

You have obviously enjoyed a very successful career in Naval Aviation, but somehow, you have completely missed some of the major tenets that have made our service and platforms so successful throughout the years. You will be a wildly successful professor at a liberal institution of your choosing, i'm sure. Good luck to you Brett . . .
This post was wrong, and I apologized to Brett via PM. Sometimes I, like many of you, fall prey to passions ignited by our own careers and experience and fail to take into account other opinions, ideas and life experience. I love the back and forth, and I’m humbled by the education, experience and insights of those that post here on AW. Learning has occurred, and clearly, I can do better. Cheers 😁
 

Sonog

Well-Known Member
pilot
Since no one else explicitly answered you I figure I would. Be careful what you ask for!

That is a patch from the reserve A-6 squadron VA-205, as the patch says they disestablished in 1994. At the time the debate about women in combat was pretty active after the Gulf War and the combat exclusion had just been lifted the year before for women in US military aviation units, they had previously been limited to non-combat units. Even though women had a nearly 20 year history in Naval Aviation by that point (except for a few female aerial navigators in WWII) they were usually limited to shore-based support squadrons like VAQ-33/34, VQ-1/2/3/4, VT, HT, VC and HC squadrons among a few others. They were also few in number, pretty rare birds so to speak.

The FAG part is 'Fighter Attack Guys', i.e. VFA guys, which flew the much disdained (by A-6 guys and a few F-14 types) F/A-18. There was a bit more rivalry back then between the Fighter and Attack guys in the Navy, most of it good natured but it did have a sharper edge to it occasionally. After all 'fighter pilots make movies, bomber (attack) pilots make history'. That edge got a little sharper post-Gulf War when the A-12 'Flying Dorito' was abruptly cancelled and the decision was subsequently made to do away with the VA/A-6 community pretty rapidly (within 5 years) in early-to-mid 90's. Some A-6 squadrons transitioned to F/A-18's but many didn't, to include VA-205. Lots of A-6 guys, who had grown up in a community that had been a large and integral part of Naval Aviation for 30+ years very quickly found themselves quickly and uncermoniously 'replaced' by the F/A-18 and modified F-14's, which were drawn down by almost 50% themselves. All of this happened right after the post-Gulf War victory high which had been followed immediately by the Tailhook '91 'crash' topped off by the Cold War going 'poof', all in the same year.

In the middle of all that Don't Ask Don't Tell was also implemented in '94.

Post-Cold War, post-Gulf War, post-Tailhook '91 was a time of great change and upheaval in Naval Aviation with previously integral parts of Naval Aviation going away very rapidly coupled with societal change WRT to women and gays along a very big drawdown in the US military all happening at the same time.

So some folks had some strong opinions on the events happening and a few cranked out some patches to reflect the attitudes at the time. The funny/ironic part is what they said in the patch has since come true, and we've done pretty damn good going to war with both. Figure that.
Thanks for the explanation!
 

sevenhelmet

Far from this opera for evermore...
pilot
Since no one else explicitly answered you I figure I would. Be careful what you ask for!

That is a patch from the reserve A-6 squadron VA-205, as the patch says they disestablished in 1994...

...So some folks had some strong opinions on the events happening and a few cranked out some patches to reflect the attitudes at the time. The funny/ironic part is what they said in the patch has since come true, and we've done pretty damn good going to war with both. Figure that.
Nice summary. Wasn't there a big airline hiring boom right around then too?
 

Flash

SEVAL/ECMO
None
Super Moderator
Contributor
Thanks for the explanation!
I came in right in the wake of all that and heard plenty about it from more senior JO's and DH's at the time, both my squadrons had quite a few A-6 refugees (5 of 6 O-4's and the XO in my VAQ squadron were A-6 types at one point) along with plenty of others in my VQ squadron. The Navy had a much more 'diverse' aviation community back then and it was interesting to see the old rivalries and attitudes, good and bad, first hand. I've also seen much of the change in the Navy and Naval Aviation since then along with hearing about a lot of it right before my time, both good and bad again, and while I miss a few things I believe most of it has been for the better. I am an optimist by nature though.

Nice summary. Wasn't there a big airline hiring boom right around then too?
I can't say for sure, you would have to ask the airline guys, but most guys leaving at that time (mid-to-late 90's) didn't seem have too much trouble getting a decent airline gig if they tried unless they had issues. Like the one guy from my first squadron who could only find a job flying Electras out of Scotland, for good reason. Right before 9/11 is when things seemed to really pick up quite a bit, almost every pilot getting out of VT-86 at the time seemed to have 3 or 4 solid offers before their terminal leave late '00 and early '01. And yes, discussions about airline jobs were all the rage in the wardroom back then too.
 
