Weaver1

Madison Weaver
Submitted to Jamie Mcbeth-Smith
English 1010-66
November 8, 2015
Are Reparations Due?
A few days ago, I saw a quote by Bill Nye that I really liked. It explained about how we
are all one people, we humans. That skin color is simply due to climate and latitude, and that
scientifically, we all are a single race. This quote concluded with the line, We have to work
together. I loved it! So, naturally, I shared it. The next morning, I found a comment that a friend
had left on this quote that I loved so much. Basically, she told me that this quote was racist, that
its easy for Bill Nye to ignore the past and call for peace, because he is a white man and he
didnt have to feel the effects of colonialism. I was told that my white uncomfortability is
exactly what I need to feel, because that means that I am recognizing the wrongs that my
ancestors did to the colored people. Wow! Here was this quote that I thought was great, that had
a completely different meaning to someone with a different history. It made me really start to
think about the issue, and want to see what others had to say about it. Weve all heard of the talk
surrounding the issues of reparations; its no secret that victims of colonialism have been pushing
for retribution. The fight for reparation began immediately after the Civil War, when
Reconstruction was sweeping through the South. Newly emancipated slaves were demanding
that the old plantations be divided out and given to the former slaves. This fight didnt stop there,
though. It has made reappearances throughout the history of the US, sometimes as civil rights
movements, and other times as outright demands for repayment. All of this leads to many
difficult questions. Should I be held responsible for what my ancestors did? How do I know that

Weaver2

is was MY ancestors that did it? And, how can you put a price on human suffering? All of these
are hard questions, but the question that it all culminates to is: Are the descendants of victims of
colonialism, namely former slaves, entitled to reparations?
"EDITORIAL: Reparations for a Dream." University Wire. Oct 14 2015. ProQuest. Web. 1 Nov.
2015 .
In this editorial, the author makes it clear that theres no denying the major effects
that the Western nations atrocities have had on other areas in the world, whether we want
to acknowledge them or not. The author states that many Caribbean and West African
nations still suffer from socioeconomic wounds. The US and UK both received profits
from the slave trade and slavery, according to Ayesha Bell Hardaway, an assistant law
professor at Case Western Reserve University. But, why hold on to the past? Because, the
author explains, history repeats itself, and the effects of the past have not gone away with
the past. The injustices are important now. The United States duty is to protect the ideals
of democracy, liberty, equality, opportunity, and rights. Because of the way our nation
was founded, we have an obligation to protect those ideals. The author concludes that this
means that part of the American Dream is reparations for those nations that were victims
to the slave trade and/or colonialism. Critics will say that we cant identify who gained
from the slave trade because of the mixed heritage of African-Americans, but this ignores
the nature of reparations. Theyre paid to nations, not people, because it is nations that
clearly benefitted or suffered from the injustices of the past. Others might argue that
African nations also played a role in and benefitted from the slave trade. The author
argues that this view fails to address the exploitation that they experienced on large
scales. Some critics scoff that we could just give reparation for every historical injustice,

Weaver3

but they fail to recognize the modern relevance of the issue. The author emphasizes, We
pretend like the past never happened, but those who fail to learn from history are doomed
to repeat it.
The author uses Kairos and Logos to his/her advantage very well, but his/her
Ethos is not strong at all, and it tends to detract from the credibility of the argument. The
issue is a very timely one because many people have been discussing this topic lately; in
fact, many nations have been pushing for reparation in the past few years. The author also
makes very good use of logic in his/her argument. Several times throughout the text, the
author turns to logic to make a point. For example, in the text, the author reasons that
rather than pay reparation to individuals, it should be nations who are receiving them
because it was nations as wholes that benefitted. Later in the text, the author also points
out that we shouldnt give reparations for all historical injustices because, Issues
between the Egyptians and Romans from thousands of years ago are not relevant today,
but the slave trade still has effects on the global economic climate. Because the author of
this text is not stated, it isnt as credible as it might be had that information been included.
Not knowing who the author is really takes a hit on the credibility because it could have
been anyone who wrote this piece. It does say, though, that it was written by a student.
This doesnt have much of an effect on the Ethos because students, by nature, dont tend
to have a lot of credibility because they dont have a ton of experience yet. However, the
student appears to have written this for a university publication, which helps to elevate
their status as student. Overall, this piece is somewhat credible. It makes some very good
points about the issue, but because the authors name is not included, and because it was
only a student who wrote it, this text should be taken with a grain of salt.

