Archive for the ‘Reparations’ Category
Apology Lite
posted by Kaimipono D. Wenger
Earlier this week, the Connecticut Law Review CONNtemplations published my short article, Apology Lite: Truths, Doubts, and Reconciliations in the Senate’s Guarded Apology for Slavery. The article’s abstract is:
The United States Senate recently offered an apology for slavery, which contained an unusual disclaimer prohibiting its use in any claim for monetary reparations. This Essay examines the legal and moral effects of that apology. It analyzes the role of apology within the slavery reparations debate generally as well as the question of whether a stand-alone apology can be a valid form of reparations. It then examines the moral and symbolic effects of the Senate disclaimer, and offers suggestions for bolstering the apology and furthering the restorative justice goals of reparations.
If you’re interested in the topic, please take a moment to read the article; it’s not particularly long. If you’ve read the piece, I’m curious as to your thoughts about the Senate’s guarded apology. How serious are the concerns set out in Apology Lite? Can a lite apology be effective? Is it better than no apology? And, what do you think about my suggestions for bolstering the Senate apology?
October 30, 2009 at 3:48 pm
Tags: apology, Reparations, slavery
Posted in: Civil Rights, Reparations
Print This Post
One Comment
Reparations and Net Benefit
posted by Kaimipono D. Wenger
As reported in outlets like the National Law Journal, Connecticut professor Robert L. Birmingham has taken a leave of absence following a strange incident in which he apparently showed the class a racy video clip — complete with scantily clad strippers — as part of an in-class argument against reparations for slavery. Some commenters have suggested that this case raises potential questions of academic freedom. Let’s set aside those issues, to focus on the substance of Birmingham’s argument as reported in the NLJ.
The NLJ summarizes Birmingham’s argument as: “The sometimes controversial professor asked students to make a case for slavery reparations in light of the fact that much of Africa is beset by war, famine and AIDS.” Law.com later summarizes:
In an e-mail, one student in the remedies class characterized Birmingham’s classroom exercise as a “syllogistically perfect” argument that the students, try as they might, were not able to disprove in 15 minutes of discussion. The professor questioned whether reparations are logically due for American descendants of slaves, who generally enjoy a much better standard of living than modern West Africans whose ancestors were not enslaved,” the student wrote.
Of course, this basic argument isn’t limited to Birmingham, and is quite familiar to reparationists. It’s a point often raised by reparations critics like David Horowitz.
Is this really a syllogistically perfect (or otherwise convincing) argument against reparations for slavery?
November 7, 2007 at 6:56 pm
Posted in: Civil Rights, Reparations, Tort Law
Print This Post
11 Comments
The World Conference on Japanese Military Sexual Slavery
posted by Deven Desai
The World Conference on Japanese Military Sexual Slavery is going on right now at UCLA. I remember taking a class on the rhetoric of the law of war as an undergraduate student and some of the issues we studied come up here. Where does the law fit? How accurate is the history? How does one attain justice and still have room for atonement and a way to move forward as a society? As Beth Van Schaack explains regarding the panel about comfort women “A perfect storm of legal doctrines, foreign policy objectives, treaty provisions waiving claims for reparations, failures of political will, and Japanese intransigence has left the ‘comfort women’ with little in the way of legal options at this point.” For those interested in the specific topic or the general area of reparations, Beth’s post notes the historical context and the trouble one faces in trying to apply law to the issues. In short, it is an interesting read.
October 5, 2007 at 6:12 pm
Posted in: Reparations
Print This Post
One Comment
Lots Worth Reading At Is That Legal
posted by Dan Filler
Eric Mulller, over at Is That Legal, has been very busy for the last few days. First he offered a trenchant critique of Pope Benedict’s talk at Auschwitz last week. (”The Pope’s Disasterous Speech At Auschwitz.”) Then he engaged Dean Esmay over what he frames as Esmay’s propogation of ” the revisionist myth of a terrorized German populace whose will was overborne.” You know the world is topsy-turvy when John Leo is citing Eric approvingly.
Now Eric’s writing about an interesting development in Wilmington, North Carolina: a legistlatively authorized commission has concluded that an 1898 race riot there was a political coup d’etat that reversed the fortunes of the city’s African-American community for years to follow. The committee offered recommendations “to repair the moral, economic, civic and political damage wrought by the violence and discrimination resulting from a conspiracy to re-take control of city, county, and state governments by the Democratic Party’s white supremacy campaign.” The executive summary is here.
This report will presumably be of great interest to Al Brophy, who served as counsel to the Tulsa Race Riot Commission. You can find a number of links to Tulsa Race Riot materials here.
On a more self-interested note, we’re very excited that Eric will be visiting with us here at Co-Op starting in a couple of weeks!
June 2, 2006 at 12:22 am
Posted in: Blogging, Civil Rights, Reparations
Print This Post
No Comments
