Should Native Americans receive reparations?

Should Native Americans receive reparations?

Opening remarks

The issue of reparation is not new to us. We have heard it time and again. When the issue is raised, the African Americans are the ones that come to our minds first (Kane 190). However, in the recent past, the issue of Native Americans receiving reparations for the ill-gotten gains of early Americans who drove them off their lands has been debated extensively. Like every other reparation issue, this issue enjoys support among some races, but it does not enjoy support among other races.

In this presentation, I am going to convince you that Native Americans should not receive reparations. My three points of argument will include we are not responsible for the sins of our fore fathers, we should learn a lesson from gambling revenue and we should acknowledge that legislation giving back land and allocating money to native people faces many obstacles. Thesis: As such, Native Americans should not receive reparations because it would not be possible to support this claim legally.

 

 

Con Side

Firstly, past is past and there is no need of going back to it. In fact, the history of the way we treated the Native Americans happened so long ago that we are not responsible for the so called the sins of our fore fathers. Accordingly, we should not go back to the past injustices because even if they teach us a lesson or two, we do not have anything to do with past injustices. Our fore fathers did what they did and because that is long gone, we should look ahead by forgetting past injustices. Going back to the past awakens many wrong things that we cannot handle right now. We cannot even justify most of them legally because there is no direct link (Brophy 812). For example, we cannot justify that Native American failed to go to school or prosper because their lands were taken away by the people that drove them off their lands.

Secondly, the legislation giving back land and allocating money to native people faces a number of obstacles. Some of those obstacles include the challenge of identifying the victims of the injustice, the immunity and sovereignty question that both state and federal governments enjoy in the private action law suits and the difficulties of establishing direct causation of the injustice on the native people. The most important obstacle is the statute limitation that specify the period within which injustice survivors can file their cases (Obuah 49). Given that the specified period of filing the case is six years, then it may not be possible for the Native Americans to file the case and prosecute those responsible for the injustice (Ogletree 281).

Thirdly, the revenue from gambling teaches a lesson that we should not forget. It teaches us that when we gamble and win, we should be careful next time. For the Native Americans, it teaches them that if they gamble this problem and win they should be careful of becoming problem gamblers expecting to win every time. Accordingly, the moral thing to do would be to deny the Native Americans reparations because it would not be possible to support their case legally.

Concluding remarks

My three points have been that we do not need to go back to the past because the past is long gone, legislation giving back land and allocating money to native people has many obstacles and that we should learn a lesson from gambling revenue. With these three points, I strongly believe that Native Americans should not receive reparations because it would not be possible for them to support their case legally.

 

Work cited

Brophy, Alfred. Reconsidering reparations. Indiana law journal, 81, 2006. Print.

Kane, Gregory. Why the reparations movement should fail. University of Maryland law journal of race, religion, gender and class, 3.1, 2003. Print.

Obuah, Emmanuel. The politics of reparations: The academic epistemic communities and the implications of reparation debate on African-American and Africa’s quest for reparations. Open journal of political science, 6, 2016. Print.

Ogletree, Charles. Repairing the past: New efforts in the reparations debate in America. Harvard civil rights – civil liberties law review, 38, 2003. Print.