Reparations for the future

Journal of Social Philosophy 37 (3):396–405 (2006)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

All of these claims for reparations have mobilized popular support, and all share a degree of intuitive plausibility. The challenge to the theorist is to judge whether and which of such demands are grounded in sound principles of political normativity, so as to be able to select out the valid claims and to measure how the urgency of these claims compares with other demands on the public agenda. The most basic question for those considering the justifications of reparations is how to orient their theories within the space of reasons. Do valid claims for reparation rest at the deepest level on reasons we have for redressing a past injustice? Or do they rather rest on reasons we have to improve our current relations so that we can get along better in the future? Are valid reparative demands backward- or forward-looking?

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,423

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
399 (#48,055)

6 months
19 (#130,686)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Leif Wenar
King's College London

Citations of this work

Intergenerational justice.Lukas Meyer - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Backward-looking reparations and structural injustice.Maeve McKeown - 2021 - Contemporary Political Theory 20 (4):771-794.
Should the beneficiaries pay?Robert Huseby - 2015 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 14 (2):1470594-13506366.
Should the beneficiaries pay?Robert Huseby - 2015 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 14 (2):209-225.

View all 24 citations / Add more citations