A Lockean argument for Black reparations

The Journal of Ethics 7 (1):63-91 (2003)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This is a defense of black reparations using the theory of reparations set out in John Locke''s The Second Treatise of Government. I develop two main arguments, what I call the ``inheritance argument'''' and the ``counterfactual argument,''''both of which have been thought to fail. In no case do I appeal to the false ideas that present day United States citizens are guilty of slavery or must pay reparation simply because the U.S. Government was once complicit in the crime.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
740 (#78,845)

6 months
47 (#176,555)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Bernard Boxill
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Citations of this work

The Heart and its Attitudes.Stephen Darwall - 2024 - Oxford: Oxford University Press.
“Ideal Theory” as Ideology.Charles W. Mills - 2005 - Hypatia 20 (3):165-184.
Reconciliation.Linda Radzik & Colleen Murphy - 2015 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

View all 88 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Superseding historic injustice.Jeremy Waldron - 1992 - Ethics 103 (1):4-28.
The Morality of Reparation.Bernard R. Boxill - 1972 - Social Theory and Practice 2 (1):113-123.
The new Indian claims and original rights to land.David Lyons - 1977 - Social Theory and Practice 4 (3):249–72.
Existential Limits to the Rectification of past Wrongs.Christopher W. Morris - 1984 - American Philosophical Quarterly 21 (2):175 - 182.

View all 8 references / Add more references