Weaver4

This editorial has given me a viewpoint to consider that I otherwise would not
have thought of. Id never considered that reparations might be tied to the American
Dream in that it is our duty to fulfill the American Dream, which means granting
reparations to those victims. I also never considered the idea that reparations may be paid
to nations. Whenever I had thought of reparations, Id always automatically thought of
individuals. My thoughts on this issue have definitely been influenced by this text. This
was the only one of my sources that suggested paying reparations at the country level,
rather than at the individual level.
Innis, Niger. "Should There Be Reparations for Slavery?" Scholastic Teachers. Scholastic.com.
Web. 3 Nov. 2015.
Innis informs us that the idea of reparations was first suggested in 1829. This
latest drive for reparation is inspired by compensations received by Jews and JapaneseAmericans for World War Two. But, Innis believes that todays reparation movement is a
way to make white people feel guilty, rather than a move to receive justice for the slaves
or their direct descendants. All of white America has come to represent the evils of
slavery to the proponents of reparations, according to Innis. We are all still haunted by the
horrors of slavery and segregation. But, living victims were involved in the Holocaust
and the internment of Japanese-Americans, not just the descendants of the victims, which
makes the Jews and Japanese-Americans better-suited recipients of reparations. Even
though we have made a lot of progress as a country in race relations, there are still many
African Americans that are excluded from that progress. Even worse than that, popular
culture and the civil rights establishment of today have created a culture of victimization
that cripples rather than liberates. This victimization culture feeds into the reparation

Weaver5

movement, failing to provide justice for the real victim. Innis states that the best thing
that black Americans can do to repay the victims of slavery and segregation is to take
advantage of opportunities that werent available to those in the past. This is a much
better solution than dwelling on the injustices of the past.
Innis strongest appeal is Pathos, but his Ethos is also a strong factor in his
argument. Niger Innis is the National Spokesman for the Congress of Racial Equality,
which obviously gives him a good amount of credibility. He has apparently had a lot of
experience with these kinds of issues, and has likely heard many different viewpoints on
the issue. But, more than his credibility, his Pathos appeal makes his argument strong. All
through the text, he uses his argument to play to peoples emotions. Most of the claims
that he makes are either emotionally based or based on values. From the beginning, he
states that the reparations movement has become a way to make white people feel guilty,
which appeals to the emotions of blacks and whites alike. He describes how Americans
are still haunted by the injustices of the past, as well as how the culture of victimization
that has risen around us is in fact crippling. His greatest argument plays to African
American values, stating that they ought to take advantage of the opportunities that they
have that their ancestors didnt. He uses peoples values and emotions to help them
understand his argument. It is fairly credible, since the author is such a well-known man,
and his appeals to emotions and values are very strong.
This was a very interesting work to read. It was awesome to get the perspective of
a black man who is in the midst of this issue. Though I had already heard or read many of
the points he makes in the piece, he gave me a slightly different perspective at which to
think about it. I had also never thought about suggesting that African Americans take

