The Case For Reparation

In the Atlantic article by Ta-Nehisi Coates titled “The Case for Reparations, Coates argues that the reason why the United States was able to grow and acquire most of its wealth can be directly tied to the enormous losses people of the African-American community have suffered since the use of slave labor in America. Historically, African-Americans have always been discriminated against. Even today, African-Americans continue to be excluded from the system, while the nation, primarily non-blacks, continues to reap the benefits. Moreover, Coates affirms that the nation needs to acknowledge these truths and should provide reparations for the African-American people. Merriam-Webster defines reparations as “the act of making amends, offering expiation,

Ta-Nehisi Coates’ essay, The Case for Reparations, is a rhetorical essay focused on attempting to convince American’s that the descendants of African-Americans are owed something since their ancestors were a key part of the foundation of this nation. His main audience is clearly African Americans, but my question is how well he does convincing other demographics. Can he convince Asians, Caucasians, or Hispanics? What about single mothers in Kentucky? If Ta-nehisi Coates is unable to convince more than just his target audience then it can be argued that he did not do a great job of communicating his ideas to everyone.

In “The Case for Reparations” by Ta-Nehisi Coates, the author begins his article with this quote to ensure that his audience has a different perspective about the case for African American reparations. There is no denying that since the inception of the United States of America, African Americans have faced serious discrimination and injustice, which may in fact entitle them to reparations. Some African American communities of the present are still experiencing the negative effects of slavery, Reconstruction and post-Reconstruction racism. These negative effects are evident in Chicago’s North Lawndale, where the almost all-black community still suffers from the injustices committed by contract sellers when African Americans would try to purchase a home (Coates). In his article, Coates claims that African Americans deserve reparations because they inherit an “ecologically different” type of poverty compared to whites as members and are haunted by their history of impoverished ancestors (“The Case for Reparations”). The author’s premise is flawed because poverty is disadvantageous to all groups it affects, not just African Americans. Thus, one cannot justify reparations because African Americans have a different type of inherited poverty. There are

The article, “The Case for Reparations”, presents itself with a commendable representation on how the need for reparations is essential when combined with the brutal history of slavery and progression of blacks in American Society after slavery. Ta- Nehisi Coates argues that the relationship between racial identity and reparations is based upon America’s debt to blacks for the countless years of injustice. With this he demonstrates how white supremacy has ultimately used impractical measures to maintain what they consider social stability for those who were not African American.

The ‘on-contract’ method of home led to “all the responsibilities of homeownership with all the disadvantages of renting—while offering the benefits of neither.” The white oppressors would give properties markups upwards of 230%. On top of which there was no insurance or equity for missed payments, which would lead to their later eviction. Upon being evicted a new cash cow black family would appear for the whites to reap. The Case for Reparations illustrates this point with: “85 percent of all black home buyers who bought in Chicago bought on contract.” as well as that the whites were getting rich, by noting “If anybody who is well established in this business in Chicago doesn’t earn $100,000 a year,” Then came the Redlining, a practice of “selectively granting loans and insisting that any property it insured be covered by a restrictive covenant—a clause in the deed forbidding the sale of the property to anyone other than whites.” This process, which effectively stopped blacks from buying houses “was not officially outlawed until 1968, by the Fair Housing

The author uses the term “Reparations” repetitively in the text. According to the text the word “reparation” means to make amends. Coates (2014) also refers to reparations as compensation. America should take responsibility and pay the price for the mistreatment to African Americans (2014). Coates (2014) does not only mean monetary compensation but acceptance and acknowledgement. The author

In “The case for reparations,” Coates argues that African Americans have been taken advantage of for centuries. During this time the government took their labor, civil rights, and basic human rights too far. He argues that they were also robbed of equal treatment even after desegregation. Coates blames the government and says they are responsible for compensation of generations of Americans being discriminated against. Especially with discrimination still occurring in places such as the school system, judicial system and other market areas after desegregation. Coates talks about a lot in this essay. He talks about a planned black oppression, in which white Americans are the ones who directly benefit. He also addresses that this remains tragically still unresolved. He chooses the argument that nuclear family is a cure for black poverty. Coates was wise to focus on the evils of slavery and more on the ways in with African Americans have been walked over for the last 150 years. He truly chose a very powerful argument, that is going to turn heads no matter which way you choose to look at it. I see the slavery side of Coates argument, but I do not agree with him. I think the government did play a big role in how African Americans were treated, but is not to blame for the whole issue. The government can choose to control private institutions, federal laws and private banks, and yes allowed this issue to go on for far too long. But the government cannot control our everyday