Last edited:

Sam I am

Average looking, not a farmer.
pilot
I joined in 99...Started flight school in 2000. Tailhook was still talked about a lot by the Old Salts and all the VT instructors were getting out and flying for the airlines. Even the Helo guys were getting jobs with only single engine T-34 time. I was my On-Wing's last On-Wing before he went to fly for an airline. He was a total piece of shit by that time. Completely checked out. Couldn't even be bothered to show up for my tie cutting. I heard he got furloughed after 9/11 and I LOL'ed at that. Shitty? Perhaps. Fuck that guy. He was a shitty person, shitty officer, shitty on-wing, and in hindsight a shitty pilot too. Having said all that I did learn a lot from him and I valued my experience with that shitbag: he was a great example of what not be.

EDIT: Cathartic Post.
 

DanMa1156

Land of the rising sun. Literally. There's no DST!
pilot
Contributor
Mmm, I think I probably didn't provide the context for the articles I was reading. The particular context were a slew of articles like these that specifically highlight the achievement of Capt. Bauernschmidt being the first female CVN CO. A fairly common response in the comments sections of these articles (just peruse any of them) is that the articles shouldn't be focusing on gender. I think this line of thinking minimizes the unique challenges somebody in a minority faces rising up to that station that I obviously don't need to detail here.

If I'm muddying up my point too much (Bulleit Rye gets a vote), I guess I'd exaggerate the point with this example: If somebody were physically disabled and managed to work their way into an elite athletic competition, it would be silly for people to respond to congratulants by retorting, "I don't know why everybody's making such a big deal out of this...if they've got the chops, they've got the chops, same as anybody else." Obviously that person has overcome a very observable obstacle to their goal, and to pretend that accomplishment isn't significant minimizes the importance of the achievement.

Of note, this argument doesn't hold much weight to an individual who doesn't believe somebody with a disability faces any more or fewer challenges than any other athlete. I'd say the same about an individual who doesn't believe that, for example, females or other minorities seeking to serve in the Armed Forces have faced (on average) any more challenges than white males. That's a difference in perspective that probably can't be reconciled.

To be clear, I don't think Capt. Bauernschmidt should continually have to wear that tag throughout the remainder of her career. I'd say the same about Vice President Kamala Harris, who we're all abundantly clear by now is the first black/Asian/female VP. The instance of those stations being assumed by those two people at this point in history was rightfully newsworthy and worthy of discussion at the time.
I get this. No one talks about Jim Abbott without mentioning his disability, yet he had a pretty successful career in the MLB.
 

DanMa1156

Land of the rising sun. Literally. There's no DST!
pilot
Contributor
I'm picturing a bunch of people saying, "But you could at least try."

Slaves generated huge value with their work, and were treated and traded like livestock, with a going price in the 1850s of around $1000 each. I'm pretty sure they never saw a penny of the selling price. What would $1000 in 1850 dollars be worth now?

Contemplate this...what would be the disaster in deciding to pay every slave's ancestor some sort of inheritance for the value generated by their toils? Along with a formal apology from the government? $10K?

We've never come close to anything like this.
There is a great NPR Planet Money where they analyzed slavery from the perspective not of the horror of it, but from the fact that it was, in essence, a "stolen service." They took the average day laborer rate from one of the years of slavery and adjusted it for inflation and numbers of years worked. Turns out, if you were to pay the average descendant of a slave the back wages, it's a pretty hefty sum. (It's been 2-3 years since I heard the episode, but I recall the number being $1.3 million in wages per slave). I'll see if I can find the episode.
 

DanMa1156

Land of the rising sun. Literally. There's no DST!
pilot
Contributor
There is a great NPR Planet Money where they analyzed slavery from the perspective not of the horror of it, but from the fact that it was, in essence, a "stolen service." They took the average day laborer rate from one of the years of slavery and adjusted it for inflation and numbers of years worked. Turns out, if you were to pay the average descendant of a slave the back wages, it's a pretty hefty sum. (It's been 2-3 years since I heard the episode, but I recall the number being $1.3 million in wages per slave). I'll see if I can find the episode.
Found it for all those interested. It's a 2 part episode with an interesting story to go along with it in the sense that the descendants have a pretty easy trace to their enslaved ancestors... and owners (Georgetown University).

Part One (the audio can be listened by clicking the Play Button immediately to the right of the beginning of the text in the article)

Part Two
 
Top