by Leslie Lytle, Messenger Staff Writer

At a Nov. 18 lecture, authors William A. Darity Jr. and A. Kirsten Mullen unpacked the argument made in their book, “From Here to Equality: Reparations for Black Americans in the Twenty-first Century.” Reparations are not a choice, Darity and Mullen maintain, but the nation’s obligation to end the wealth gap perpetuated by slavery and ongoing government sanctioned circumstances that continue to this day.

“Wealth structures the participation in society,” Darity insisted. Black households would need to save 100 percent of their income for 14 years to eliminate the black-white wealth gap. Only 4 percent of blacks have assets over $1 million, while 25 percent of whites do. Blacks descended from enslaved ancestors (12 percent of Americans) have only two percent of the nation’s wealth. Single elderly white women with a college degree have 35 times the wealth of single elderly black women with a college degree. Even more startling, single elderly white women without a college degree have 5 times the wealth of black women in the same non-degree category and 5.5 times the wealth of single elderly black women with a degree. Likewise pointing to the fallacy in the notion more education for blacks will fix things, blacks with a college degree have two-thirds the net worth of whites who never finished high school. And as for financial behavior and financial literacy, in some categories, blacks save more.

A progression of government sanctioned socio-economic circumstances perpetuated the wealth gap, according to Darity and Mullen. The story begins with chattel slavery followed by the post-civil-war government promise of 40 acres for freed African Americans, land never received. Coincidentally, the 1862 Homestead Act gave white American deed to 160 acres. With the means of sustenance through a small farm denied them, blacks went on to suffer government sanctioned massacre, destruction of their homes, government policies intended to recreate the conditions of slavery, and Jim Crow era segregation. Following on the heels of Jim Crow, red lining, credit starvation, and denial of GI bill benefits stymied African American home ownership, while mass incarceration of blacks and police execution of unarmed blacks continue to this day.

Circa 1950s facts: of 3,229 GI Bill recipients of economic assistance, only two were people of color; in 1959, African Americans were three times more likely to live in poverty, and this is still true today.

Initiatives such as renaming buildings and taking down statues “are racial equality initiatives … not reparations,” Mullen insisted. “Reparations are not a matter of personal or individual institutional guilt; black reparations are a matter of national responsibility.”

Mullen outlined reparation’s three steps: “acknowledgement,” the admission of culpability by the responsible party; “redress,” the action of financial restitution; “closure,” agreement by both parties no further payment is needed.

Giving examples of restitution paid to victims, Mullen cited payments to families of 9/11 victims, families of children massacred at Sandy Hook Elementary School, Japanese-American WWII internment-camp prisoners, and German Holocaust victims.

In Germany, the country proceeded with the payments without a popular mandate, Mullen pointed out. Since 2000, the number of Americans supporting reparations for African Americans has increased from 4 percent to 30 percent, she said. Darity and Mullen set two criteria for receiving reparation: one, at least one ancestor who can trace lineage to slavery; two, a person self-identified as black, African American, or negro before the program was established.

Darity and Mullen estimated the cost at $14 trillion over 10 years. Countering claims the sum was unfeasible, Darity pointed to the amount the government spent in response to the recession and the pandemic. Mullen cited $6.8 trillion in unaccounted for Defense Department spending. Acknowledging the current U.S. Congress would not support reparations, Darity said, “The political task is to change congress.”

Asked about what the University could do, Darity said scholarships for the unrepresented St. Mark’s community would be a positive step, but stressed, “That would not be reparations.” Mullen suggested the University “should use its might to lobby and petition congress.” Addressing the audience she asked, “Will you engage your friends and classmates in the cause?”