[American Thinker] The genesis of the Democratic Party’s current infatuation with the idea of reparations for slavery and Jim Crow can largely be traced to an article in the Atlantic from 2014 by Ta’Nehisi Coates’ "The Case for Reparations." Make no mistake, the "Case for Reparations" is not about money, it is about "moral reckoning" and remaking the United States.
Like most things Coates writes, few people who cite his work appear to have actually read it. In 2014 Coates was the enfant terrible of the left, now replaced by another even less impressive pseudo-intellection who goes by the moniker "AOC."
But for a certain and relatively large subset of liberals (and particularly white liberals) Coates is the touchstone to most things black. That is, if Coates if for it they are, and more so, if Coates wrote it, or said it, it must be morally justified. It pretty much goes without saying that within this liberal subset are pretty all the Democratic presidential candidates.
Reparations are not about money. They are about a day of judgment for the United States that will restore justice to African-Americans by eradicating "white supremacy."
The immediate means would be through H.R. 40 a House bill that’s been pending for decades. On June 19th the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties held a hearing on H.R. 40 -- star witness Ta’Nehisi Coates, along with actor Danny Glover and other worthies. The stated purpose of H.R. 40 is to establish a Commission to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African-Americans Act. As the hearing continued into this week, President Trump weighed in on Tuesday saying "I don’t see it happening." Of course, that’s likely only to encourage the movement. |