On Reparations: Does It Mean What You Think It Means?
Support for reparations is increasing. But are we all talking about the same thing?
The Growing Call for Reparations
Discussion of reparations is getting hot, especially on the heels of federal recognition of the Juneteenth holiday. There’s about to be a lot more talk on the need for them, and claims of this, that, or the other thing as reparations. This is an important moment, because if proponents of reparations allow ourselves to get caught up in the hype of those who want to use their support for reparations as a way to gain publicity or praise, we are going to lose out on the truly transformative potential of reparations. That potential, I believe, will benefit many more than those to whom reparations are due. From providing an alternative model for handling harm in our society, to investments in everything from transportation to education that have long been neglected, to honestly facing the true mess of the whole corporate-capitalist-colonialist (however you want to name it) path that we’ve been on so that we might at last begin to course-correct, reparations is a potent force for social change. Reparations has always been the right thing to do. I’m also convinced that it’s the strategic thing to do for anyone interested in transformation of our economic systems.
But it’s only strategic and transformative if it’s the real deal. After absorbing a lot of media on the discussion around Juneteenth and the burgeoning call for reparations this past week, I think we need to get real clear on what meaningful reparations look like. What are we really talking about when we talk about reparations?
You Keep Using That Word. I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means
In recent years a variety of interesting actions, behaviors, and efforts have been labeled “reparations” by those undertaking them. They range from relatively harmles to pretty misguided, but most of all, none of them are serious attempts at reparations. Here’s a sample list of actions that are not reparations:
White people sending famous Black organizers whom they’ve never met Starbucks gift cards via Twitter: not reparations.1
Demanding one random individual pony up money to another random individual based on their race? Nope. I’ve seen this kind of thing happening online, but have also seen it in person. Sometimes done with humor, or done with empathy, and sometimes also done with bitterness. Emotional flavor aside, not reparations.
Buying extra stuff at your favorite Black-owned business? Also not reparations.
Discriminatory charging for events? I’m going to take flack from some folks in Seattle on this point—there’s a whole controversy happening over Pride events in the city there, one of which is now charging different rates for people to participate based on race—but guess what? Not reparations. It might help you achieve some other goals, like increasing BIPOC attendance at your event, but it’s not reparations.2
That all of this and more has been conflated with reparations has caught the attention of reparations organizers, enough so to warrant some explicit clarification on the matter. From the Movement for Black Lives’ Reparations Now toolkit:
There has been a lot of confusion about what reparations are and what they are not. Some presidential candidates have claimed that universal programs like baby bonds are reparations. They are not. Other people have claimed that individual GoFundMe campaigns for their own benefit are reparations. They are not.
As explored above, reparations include five key components: Cessation/Assurance of Non-Repetition, Restitution and Repatriation, Compensation, Satisfaction, and Rehabilitation. Reparations are a concept rooted in international law that involves specific forms of repair to specific individuals, groups of people, or nations for specific harms they have experienced in violation of their human rights. Therefore, reparations cannot be achieved simply through “acknowledgment or an apology” or “investment in underprivileged communities.”
One of the co-authors of the M4BL toolkit, Marbre Stahly-Butts (who is also Executive Director of Law For Black Lives), spoke more forcefully to this point on a Reparations 101 teach-in earlier this month. Fielding an audience question on “Do checks from white slave owner descendants to Black non-profits count as reparations?” Stahly-Butts references the above paragraphs from the toolkit and expands on why their team felt compelled to put them in:
“One of the things that was happening a lot was just individual people asking for money. Which is not reparations… How do we think about ending the harm, about rehabilitating the harm, and compensating — any one person’s demand around money or around compensation does not actually come to that level.
Building on earlier comments from the panel about a misguided focus on directing funding to public and non-profit programs or initiatives, Stahly-Butts continues on to say:
“People funding programs, funding nonprofits, and thinking that’s reparations is a huge mistake. We really focus on a specific harm for a specific wrongdoing and what is a specific remedy for that. So it’s not enough to say “I wrote my check to an HBCU this year so I’m good.” That really reparations is a deeper assessment of what harm’s been done and how you can actually make somebody whole.
“And so a check to a non-profit doesn’t actually make anyone whole from slavery, doesn’t make anybody whole from redlining. It doesn’t necessarily address the kind of range of harms that any specific wrong caused. So you should definitely write checks to non-profits, and people who come from slave-holding families who have that privilege and that wealth should get rid of it and should give it away but that’s not actually reparations in a holistic understanding of addressing past harms and redressing them. So that is my thought on that.”
Reparations involves redirecting money, yes. But it’s also about healing, and wholeness—something your unasked-for $5 gift card for a latte is not going to bring about.
