"Skywise" wrote in message
...
No. I am trying to focus on one specific point but you keep
going off on everything else.

Here I'm honestly puzzled. What "specific point" are you "focusing on"? That
*punitive* reparations are not warranted? Who has ever disagreed with you
about that?

My point is that when you hear advocacy of compensatory reparations
(compensation for the lost inheritance of the value of the stolen labor),
you respond as though you had just heard an advocacy of punitive
reparations, even though that's not in fact what's being argued for. If you
want to rebut the argument for compensatory reparations, that's fine; but
please engage the argument that's actually presented, not a straw one that
you substitute for it.

When I point out your misconstrual of the standard pro-reparations argument,
you reply that I'm thereby somehow shifting from your "focus" to "everything
else". In reality, you did not mention the idea of *punitive* reparations
until midway through the discussion, at which point you declared that it's
what you'd been talking about all along.

--Gary