For many years the United States has committed atrocious and discriminatory acts against African Americans. In a seemingly more “equal” society today many are wondering what debt is owed to the descendants of African Americans. According to Alfred Brophy of University of North Carolina, reparations are defined as, “programs that are justified on the basis of past harm and that are also designated to assess and correct that harm and improve the lives of victims in the future.” Throughout this paper I will be discussing whether reparations should be paid to African Americans. I will evaluate the question through legal, moral, and political lenses. I will evaluate the start of the movement of reparations while also taking into consideration how reparations have been given in the past. I will also explore new forms/types of reparations that can be given to African Americans. I will also determine the short and long term impacts the implementation of reparations would have on African American society and the society in its entirety.

Reparation is a term defined as “the making of amends for a wrong one has done, by paying money to or otherwise helping those who have been wronged.” How does this exactly apply when we’re talking about discrimination and segregation? Ta-Nehisi Coates presents “The Case for Reparations” to illustrate the need of a reparation to African- American citizens. Coates explains three major concepts in his paper. He emphasizes how African- American citizens have helped create wealth, displays how the government has actually restricted African- American citizens from owning homes in history, and presents a series of compelling stories from people still suffering discrimination and segregation today. In this paper, I will defend “The Case for Reparations” in agreement with Ta-Nahisi Coates.

In this paper, a clear reasoning will be made pertaining to how reparations have helped different groups of people who have been awarded atonement. Throughout the course of this paper, it will become apparent how monetary reparations will affect the quality of lives of African Americans through analyzing the prior instances of reparations to different groups of people along with other instances in which reparations were awarded to African Americans. These previous instances set a precedent for any monetary reparations that can be given to African Americans for slavery and segregation. Reparations are meant to rectify violations of human

From a Kantian perspective, providing reparation to blacks addresses the past wrongs of slavery and gives financial support to a long time disadvantaged group. To further explain, human beings are born free and anything that violates this freedom goes against moral laws and categorical imperatives; two important factors associated with the concept of freedom. Slavery violates freedom and was used as a means to an end; making it morally wrong. Reparation corrects this action by establishing financial equality for all members of society. With this stated, Kantian supports reparation.

In direct opposition to this position, financial reparations awarded on the basis of race hinder integration, and may foster feelings of antipathy towards the already-wronged persons. It is true that formal apologies provide a sense of closure, recognition of wrongdoing and finality in the sense that the past is the past. However, while some apologies do offer closure, the campaign seeking an apology may result in people living in the past, as opposed to living in the present with an eye to the future. The issue of financial compensation raises questions about trans-generational justice, and the problem of descendants of those responsible for wrongdoing paying reparations to the descendants of the wronged (Torpey 2006). In contrast to this position, financial compensation may enable those awarded compensation to pursue previously inaccessible opportunities or to regain or attain financial

The most interesting topic is perhaps, reconciliation and healing. In chapters 11, 12,13 and 14. Hayner discusses the relevance of commissions for the victims of the human rights violations. According to her, for victims telling their own story and obtaining acknowledgment of their cases can be a way of healing, but at the same time the victims run the risk of retraumatization. However, the comparative study mentioned in the previous paragraph, presents a more holistic argument; there is no reconciliation without justice, and there is no justice without reparations. Without reparations, the condition of victim persists and the strategic value of forming a commission is lost.

Restorative justice works much in the same way. It is acknowledging that all men are sinners and no one is good which leaves room for each individual to admit they are flawed and could possibly wrong another and in turn want forgiveness (Romans 3:10). This is demonstrated in the story of Zacchaeus as he is determined to correct those things with the neighbors he felt he had wronged and sets out to make things right (Luke 10:1-10). Restorative justice works in much the same way in that the offender admits to the “crime” committed while

Just like the big banking problems, blacks had problems with buying houses but created a way for them to buy the houses. Buying a house on contract was horrid, on contract houses the buyer would have to put a down payment as much as one thousand dollars and if he had not paid the monthly amount his house would be evicted