Weaver6

advantage of the advantages they enjoy today, rather than being upset over what
happened in the past. I really like this suggestion. This source seems to be the epitome of
the anti-reparations argument, but it brings different points to the table than any of my
other sources did.
Liu, Eric. "Why We Need to Talk about Reparations." CNN. Cable News Network, 27 June
2014. Web. 2 Nov. 2015.
Liu begins by pointing out the controversy surrounding the issue of reparations.
He uses Ta-Nehisi Coates as an example, explaining the huge response that Coates
received from his cover story, The Case for Reparations. Liu notes the uneasiness that
characterized many of these responses, which he believes is a reflexive move to justify
why reparations cant be paid or why it is unfair or unworkable. To Liu, this response is
as interesting as the argument of origin. America must imagine the necessity of
reparations before actual reparations can even be negotiated. In Lius words, The
greatest obstacle to considering reparation isnt practicality; its a dearth of moral
imagination. Liu goes into detail about Coates argument, explaining how whites built a
nation that gave second-class status to blacks and reserved supremacy for whites. This
isnt just about racial subjugation, but also about measures that were meant to create
wealth and opportunity, like the New Deal. Liu argues that what Coates brings to the
table is only hard to accept if you dont want the truth, but that his case isnt really a case
for reparations. Instead, he is making a case for the discussion of reparations. Liu
recognizes this as the purpose of Coates argument, rather than a downside of his piece.
He calls for an earnest study of the issue, a reconsideration of the difference between
Americanness and whiteness, as well as for people to notice how whiteness was an

Weaver7

identity fabricated from the myth of blackness(Liu). Liu explains that any non-white
ethnic group can name an experience of suffering in America, but it is the African
Americans suffering that is central to our nations history. None of Coates argument
answers the questions that people tend to rush to How to decide who gets
compensation? How to decide who decides? How to allocate reparations? but he calls
for a hearing. The point of this hearing wouldnt be to determine how, but to determine
why. Liu believes that only when we can understand why reparations are justified, will
we be able to be beyond race. Liu concludes by saying that we will be making true
progress when we admit that we dont know the answer, but that wed like to understand
more about it.
Liu uses Pathos, Logos, and Ethos to very good effect in his article. Pathos is a
big part of his whole argument, because it is an issue of values. He argues that we need to
stop worrying about how reparations can be paid until we figure out why, which is tied
very closely to peoples beliefs. Along with playing to the audiences emotions, Liu uses
logic to back up his argument. For example, when he cites Coates piece, he reasons that
it really isnt a case for reparation, but rather a case to consider and ponder reparation.
Liu also turns to logic when he points out that yes, many other ethnicities have suffered at
the hands of white Americans, but only the suffering of the African Americans is central
to our countrys history. Although both of these appeals are used effectively, perhaps his
best appeal is his credibility. Not only did he write this piece for the CNN News Website,
which is a very widely-known news station, but he contributes to the Ethos of the piece
just by who he is. Eric Liu is the founder of Citizen University, has written several books
about racial issues and democracy, and he was a White House policy advisor and speech

Weaver8

writer under President Bill Clinton. He is obviously well-versed in the issue and is a very
credible source due to the combination of his appeals.
I really enjoyed reading Lius perspective on the issue, and it has definitely given
me a lot to consider. With most things, people have to accept a need for action before the
action can be taken, but I never applied that principle to this issue. Liu helped me to see
that just like any other issue, it must be worked out if reparations are actually needed
before they start pushing for them. Many nations have started pushing for retribution
before its even been decided if it is necessary, which almost seems counterproductive.
No other sources that I came across mentioned this shortcoming in the reparations debate,
which has made Lius piece a great contribution to my research.
McFadden, Terri, and Geraldine Wagner. "Counterpoint: African Americans Deserve
Reparations For Slavery." Points Of View: Reparations For Slavery (2015): 3. Points of
View Reference Center. Web. 1 Nov. 2015.
The authors begin by stating that the economic success of the US is due to
generations of unpaid or underpaid people, namely African Americans. It occurred in
both the North and the South. Slavery was outlawed in the early 19th century in the
North, according to McFadden and Wagner, but many in the North still benefitted from
the profits of the slavery that still thrived in the South. Merchants, banks, bridges,
railroads, and others used the money and/or crops that were provided from the slaves
labor to turn a profit. New England traders even continued to buy and sell slaves just
not in the North. After the Civil War, many blacks remained in the South to continue to
work the land. They became tenant farmers that were underpaid. Soon, the Southern
blacks began moving to the North, looking for work that was provided by the industrial

