Brent Staples
An editorial writer for the New York Times, Brent Staples (b. 1951) is author of the award-winning memoir Parallel Times: Growing Up in Black and White (1994). The following essay appeared as an op-ed piece in the New York Times on September 2, 2001.
My great-grandfather John Wesley Staples was born in Bedford County, Va., on July 4, 1865. Independence Day of that year was laden with symbolism because it heralded the end of slavery through the 13th Amendment. Family legend has it that John Wesley was one of the first free Negroes born in his county. But three of his siblings were born into slavery, as was his mother, Somerville, who was known in the family as an Ethiopian.
Slavery is nearer to us in time than most Americans understand. My eldest uncle, who turns 84 this year, has often recalled meeting former slaves when he was a boy at John Wesley’s farm in Troutville, Va. Had John Wesley lived to my uncle’s age, he would had seen the beginning of the civil rights movement and met the great-grandson who would later become an editorial writer for The New York Times.
The post-slavery South was especially brutal for elderly black people who had given their working lives to their masters and could no longer care for themselves. Freedom, such as it was, was further circumscribed during the late 19th century, when Southern states were writing Negroes out of the state constitutions, denying them the right to vote, hold office or attend school. The trend was deepened by sharecropping and other forms of bondage.
Black Americans often suppressed slave memories out of horror and shame. But the Staples family embraced its story out of pride in how well John Wesley and his wife, Eliza, managed to fare in the aggressively racist environment of the South in the late 19th century and early 20th century. My great-grandparents had the benefit of a strong extended family, allowing them to pool resources, including manpower. The Staples family protected the farm and John Wesley’s wholesaling business with shotguns and pistols that were evident even at the dinner table. With no school available for black children, John Wesley and Eliza joined with their neighbors and built one in a field at the intersection of their three properties.
5
The teacher is listed in my great-aunt Sophronia’s grade school composition book as a “Miss Marion B. Brown.” She worked at the one-room school in return for room and board from the families. When John Wesley died in 1940, he left behind a literate family, a thriving farm and $40,000 in cash—a small fortune by standards of the time. This achievement paved the way for my father’s generation and mine, which included the first college-bound members of the Staples family line.
Black Americans made spectacular progress beginning in the decades after slavery, moving from cotton fields to the boardroom in just over a century. But the recent debate about reparations for slavery has introduced a different narrative in which black people are cast as a victim class seeking compensation for the suffering of ancestors. The most popular version of the reparations proposal is found in The Debt: What America Owes to Blacks, by the Africa analyst Randall Robinson. The book has gained surprising credibility on the political left while generating a considerable backlash among moderate and conservative black intellectuals.
Targeted compensation is legal and morally just. The state of Florida made the right gesture in 1994 when it gave college scholarships to descendants from the black community of Rosewood, which was destroyed by whites in 1923 while the state did nothing.1 The federal government has rightly compensated modern-day Native Americans for lands taken from them in the last century. Supporters of reparations have at least a moral case when they argue that companies that enriched themselves in slavery should attempt restitution when documents are specific enough to permit it.
But the sweeping notion that individual black Americans are owed a “debt” for slavery is a bridge too far. Black families have made and lost fortunes just as white families have. There is in addition no provable connection between 19th-century bondage and specific cases of 21st-century destitution. For these reasons, a publicly financed reparations program based on ancestry is not sustainable politically.
Such a program would logically be open to millions of people who have lived as “white” for generations but are descended from enslaved black people. The program would also be available to the descendants of black slave owners, who were far more common than many people like to admit. Black masters in South Carolina, for example, were confined to the margins of society but held many of the same attitudes about race as whites. Black masters continued to hold slaves even as the Union Army prepared for its terrible march through South Carolina.
10
The reparations debate is part of a burgeoning discussion about the role of slavery in American history. But by blaming history alone for modern-day social ills like poverty, illiteracy and unemployment, reparations advocates are unwittingly saying that these problems are so deeply rooted as to be unsolvable. They are also subverting the true story of black people in the United States. This story is one of extraordinary achievement in the face of gargantuan obstacles. It begins in the waning hours of slavery and continues to this very day.
(2001)