With respect to Mr. Coates’ concept, would it be less-wrong (e.g. more agreeable) if “reparations” arrived in a form other than cash?
Thanks for the link. Haven’t read the details of his proposals for a while.
That essay gives an exhaustive inventory of how awful slavery was. And it gives examples of how specific people were wronged. To that point I agree with it. A gay person who was hooked up to a “fruit machine” and lost his job, who should have had a pension, who should have had security, Yep, that we can deal with. A black person whose home was repossessed because someone came along with a redline in that neighbourhood, maybe we’ve got the documents for that too. That doesn’t justify compensation for people who
resemble those victims of discrimination, whether they suffered to the same degree or not, or not at all. And it doesn’t justify withholding support from victims who do not resemble those specifically wronged individuals. If they fired gay people in Canada from the voodoo read outs of a cockamamie gay detector with no more scientific validity than a Scientologist’s “E Meter” or some good old Utah cold fusion, then they fired other people for dumb reasons too.
And to emphasize the point about history: we go after 90 year old Nazis. That’s good and ethical and
possible because we can still find documentary evidence of
specific wrongdoing. I’m open to an approach like that with other kinds of discrimination. But we’re not dividing the world into oppressors and oppressed based on physical resemblance and then deciding like the actual details of what happened to an individual don’t matter. My family tree shows some of my ancestors being exiled from England to Ireland. To whom do I write for the cheque?
With compensation in cash off the table, what about symbolic gestures?
I got an apology last year from my prime minister because...he was very sorry that he spent his own career fighting for equality?? Because when other people — who weren’t apologizing— held power,
they screwed over other gay people? That apology would have meant something from Mulroney or Harper. But what would Trudeau have to apologize for? Appointing a gay cabinet minister. What would Chrétien have to apologize for? Legalizing equal marriage? What would Trudeau the elder have to apologize for? Decriminalizing us?
Some people see a difference between the accountability of the individual and say I’m missing the “Accountability of State” as though this is some separate concept. I can’t agree. An apology has to come from the wrongdoer for it to be meaningful and that’s someone specific who failed in their particular duties. The only apology I need from my country was them changing the law, bringing in the constitution, making a better way.
That carries some weight.
Also that Coates is dead wrong about the value of “respectability.” He’s just totally wrong. Gay people have made the strides we did by showing ourselves to be part of civilization. We made the case.