PPECMC2023Sextons

  After reading Taiwo’s Reconsidering Reparations , I am deeply persuaded by his account detailing the Global Racial Empire’s influence on our current world order. There is clear reason to pursue a justice for the global south on account of the various injustices outlined.   Revisiting The Problem of Global Justice, I think Nagel is mistaken in his cosmopolitan approach vindicating powerful nations from their obligations to global justice. Where before I was persuaded by his reasoning, now I think he puts the cart before the horse, wrongly considering political legitimacy as the standard which holds institutions/nations responsible for justice , rather than how historical injustice has paved the way for illegitimate government that still has justifiable claim to justice. I side with Taiwo in viewing justice as a debt owed to the global south on account of historical and continued abuses to its political/economic/social legitimacy for the gain of wealthy nations. When you add ...

Wendt and Táíwò The concluding sentence of chapter two of Reconsidering Reparations reminded me of a previous Gov70 reading. Táíwò, on page 67, writes, “If slavery and colonialism built the world and its current basic scheme of social injustice, the proper task of social justice is no smaller: it is, quite literally, to remake the world.” I agree with Táíwò that we would need to undertake a “remaking,” but I think there is perhaps one critical aspect of his theory that should be addressed. If these systems of exploitation are recognizable, why haven’t they been tackled before due to moral reasons, not economic ones? One explanation can be found in the theory of Anarchy. In international relations, Anarchy is the theory that the world lacks any form of a supreme “leader” or authority. Therefore, a lack of ultimate authority has allowed many to justify “self-help” ideologies or the idea that states are out for self-survival and power.  Pushing back against the view most prominently i...

I've spent way too long trying to argue against Henry's point because it just seems wrong to conclude with "there is no current social framework by which we might call their lasting effects socially unjust–at least under the political conception of justice". Yet, the more I thought about it, the more I felt I had to agree with Henry's argument regardless of how strange it felt to do so. Still, I did have a few ideas as I was thinking of how to refute Henry's conclusion: -------------------------------------------- 1) With the hypothetical situation Henry provides, if we were to fully extend its logic to our current world, I think Prof. Hurley would have also created a division between the A and B group that would have maintained even into Tuesday. I think were that division were to have taken place, even after Prof. Hurley disbanded the government, the division would have remained and the hierarchy of power would continue into the rest of the week. It seems fa...

 In chapter 2 of  Olúfẹ́mi O. Táíwò's Reconsidering Reparations, he explains how the 'Atlantic Order' and "Global Racial Empire" was created through continuous historical instances of slavery and colonialism of the Global South, by various countries in the Global North. As such, he emphasizes that "history is not simply a point of comparison to the present. It is a way to map the currents that engulf us in the present" (36). From this claim, he urges readers to realize that when current issues within the Global South are discussed, it is false that "they themselves are to blame for the continent's problems... this snapshot view of [political problems] neglects the role of colonialism in explaining the strengths and weaknesses of institutional structures that post-colonial societies have in place" (59). Essentially, the major issues of inequality, corruption, poverty, etc. are not simply caused by the inadequacies of public officials and str...

Tàíwò, in his second chapter of Reconsidering Reparations , focuses on the colonial, neocolonial, and institutionally racist methods of “the currents of history,” which almost entirely inform the present status of modern global injustice. (24) He argues that the smaller-scale inequalities in localized communities operate on a much larger, transnational scale, which are a product of layers and layers of colonial abuses. He mentions international institutions such as The World Bank or IMF as continuing the taking advantage of those in the Global South. I would like to reiterate this point, but on the conduct of the United Nations and its system of “restoring justice” – particularly within the handling of seeking justice against wrongdoing by countries, or subset communities within those nations.  It is worth discussing that the human rights reconciliation legal process is itself an exercise of neocolonialism, functioning off of the wealth and political power disparities between the G...

In reading Taiwo's Reconsidering Reparations  I was reminded quickly of reading about materialism in Marx's The German Ideology . Marx built a framework that viewed nearly every aspect of society, from basic family dynamics to tools to language to industry as a result of humans fulfilling their material needs. Taiwo cites author Charles Mills who argued for a framework of "global white supremacy" as a political system  that results from the fact that "the world has been foundationally shaped for the past five hundred years by the gradual consolidation of global white supremacy" (25). Taiwo goes on to say that his book agrees with this theory.  I do not object the the fact that global white supremacy has affected nearly the entire world. It has been a phenomenon that has shaped the global power structure, allowed those in power to gain wealth, and subjugated millions of people.  Though, I do think an important nuance could be clarified. I notice that subjugat...

  Reconsidering Reparations by Professor Olúfẹ́mi O. Táíwò illuminates the large extent to which racism and colonialism played in creating the current global economic structure, in which the global north dominates the global south. Additionally, this book highlights how current policies implemented by global institutions such as the IMF and the World Bank have further strengthened and reaffirmed this positioning. Taking into account this global historical perspective, we can better understand how “consequences flow from some other parts of the world to other parts, often across national borders, and in ways that complicate geographically and politically narrow ways of thinking about reparations” (24). Thus, some sort of international obligation of social justice must be exist. Táíwò’s emphasis on the role that slavery and colonialism played in establishing the current economic order makes me think about the signal which this sends to the Global South in the development of their p...