Education as a Platform Reparations for Black Communities

Reparations for Black Communities: Education as a Platform

Introduction

The concept that we all have an equal chance to earn the kind of riches that gives meaning to the Declaration of Independence’s bold phrase “liberty, life, and the pursuit of happiness” is the core of the American Dream. The American Dream implies that a person can be a homeowner, create a business, and build a savings account for future generations. However, the U.S. government’s decisions to deny Black Americans the opportunity to earn wealth have consistently nullified this concept (Ray & Perry, 2020). In the United States today, stark race-related inequities exist across the whole spectrum of the human condition. African Americans have shorter life spans, lower earnings, and less access to high-quality healthcare than whites. However, when it comes to education, the differences are more obvious. Because education is the key to addressing the variety of other issues confronting the African American community today (Klinenberg, 2019; Longo, 2007), identifying chances to address this issue directly is critical. As a result, this paper examines educational reform in the United States through an anti-racist and anti-oppression perspective, focusing on reparations to address racism and oppression.

Case for reparations

The atrocities carried out during the Transatlantic Slave Trade, the era of slavery, segregation through Jim Crow laws, and ongoing discrimination against African Americans have caused many historians, educators, civil rights activists, legislators, and common citizens to argue that slave descendants are entitled to reparations (Feagin & Ducey, 2018). These reparations are intended to restore, to the extent possible, the immeasurable harm caused by segregation, slavery, and discrimination, which continues to contribute to African American inequality and injustice (Franke, 2019). Property (promised but never delivered after the Civil War ended in 1865), cash transfers, and government initiatives to eradicate poverty, education, and health care are all rights that African Americans have long been denied.

Simultaneously, vocal opponents of reparations argue that they promote victimization, aggravate racial tensions, deny the incredible socioeconomic progress made in the African-American community since 1964, establish a moral hazard by forcing Americans to pay for their forefathers’ sins, and pose serious practical and logistical issues (Steele, 2015; Williams, 2019). Furthermore, according to critics, reparations supporters misunderstand historical facts and minimize the role of Africans and their governments in the slave trade. At the same time, the emphasis on group identity portrays all blacks as victims and all whites as oppressors (Williams, 2019).

Educational reparations and their sufficiency

Proposed reparations programs for African-American descendants of enslaved people include formal apologies, public recognition of historical injustice and current manifestations, direct individual payments over time, trust funds for youths, community-wide programs to invest in education, infrastructure, affordable homes, and access to trauma counseling and therapy (Corlett, 2016). In this context, reparations targeted at the education sector are educational reparations. There is a clear case of inequality between black and white schools, which is a clear disparity attributed to racism. These financing inequities date back to the so-called “separate but equal” era, codified in the United States’ laws by the Supreme Court’s Plessy v. Ferguson ruling in 1896.

Educational reparations are an important part of reparations initiatives, but they are not sufficient in and of themselves. It is important to recognize that the harm caused by slavery and the lifestyle associated with slavery is a substantial drawback that cannot be remedied with a single reparations program, such as an educational one. Experts say that reparations programs help establish and maintain national awareness of America’s racial history through education (Ewing, 2018; McKeown, 2021). Minoritization and dehumanization of Black Americans, which devalues their identity, social condition, and memory—increases poor identity development, stress, low self-esteem, and suffering—including a lack of awareness of previous trauma and ongoing discrimination.

Reparations can help perpetrators and victims show regret and foster a constructive, respectful relationship based on equal citizenship, recognition, social standing, and civic and social trust (McGary, 2010). When genuine expressive reparations are paired with monetary contributions, reparations programs can give victims, and perpetrators hope and help them work together constructively to achieve mutual goals.

Possible strategies for educational reparations

Reparations are needed because Black schools are given less money even though Black homeowners pay more property taxes than White homeowners. They can be paid by altering how Black homeowners are taxed and how Black communities’ schools are funded. This argument is based on research findings from school finance and education law specialists who have spent decades studying racial disparities in education (Green III et al., 2021). To redress racial inequities in education, a four-part reparations scheme is proposed. It covers; local property taxes, school revenues, prioritizing financing to bridge inequities in student performance, and federal monitoring.

i. Local property taxes

Housing segregation is a major factor in racial funding discrepancies. This division has resulted in significant disparities in housing values and wealth amassed by families. This impacts how much money may be raised for local public schools through property taxes. Because Black housing values are lower on average, higher tax rates are frequently used to increase municipal tax income. This takes the shape of a “Black Tax,” as referred to herein (Green III & Baker, 2021). Even with higher tax rates, Black communities in the same state or metropolitan region do not earn the same property tax income to pay for public schools. The tax rates needed to bridge these gaps would be far too high.

Black homeowners in formerly redlined or otherwise segregated neighborhoods will get direct reimbursements in the amount determined to cover the Black Tax. These rebates might place money in the hands of Black homeowners, allowing them to either boost their savings or spend more on their local public schools.

ii. School revenues

State general assistance schemes, which ensure that all schools receive equal funding, frequently fail. This is due to the fact that districts that serve Black students have less taxable wealth. Districts with a higher percentage of Black children receive more state general funding than districts with a higher percentage of White children, but not enough to close the revenue disparity. Other state subsidies to Black school districts could help bridge the gap.

iii. Financing to bridge inequalities in student performance

From graduation rates to college enrollment and test scores, money matters in improving schools and increasing student outcomes. School financial reforms have benefited Black kids in particular. In this sense, research is becoming increasingly evident. Equitable and adequate funding for public education systems is a prerequisite for ensuring that all children have an equal chance to achieve.

