Glad TNC is being referenced here; he’s done yeoman’s work popularizing this issue while pointing out its complexities. Andy is also doing yeoman’s work in this thread bringing that to our attention. (I did not know TNC had commented on McConnell’s remarks!)
Prediction: most people in this thread will continue to shoot down simplistic versions of what reparations might mean. Something like what you see in the Dave Chappelle sketches.
So yeah. I predict we’re in for a whole lot of “that’ll never work because X,” little “how can we make up for Y, and fix Z?”
Because the idea of reparations is about fixing what’s wrong with our country right now as well as making up for past and present injustices.
How do you define success and failure? I would expect massive influx of resources to a targeted population to have positive impacts, but that would apply to any group so chosen. That can’t be sufficient to declare success.
If it fails to produce desired results, then what?
I’m sure there would be “anger and resentment”, but this already exists – in fact, the main reason for reparations is to try and make a reasonable attempt to address the widely extant “anger and resentment” that has lead to millions of Americans not feeling like they have a stake in the grand project of America. If reparations were successful, the vast majority of black Americans would truly feel like they lived in a just and fair society. I think that’s well worth the possibility of some “anger and resentment” from some number of comfortable older white Americans (who likely already had some negative feelings towards black people that this would just be an excuse to voice).
Again, it’s not just about slavery. With a serious and detailed research program, we could identify with a high degree of probability which living Americans were harmed by various discriminatory policies and practices (redlining, segregation, and more) that continued well into 20th century.
It wouldn’t be some flippant “checks to black people” program. It would be a serious and long-term project that would involve years of historical research, interviews, and much more.
Agreed. Luckily, none of the serious proposals for reparations involve such payments. The goal is to make America better, stronger, and more just, and any payments that did harm to the long-term finances of the country would be rejected.
I think the policies and practices that harmed Native Americans well into the 20th century should certainly be researched, and redress should be considered. That’s the one group that can claim a similar level of harm done by government policy as black Americans. And not-so-coincidentally, Native Americans are also at the bottom of most statistical indicators of success/failure in things like crime, education, wealth, and much more. And just as we successfully made reparations to Japanese American internees, we should look at other historical injustices of government policy that harmed living Americans and consider redress, IMO.
The just, fair way to do it would have been immediately: At the close of the Civil War, every former slaveholder should have been forced to pay back wages to all of their slaves, with their estates confiscated and sold if necessary to make it happen.
The fact that we didn’t do that when we should have doesn’t mean that we’re now off the hook. It means that now, black people are owed that much plus a century and a half of interest. And, yes, the payments should only go to those who were personally disadvantaged by slavery… which is all blacks living in America. The evils of slavery didn’t end with slavery itself. Black people are still poor, are still discriminated against, and still have a harder life than white people, and it’s ultimately because of slavery.
As for who should pay it, at this late remove, the only possible answer is US taxpayers. And as a taxpayer, I’m OK with that, even though none of my ancestors ever actually owned slaves. Solving the problem is more important than assigning blame.
Off the top of my head, success would be in statistical indicators like crime, education, wealth, etc. – have these numbers for these folks (and their children) trended towards the median for white folks in that region, and is this continuing to improve with time?
Then I’d do a very detailed look at everything that we did, see what we did wrong, and start over. It’s possible that TNC and I are completely wrong and there’s no hope, but I won’t believe that until we actually make a serious and good-faith effort to try and address these past discriminatory policies and practices, especially the ones that have harmed living Americans.
Again, there are blacks in America who have no tie to slavery whatsoever - for instance, Africans who recently immigrated from Africa to the United States.
And what percentage of blackness is required to qualify?
The very basic question I’d start with is this (or something very close to this): What should America do about the living Americans who were financially harmed (very significantly!) by Redlining?
Any reparations-skeptics want to chime in? Do you believe the answer is “nothing”?
Who indeed. This thread seems to revolve around the US culpability, but I wonder if folks realize that Europe was mainly responsible. Even after they had washed their own hands (well, at home anyway) of slavery, they were the main beneficiaries of US (and other) plantation slavery, as most of goods went to their markets for processing and refinement. Especially cotton. Hell, the British industrial revolution was driven to a large extent by US cotton. The North, of course, also benefited hugely because of Southern cotton, even while they (sort of kind of) opposed slavery. Then you have the fact that many other cultures were part of the slave trade, including African tribes and Arab slavers. So…who pays? Why is the discussion only about the US paying for this when the material benefits to slavery were reaped by MANY countries, especially in Europe? Well, because no one else is seriously troubled about this fact and everyone wants to blame the young US for it of course.
