IMO this is what needs to be repeated over and over and over.
As far as payments are concerned, the US government is funded by the taxpayers. Should African-American taxpayers have to pay themselves reparations? What about immigrants from Mexico or Central America?
TNC calls America “a collective enterprise that extends beyond our individual and personal reach”, and thus every taxpayer would be involved, in the same way that every taxpayer is involved with every American government expenditure.
Haven’t read TNC’s most recent comments, but have not been persuaded by his previous writings.
I’m all in favor of restructuring society to address past inequities, but I see no convincing argument as to cash payments of any specific amount from any specific parties to any specific individuals. OP - simply stating a position as self evident does not make it so.
I am HUGELY in favor of increased investment in minority communities, enhanced education/vocational/social programs, racial preferences for jobs, school enrollments, etc. But I find the arguments for reparations entirely unpersuasive. I’m very disappointed to have heard some candidates whom I respect suggest it is a legitimate topic of discussion.
What you describe as “increased investment in minority communities” could be a huge part of a reparations discussion. TNC himself says that reparations could come in many forms, and would not necessarily require “cash payments” to anyone. I think you should try reading his arguments again if you missed this.
Reparations for slavery is a bad idea- I am guessing not a single former slave is still alive. Agree it SHOULD have be done, but you’re at least 100 years too late now, for it to benefit those who deserved it.
You could make a more compelling case that reparations should be paid for the failures of the Civil Rights Act in 1964.
Fair enough. But if it were done this way, the cry would go up that when the Japanese internment survivors were given reparations, it went directly to the individual victims.
My hypothetical experiment would start with all the living Americans (of a single town/neighborhood) who were harmed by Redlining, segregation, and similar discriminatory and oppresive government policies and practices within living memory. If that were successful, then I’d start looking at the policies and practices that were gone before the lifespan of any living American.
TNC is very flippant about wanting to spend other people’s money. Myself, I’m less flippant about letting him take it.
-
The Senate will never pass a Reparations’ Bill even if the House does. If they somehow did, Trump would veto it.
-
If we’re going to pay out Reparations to African Americans, what about Native Americans whose land we stole and whose tribes we slaughtered? Shouldn’t they get a whole lot more? I don’t see how you can do the former without having to do the latter.
-
I think Reparations would actually worsen the racial divide in this country and wouldn’t be nearly worth the amount of money payed out to each individual African American citizen. The common taxpayer would end up footing the bill for criminals long dead. To make matters worse, the descendants of the people who became rich from their ancestors’ profiting from the human trafficking cannot be made “unrich” as a punishment. The damage was done. There are many aspects of it that would make it very unfair in the minds of many people. Creating anger and resentment isn’t a good way to improve race relations. It would fuel the already increased growth of hate groups and racism in general.
Wherever you have inequality now is where the money should be spent. That guarantees that those most materially harmed by any past practises, race-based or not, are the ones who end up being helped the most.
You don’t need to tie it into race at all but the bulk of the assistance would probably go to african-american communities purely on the basis of need. That seems a sensible and proportionate policy that should pretty much be the cornerstone of any society that seeks to be fair and to be perceived as fair.
It would also be a policy that is far easier to manage, and less divisive. A cash payout based on the colour of your skin seems ludicrous.
Thankfully, he doesn’t advocate it be done by fiat, but rather by the normal democratic legislative process – the same process that resulted in reparations for Japanese-American internees. Did you consider those reparations “flippant”?
In the present, this is true. This isn’t about passing any bills (aside from maybe a commission or a study) now, but starting the conversation for possible action in the future.
We definitely should also discuss reparations for the many policies and practices of the US government that harmed (and continue to harm) Native Americans. TNC has also said this many times.
This is a gross concept error regarding reparations – it’s about far more than harm by dead Americans to other dead Americans. It’s also about policies and practices that did great harm to living Americans well into the 20th century – I think those policies and practices are the most important and should be the focus of the discussion.
No thanks. I recall when I first heard of him some years back. In the Atlantic, I suspect. Thought his perspective interesting. As time went on, and his reputation grew, I thought his writings said less and less - while getting longer and longer. The more I read, the less I thought he had to say.
Not saying he will NEVER have ANYTHING worthwhile to say, just that I don’t care to wade through his turgid and repetitive prose too find an occasional pearl.
I think the very word “reparations” highly problematic. And I say this as one of the most liberal persons I know on most social issues. I happen to be a white middle-aged, middle-class male who has never objected to the taxes I pay, or to (most - I’m sure there may be infrequent exceptions) efforts to increase diversity/opportunity in schools/work/housing.
I apologize if I misunderstood the less-than-detailed OP. Would the OP - or someone else - please define “reparations” so we can meaningfully debate how self evident they are and who ought to pay them?
The US government has done much worse things than redlining. How about we start with the victims of the military and work our way back until the US govt goes belly up. I think we may get back to the Iraq war at that rate
I’d be happy to – reparations are measures taken by the state to redress gross and systematic violations of human rights.
I disagree. There’s an important distinction in calling something reparations - it’s saying it’s compensation for something that has happened. It’s not compensation for something that’s still happening.
Look at the reparations paid to Japanese-Americans. It was the final step. The first step was to release them from the detention camps. It was only after we had stopped doing something wrong that we could move on to figured out the cost for what we had done. It would have been wrong for us to send them payments while we continued to hold them in the camps.
But we haven’t reached that point with black Americans. They’re still being victimized. So our first priority needs to be stopping the racism that’s still going on. Only when we have stopped racism from occurring in the present and in the future can we go back and address the effects of racism in the past.
My goal is to make America stronger, better, and more just. It sounds like your goal would be in conflict with this, so no thanks.
This seems like a rationalization for avoiding reparations forever.
In any case, it doesn’t address my argument. I’m not advocating reparations for racism. I’m advocating them for the specific governmental policies and practices that harmed Americans, including living Americans. I want reparations for Redlining, for example. Redlining is over, just like the Japanese-American camps are done. But the final step for our society to address Redlining would be for a serious effort to determine the harm done and a good-faith effort to make redress for this harm.
We’ve had numerous threads about this already, but here goes:
**1. **There is no way to do such a reparations program without causing massive anger and resentment - an anger that could end up setting race relations back. It is likely to piss off a big chunk of the populace.
- There is no way to do this and properly identify who should get paid. A black American who can prove a direct history to slave ancestors? Okay, maybe. What about someone who is only 1/32 black, looks white, and has always been treated as a white person, but claims “I’m black too, I want my money?” What about black people who immigrated from Africa recently and have no familial connection to slavery whatsoever? What about black people who owned slaves?
**3. ** You can’t pay many millions of people something like $100,000 apiece and not have it lead to massive financial chaos. That adds up to a sum of trillions. Are we going to raise taxes sky-high? Borrow trillions more and add to the national debt?
**4. ** Where does this stop? Do Hispanics, Asians, Arabs, Muslims, Native Americans, women, atheists, gays, lesbians, deserve reparations? We’ve had centuries of misogyny, haven’t we? We’ve had centuries of anti-LGBT discrimination, haven’t we? Eventually we would be handing everyone reparations (except, maybe, white straight men.)