The Bigger Picture: International Legal Frameworks, and All the Things Needing Repair
The language M4BL draws from in their educational materials around rehabilitation, compensation, etc. is from the United Nations’ legal framework on reparations. If you want to get familiar with that, scroll down this page to Section IX, “Reparation for harm suffered.”
The specific harm matched to a specific remedy model is important, because it allows us to seek continuing redress for ongoing and unique harms whose impacts compound upon one another. Because it’s not just slavery for which the United States (and other countries as well as various corporate entities who profited from the slave trade) owe reparations. It’s for ongoing violence throughout the Jim Crow era. It’s for the intentional decimation of Black communities via “urban renewal” programs and the theft of equal economic opportunity through redlining and other discriminatory practices. It’s for the destruction of Black families through decades of the “War on Drugs.” These are distinct harms, and reparations for each might, and maybe should, look different.
One of the elements that is most critical in the framing for reparations developed through the U.N. is the emphasis on “guarantee of non-repetition.” This is a thing to keep in mind as high-profile politicians come out in favor of reparations. If the mayor of your city jumps on the bandwagon for reparations, I encourage you to show up at public forums and say something along the lines of, “This is fantastic! But in addition to giving people money, are you also working with state legislators to make sure that people in correctional facilities will be paid more than slave wages for their labor? Or even better, released? Because reparations includes non-repetition, and we’re not making full repair if we’re still committing a similar harm.” Or consider asking them which harm they’re addressing, and if additional reparation funds will be forthcoming to address the separate harms of racist housing policies and racist policing practices.
How are reparations activists using the international legal framework to shape their demands in the U.S.? What are possible strategies for further increasing support for reparations and passage of bills like H.R. 40? And how might reparations bring transformative change beyond simply ‘closing the racial wealth gap’? Lots of other questions to pursue and explore. But I’m cutting it short for now because I really hope that, if you aren’t familiar with the discussions on reparations that have been taking place, you’ll dive into some of the resources below. Reparations is more than whatever thin image of it has been shared online this past week. It’s bigger than what we can do as individuals, and truthfully, much bigger than the U.S.-centric discussion I know many of us are likely to be in. It’s a conversation that’s been happening not just for decades, but for centuries. I think being a serious supporter means getting at least some passing familiarity with the incredible amount of work that has preceded this moment, and not letting easy actions aimed at relieving feelings of white guilt substitute for the much more substantive reparations that are required.
Here are some of the materials I’ve been using to learn about reparations:
From the Movement for Black Lives:
Other recent discussions and talks:
openDemocracy hosted a discussion last week called “Is it time to pay reparations?” featuring author and professor Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor, Esther Stanford-Xosei of the Pan-Afrikan Reparations Coalition in Europe (PARCOE), and Ronnie Galvin, a fellow at The Democracy Collaborative working on the concept of the “reparative economy.” This discussion starts with the basic arguments for reparations for redlining practices (a topic covered by Taylor) but quickly gets into bigger ideas about broader reparations efforts for colonialism as a whole (a perspective brought by Stanford-Xosei) , as well as the connections between reparations efforts and broader economic change (from Galvin).
I went from watching this to immediately looking for other resources from PARCOE, and found a talk Esther Stanford-Xosei gave at an Extinction Rebellion event in January in the UK that was a sobering perspective to have as all the excitement about Juneteenth was happening here. Partway through she discusses the establishment of Emancipation Day in the UK. Want to know what came along with the establishment of Emancipation Day there? Reparations for former slaveowners, that’s what. Nothing will come out of the establishment of Juneteenth other than what we all organize to make come out of it, is what I take from that.
U.S. Reparations Groups:
Formerly enslaved people have been making demands for reparations since the 18th century at least. Organizing for reparations has been happening formally and informally since then, with major efforts appearing after the Civil War and during the 1960s. Here are two of the national organizations working on reparations right now.
The National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America is tracking which congressional representatives have signed onto H.R. 40. Obviously, contact yours if they aren’t yet on board.
The National African-American Reparations Committee is also helping expand the understanding of reparations and guide efforts to secure them with their Reparations Plan.
Have other resources you think Unsettling readers would benefit from knowing about? Share in the comments or send them to unsettling@substack.com.
Tarana Burke recently discussed being subject to this kind of attention from strangers on the podcast Lady Don’t Take No.
And honestly, it might hinder some other goals, like the ability to build coalitions for reparations with working class white folks who might come on board if reparations’ likely co-benefits are clear, but who may not if reparations are just painted as requiring that they pay more for things right now! This concern may not need to be central to any strategy for winning reparations, but certainly it shouldn’t be completely ignored.