“赔偿”是一个肮脏的词:反对奴隶制赔偿的规范

Lee Harris
{"title":"“赔偿”是一个肮脏的词:反对奴隶制赔偿的规范","authors":"Lee Harris","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.433020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Social norms have been used to explain a variety of legal subjects, from family law to tax law. I assert in this Article that a social norms construct may help us understand the current public debate (or lack thereof) over whether the United States should make reparations to African Americans. Specifically, I find that reparative ideas are incongruent with norms of socially acceptable behavior. My first task is to explain why there is a norm against public support for slavery reparations. I identify three sources of social norms'; norms derived from culture; norms instigated by individuals; and norms derived from the law; and explain how each source conflicts with reparative ideas and thus contributes to a norm against supporting reparations. Next, I discuss public debate over reparations in light of a norm against reparations. Specifically, I argue that an anti-reparation norm has stifled public discussion of reparations to African Americans. Predictably, it has become increasingly impossible for supporters of reparations to be open and honest. Finally, I take the liberty to look back on my argument at its weakest links.","PeriodicalId":87424,"journal":{"name":"The University of Memphis law review","volume":"423 1","pages":"409"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"'Reparations' as a Dirty Word: The Norm Against Slavery Reparations\",\"authors\":\"Lee Harris\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.433020\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Social norms have been used to explain a variety of legal subjects, from family law to tax law. I assert in this Article that a social norms construct may help us understand the current public debate (or lack thereof) over whether the United States should make reparations to African Americans. Specifically, I find that reparative ideas are incongruent with norms of socially acceptable behavior. My first task is to explain why there is a norm against public support for slavery reparations. I identify three sources of social norms'; norms derived from culture; norms instigated by individuals; and norms derived from the law; and explain how each source conflicts with reparative ideas and thus contributes to a norm against supporting reparations. Next, I discuss public debate over reparations in light of a norm against reparations. Specifically, I argue that an anti-reparation norm has stifled public discussion of reparations to African Americans. Predictably, it has become increasingly impossible for supporters of reparations to be open and honest. Finally, I take the liberty to look back on my argument at its weakest links.\",\"PeriodicalId\":87424,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The University of Memphis law review\",\"volume\":\"423 1\",\"pages\":\"409\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The University of Memphis law review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.433020\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The University of Memphis law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.433020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

社会规范被用来解释各种各样的法律主体,从家庭法到税法。我在这篇文章中断言,社会规范的构建可以帮助我们理解当前关于美国是否应该向非裔美国人赔款的公开辩论(或缺乏辩论)。具体地说,我发现修补性观念与社会可接受的行为规范不一致。我的第一个任务是解释为什么会有一个反对公众支持奴隶制赔偿的规范。我确定了社会规范的三个来源;源自文化的规范;由个人发起的规范;以及源自法律的规范;并解释每个来源如何与修复思想相冲突,从而有助于形成反对支持修复的规范。接下来,我将根据反对赔偿的规范讨论有关赔偿的公开辩论。具体来说,我认为反赔偿规范扼杀了对非裔美国人赔偿的公开讨论。可以预见的是,赔款的支持者越来越不可能公开和诚实了。最后,我冒昧地回顾一下我的论点中最薄弱的环节。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
'Reparations' as a Dirty Word: The Norm Against Slavery Reparations
Social norms have been used to explain a variety of legal subjects, from family law to tax law. I assert in this Article that a social norms construct may help us understand the current public debate (or lack thereof) over whether the United States should make reparations to African Americans. Specifically, I find that reparative ideas are incongruent with norms of socially acceptable behavior. My first task is to explain why there is a norm against public support for slavery reparations. I identify three sources of social norms'; norms derived from culture; norms instigated by individuals; and norms derived from the law; and explain how each source conflicts with reparative ideas and thus contributes to a norm against supporting reparations. Next, I discuss public debate over reparations in light of a norm against reparations. Specifically, I argue that an anti-reparation norm has stifled public discussion of reparations to African Americans. Predictably, it has become increasingly impossible for supporters of reparations to be open and honest. Finally, I take the liberty to look back on my argument at its weakest links.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信