Reparations have been the central idea of people in the United States, with people from the minority groups claiming to be compensated for the loss they incurred in life. Various groups of people, such as African Americans, Indians, and Japanese Americans, need to be paid for the damage they experienced as slaves in the hands of Americans. The central idea is that the minority groups contributed to the losses in agricultural lands and their effort devoted to the development of the richness of the Americans. However, the issue of reparation has become one of the debatable issues in the United States as supporters try to find ways to address inequality. Reparation seeks to promote equality by compensating minority groups from the loss they experience. The outcomes of reparation issues create more problems than solving the disparity created by Americans. Reparations should, therefore, not be paid out.
Brief History of Reparations
The government of the United States implemented a reparation program for African Americans since 1969. The program was initially referred to as the Philadelphia plan. The central idea of this program was to promote the creation of employment in construction trades. The motive for this program was to ensure that there is a creation of equality by eliminating discrimination experienced by African Americans (Frum, 2014). The impacts of the Philadelphia plan expanded to other industries and could influence the functioning of the education and public contracting. The implementation of this program has experienced complications as many groups emerge seeking compensation for losses suffered in the hand of Americans. For instance, women, Hispanics, Mexican-Americans, and Japanese Americans have come forward to claim compensation (Frum, 2014). The groups to be included under reparation continue growing as new events emerge, promoting inequality. Another example are the rules and policies implemented to curb the Covid-19 pandemic create new groups that need to be included in reparation programs. These complexities indicate that the reparation program would make it costly for the government to support the program at the expense of the economy.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Different Political View Points
America’s contentious racism has sparked the issue of reparation among American politicians. However, reparation has contributed to the political divide, with some people supporting the implementation of programs while others remain reluctant to this idea. For example, the Democrats have revealed their differences in supporting reparation programs. Some senators such as Warren, Booker, Harris, Gillibrand, and former Colorado Governor have endorsed some forms of reparations. The supporters for reparations propose for the creation of legal system capable of preventing African Americans and LGBT people from discrimination. In their political campaigns, they emphasize the importance of creating a community where equality governs interactions and avoid disadvantaging people from a particular community (Tanner, 2019). However, African Americans appear to the most vulnerable group that should be included in reparation programs because they contributed significantly to the richness of the Americans.
Some Democrats, such as Biden and South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg have been opposing the implementation of the reparation program because of the adverse impacts associated with reparations. Since 1975, Biden has openly criticized reparations through interviews by identifying the challenges that could arise as a result of complications related to collection and accounting data (Tanner, 2019). The main idea for the opponents for reparation is the adverse economic outcomes of the programs and complexities associated with the several groups that should be included in the compensation program. For instance, Buttigieg says that the implementation of the reparation program requires the creation of some accounting for the present and past discrimination and racism to implement a cash transfer proposal. However, it would be challenging for people to come together and support this program as a fair approach to compensation.
Strengths and Weaknesses of the View Points
The power of the supporters of reparation is recognition of the difficulties that victims of the American oppression experienced. For instance, enslaved African Americans as a group contributed to the accumulation of wealth in American, and they experienced mistreatment. Similarly, Japanese Americans and Hispanic groups also experience discrimination that exposes these people to challenges associated with the development of the Americans into economic discrimination and difficulties in living in the community. Similar problems continue to be witnessed in modern society with increased brutality by the police against African Americans and discrimination from work. However, the weakness of the political supporters is that they fail to recognize the complications and economic challenges associated with the implantation of reparations. For example, the Obama administration paid the black farmers approximately $1.25 billion as compensation for the discrimination for the years they experienced discrimination by the agency (Tanner, 2019). This issue, accompanied by the rising cases of discrimination indicates that reparation would cause more economic challenges than the benefits.
The strength of the opponents for reparation is the identification of difficulties associated with the implementation of the program. First, several groups, such as Hispanics, women, African Americans, and Indian Americans have suffered in the hands of Americans in the past. Reparation programs to compensate for a particular group would lead to the rise of several groups to be included in the program creating a financial burden to the government. The role of the government is to serve the citizens with morality by promoting equality. However, the government has been experiencing a challenge in identifying the value of the property to be compensated. For instance, after the Second World War, the Congress created a plan for repaying the Indians for a land that had been seized by the United States but experienced difficulties in identifying the value of productivity of the agricultural land (Healy & Hassan, 2019). However, the arguments of the opponents are weak because they fail to offer alternative approaches for compensating the victims.
Evaluation of the View Points
The assessment of the two sides indicates that reparation should not be paid. The reasons provided by the opponents of the compensation are justifiable because they are evidence-based. The central idea is that the implementation of a reparation program to compensate for a single group will lead to the creation of several groups in need of reparations. For example, if the program is exercised towards African Americans, other victims such as the Mexican-Americans who experienced losses as a result of engaging in the Mexican American war and the right to migrate to their former nation also deserve compensation (Frum, 2014). Chinese Americans were also deprived their rights through the labor and oriental Exclusion Acts and may also require to be compensated for the losses. The list for claimers appears to be endless because claimers will continue to be created through daily interaction, making the process a complicated one. For example, the responses to Covid-19 practices have already created victims because some businesses have already been locked down, and citizens lost jobs.
The side effects of reparations will be significant compared to the benefits. For instance, the creation of a reparation program will have to come at a cost experienced by the government and promote inequality likely to create new claimers. The public sector of the American economy appears to be secure compared to be the private sector. However, the government implemented a program requiring 30% of the public sector jobs to give to the African Americans, thus depriving the Native Americans of these advantages (Jones, 2020). The program intended to compensate the Black Americans for the discrimination they experienced in the labor market. The reparation program caused losses to the economy through financial losses and failure to employ competent workers as a result of focusing on a particular group. For instance, if the government supports the program for two or more decades losing $34 trillion every decade, the economy would lose a significant amount of money and expose employees to low wages and other poor working conditions.
The critical question for implementing an effective reparation program is determining the people who qualify for a particular compensation plan. Several institutions do not have records capable of providing a list of people who suffered within their institutions. This problem, accompanied by the lack of federal law governing the reparation program, indicates that cities and states will be lobbied a significant amount of money used to support the initiatives for the leaders. An example of this was the funds designed to help the reparation program in Chicago were designed to offer direct financial benefits to survivors. In contrast, in Georgetown, the funds were directed towards supporting charities and indirect benefits (Jones, 2020). This information indicates that even if the victims are identified, they will never receive the funds.
Reparation programs should not be paid out because they cause more harm than benefits to the government and the community. The primary challenge associated with reparation programs is that they are endless and occur at a cost experienced by the government, thus affecting the economy adversely. Secondly, the absence of a proper institutional record of people justified for inclusion in the program and lack of federal law to govern the implementation of reparation creates a loophole for misuse of funds.
References
Frum D., (2014). The Impossibility of Reparations. The Atlantic. Retrieved from: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/06/the-impossibility-of-reparations/372041/
Healy, J., & Hassan, A. (2019, June 19). America Has Tried Reparations Before. Here Is How It Went. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/19/us/reparations-slavery.html
Jones, T. (2020, January 31). Perspective | Slavery reparations seem impossible. In many places, they're already happening. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/01/31/slavery-reparations-seem-impossible-many-places-theyre-already-happening/?arc404=true
Tanner M., (2019). The Wrenching Reparations Question. Retrieved from https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/wrenching-reparations-question
