Andrew Jason Cohen, a philosophy professor at Georgia State University, recently wrote “Some Reflections on Reparations,” Discourse, September 22, 2023. Various commenters on Facebook have had some objections and I share some of them. But no one other than me stated my main objection.
I, along with co-author Charley Hooper, recently wrote about it in “The Surprising Beneficiaries of American Slavery,” American Institute of Economic Research, July 14, 2023, and I blogged about it here.
Here’s our basic argument:
Here’s the problem. The reparations being proposed will take money from people, the vast majority of whom gained nothing from slavery, and give it to people who benefited immensely from slavery.
Who suffered from slavery? The slaves themselves. They were brought from Africa against their will, and they were forced to work without receiving the full value of their labor.
Who gained nothing from slavery? Except for the rare person who inherited an estate that slavery enriched, every contemporary non-black American gained nothing from slavery.
Who gained from slavery? Americans of African descent.
The late economist Walter E. Williams said that slavery was the worst thing ever to happen to his ancestors, but the best thing ever to happen to him. Why? Because instead of growing up in Guinea-Bissau, Angola, Senegal, Mali, or the Democratic Republic of Congo, he enjoyed the opportunities, wealth, health, security, and freedom of the United States.
Cohen is aware that he must deal with this argument and he tries. He writes:
This is not to insist that the lives of descendants of slaves would be better if their ancestors had been left in Africa. But if they had come to the U.S. voluntarily and lived their lives freely, their descendants would be better off than they are. In this fairly simple sense, many African Americans are living less prosperous lives than they would have absent actions of the U.S. government.
It seems that in Cohen’s view, if they had not come to America as slaves, they would have come as free people. If that’s true, then his argument holds. It doesn’t necessarily justify reparations but it does justify the idea that they’re worse off.
But would they have come as free people? I don’t think so. Certainly some Africans would have come as free people but the vast majority would not have. So the vast majority of descendants of U.S. slaves are better off now than if there hadn’t been slavery.
Interestingly, when I raised this idea on Facebook, Cohen said that he agrees with me that it’s unlikely that many Africans would have moved here voluntarily. Then he wrote that he’s not sure that it matters, adding:
The reason I am not sure it matters though is simply that I already admitted that African-Americans in the US may be better off than they would have been if born in Africa. I don’t think that’s the right comparison. In fact, all of the comparisons (my own included) are close to impossible to make. Add in the nonidentity problem, and it’s ….. really hard to be clear about.
That certainly left me unpersuaded. I still think it matters. It does get complicated, as some commenters on my original post pointed out. The main complication is that the descendants of slaves here are different from the would-be descendants if the people had stayed in Africa. But I don’t see how that complication undercuts Charley’s and my case.
One other issue is this. Various governments in the United States have done horrible things to many people that have violated their rights. For example, in World War II, the federal government imposed a draft, a form of short-term slavery, and arguably hundreds of thousands of draftees died or were seriously wounded because of the draft. (It might be only a hundred thousand because one can argue that the majority of draftees would have volunteered.) Should the government give them reparations? It’s not hard to see that the sum total of reparations for various government measures could exceed a few years of GDP. And they would be paid by people who had nothing to do with it. Check Cohen’s article for his distinction between the government, which he thinks should pay, and various innocent people who would be required to pay. He thinks he can get around this issue by saying that taxes are not punishment and so innocent people aren’t being punished. That’s a stretch.
One other objection. Why stop at having the U.S. government do reparations? Why not seek reparations from governments in Africa that failed to jail African slave catchers who sold the slaves?
Also, think of all the people that the U.S. government is forcibly preventing from coming here and think about their losses. Should they get reparations?
In a comment on my blog post, my co-author Charley Hooper pointed out that if anyone is owed reparations, it’s American Indians. He also wrote:
The historian J. Rufus Fears said that you can never satisfactorily resolve past grievances. You can’t aim for justice because everyone has a different idea of what that means. You can only stop current injustices, forgive, and move on.
