Literature Review:The Cases(For/Against)Reparations

“They gentrified your neighborhood no needs for cops, watch Look at the yoga pants, coffee shops and yogurt stands Consumerism, holy land And on the other hand my momma land” - Noname

In 2014, Author Ta-Nehisi Coates wrote a compelling article for The Atlantic that began by providing the historical background for what Coates calls the “plunder” faced by African Americans. Coates presents the historical trauma faced by Africans Americans and argues its relevance as it relates to a 20 year old Congressional bill (H.R.40) that by title is a bill to “Study and Develop Reparations Proposals for African Americans. The debate about Reparations has not only been centered in the house, but has also inspired a five scholars to weigh in on the concept. Ta-Nehisi Coates initiated the discussion outside of politics and writer such as Williamson, Frum, Bouie, and Vinik have added their own understandings and suggestions as it relates to Reparations. These five authors share similar and opposing views as it pertains to the distribution, qualifications, harms and benefits of reparations.

Why Are Reparations Needed?

We are introduced to the migration story of Clyde Ross, a man who, as a young child witnessed his family’s farm be confiscated at the whim of Mississippi authorities who claimed Ross’s father owed back taxes. The Ross Family become sharecroppers, resulting in a negative impact on their financial stability (Coates, 2014). Jamelle Bouie echoes arguments made by Coates and focuses on this idea of “Stolen income”. Bouie posits, the “Stolen Income” is centuries of economic profit that was obtained as a result of slavery and practices such as sharecropping. Specifically, he argues ten trillion dollars was accumulated during the centuries of “plunder”(a term originally articulated by Coates) endured by African Americans (Bouie, 2014). In Kevin Williamson’s Case against Reparations, he opposes both Coates and Bouie by suggestioning during the Reagon era, Black Americans achieved economic growth that superseded White American economic achievement in median income households (Williamson, 2014).

The points of view of these three writers are important as one begins the very basic thought behind Reparations. The Ross family’s story serves as the evidence in support of what Coates describes as the “plunder” faced by many African Americans. Jamelle Bouie takes Coates’ idea of “plunder” and attaches a dollar amount(10 trillion) in “stolen income” that is owed to African Americans in Reparations. Kevin Williamson’s suggested argument of Black achievement post slavery and Jim Crow era seems to provide a basis for why Reparations may not be needed present day.

How Should Reparations be Distributed?

The distribution of Reparations is an idea that is, for the most part, left out of The Case For Reparations by Ta-Nehisi Coates. Although, writers who decided to engage Coates in the discussion about Reparations have offered a variety of suggestions. Referring back to Jamelle Bouie’s idea of the 10 trillion dollars of “Stolen income” as a reason why reparations are needed, Bouie also suggests ways for Reparations to be distributed (Bouie, 2014). Bouie mentions the 3 “Wealth Option” through “cash payments” as the most commonly suggested form of Reparations. He continues, articulating the process of this form of Reparations as checks that are paid out by the government to individual people (Bouie, 2014). In the same breath, Bouie also mentions the “Policy Approach”, he says, “Instead of cash, the federal government would implement an agenda to tackle racial inequality at its roots” (Bouie 2014). Danny Vinik, agrees with Bouie and offers four specific suggestions for forms of Reparations. The four approaches are : “Lump sum payments, Allow Africans to receive grants for asset-building projects, provide vouchers for certain monetary value, or ‘In-kind’ Reparations such as free medical insurance or guaranteed college education” (Vinik, 2014).

It is important that the distribution process of reparations is thought out as it could have major impacts on the African American community, good or bad. Based on the arguments made from both Danny Vinik and Jamelle Bouie, the two main distribution forms of Reparations are individual cash payments or policy based forms of Reparations. An important idea to think about is long effects or either and how that may parallel to the benefit or harms of Reparations.

Who Qualifies For Reparations?

The Qualifications aspect of Reparations continues the important discussion about Reparations. We can look to Danny Vinik who describes eligibility in two different ways. Vinik first qualification for an individual to receive reparations is they would have to prove they’re “descendants of a persons formerly enslaved in the United States”(Vinik, 2014). He continues by stating his second eligibility requirement as, an indivual would have to “Identify as “African-American, Negro, or colored, in the last ten years prior to the adoption of the Reparations program”(Vinik, 2014). On the other hand, David Frum mentions the absurdity in the idea of qualifications as it relates to reparations. To support his claims, he mentions current systems in place that center around qualifications on a race basis for “hiring and admission process”(Frum, 2014). Frum asks four questions that will have to be answered as it relates to who qualify for reparations: “Does a mixed race person qualify? How mixed?...”(Frum, 2014). These questions suggests the very unclear line between who exactly would and would not qualify for reparations

The question of who qualify is important as it may become difficult to decide who receives Reparations and could cause some confusion or elongate the process of distribution. For instance, Vinik’s first approach, of “proving descendants” may be extremely difficult to track. Frum’s questions are valid as we begin to consider diversity and the mutilracial individuals, but is that a reason to not consider Reparations?

The discussion about Reparations is a long complex thought process as it reflects upon the history of Black Americans. As the need for Reparations is stems from Coates’ idea of “plunder” and Bouie’s idea of “stolen income” (Bouie, 2014). The distribution can be attributed to Bouie’s “cash payments or policy approach” and Vinik’s four suggestions distribution forms. We can refer to Vinik to ponder on who qualifies and take into account Frum’s concerns about mutilracial individuals. I am convinced Reparations are owed to those who have experienced the effects of what Coates calls the “American Plunder”(Coates, 2014). I do however have questions about who qualifies as I believe Frum’s arguments suggest interesting points. However, I’m not convinced that those concerns trump the need for Reparations, as I believe Coates when he says Reparations is the first step to acknowledging the past and moving forward with social justice and healing as a nation. As the 2020 election comes around, I believe more Democratic candidates with come up with policies and plan to pursue Reparations. On the other hand, I believe the Republican party might oppose or bring up concerns about the idea of Reparations.

#TheCaseForReparations #TheCaseAgainstReparations #TaNehisiCoates #DavidFrum #DannyVinik #JamelleBouie #KevinWilliamson