I got an email outlining a “prescription” from the
National African American Reparations Plan.
Some of the proposals probably don’t have direct
effect on others not in minorities. One
of them in particular is interesting, the return of some government lands to descendants
of slaves.
We do have a long history of policies based on
ancestry with regard to Native Americans.
I became more aware of this when living in Minneapolis 1997-2003, often
going to the Mystic Lake casino on Highway 161 south of the city, sometimes for
Libertarian Party events. I’ve also driven
through reservations in northern Minnesota.
None of this changes the idea of individual responsibility
in personal encounters (like how the media got everything wrong in the
Covington Kids incident).
So one cannot dismiss this idea out of hand, as there
is a precedent for it.
But it is obviously potentially very arbitrary how to
define who would be eligible. Is it just
one ancestor? Should there be a means
test for someone trying to use such a reparative benefit? Probably yes.
What seems more objectionable is re-dividing people up
into groups and apportioning benefits and possibly expropriation on people
based on their group or tribal membership.
History does this all the time.
But, outside of the Native American issue, approaching assessment of
benefit this way strictly based on racial or ethnic definition is unheard of in
this country.
Furthermore, we are noticing people want to make tribal
(ethnic or racial or otherwise manufactured) identity more important than who
they are as individuals, because they have trouble competing as individuals.
No comments:
Post a Comment