READER COMMENTS
MarkW
Sep 25 2023 at 9:20am
I think your position is correct, but my own argument against reparations is that A) in the end it’s simply never going to happen, but B) merely entertaining the possibility is extremely divisive to society generally and more so to Black Americans in giving them the sense that they are owed and that their problems will be solved when reparations are approved (and will be thwarted until they ‘get what they’re owed’). It is something like the characters in Dickens’s Great Expectations whose lives were stunted while waiting for the windfall from their court case to finally come.
Another problem is this — uncomfortably, those Americans probably most likely to have slaveholders as ancestors are African Americans themselves. If you’ve ever seen a photo of the descendants of Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemmings, you’ll notice that it’s a very mixed looking racial group, with some of the descendants, for all appearances, being blond-haired, blue-eyed White people and others looking Black. This is not surprising since Sally Hemmings was the half sister of Jefferson’s dead first wife, and the children of Hemmings and Jefferson were 3/4 White before starting to have any children themselves. Some of these descendants ‘passed’ into white society many generations ago and have about as much African ancestry as Elizabeth Warren does American Indian ancestry. How would you determine which of the Hemmings-Jefferson descendants were deserving of reparations? Would there be a kind of ‘paper-bag’ test for those eligible for compensation vs those who did not? Would compensation levels be scaled by 23-and-me genetic tests? Or skin tone? Or would there be a gold-rush of ancestry research to find the ‘golden’ ancestor that put you in line for a payout?
AMW
Sep 26 2023 at 10:43am
I’m nitpicking here, but I believe you’re referring to Bleak House.
MarkW
Sep 26 2023 at 1:29pm
Of course you’re right! That’s embarrassing. I guess I need a personal fact checker.
TMC
Sep 25 2023 at 11:23am
To complicate things more, the slaves who were sold in Africa were often the losers in a war between tribes. Those losers sold were often killed before there was a market for them. The winning tribe took as many slaves as they needed and killed those left.
Monte
Sep 25 2023 at 11:41am
On the question of paying reparations, AJC argues the moral obligation rests with the federal government, not the people, and shirking that responsibility “would leave us little reason to have faith that America can be a moral leader” or a government that can “stand for good.”
First, the federal government functions vicariously through we, the people., so there is no disconnect. Secondly, America has proven itself to be a (flawed) moral leader that stands for good through most of history as much as, if not more than, any other government that comes to mind. Finally, we must ultimately apply a statute of limitations to the crime of slavery. In the Bible, ancestral sin is only visited upon the 3rd and 4th generations. 5 generations have passed since slavery was abolished. Mashelem!
Mark Z
Sep 25 2023 at 12:44pm
It’s odd that he brings up the non-identity problem, because, as Bryan Caplan had pointed out, this hurts the case for reparations. Individual modern day African Americans wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for slavery, so to argue they’re owed relative to how well off ‘they’ (really, totally different people) would have been without slavery is already logically absurd.
Ahmed Fares
Sep 25 2023 at 3:33pm
The source below opens a pdf file:
https://delong.typepad.com/113_F07/20070910_cuibono.pdf
Andrew_FL
Sep 25 2023 at 9:02pm
DeLong’s reasoning is fallacious in so far as he suggests that machine made cotton textiles would not exist without slavery. The might have been somewhat more expensive without slavery, but not non-existent.
Henri Hein
Sep 25 2023 at 4:22pm
I agree with Cohen that even if descendants of slaves are better off compared to the counter-factual of not being in the US and enjoying its benefits is not material to his argument.
Consider a kidnapper that on 9/11/2001 hauled off someone that was going to work in the World Trade Center. The kidnapper’s defense attorney could argue that the victim was better off in the kidnapper’s basement than in the WTC. It doesn’t work that way. Kidnapping is wrong and we should always punish it when we can.
I think that’s Cohen’s argument and I buy it.
(I’m still against reparations. I’m just saying Cohen’s argument is strong.)
Richard Fulmer
Sep 25 2023 at 10:16pm
To make your analogy more accurate, we’d have to be talking about getting reparations from the kidnapper’s great, great, great, great grandchildren to compensate the kidnapping victim’s great, great, great, great grandchildren who (by the way) wouldn’t exist if the kidnapper hadn’t committed the crime.
