Slavery Can’t Be Repaid — Why Reparations Won’t Work

By Aaron Kliegman Amid the racial unrest currently plaguing America, the idea of paying reparations to black Americans to atone for slavery is, once again, gaining popularity. This idea is not new. In 1973, for example, Yale law professor Boris Bittker wrote a book titled, The Case for Black Reparations. If the library had a “reparations” section, Bittker’s book would have plenty of company, including some bestsellers. In the court room, numerous lawsuits have been filed seeking compensation for descendants of slaves. Prominent attorneys, such as Harvard law professor Charles Ogletree, have worked on some of these cases. Long-time Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), who died last year, introduced a bill to push reparations in every congressional session since 1989. He enjoyed support among fellow lawmakers — but never enough for the measure to pass. Of course, reparations never came to fruition. In the past, civil rights leaders and organizations rejected the policy. (Dr. John Morsell, assistant director of the NAACP during the civil rights era, described the idea of reparations as “an illogical, diversionary, and paltry way out for guilt-ridden whites.”) They recognized that the notion of people who never owned slaves giving money to people who never were slaves to make amends for slavery is absurd, even laughable. Or, as civil rights leader Bayard Rustin, who organized the March on Washington in 1963, said, “If my great-grandfather picked cotton for 50 years, then he may deserve some money, but he’s dead and gone and nobody owes me anything.” But now we live in the Age of Wokeness. Today, much of the black elite, including the leadership of civil rights groups, advocate reparations. Naturally, the Black Lives Matter movement includes reparations in its platform. Writers and even actors have also voiced their support for the idea. And Democratic politicians are championing the cause, leading to headlines such as: “How Reparations for Slavery Became a 2020 Campaign Issue.” Last year, Sen. Elizabeth Warren said “it’s time to start the national, full-blown conversation” about reparations. In the spring, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) and Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), then a presidential candidate, introduced a bill to form a commission for the study of reparations proposals. The bill gained several cosponsors. Indeed, some of the most prominent, influential Democrats are flirting with the idea of reparations, if not embracing it. And now, the newly unveiled draft of the Democratic Party’s 2020 platform similarly calls for a national commission to study reparations. This embrace of reparations can also be seen at the local level. In cities such as Providence, Rhode Island and Asheville, North Carolina, local governments are passing measures to move toward implementation. None of this means the idea is popular among the American people. In fact, polling shows that the opposite is true. But that won’t stop progressives from pushing the issue as they think they’re making progress — especially amid the chaos following George Floyd’s heinous death. The arguments against reparations are simple and powerful. The most poignant one was made by Shelby Steele, an author and fellow at the Hoover Institution, who said that slavery can be endured and overcome but not repaid. Stated differently, white people can’t buy their innocence for America’s original sin of slavery, yet proponents of reparations — black and white — seem to think they can. The notion is reminiscent of the Catholic Church’s abuse of indulgences during the late Middle Ages — people could essentially buy their way out of purgatory, or so they were told. More practically, since 1964, American taxpayers have spent some $22 trillion to alleviate poverty in America, especially within the black community. Every program and initiative as part of this effort has failed. The situation among blacks has not improved in any measurable way. Why would more money, or another kind of welfare program, this time in the form of reparations, be any different? It defies logic and all experience to think such a program would be successful this time. And when reparations don’t improve the lives of blacks collectively in any demonstrable way, what then? Would proponents say they simply didn’t receive enough money? Maybe they’d say systemic racism is still holding blacks back. Regardless, we’d be right back to where we started before reparations were doled out. Beyond concrete wellbeing, there’s a moral argument that must also be addressed. In his famous 2014 article titled “The Case for Reparations,” Ta-Nehisi Coates writes that America needs “a healing of the American psyche and the banishment of white guilt … Reparations would mean a revolution of the American consciousness.” Coates’s implication — that reparations will somehow end racial tensions in America — is ridiculous. Again, the same tangible, real-world issues will remain, and it’s impossible to make slavery — its legacy, its memory — go away with money. The idea should actually be insulting. The truth is that proponents of reparations don’t want to move beyond racial issues and slavery. As Steele says often, liberalism and progressivism basically sell innocence from America’s troubled past — that’s the pitch, at least. If bigotry were to disappear from American society, then the left would lose its most powerful appeal — and its most powerful weapon, to accuse others of racism. So, leading Democrats and heads of civil rights groups will describe blacks as victims who need to be rescued and defended by white guilt. Blacks who support this idea are putting their fate into someone else’s hands. That’s not what Frederick Douglass and Martin Luther King Jr. preached. They valued self-reliance and personal responsibility — and they lived when blacks were not free, unlike today. The only logical way to move past racism in America as much as possible — it will never go away fully, of course — is to embrace a colorblind society, one that puts merit and, to paraphrase King, the content of one’s character above all else. If we want to stop race-based discrimination, then let's stop race-based discrimination, whether it’s to hurt or help blacks. Maybe then we can all rise together as a free people. But don’t hold your breath. The Democratic platform says that Democrats “recognize that race-neutral policies are not sufficient to rectify race-based disparities.” This attitude is precisely the problem, and it will ensure that nothing changes. As President Trump asked during the 2016 campaign, what do black voters have to lose trying something else? Order Newt's Latest Book: https://www.gingrich360.com/trump-and-the-american-future

INNER CIRCLE MEMBER CONTENT