A Response to “An Idea”: An Argument against Reparations for Slavery
Your opinion is important to us, please comment on this article.
by Michael Hall
It was just a century and a half ago when one of the most horrific ongoing crimes mankind has ever committed was abolished in the United States. This, of course, is none other than slavery. But the crimes didn’t stop there. Segregation endured for another 100 years. And even today, racism still endures. No one can deny that these transgressions were unjust. But a dispute does exist over whose responsible today for these actions. Manning Marable, in his article “An Idea Whose Time Has Come..: Whites Have an Obligation to Recognize Slavery’s Legacy,” argues that white Americans should pay reparations to the descendants of slaves. However, the argument that Marable proposes fails for a number of reasons. Not only does Marable’s argument fail due to his use of emotive techniques, faulty logic, and a lack of evidence, but also to his failure to realize that his argument is unjust and does nothing to confront the real issue.
Although Marable uses personal experience and connotative language as techniques to emotively involve his audience, the argument ultimately fails as these techniques do nothing but cloud the issue. For example, the article begins with a historical anecdote of how his great-grandfather was “sold on an auction block” (Marable 108). This narrative is intended to emotionally hook the audience into sympathizing with the author. The expected result is that the audience, depending on race, will develop feelings of either guilt or anger. And even if this anecdote did not succeed in emotionally stirring his readers, Marable soon continues the assault by using a variety of negatively-charged connotative terms. Some of these terms and phrases are: crime against our humanity, human-rights violations, Jim Crow segregation, structural racism, white indifference, disproportionate wealth, white privilege, and black inequality (Marable 108-109). Once again, these terms were specifically chosen to stir emotions such as guilt and anger so as to sway his audience into relating with his case. Though seemingly effective on the first time reader, these techniques, upon closer inspection, do nothing but cloud the issue and thus fail to advance Marable’s case.
Marable’s argument also fails due to the numerous logical fallacies the article contains. For example, a fallacy is committed when Marable asks his audience the following question: “Do Americans have the capacity and vision to dismantle these structural barriers that deny democratic rights and opportunities to millions of their fellow citizens” (108)? The fallacy that is present in the preceding statement is known as a “complex question.” This fallacy traps the reader into admitting a premise that they would not have otherwise accepted without additional sufficient evidence to support that premise. In this example, the reader must answer “yes” or “no” to the question. But the question is loaded. Regardless of the answer the reader gives, the act of answering the question can only work in the author’s favor. This is because once the reader has answered the question, he or she has already acknowledged that there are in fact “structural barriers” in place. If you answer “yes” you believe we can tear down those “structural barriers,” and if you said “no” you believe we cannot. Either way, the existence of those barriers is now assumed. The problem is that there is no sufficient evidence given to support the premise prior to the question being asked. Therefore, Marable commits a logical fallacy, and, as a result, his argument fails.
Another fault in Marable’s argument is the lack of evidence presented. For example, Marable states that the “fundamental problem of American democracy in the 21st century is the problem of ‘structural racism’” (108). It very well may be. However, no evidence is given to support this claim; the claim which his entire argument is based off of. Another example of a lack of evidence is when Marable states: “The disproportionate wealth that most whites enjoy today was first constructed from centuries of unpaid black labor. Many white institutions, including Ivy League universities, insurance companies and banks, profited from slavery” (109). First of all, no evidence is given to support any of the information he presents in this statement. It may be true that “whites” have an overall higher income that “blacks.” But in an argument, a statement like this needs suitable statistics, not assumption, to back up its claim. Another problem with the same statement is the listing of the “white institutions” that supposedly benefited from slavery. Although Marable is quick to identify the certain types of institutions that were involved, he fails to submit any research that collaborates the information he has given. So due to the lack of evidence presented in the article, Marable’s argument ultimately fails.
Marable fails to realize that the disbursement of reparations for past transgressions is not only unjust, but it will do nothing to help solve the real issue. First of all, the most obvious argument against reparations is that the perpetrators and the victims have long ago passed away. Slavery was abolished almost 150 years ago. No one alive today was a slave. No one alive today was a slave owner. No one alive today was a businessman who made money off of slavery. Therefore, no one alive today can be held accountable for those crimes, and likewise no one alive today is in a position to accept compensation. A second possible argument against reparations could be that they would not solve anything. Let’s say that reparations are given out to the descendants of the victims. Does that make the crimes of our nation’s past disappear? Are they then forgiven? Has justice been served? What message will we be sending to our young ones: that money will solve anything? Will we demean the memory of slavery by relating it to something as base as financial compensation? The issue of slavery’s legacy is indeed a difficult one—one that may have no good answer. The racism that endures today may have its roots in history, but the issue is something that must be solved in the present, and not in the past. What has been done cannot be undone. It may be that the better choice is to learn from our mistakes and to never forget the past.
Overall, Marable fails in constructing a convincing persuasive argument. He uses techniques that stir the emotion of the audience and cloud the issue. He also commits numerous logical fallacies. And in addition, Marable fails to present any sufficient evidence to back up his claims. Finally, Marable fails to understand that the argument he is proposing is not only unjust, but would also do nothing to solve racial tensions. So not only does Marable’s argument fail due to his use of emotive techniques, faulty logic, and a lack of evidence, but also to his failure to realize that his argument is unjust and does nothing to confront the real issue.
Marable, Manning. “An Idea Whose Time Has Come..: Whites Have an Obligation to Recognize Slavery’s Legacy.” Reading and Writing Short Arguments. Ed. William Vesterman. 5th ed. New York: McGraw, 2006. 108-109.
Leave a reply