Dave
Sep 26 2023 at 12:54am
Nice comment, Richard. I think this is the identity argument.
I’d suggest amending the analogy thus: rather then reparations being paid by the kidnapper’s great great great… descendants, they are paid by the folks living in the kidnapper’s old house, or rather in the apartment building now standing where the house used to be.
Henri Hein
Sep 26 2023 at 2:02pm
That’s correct only if I was making a point about reparations in general. I wasn’t. I was making a more discrete point that a transgression is wrong and ought to be punished even if the perpetrator can show their victim was better off because of the transgression.
Richard Fulmer
Sep 26 2023 at 3:28pm
Kidnappers and slave owners should be punished; no one here disputes that. But that’s not what’s in question. Unlike your hypothetical kidnapper, the slave owners are all dead. Their children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren are dead. Who, then, should be punished?
Jon Murphy
Sep 25 2023 at 5:41pm
Here is another practical matter: when it comes to actually undertaking reperations, there is serious disagreements what the term even means.
Monte
Sep 25 2023 at 10:31pm
Totally agree. No possibility for consensus of opinion, which is critical, politically.
steve
Sep 25 2023 at 7:19pm
Was the Holocaust a good thing for Jews in America? Clearly they are better off financially being here than if they had stayed in Germany. If the cost paid to get them here is irrelevant, the case being made for black people, then by the metrics given they are better off. However, I just dont see how you ignore the costs. The peripheral arguments are just distractions. How do you propose collecting from the African nations were they were first bought? The issue is American policy.
Also, yes it is true that people other than slaveowners benefitted from slavery, though clearly the owners were the most direct beneficiaries. The Japanese people as a whole benefited from having Korean comfort women since they didnt have to pay for prostitutes for the soldiers. The comfort women probably got fed better than they would have if they stayed in Korea. So this was a net gain for everyone and all should be glad, including the Koreans that this happened.
This is all just extreme ends justify the means arguments. It’s poorly reasoned. The real reasons we should not have reparations is it’s too late (most important), we cant figure out how to do it and there would be huge political backlash. What we should do is at least apologize. Sorry black people. You were harmed with loss of economic and human capital, loss of freedom and life, for hundreds of years but it would be unfair to compensate you, if we could figure it out.
Steve
Monte
Sep 25 2023 at 10:26pm
Yes to all of this!
Jon Murphy
Sep 25 2023 at 11:08pm
That’s not a relevant comparison. Aside from being an argumentium ad Hitlerum, Jewish refugees from Germany were not allowed in America; the federal government rejected them and sent them back to Germany. Additionally, the Holocaust was not commited by the American government.
Short version: this line of argumentation seeks to confuse the issue rather than clarify it. Your argument is rejected out-of-hand.
steve
Sep 26 2023 at 2:29pm
While the US did turn away a lot of Jews they did accept over 100,000. The American Holocaust Museum covers this and claims that eh US accepted more Jewish refugees than any other country thought to be more accurate that would also include other European countries.
https://exhibitions.ushmm.org/americans-and-the-holocaust/how-many-refugees-came-to-the-united-states-from-1933-1945
“Additionally, the Holocaust was not commited by the American government.”
I didnt make that claim. The issue is whether if some group was harmed but in the end some members of that group benefited, whether we should accept or minimize the costs of the damage. This is relevant in whatever country it takes place. It is this specious argument that if we deprive you of your liberty, your freedom, your money and some of your lives but one hundred years later your are better off so lets just forget about the bad stuff we did. I cant believe you guys arent embarrassed at even entertaining that argument.
Steve
JFA
Sep 26 2023 at 7:45am
“Also, yes it is true that people other than slaveowners benefitted from slavery, though clearly the owners were the most direct beneficiaries.”
I would think that the sellers of the slaves were the most direct beneficiaries! Given the direct participation and benefit of various African tribes in enslavement, it would be odd to exclude them from the discussion, no?
steve
Sep 26 2023 at 2:34pm
“Given the direct participation and benefit of various African tribes in enslavement, it would be odd to exclude them from the discussion, no?”
