The Black Reparations Project: A Handbook for Racial Justice ed. by William A. Darity, Jr., A. Kirsten Mullen, and Lucas Hubbard (review)

Charles Mills’s Liberal Redemption Song

With billions of dollars pledged and trillions of dollars demanded to redress slavery and Jim Crow (“Black Reparations”) the question of how best to use these funds has moved into the forefront of the ongoing campaign for racial justice in our post-civil rights society. Reparatory strategies typically target the norms and structures that sustain racial disadvantage wrought by slavery and Jim Crow. The goal of such transitional reparations is to extinguish the menace of white supremacy and systemic racism across the board. Restructuring in housing, education, employment, voting, law enforcement, health care, and the environment—social transformation—is absolutely needed in the United States if the race problem is ever to be resolved. That much is clear beyond peradventure. The hard question, however, is whether Black Reparations can take us there. Are Black Reparations (or reparations in general) powerful enough to engineer social transformation, or what in this case would be “transitional racial justice”? Unfortunately, I do not believe they can. The American race problem is simply too big for reparations to fix. It would take decades of massive amounts of government spending and the sustained moral commitment of the American people to achieve transitional racial justice in this country. The inflationary impact of the requisite spending (estimated at $6.4 trillion to $59.2 trillion) would give opponents of reparations an easy target. Moreover, transitional reparations have rarely been attempted in other countries and when tried it has never succeeded to my knowledge. South Africa attempted to use reparations for social transformation. While there has been a transformation of political power, giving Black South Africans a strong voice in the government, economic power remains in the hands of White South Africans and racial discrimination in housing and education continues. Although at one time I was among scholars who had hoped Black Reparations could deliver a much-needed Third Reconstruction, I would be remiss as a passionate supporter of Black Reparations for many decades to ignore the cold facts—reparations have never successfully reconstructed a society.
 But the perfect should not be the enemy of the good. While Black Reparations may not be sufficient for transitional racial justice, they can still play an important role in moving toward that goal. This Article attempts to show one way of doing so. It argues that the initial payment of Black Reparations should take the shape of an education reparation. Education can, as it has in the past with Brown v. Board of Education, provide a foundation for significant racial progress. The type of education reparation broached in this Article gives African American (or Black American) parents or guardians a unique choice for educating their children—Black Boarding Academies (BBAs). Kick started with public reparations, BBAs would begin with PK-3 low-income Black children, giving special attention to those at risk of falling into the dreadful foster care system, and would expand to accommodate other classes of Black students once financially stable with post-reparations funding. Like most public boarding schools, BBAs will have to be sustained with both public and private funds. Fortunately, there is a wide range of available sources. Historically, boarding schools have a poor reputation in educating children of color, especially Indigenous Americans. The few primary and secondary schools that board Black students have not experienced such problems. Neither have Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) at the postsecondary education level. Following in this rich tradition, BBAs will provide a safe and nurturing environment for Black students. Pedagogically, BBAs will prepare students not just to survive but to thrive. Students will be prepared to assume positions of leadership in our society whether they go directly into the job market or matriculate at HBCUs or predominantly white institutions. One of the most effective instructional models in the country for leadership-oriented teaching can be found in elite New England Prep Schools. They have been doing this for centuries. Using a modified version of their pedagogy—one self-consciously infused with a racial sensibility—BBAs will be able to extend the pipeline to leadership, normally available to upper-income and even middle-income African American students, to low-income African American students. Indeed, the latter are the most vulnerable descendants of the enslaved.

Waves of protest against racial injustice have once again placed discussions about reparations for slavery and the slave trade under a bright spotlight. At least two implicit assumptions have frame...