Weights—or cost adjustments—are included in-state school funding formulae for variables like how many students live in poverty or how many children have impairments. The premise is that such children’s education will cost more money (Green III & Baker, 2021). Because of governmental actions that have resulted in racial isolation and the economic disadvantage of schools and districts, the racial composition is an important component in incorporating in-state school funding formulae, according to the evidence and related studies.

iv. Federal monitoring

Some state aid programs worsen racial gaps, and some are predicated on the systemic discriminatory practices that generated them in the first place. Federal audits of state school funding systems are advised to discover widespread racial discrimination and worsen racial inequities. Because states have been unwilling to lead these programs on their own, federal support is required.

Challenges facing reparations

McGhee (2022) asks why it is that Americans can’t have beautiful things in her book “The Sum of Us.” She’s talking about the basics: proper roads, well-funded schools, decent housing, affordable health care, clean water and drinking air, and living-wage jobs. The tragedy is that; White America would opt to go without these nice things than invite Black America in to enjoy them together. Over the last five decades, life has become increasingly viewed as a zero-sum game. The public has been duped into believing that what is offered to one group must be denied to another (McGhee, 2022). Because of racism, the richest nation on the planet suffers from a scarcity mentality.

Another impediment to reparations is the interest convergence theory, coined by the late Derrick Bell, a law professor and the spiritual godfather of critical race theory. Interest convergence states that only when white and black interests converge will black people win civil rights triumphs. Brown vs. Board of Education is one of the most famous examples, according to Bell (1980), because it benefited white interests as well. Because inequitable quality education access ensures white socioeconomic advantage, schools and universities are natural places to exhibit interest convergence (Shih, 2017). Recent reports from around the country, on the other hand, may cause some to conclude that black interests are not only dominant on college campuses but also authoritarian.

Among the average White person, there is the common belief that the injuries caused by Slavery and the human rights violations have been adequately paid for through the various social programs that have been implemented to support the African American community. The government already has put in place programs to assist Black people in overcoming racism and discrimination. Headstart, Upward Bound, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the Higher Education Act, and the Job Corps as some examples of programs all created to help the poor, who were disproportionately African American at the time. According to some estimates, the Great Society programs have cost $305.7 billion (Kane, 2003). Therefore, this argument suggests that there is no need for additional reparation as what has been done already is enough and has served to uplift African Americans from poverty.

Generating support for reparations

Just like everything else in America, it is an uphill task to get all citizens as well as all representatives to agree with the need for reparations for the crimes and human rights violations meted out against African Americans from the slavery era to the modern date marked with police brutality towards black young men. This challenge is even more with the continued growth of the far-right groups that believe that “White Lives Matter Too” and the increase of mass shootings of Black People in Majority-Black Neighborhood, for example, the recent shooting in Buffalo NewYork (Somoano & McNeil-Willson, 2022), by self-declared white supremacists. However, it is still possible to get on board most Americans and Republic Representatives to break the filibuster and pass laws that support reparations. The most effective strategy proposed herein is diplomacy and persuasion, founded on the understanding that an injustice anywhere is a risk to justice everywhere. Moreover, it is obvious that black neighborhoods still lag in infrastructure, living conditions, and access to social services. This lag may directly affect African Americans, but their presence means that White Americans cannot have the optimal, best demonstrated by the COVID-19 Pandemic.

In the effort to create support for reparations, it is also wise to have common-sense programs that do not seem to disadvantage one group for the benefit of another. It is easier to generate support for reparations; it means reaffirming the nation’s commitment to fair opportunity for all citizens—especially descendants of those previously enslaved. Better schools, more and better-paying jobs, acceptable universal health coverage, a policy for immigration that doesn’t mean increased competition for menial and pressure on the wages of America’s lowest-wage workers, improved nutrition, particularly in early childhood, higher alcohol taxes, more effective and less punitive enforcement of drug laws— these are programs that would be easy to generate support among the citizenry as well as elected representatives (Coates, 2015). However, if reparations mean what most Americans understand—money moving from some Americans to others in a race-conscious manner to balance past racial wrongs—it’s a bad idea for everyone.

Reparations in the long term

The majority of the reparations programs are founded on the argument that the state should have whatever powers are required to guarantee that the poorest citizens are as well-off as possible (these powers must be consistent with various basic rights and freedoms). This viewpoint is based on Rawls’ theory of justice, which states that unequal wealth and income distribution are acceptable only when those disadvantaged are better off than under any other allocation (). To such arguments, Robert Nozick (2004) responds that they are based on a faulty understanding of distributive justice: they incorrectly define a just distribution in terms of the pattern it exhibits at a given time (e.g., a distribution that is discriminatory to some extent or an equal distribution) or the historical circumstances of its development (e.g., those who worked harder have more), instead of the transactions through which it develops. Through the Entitlement Theory of justice in acquisition, Nozick believes that any distribution of “holdings,” as he refers to them, is just if (and only if) it is the result of a reasonable distribution through lawful means (Nozick, 2004). One permissible method is appropriating unowned property in circumstances where the acquisition would not be detrimental to others. The voluntary transfer of holdings to another person is a second option. Correction of past injustices in the acquisition or transfer of holdings is the third option. According to Nozick, anyone who has obtained what he has through these ways has a moral right. As a result, according to the “entitlement” view of justice, the distribution of holdings in a community is just if (and only if) everyone in that society is entitled to what he has.

Similarly, Sandel (2010) argues that there are three approaches to justice; the general welfare of the community, individual rights, and the value of good citizenship. Based on these approaches, the need for reparations should thus seek to satisfy the welfare of the African American Community, the individual rights of the victims or descendants of enslaved people, and foster the feeling of African Americans as being full, complete, and justified American Citizens.