Friday, April 5, 2019

Reparations Are More Likely to Divide the Nation Than Heal It

In his interminably long, but moving Atlantic essay documenting our nation's undeniable history of discrimination against African-Americans, author Ta-Nehisi Coates got to the heart of his pro-reparations argument on page 51: "What I'm talking about is more than recompense for past injustices-more than handout, a payoff, hush money, or a reluctant bribe." Instead, he called for a "National reckoning" about this stain on America's history.

The only possible rationale for paying reparations is to help African-Americans close the financial gap they have with other Americans.

Advocates for this proposal are far less persuasive at explaining how reparations would permanently level the playing field than they are at detailing some of the ugliest parts of our nation's history.

How often do drastic public policies lead to amelioration rather than another round of vicious cultural battles? How naïve can a columnist be to champion such a controversial idea without exploring how it might play out?

Most reparations proposals range from creating new social programs to giving out bonds to newborn African-Americans to providing direct cash handouts to each adult African-American.

How likely will this solve anything rather than become a starting point for escalating demands? We know how things work in America.

This is not how to help a nation reckon with its past.

http://reason.com/archives/2019/04/05/reparations-likely-to-divide-not-heal

No comments:

Post a Comment