See Debatepedia's Global Climate Change Debate Series with the UN Foundation's The People Speak. Press release.
Resolved: Governments ought to make economic reparations for their country’s historical injustices
From Debatepedia
| ||||||
]Overview
]Definitions
]Governments
It may be in the interest of the affirmative to limit this to governments of developed countries. One of the difficulties of economic reparations is that it uses government money for basically a moral purpose. If the historical injustices affected economics, it may help create economic equality. But reparations for past injustices are not generally economic programs. Therefore the affirmative may wish to limit "governments" to developed governments that can afford the reparations. A government that has had multiple regime changes in the past decade may run a country burdened with historical injustices, but it probably wouldn't be able to afford the reparations.
]Ought to
Ought means to have a duty or moral obligation. Therefore, the use of "ought to" in this resolution implies that a government has a moral obligation to make economic reparations.
]Economic Reparations
Payments offered as an indemnity for loss or damage.
Who would these payments be made to?
]Country's Historical Injustices
Times in a nations history in which individuals were not given their fair due.
]Country's
This could be defined in a more inclusive sense, meaning injustices by the government and the society. It would then include a huge realm of injustices, including vigilantism and media abuse. Otherwise, and this may be preferable for the affirmative to keep the debate more specific, it can be defined only as injustices made by the government. Even under this definition, it could still include injustices made by the people that the government made a conscious decision to let go unpunished.
]Historical
It may be necessary to address how long ago in history these injustices can have occurred. It seems illogical that the Italian government would be responsible for the injustices of the Roman Empire, but a general guideline for this may need to be proposed by the affirmative.
]Injustices
In practice these are going to be subjective, and will have to be defined by the government itself. For the sake of a value debate, this is not really the affirmative's problem, because that side is only arguing that whatever those injustices are, the government ought make economic reparations for them.
]Affirming the Topic
| Arguments | Responses |
|
[ ]Argument #1 | |
|
[ ]YesArgument. |
[ ]NoType your responses here. |
|
[ ]Argument #2 | |
|
[ ]Yes |
[ ]No |
|
[ ]Argument #3 | |
|
[ ]Yes |
[ ]No |
|
[ ]Argument #4 | |
|
[ ]Yes |
[ ]No |
]Negating the Topic
]Relevant Examples
- The Holocaust
- Slavery in the U.S.
]Related Pages on Debatepedia
]External Links and Reources
]Reparations for the Holocaust
- Germany to compensate more Holocaust survivors - BBC - Dec. 27, 1997
- Gypsies ask IBM for Holocaust reparation - BBC - Jun. 10, 2001
]Reparations for slavery in the U.S.
- Black Churches: Struggle Within - New York Times - Jul. 21, 1969 (abstract)
- Church Supports Rejection of Black Manifesto New York Times - Aug. 19, 1969 (abstract).
- Blacks Press the Case for Reparations for Slavery New York Times - Jul. 21, 1994 (abstract).
- Seeking Out a Just Way To Make Amends for Slavery - New York Times Aug. 12, 2000 (abstract).
- "Reparations for slavery: A cause for reparations, a case against" by David Horowitz
- "In Defense of Black Reparations" by Dr. Manning Marable October 2002