How would you make them pay? There is no practical way to do this. We have some control over the actions of fellow Americans and our own government but none over other sovereign nations. Also, the importation of new slaves stopped around 1800 so most slaves were sold by Americans.
Steve
Mark Z
Sep 26 2023 at 10:06am
Importantly, reparations for the holocaust were not paid to Jews ‘as a whole.’ They were paid (are being paid) to survivors of the holocaust, who had an immediate claim to damages.
Additionally, races it nationalities ‘as a whole’ aren’t moral agents, so who exactly is this ‘we’ that’s apologizing? I certainly don’t feel like the reincarnation of a southern slave owner, and am not descended from any. I’d like to be excluded from any collective apology, I frankly don’t feel that I owe one.
robc
Sep 27 2023 at 9:57am
The apology is no different than the reparations.
I didn’t own slaves, so I have no need to apologize. Maybe some of my ancestors did, I dont know, but they were mostly poor farmers in a low slave area (KY), so probably not. And even if they did, I am not responsible for their actions.
robc
Sep 27 2023 at 9:59am
As an aside, the only ancestor I know of who fought in the civil war, joined the union army. As a kentuckian, he had a choice to make. The only thing I know was he was a cavalry officer. I wonder if he was with Buford at Gettysburg?
Andrew Cohen
Sep 25 2023 at 8:14pm
Nicely done. Very fair.
David Henderson
Sep 25 2023 at 11:47pm
Thanks, Andrew.
Richard W Fulmer
Sep 26 2023 at 4:20pm
Today’s African Americans have a better case for reparations based on the impact that the War on Poverty has had than they do for slavery. The victims of the former are still very much alive while those of the latter and their children and grandchildren are long dead.
Blacks aren’t suffering from systemic racism; they’re suffering from systemic paternalism. Many of the problems that black and other Americans face today are systemic, but they’re caused by progressive institutions and policies, such as:
– Minimum wage laws
– Occupational licensing
– Rent control
– Welfare restrictions that favor single-parent families
– High marginal tax rates on earnings by welfare recipients
– Zoning restrictions
– Rent controls
– Civil asset forfeiture laws
– Urban renewal
– Teachers unions
As Walter E. Williams wrote:
Of course, the welfare state is an equal opportunity destroyer, and its ill effects are not limited to African Americans.
Mark Brady
Sep 26 2023 at 6:59pm
How about distinguishing between reparations as currently proposed and restitution from the descendants of the owners of slaves to the descendants of those slaves?
The latter would not be easy to implement, but I suggest that in principle it would make far more sense from a classical liberal perspective.
MarkW
Sep 27 2023 at 7:44am
How about distinguishing between reparations as currently proposed and restitution from the descendants of the owners of slaves to the descendants of those slaves?
Far too many generations have passed for that to be at all viable. Many Black Americans are descendants of both slave owners and slaves–would they both pay and receive? Many non-Black Americans have ancestors who came to the US after slavery was abolished. Only a relatively small minority of white Americans ever owned slaves personally and are we going to order somebody to pay restitution if we discover that one of their 64 great-great-great-great grandparents owned slaves (provided at least one of their quadruple-great grandparents was not a slave)?
David Henderson
Sep 28 2023 at 7:55pm
You write:
No. And not just for the reasons that Mark W states, good as they are. The main reason is the argument I made: you don’t make restitution for an action to someone who gained from that action.
Mike Wagner
Sep 26 2023 at 9:22pm
Perhaps the current plight of inner city blacks can be considered a form of modern day slavery. Starting with a destroyed family structure, poor education, and an elite class that thinks they know what is best for these folks? Why not consider ‘reparations’ of the current situation before looking into the past?
Richard Fulmer
Sep 26 2023 at 10:23pm
Perhaps we should first end the policies that are destroying people’s lives.
Philo
Sep 28 2023 at 4:33am
The non-identity problem seems decisive. If American slavery had never existed, (it is overwhelmingly probable that) none of us people would exist today; instead *other people* would exist. So we all, American Blacks included, owe our very existence to American slavery (as well as to all other features of the past–at least, of the distant past). There is no ground for reparations.
Comments are closed.