
Ta-Nehisi Coates Revisits the Case for Reparations - docker_up
https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-new-yorker-interview/ta-nehisi-coates-revisits-the-case-for-reparations
======
core-questions
The problem with this is that we lack two fundamental guarantees:

\- Will reparations, whether monetary or through some kind of program,
actually improve the state of the community in a sustainable fashion? When the
money runs out / the program ends / etc. will the improvement stay? Or, will
it be a continual welfare program that can never be safely removed without
massive negative impact once everyone is used to the benefits it provides?

\- Will reparations actually solve the societal divide, end the continual
accusations of White Privilege and systemic racism, etc. or will those
narratives continue unabated, having been rewarded by success in the form of
the reparation program itself?

~~~
eesmith
Presumably the commission would consider those factors, yes.

As to your first point, Coates gives Chicago as an example of a "less
significant reparations program." This includes a permanent change to how they
teach history, which he regarded as being crucial.

Another example is a change in criminal-justice policy.

Both of these (I have good reason to believe) would improve the community and
be sustainable, yes.

I don't see anything in the essay which can be considered a "continual welfare
program", so I don't know what you refer to. The proposed compensations are
all "for specific acts" of legalized discrimination.

Your second comment appears needlessly binary. Coates gives an example of
Jewish reparations in Israel after the WWII. Those reparations did not solve
anti-Semitism. Then again, the narratives did not "continue unabated."

Since neither of your two outcomes happened, if I interpret your argument to
mean that those are the only two acceptable outcomes, then are you suggesting
that those Jews should not have received reparations? If not, then I don't
know how to interpret your question in the context of reparations for slavery
and legalized discrimination.