Throughout his writings, Frantz Fanon remains committed to what Francoise Verges has described as the seductive dimension of [his] vision1: the notion that revolutionary activity aimed at moving beyond situations and systems of oppression enables those engaged within the struggle to break free from the fetters of the past and set afoot a new man.2 One of the first and arguably most moving appearances of this aspect of Fanon's thought occurs in the final chapter of Black Skin, White Masks, in which he critiques the ten dency of some black intellectuals alienated by the colonial condition to lose sight of the present and future by attempting to reconstruct the cultural past destroyed by the occupying powers. Surprisingly, when read in light of contemporary debates over racial injustice in the United States, Fanon also renounces the right ... to claim repa ration for the domestication of [his] ancestors, since doing so would involve remaining the slave of the Slavery that dehumanized [his] ancestors.3 The dilemma appears to take the following form: demanding reparations for the historical injustices stemming from the practice of slavery requires the descendants of slaves, as a collec tive, to affirm an identity that unites them with their enslaved ances tors. The adoption of this identity, however, has the potential to constrain the possibility of engaging in projects of self-creation that depart from the identity. Faced with the choice between reparations and radical self-creation, Fanon opts for the latter. But do these options constitute mutually exclusive courses of action? Must the pursuit of slavery reparations necessarily entail sacri ficing the possibility of recapturing the self' from the dead weight of the past (BS 231)? Francoise Verges concludes that the either/or dimension of this decision is inevitable, but suggests contra Fanon

The issue of black reparations has received a great deal of attention in recent years. On the face of it, this development would seem odd. After all, we are more than one generation removed from the close of the civil rights era which ended de jure segregation and outlawed most forms of racial discrimination. Yet it is precisely the failure of policies adopted during the civil rights era to bring about racial equality that lies behind the attention that the issue of black reparations is currently receiving. The idea of black reparations provides a framework for advancing the stalled progress toward racial justice.

Purpose: To better understand how district leaders at urban school districts innovate and design policies, this study investigated how actors in one district, Oakland Unified School District, discussed ways to improve their education system at school board meetings during 2020 and 2021. Approach: The research used a case study approach to develop a process of inquiry, drawing on theoretical literature on innovation in social fields, empirical work on urban education reforms, and methodological considerations from critical social analysis techniques. It used a variety of qualitative methods to identify critical policy issues and policy innovations, and examined the way actors in two coalitions, each with a different approach to change, used discourse to convey their ideologies about racial equity and justice. Findings: District actors collaboratively designed and passed five innovative policies: school safety, remote learning, climate change, Black reparations, and mental health. While one group, the incumbent discourse coalition, focused attention on fiscal stability and closing underperforming schools, another, the challenger discourse coalition, conveyed strategies on improving schools and surrounding communities through new education policies. Though unexpected crises expedited innovation, the perspectives of the dominant culture were most privileged in the final designs of resolutions. Implications: By using broad theories and generalizable concepts this study shows how discourse in policymaking can be examined in other settings and illustrates ways similar school districts may innovate in their systems.

Arguments for slavery reparations have fallen out of favour even as reparations for other forms of racial injustice are taken more seriously. This retreat is unsurprising, as arguments for slavery reparations often rely on two normatively irregular claims: that reparations are owed to the dead (as opposed to, say, their living heirs) and that the present generation inherits an as yet unrequited guilt from past generations. Outside of some strands of Black thought and activism on slavery reparations, these claims are widely rejected. I develop an argument for slavery reparations around those foundational claims by adopting the normative framework of Immanuel Kant. On what I call the Basic Argument for slavery reparations, the application of Kant’s retributivist theory of punishment to slavery justifies reparations as a kind of proportional punishment for slavery. I also show that Kant’s philosophy offers reparations theorists resources to overcome several contemporary objections to slavery reparations.

There has recently been a surge of interest, theoretical and political, in reparations for slavery. This essay takes up several moral-political issues from that intensifying debate: how to conceptualize and justify collective compensation and collective responsibility, and how to establish a plausible connection between past racial injustices and present racial inequalities. It concludes with some brief remarks on one aspect of the very complicated politics of reparations: the possible effects of hearings and trials on the public memory and political culture of a historically racist society. The hope is that these arguments, taken together, draft a coherent case for slavery reparations as pursued by the Reparations Coordinating Committee.

