The Pigford Debacle Shows Why Slavery Reparations Just Won’t Work

Reading this New York Times front page article about the Pigford case, which the late Andrew Breitbart and my friend Lee Stranahan doggedly pursued for years I remember thinking two thing simultaneously.  First, there was a very real chance that black farmers did face systematic discrimination.  There really were people who were genuinely aggrieved.  But it was equally obvious that this process was not well-calculated to find them.  And it occurred to me that it was equally a microcosm of why reparations for slavery is simply unworkable.

I have long said that I think that slavery reparations would have been a great idea... in the 1860’s.  For one thing, it would have solved the problem of millions of African Americans suddenly being thrown out into the world without a dime to their name.  But more significantly it would have been justice.

Slavery was legal, but it was profoundly wrong.  Morally it was tyranny far worse than what Britain imposed on the original thirteen colonies.  And economically, I previously described it as follows:  “slavery is exactly like as if every day you worked, and every day you were paid at the end of the day, but also every day a thief set upon you and took your money.”  Not much could ever be done with the moral end of things, but all those years of legalized theft could be compensated, in part, by taking the plantations where the slaves served, and carving them up to forty acres and a homestead.

The benefit of this approach is that the pain and the benefit could be nicely pinpointed.  By taking only the large plantations (as was the proposal), it ensured that only the worst offenders would suffer.  And likewise, since the benefit would be given to the former slaves usually on the very plantations where they suffered, there was little room for fraud on that end, too.

But the proposal died in the 1800’s and as time it lost its focus.  Today there isn’t a single person alive who lawfully owned a slave in America.  The people who committed this crime against humanity are dead.  And likewise there isn’t a single person alive who was legally enslaved.  And their children in turn have intermixed with children of non-slaves.

The most obvious example is the resident of the White House.  If Barack Obama has any ancestors who were held in slavery in America, it is more likely to be on his mother’s side than his father’s.  More than likely no one in his family ever was an American slave.  Being black is not a perfect proxy, for there are plenty of immigrants from Africa who have no connection at all to American slavery.  And who do we take it from? The descendants of slaveholders?  White people generally?

And worst of all, it just ends up being an acceptance of the principle of collective guilt, which could do more damage than good.  Why is it wrong, for instance, for a Christian to hate a Jew because they “killed Christ.”  The average Christian takes it as a matter of faith that their savior was wrongfully (although necessarily) killed and some people who were Jewish were involved.  But what any good Christian says is that these facts have nothing to do with modern Jews.  This was about two millennia ago, and the Jews of today are not responsible for what the Jews did back then.  This is true even if we could prove that they were descended from the specific Jews who helped kill Christ.  You are not responsible for anyone’s conduct than your own. To breach that principle for the more laudable goal of making things right for the descendants of American slaves could do more harm than good.

And with the diffusion of genes the results might be downright ridiculous.  If Michelle Obama is descended from slaves, and Barack Obama is not, will Malia Obama be required to pay herself reparations?

The good intentions that eventually went wrong in Pigford seem to find their origin in the view that every wrong should be righted, indeed can be righted.  We should do as much justice as we can, of course, but we have to sometimes admit that injustice had been done, and there is no practical way to correct it.  Perfect justice is something we will only see in Heaven.

---------------------------------------

My wife and I have lost our jobs due to the harassment of convicted terrorist Brett Kimberlin, including an attempt to get us killed and to frame me for a crime carrying a sentence of up to ten years.  I know that claim sounds fantastic, but if you read starting here, you will see absolute proof of these claims using documentary and video evidence.  If you would like to help in the fight to hold Mr. Kimberlin accountable, please hit the Blogger’s Defense Team button on the right.  And thank you.

Follow me at Twitter @aaronworthing, mostly for snark and site updates.  And you can purchase my book (or borrow it for free if you have Amazon Prime), Archangel: A Novel of Alternate, Recent History here.  And you can read a little more about my novel, here.

---------------------------------------

Disclaimer:

I have accused some people, particularly Brett Kimberlin, of reprehensible conduct.  In some cases, the conduct is even criminal.  In all cases, the only justice I want is through the appropriate legal process—such as the criminal justice system.  I do not want to see vigilante violence against any person or any threat of such violence.  This kind of conduct is not only morally wrong, but it is counter-productive.

In the particular case of Brett Kimberlin, I do not want you to even contact him.  Do not call him.  Do not write him a letter.  Do not write him an email.  Do not text-message him.  Do not engage in any kind of directed communication.  I say this in part because under Maryland law, that can quickly become harassment and I don’t want that to happen to him.

And for that matter, don’t go on his property.  Don’t sneak around and try to photograph him.  Frankly try not to even be within his field of vision.  Your behavior could quickly cross the line into harassment in that way too (not to mention trespass and other concerns).

And do not contact his organizations, either.  And most of all, leave his family alone.

The only exception to all that is that if you are reporting on this, there is of course nothing wrong with contacting him for things like his official response to any stories you might report.  And even then if he tells you to stop contacting him, obey that request.  That this is a key element in making out a harassment claim under Maryland law—that a person asks you to stop and you refuse.

And let me say something else.  In my heart of hearts, I don’t believe that any person supporting me has done any of the above.  But if any of you have, stop it, and if you haven’t don’t start.