LogFAQs > #923788132

I don't think US reparations for slavery makes much sense at all. Slavery was by no means confined to the US, and they were not the only ones to benefit. Do we also track down the descendants of African tribes that conquered and sold off other tribes and get them to chip in too?

I do feel reparations for Jim Crow laws, red lining, and basically everything that happened after the Reconstruction does make sense. It was a uniquely American problem that the "land of the free" still had second class citizens. Yet still the question lingers of who pays. The 20th century brought with it unprecedented immigration to the US from people in places that had nothing to do with the Atlantic Slave Trade. While it could be argued they benefited from a strong American economy bolstered by slavery, it's inescapable that they weren't involved.

Despite that I do still think the matter of reparations has some merit. I don't think straight cash reparations are a good idea for the simple fact that giving people money is often not an effective way of changing their circumstances in the long term: lottery winners are well known for going broke. A better solution in my opinion would be options for reparative subsidies for home ownership and small businesses, as well as expanding existing affirmative action programs in colleges and larger businesses. Though in the latter case we have data suggesting those programs have not necessarily worked as intended, so they may need to be overhauled anyway.
---

This album is not available to the public.
Even if it were, you wouldn't wanna listen to it!