Public Affairs Quarterly 21 (3):255-274 (2007)
|Abstract||The renewed interest in the issue of black reparations, both in the public sphere and among scholars, is a welcome development because the racial injustices of the past continue to shape American society by disadvantaging African Americans in a variety of ways. Attention to the past and how it has shaped present-day inequality seems essential both to understanding our predicament and to justifying policies that would address and undermine racial inequality. Given this, any argument for policies designed to pursue racial justice must be, at least in part, backward-looking, justifi ed partly as compensation for the effects of the wrongs of the past. However, some arguments about black reparations, both pro and con, are focused too far in the past. An unspoken assumption of much of the debate about black reparations is that these would be reparations for slavery. This, we argue, is a mistake. Racial inequality in the United States today may, ultimately, be based on slavery, but it is also based on the failure of the country to take effective steps since slavery to undermine the structural racial inequality that slavery put in place. From the latter part of the nineteenth century through the fi rst half of the twentieth century, the Jim Crow system continued to keep Blacks “in their place,” and even during and after the civil rights era no policies were adopted to dismantle the racial hierarchy that already existed. An important part of the story of racial inequality today is the history of housing and lending discrimination in the second half of the twentieth century (McCarthy 2002; 2004). Home equity, for many Americans, is a very important source of wealth, and the decades after World War II were ones of rapid home equity growth. They were the decades that saw the creation of a large, mostly suburban, middle class. But the middle class that was created was also mostly White, and this was due largely to government policies that (in many cases intentionally) excluded Blacks from the opportunities to get into the home market and benefi t from home equity growth. In this paper we argue that recent housing and lending discrimination constitutes an important basis for black reparations..|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Derrick Darby (2010). Reparations and Racial Inequality. Philosophy Compass 5 (1):55-66.
Thomas McCarthy (2004). Coming to Terms with Our Past, Part II: On the Morality and Politics of Reparations for Slavery. Political Theory 32 (6):750-772.
Ariela J. Gross, When is the Time of Slavery? The History and Politics of Slavery in Contemporary Legal Argument.
Thom Brooks (2008). A Two-Tiered Reparations Theory: A Reply to Wenar. Journal of Social Philosophy 39 (4):666-669.
David Boonin (2011). Should Race Matter?: Unusual Answers to the Usual Questions. Cambridge University Press.
Lawrie Balfour (2005). Reparations After Identity Politics. Political Theory 33 (6):786 - 811.
Howard Mcgary (2010). Reconciliation and Reparations. Metaphilosophy 41 (4):546-562.
Kimberly Smith (2004). Black Agrarianism and the Foundations of Black Environmental Thought. Environmental Ethics 26 (3):267-286.
Stephen Kershnar (2001). The Case Against Reparations. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 8 (1):41-46.
Jennifer Harvey (2011). White Protestants and Black Christians: The Absence and Presence of Whiteness in the Face of the Black Manifesto. Journal of Religious Ethics 39 (1):125-150.
Sharon Anderson-Gold (2000). Ambivalence and Identity in Black Culture. Social Philosophy Today 16:11-24.
Howard McGary (2003). Achieving Democratic Equality: Forgiveness, Reconciliation, and Reparations. [REVIEW] Journal of Ethics 7 (1):93-113.
Tommy J. Curry (2007). Please Don't Make Me Touch 'Em. Radical Philosophy Today 2007:133-158.
Added to index2010-12-22
Total downloads7 ( #142,190 of 722,698 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,006 of 722,698 )
How can I increase my downloads?