Weaver9

revolution. They did find jobs, but they continued to be paid much less than their white
counterparts. Near the end of the Civil War, the reparations process began. Former slaves
were promised forty acres and a mule so that they could make a living. There was a lot of
government support for this in the beginning, but the Southern elite soon reestablished
itself. Racism and the desire for cheap labor made its appearance in Jim Crow laws,
which governed the South for the next hundred years. African Americans were now
second-class citizens, which isnt necessarily better than the status of slave. Segregation
was the new form of humiliation, and it made things much worse for the former slaves.
McFadden and Wagner quote W. E. B. Dubois as saying that slavery and racism were like
a willful national amnesia. This is why it wasnt until the 1950s that the carefully
constructed edifice of government-sanctioned racism began to fall (McFadden and
Wagner). In 1954, mandatory integration of segregated schools began. During the 1960s,
the government began recognizing that the inequities caused by slavery must be dealt
with. The civil rights movement and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 showed that both the
government and the people were beginning to accept the truth of the unfair treatment of
African Americans. McFadden and Wagner claim that the movement has lost momentum,
though. Although racism is no longer legal, that doesnt mean that it no longer exists. The
authors state that because the American economy benefitted from the institution of
slavery, it is only fair that reparations be paid. These reparations should come in
monetary form from taxpayers and businesses. The harsh past is still affecting people
today. McFadden and Wagner suggest that reparation funds could be used to improve
inner-city schools, build hospitals and clinics, provide start-up funds for small businesses,
and to encourage African Americans to participate in politics more fully.

Weaver10

The authors in this text use both Logos, Ethos and Pathos to their
advantage. Most of the work consists of a summary of the history of African Americans,
namely what has been done to them by the whites. This provides both the Logos and
Ethos part of the argument, because it was a very logical move to provide the audience
with some background, and it shows that the authors actually understand the issue they
are talking about. These two appeals are used the most widely in the text, but not
necessarily the most successfully. McFadden and Wagner use Pathos well when they
suggest what reparations ought to be used for. They use this to appeal to our emotions,
because it shows us how we could actually better the lives of African Americans by
paying reparations, rather than simply stating why we should. Overall, the work is fairly
credible. The background information lends a lot of credibility to the piece, which is what
gives it most of its credibility.
It was a nice reminder to read a little bit into the history of this issue, even
though only a small portion of the text actually answered my question. I chose this source
for my research for those reasons: It gives a lot of background information, which is
useful, and it also provides the audience with suggested uses of reparation, rather than
simply stating why it is deserved. This was the only one of my sources that actually did
that, which I thought would make a good contribution. It definitely helped me to widen
my perspective on the issue. Like many other aspects of this issue, I had never actually
thought about what reparations might be used for. Id always assumed that they would
just go to certain families who would use them to better themselves in some way. I like
the idea of using them for community advancement much better.

Weaver11

Pearson, John, and Chuck Goodwin. "Point: The Payment Of Reparations For Slavery Is
Unworkable And Unjust." Points Of View: Reparations For Slavery (2015): 2. Points of
View Reference Center. Web. 1 Nov. 2015.
As Pearson and Goodwin note, there are no longer any slaves living in the US,
nor are there any more slave owners. Tracking down the descendants of these victims and
offenders is both costly and inaccurate. Restitution would have to include anybody who
directly or indirectly supported the slave trade, like buyers of cheap cotton on the global
market or companies that brokered slaves. Questions like the liability of descendants for
their ancestors actions and global connections arise, with no easy answers. Slavery
touched millions of lives in many ways, and singling out individuals to receive
reparations is, as the author puts it, totally unworkable and unjust. According to the
authors, slavery benefitted African Americans from an economic standpoint. Most black
Americans can expect a higher income because of their American citizenship than they
otherwise would receive in any country in Africa. The issue of reparations has no logical
conclusion, and it only increases racial tension. Greed and grandstanding characterize
the call for reparations for slavery in America. It slows racial progress, blurs the memory
of those, black and white alike, that fought for emancipation, and it belittles the progress
made through the civil rights movement. Reparation advocates cite cases in which Jews
and Japanese-Americans have sought and received restitution, but these were very
different cases. As the authors explain, these were cases of immediate victims or their
families, or those who could prove a substantial loss of property. In 2002, a reparations
lawsuit sought billions in damages from a variety of companies that held peripheral
connections to the slave trade. Pearson and Goodwin compare this to holding any

