May 30, 2021

"The flagship commemoration event to mark the 100th anniversary of the Tulsa Race Massacre was scrapped after three survivors demanded $1 million each to appear."

"Monday's Remember & Rise event - which was also set to feature John Legend and Stacey Abrams - was called off on Friday after survivors Viola Fletcher, 107, her brother Hughes Van Ellis, 100 and Lessie Benningfield Randle, 106, upped their appearance fee from $100,000 each to $1 million each."

The Daily Mail reports. 

State Sen. Kevin Matthews, the chairman of the [1921 Tulsa Race Massacre Centennial Commission], said after meeting with Solomon-Simmons and other representatives of the survivors, the commission agreed to provide $100,000 to each of the three survivors, along with $2 million in seed money for a reparations fund.

'We raised the money and we were excited the survivors were going to accept these gifts,' Matthews said Friday. 'Unfortunately, on Sunday they reached out and increased the amount of the $100,000-per-survivor gifts to $1 million, and instead of $2 million, they asked for $50 million - $50 million - in seed money. We could not respond to those demands. To be clear, I absolutely want the survivors, the descendants and others that were affected to be financially and emotionally supported. However, this is not the way.'

This is a lesson on reparations: It will never be enough. Do the three centenarians look greedy? I will presume they feel principled. I would not criticize them. They were tapped for use in political theater, a fact made obvious by the use of the term "appearance fee." The much larger demand should be read as a desire to speak in terms of reparations, but as reparations, the exorbitant "appearance fee" looks radically undersized. In retrospect, it would seem that the commission should never have spoken in terms of money at all.

2 comments:

Ann Althouse said...

Owen writes:

You hit the nail on the head: “Never Enough” is the watchword for the grievance-hustling industry, and this (blessedly failing) event is a wonderful example of how the game plays out.

In a better world, the organizers would sue those who broke the deal. A lot of work presumably went into setting up this show and now it goes down the drain. Hit those responsible with a 7-figure claim, and get some discovery on those who stand behind these three centenarians pulling their strings and planning to profit mightily for their being wheeled onstage.


Good example of why you don't bring a lawsuit for every possible contracts claim. In any case, we don't know that they had a contract.

Ann Althouse said...

Louis writes:

"Do the three centenarians look greedy? I will presume they feel principled. I would not criticize them. They were tapped for use in political theater, a fact made obvious by the use of the term "appearance fee." "

I agree with that observation. I suspect that the demand for more money was made by activists who, deep down, feel that no amount of money will ever be enough. So why not ask for a gigantic sum of money? It's a win/win for them. The money is not going to them. The money is a theatrical prop. If the demand is met, it provides a blueprint for more extortion. If the demand isn't met...."They're racist!"

We Latinos are fascinated by all this racial tension. We're in a strange situation. A lot of people feel that Latinos are actually "white." I can tell you that is not the case. We have a wide range of skin tones, but my dad was so dark that everyone in his neighborhood (In East Los Angeles) called him "Blackie." When I went to my Aunt's funeral a few years ago, a very old man came up to me and asked, "Are you Blackie's son?" My dad is darker than a lot of the African Americans I know. My dad knew racism and he had his share of run ins with racist cops. That's a big reason why he opted for public service. He wanted to be a firefighter, but in the 1950s, Latinos weren't allowed to be firefighters in Southern California. So, he became a mailman. (I actually made a pilgrimage to his old post office a few years ago. It had a vaguely familiar feel to it, since I would have been there many times as a toddler.) Then, my father became a deputy U.S. Marshall in the late 1960s. When Jimmy Carter became President in 1977, Alan Cranston, a Senator from California, submitted my dad's name to be the U.S. Marshal for the Central District of California. My dad was selected, and confirmed by Congress, but had to retire four years later when Reagan became President. Ironically, my parents switched from being Democrats to being hard core conservatives in retirement.