The Benefits of Redressing Racism with Race-Neutral Remedies
This Atlantic piece by Conor Friedersdorf draws attention to an article by Ta-Nehisi Coates, author of the book Between the World and Me. Coates’ article, “The Case for Reparations” speaks to the injustices felt by the black community in regards to housing discrimination during the Jim Crow era. Friedersdorf highlights the detrimental consequences of redlining still felt today and how the individuals affected by these inequalities can be compensated in the future. Friedersdorf critiques Coates when he details a race-neutral remedy to the everlasting redlining problem. Unlike Coates, Friedersdorf speaks to the Hispanic population that continues to experience the consequences of 1900s housing discrimination.
“A race-neutral approach could still include a historic inquiry into the practice of redlining that would accurately highlight the disproportionate ways that it targeted and harmed blacks. Black victims of redlining would get their measure of justice and recompense as surely as they would under a race-specific policy.”
Through Friedersdorf’s race-neutral approach, he highlights the following major flaw in US deliberation: the country is a rather just nation with few blemishes if one looks past slavery and the Jim Crow Era. Friedersdorf claims a race-neutral remedy to past inequalities would disprove this “self-serving myth.” This is an interesting take on our conversation in class, give it a read. Is it acceptable to group all minorities into Friedersdorf’s resolution, or does this completely negate much of what Coates argues in his article?
-Cat Berry