Weaver12

company that promotes cigarette smoking liable for any damages that are caused by
cigarettes. They also point out that African tribes that contributed to the slave trade,
European sailors who facilitated the trading, and black slave-owners are being excused
from the blame. Reparations have already been paid, in the authors eyes. Americans have
harbored guilt for the slave trade for many years, and have gone to great lengths to make
amends. Since the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed, African Americans have been
able to take great leaps in American society. The authors clearly agree with a quote from
Condoleezza Rice stating, I think were better to look forward, not point fingers
backward. Pearson and Goodwin conclude by stating that The Pan African Reparations
Movement and the Global African Congress have demanded $776 trillion in
compensation, which is greater than 70 times the US annual economic output. The
authors make a point that this issue could potentially damage the global economy, and if
it does, the ones who are demanding reparation will end up doing more harm than good.
Logos is definitely the most widely and successfully used appeal in this piece, but
the authors also make use of Pathos and Ethos. The authors use logic to develop most of
the points that are made in this piece. Nearly every argument that is made in the text is
saturated with logic, which makes it very hard to dispute this work. They begin with an
undeniable statement: There are no longer and slaves or slaves owners living in America.
They also end with a logical point: If demands for reparation get too pricey or too heavy,
it could damage our global economy, which would affect everyone. Ive never seen
Logos used so effectively in a piece of writing before. Logos isnt the only appeal they
use, though it is their best one. They also appeal to our emotions, when they state that
reparations have already been paid. It is true that many Americans have long felt guilty

Weaver13

about the cruel practice of slavery, and many of us are ashamed by this part of our history.
They use this fact to further their argument in that efforts for reparation have been made
multiple times due to this horrible guilt that we feel. Weve done much to try to elevate
the standing of African Americans in our society, thanks to our conscience. Along with
Logos and Pathos, the authors use Ethos simply by writing this piece while the issue is
relevant. This text is a very credible one. The logical assertions are so solid that its hard
to deny the points that are made. Even without the other appeals contributing to the
authors arguments, this piece is very well-written.
This work has brought to my attention many points that have never crossed my
mind. Not only is the evidence for all of the points made very solid, it also brings to light
many things that arent often thought of. I had never considered that reparations might
have already been paid, because I had never thought of the things weve done in the past
as compensation. But, when you really think about it, Americans have been trying to
repair the damage we did for many years, if not economically, then socially. I also never
would have even considered the economic aspect of the situation. Although my mind
automatically thinks of monetary retribution when reparations are mentioned, I had never
thought of how all of that money might affect our economy. This essay has given me a lot
to consider regarding the payment of reparations. None of my other sources mentioned
the economic consequences, so this one has provided a great point of view for my
research.
This issue is much more complex than it appears on the surface. There are just too many
perspectives to this problem to answer it easily. I believe that victims of slavery are entitled to
something, but I dont necessarily think that the answer is reparations. People shouldnt have to

Weaver14

pay for a crime that they simply didnt commit. I think the only way to make everybody happy is
to resolve things at the individual level, which would be nearly impossible. There is no one
solution that is going to satisfy everyone, so a national resolution would likely only stir up more
conflict. Is there a way to compromise on this issue? Can we somehow make all sides happy? Is
there anything that can resolve an issue of such magnitude? There are simply too many
complications to answer this question at this point.