This paper focuses on demands for reparations for colonial slavery and their public reception in France. It argues that this bottom-up, context-sensitive approach to theorising reparations enables us to formulate a critical republican theory of international racial justice. It contrasts the critical republican perspective on reparations with a nation-state centred approach in which reparations activists are accused of threatening the French republic’s sense of homogeneity and unity, thus undermining the national narrative on the French identity. It also rejects the liberal egalitarian perspective, which itself rejects reparations in favour of focusing on present disadvantages. In so doing, this paper illustrates how the notion of non-domination offers a superior way of conceptualising global racial injustices compared to more traditional distributive outlooks.

Tort law, which governs civil wrongs, coalesced during the late nineteenth century as courts became increasingly willing to compensate injured people. Its history, however, has been told without reference to issues of race or compensation for slavery and its aftermath. In the novelThe Marrow of Tradition(1901), Charles Chesnutt stretches tort discourse by using its principle of corrective justice to theorize liability for racial injustice and so discovers what law suppresses—the problem of collateral consequences when responsibility is made a function of race. Not only does corrective justice reach an operational limit when the enormity of the wrong exceeds the ability to pay, but using race to assess liability aligns corrective justice with the logic behind the southern practice of lynching. Recovering Chesnutt's use of tort challenges the dominance of contract law as the framework for readingMarrowand revises our historical understanding of the significance of reparations.

Beyond Reparations: An American Indian Theory of Justice

In Trafficking in Antiblackness Lyndsey P. Beutin analyzes how campaigns to end human trafficking—often described as “modern-day slavery”—invoke the memory of transatlantic slavery to support positions ultimately grounded in antiblackness. Drawing on contemporary antitrafficking visual culture and media discourse, she shows how a constellation of media, philanthropic, NGO, and government actors invested in ending human trafficking repurpose the history of transatlantic slavery and abolition in ways that undermine contemporary struggles for racial justice and slavery reparations. The recurring narratives, images, and figures such as “slavery in Africa,” “Arab slave traders,” and “Black incapacity for self-governance” discursively turn Black people across the diaspora into the enslavers of the past and present in place of white Americans and Europeans. Doing so, Beutin contends, creates a rhetorical defense against being held liable for slavery’s dispossessions and violence. Despite these implications, Beutin demonstrates that antitrafficking discourse remains popular and politically useful for former slaving nations and their racial beneficiaries because it refashions historic justifications for white supremacy into today’s abolition of slavery.

There are many commonalities between the goals of transitional justice and domestic redress movements. We look at the movement for reparations for enslavement and Jim Crow in the United States as an example of a domestic reparations movement, and argue for the usefulness of the concept of transitional justice. We are particularly interested in showing that a future democratic transition – the end of mass incarceration – could animate a renewed push for reparations and a formal investigation into America’s legacy of racial injustice.

In this article, I provide an overview of the arguments for reparations for Black Americans, a topic that has gained significant steam in recent years, and offer a criticism of how reparations are commonly understood as financial compensation. I begin by providing the basic argument in support for reparations: Systemic racial injustices committed against Black Americans violated their rights; these violations should be considered an ongoing, enduring injustice; and such violations require restitution in the form of reparations. I argue that there are unforeseen problematic results of economic-repair-centered reparations programs, most concerning that the resources offered ignore the social or economic status of large portions of the Black communities they acknowledge harming. Offering two legislative attempts at reparations as examples, I argue that reparatory policies for Black Americans should utilize the framework of rectificatory justice in order to best attempt to set an unjust situation right.

ABSTRACTThere are many commonalities between the goals of transitional justice and domestic redress movements. We look at the movement for reparations for enslavement and Jim Crow in the United States as an example of a domestic reparations movement, and argue for the usefulness of the concept of transitional justice. We are particularly interested in showing that a future democratic transition – the end of mass incarceration – could animate a renewed push for reparations and a formal investigation into America’s legacy of racial injustice.