The idea of reparations for slavery is morally appealing but flawed

MITCH MCCONNELL is not known for his views on racial justice. But when asked last week whether he thought African-Americans should receive restitution for slavery and the decades of lawful discrimination that followed it, the Republican Senate leader’s response was sound. He was against the idea, he said, in part for practical reasons—for how would the recipients of compensation be selected? He also objected in principle: if African-Americans received reparations, what about the other victims of discrimination, including America’s many “waves of immigrants”? Continued, incremental improvements in the lives of black Americans seemed a more credible response to “our original sin”, said Mr McConnell. “We’ve elected an African-American president. I think we’re always a work in progress in this country.”

Democrats, who were about to hold the first congressional hearing on slavery reparations in over a decade, hit the roof. Senator Cory Booker, one of at least seven candidates in the Democratic primary to have given their support for a bill to launch a congressional probe into the issue, slammed Mr McConnell’s “ignorance”. Another candidate, Marianne Williamson, a self-help guru who has proposed making reparations to African-Americans of up to half a trillion dollars, questioned his gradualist view of racial progress. “You can’t have the future that you want until you’re willing to clean up your past.” Yet Mr McConnell’s view of the matter was similar to that of the first black president he referred to.