Florida and Slave Reparations
In an op-ed for the Miami Herald
(www.miamiherald.com/851/story/483609.html) the former chair of the psychology department at Florida International University, Marvin Dunn, addressed the state of Florida’s recent passage of an official declaration of apology for black slavery. Dunn expressed disappointment at the declaration, calling it “a meaningless act” that “cost the state nothing.” While recognizing the inherent difficulties involved in paying reparations to individual African-Americans, he suggests four ways by which the state may direct compensation to Blacks as a whole. His proposals are, first, that Florida create a comprehensive digital database of all public records relating to the practice of slavery in the state; second, that it underwrite production of a documentary on the history of slavery in Florida; third, that the state provide 1000 full college scholarships per year to Black students, and, lastly, that it should erect a monument to Blacks once held as slaves in Florida.
Certainly no historian (nor, indeed, any right-thinking citizen) could object to providing easy access to information about a subject as important as slavery. Similarly with the production of a film on the topic. Both can promote a wider dissemination and, one would hope, appreciation of the institution of slavery as it was once practiced in the state of Florida.
Dunn’s scholarship idea, by contrast, is problematic as it would seem to be merely a form of individual reparation payments offered under another guise. The idea of scholarships being awarded solely on the basis of kinship to a slave ancestor – even when those awarded such scholarships would have to meet all other admissions criteria – is still fraught with the same pitfalls as cash payments paid directly to individual descendants – and for those same reasons would be unlikely to garner the public support required for passage. In addition to the inherent unfairness of potentially awarding scholarships to those not in need of financial assistance (while the underprivileged go without), there is the larger question of just how Black a person must be in order to qualify. In an age of genetic testing, would some Whites also qualify, provided they could establish a certain degree of African ancestry? Not to mention the more likely problem facing Black state residents who, though possessing a long family history in Florida, lack any record of enslavement there. The payment of reparations in any form, it seems, is a solution whose time has long since passed.
The proposal for a slavery monument is an ambiguous one. A lot would depend on the form and intent such a monument would take. A monument meant simply as a statement of past shame – even one which, as Dunn suggests, honors the contributions made by slaves to “the early growth of the state” – would be little more than a codification in stone of the declaration of regret and apology already issued and likely would not attain much public resonance. In addition, there is also the not insignificant matter of Florida having been a Spanish possession until 1821, when it was ceded to the United States, effectively making the history of slavery practiced within its borders a shared responsibility. Moreover, any monument dedicated solely to commemorating slavery in Florida may be both too narrowly focused and too broadly defined to be of much use.
A monument modelled after South Carolina’s Black Heritage Memorial, located on the State House grounds, with its depictions of the Black (not merely slave) experience across the full length of the state’s history, might offer a better solution. The problem with monuments as such, however, is that they often serve as endpoints to the public discussion of an issue, and not as starting points. Museums and historic sites are perhaps better suited to preserving and promoting memories of the past. In any event, the core impetus behind any effort to deal in this form with the issue of slavery should be to nurture a greater measure of knowledge and appreciation of the complex history of race in America and how that history continues to have meaning for us today.
(www.miamiherald.com/851/story/483609.html) the former chair of the psychology department at Florida International University, Marvin Dunn, addressed the state of Florida’s recent passage of an official declaration of apology for black slavery. Dunn expressed disappointment at the declaration, calling it “a meaningless act” that “cost the state nothing.” While recognizing the inherent difficulties involved in paying reparations to individual African-Americans, he suggests four ways by which the state may direct compensation to Blacks as a whole. His proposals are, first, that Florida create a comprehensive digital database of all public records relating to the practice of slavery in the state; second, that it underwrite production of a documentary on the history of slavery in Florida; third, that the state provide 1000 full college scholarships per year to Black students, and, lastly, that it should erect a monument to Blacks once held as slaves in Florida.
Certainly no historian (nor, indeed, any right-thinking citizen) could object to providing easy access to information about a subject as important as slavery. Similarly with the production of a film on the topic. Both can promote a wider dissemination and, one would hope, appreciation of the institution of slavery as it was once practiced in the state of Florida.
Dunn’s scholarship idea, by contrast, is problematic as it would seem to be merely a form of individual reparation payments offered under another guise. The idea of scholarships being awarded solely on the basis of kinship to a slave ancestor – even when those awarded such scholarships would have to meet all other admissions criteria – is still fraught with the same pitfalls as cash payments paid directly to individual descendants – and for those same reasons would be unlikely to garner the public support required for passage. In addition to the inherent unfairness of potentially awarding scholarships to those not in need of financial assistance (while the underprivileged go without), there is the larger question of just how Black a person must be in order to qualify. In an age of genetic testing, would some Whites also qualify, provided they could establish a certain degree of African ancestry? Not to mention the more likely problem facing Black state residents who, though possessing a long family history in Florida, lack any record of enslavement there. The payment of reparations in any form, it seems, is a solution whose time has long since passed.
The proposal for a slavery monument is an ambiguous one. A lot would depend on the form and intent such a monument would take. A monument meant simply as a statement of past shame – even one which, as Dunn suggests, honors the contributions made by slaves to “the early growth of the state” – would be little more than a codification in stone of the declaration of regret and apology already issued and likely would not attain much public resonance. In addition, there is also the not insignificant matter of Florida having been a Spanish possession until 1821, when it was ceded to the United States, effectively making the history of slavery practiced within its borders a shared responsibility. Moreover, any monument dedicated solely to commemorating slavery in Florida may be both too narrowly focused and too broadly defined to be of much use.
A monument modelled after South Carolina’s Black Heritage Memorial, located on the State House grounds, with its depictions of the Black (not merely slave) experience across the full length of the state’s history, might offer a better solution. The problem with monuments as such, however, is that they often serve as endpoints to the public discussion of an issue, and not as starting points. Museums and historic sites are perhaps better suited to preserving and promoting memories of the past. In any event, the core impetus behind any effort to deal in this form with the issue of slavery should be to nurture a greater measure of knowledge and appreciation of the complex history of race in America and how that history continues to have meaning for us today.
KMPRINCE - Wed Apr 16, 08:36 Topic: U.S. memorial culture
We also see, however, how memorials become contested sites or sites actually used for political purposes. Sometimes this comes about when a new generation comes along - as with the Forrest memorial. Sometimes the use is improvised and has only tangental connection to the content - such as the use by the Russian community of the Barclay de Tolly memorial in Riga. It serves as a marker of Russianness near the city center, so it is a kind of political rallying point.
While I agree that a museum would be better, I can imagine that a memorial might actually end up serving some kind of activist or political purpose not unrelated to slavery. In any case, I am sure the debates about its location, form and accompanying text would be very interesting.