No, I don’t think the US should pay reparations to African Americans. If a number of countries want to put money in a pot to try and pay reparations for slavery then I would say the US should too, proportional to the benefit we gained from it. This isn’t an insubstantial benefit, mind…it pretty much made the US a (small) economic power at the time and paved the way for our own industrialization as well as capitalization of the nation. But the US alone wasn’t responsible for slavery, and we were far from the top beneficiaries of it.
Now, I DO think a case can be made for Native American reparations and that the US is mainly responsible for our actions on those populations both in the past and today (though several European nations should also be doing something, especially Spain, the UK and France, though not limited to those nations). I also think that Native American populations today are still materially suffering from this in extreme ways that black Americans aren’t. I’m not trying to lessen the amount of racism and bigotry on black Americans by any means, but to me it’s not comparable to how badly the Native American’s have and are suffering…and this IS mainly on the the US. The direct benefits have also accrued to the vast majority of Americans as we kind of got a continent sized nation state and all it’s goodies in the bargain.
Ah, yes, the “But you made me do it!” defense. It’s tiresome enough when it comes from five-year-olds.
And who still get treated like second-class citizens by many Americans, because they look like the people whose ancestors were enslaved. Yup, they’re affected.
Are you talking pre Fair Housing Act, or post Fair Housing Act?
My understanding is that redlining was mostly engaged in by private actors, and as such those activities post FHA should be pursued by those with standing through civil damages against those parties that engaged in those illegal practices, by HUD, DOJ, or the appropriate legal authority in their capacity as a regulator or law enforcement agency.
I’m not clear why you think the taxpayer should pay for the actions of Associated Bank in Chicago.
It was Federal Government maps that made much of redlining possible, so I’d start with those living Americans who were financially harmed by redlining policies that used those maps as a basis for discrimination. What do you think should be done for them?
You’ll have to draw a stronger line of culpability. Simply drawing maps as was part of HOLC role in connection with their charge of stabilizing mortgage lending as part of the New Deal, is hardly sufficient to obligate the American taxpayer. HOLC drew maps. Banks and others used the maps for bad, but legal, and sometimes illegal purposes. But somehow culpability vests with the federal government, and not the banks that denied loans both legally and illegally? That’s fairly weak.
As to what should be done for them? Those individuals who have standing should pursue their claims through civil action. HUD, DOJ, or the appropriate legal authority in their capacity as a regulator or law enforcement agency should pursue redress against those parties that engaged in illegal behavior.
Certainly there must be old-money families who are still benefiting from wealth obtained by slave labor many years ago, right? There must be former plantation land that is still owned by the descendants of slave owners who now indirectly benefit from slavery to this day. That’s a good place to start. Maybe a reparations tax.
Those maps were drawn in a way that deliberately singled out black neighborhoods as not qualifying (or not being recommended as qualifying) for loan assistance. I’m sure the banks and others have some culpability, but reparations (the TNC version) are about the culpability of the US government. If you agree that the US government bears some culpability, then that’s a good starting point. Do you think nothing should be done?
Sue the people who discriminated against them, if they have a case. Do you think GM should pay reparations because they manufactured the getaway car in a bank robbery?
So the fed gov drew maps. Banks discriminated. And the answer to the question of who should pay is the entity who drew the map, not the entity who actually discriminated?
19 Saudi terrorists who trained in Afghanistan attacked the US. Let’s invade Iraq!
So, to be clear here (for me I suppose), you aren’t talking about slavery anymore, but culpability with respect to practices against specific people or communities in more recent times, such as those who weren’t able to get loans or purchase homes in specific areas and/or had to have homes in less beneficial areas? Now THAT I could see if you could make a strong enough correlation to define this as a Federal government issue that they were responsible for and that the current US tax payers should be on the hook for. Of course, as it would be sort of a class action lawsuit type situation with the US government paying the damages you’d have to be able to define who all was affected or impacted, which might be difficult. But I don’t see any real issue with this approach, if this is what you are saying.
I haven’t seen any figures. How much are the proponents of reparations requesting? How much should each person get? I think that should be the start of any discussion. What amount is enough? Can anyone actually put a price on such a thing that is both fiscally responsible and also not insulting to the payees? What amount is reasonable?