Slavery Reparations

5 Pages 1241 Words

Slavery and Reparations
Despite the fact that slavery officially ended over one hundred years ago, there remains discussions of owing slaves’ families reparations. Numerous articles, essays, and journals have been written arguing both sides of this important and controversial issue. In Jack E. White’s article, “Don’t Waste Your Breath,” he argues against reparations. On the contrary, Vincene Verdun’s article, “To Right an Old Wrong: Potential Defendants for Slavery Reparations are Still Around,” defends and supports reparations. These two articles differ in there arguments, appeals and audiences, and credibility.
First, the differences between White and Verdun appear in their arguments. White, an African American journalist for Time magazine, received his motivation for writing his article after reading David Horowitz’s list on why reparations are “a bad idea for blacks” (White 573-574). White said he has tangled with Horowitz in the past. Even though White and Horowitz have different viewpoints on the reparations issue, White applauds Horowitz for making reparations a story worth fighting for (574). White’s main claim in his article is that the argument over reparations is a waste of time. This belief, explains the title of his article. He claims that the issue is not worth debating. Also, he argues that the amount of money it would take to comfort his fellow African Americans is astronomically. White also claims that the white race will never pay (574). To sum up White’s article, he is against reparations; and believes they will never happen.
In contrast of White, Verdun supports reparations for slaves’ families. Verdun is an associate professor of law at the Michael E. Moritz College of Law (Verdun 23). In his essay, Verdun addresses the question of who should pay for reparations. Verdun states, “I agree that no slave masters are alive to pay the debt of slavery in America. However, the governme...