Ta-Nehisi Coates’s The Atlantic article “The Case for Reparations” forges an assertion on the controversial subject of slavery reparations. Accordingly, the evidence, structure, and thesis of the argument should uphold a level of both professionalism and pragmatism in supporting the argument. While Coates’ supports his arguments with facets from the physical, economic, social, and political aspects of injustice with according evidence, the lack of cohesiveness from the text weakens the aptitude of the argument. These factors noted in terms of structure, evidence, and failure in addressing counter claims.
Structure is what binds readers’ attention to the text, and plays an important role in the development of thoughts and opinions, a significant …show more content…
This lack of chronological order does not necessarily sacrifice efficient, if an alternative structure is used, including developed aspects of injustice. The various aspects introduced in the text, include injustices in a physical, social, political, and economic regards, which unfortunately hold little cohesiveness in structure as well. The only connection seen between the two comes near the conclusion of the work, represented in the quote “The idea of reparations threatens something much deeper- America’s heritage, history, and standing in the world”(Coates, 56). This convergence of economic and social effects of reparations is powerful, yet this power through synergism is not prevalent in the text. Coates approaches the topics by describing how African-Americans fell victim to multiple aspects of injustice, but for the most part describes them as separate entities. For example, the case of Clyde Ross (Coates, 1-13) describes the experiences political, economic, and social injustices Ross faced, in regards to Jim Crowe laws, theft and predatory mortgages, and the …show more content…
The title of the work implies to the reader that Coates will describe why reparations are a relevant and beneficial solution to be considered. In such a work, a thesis is expected, with a clear description of the author’s consideration of the thesis. The problem with “The Case for Reparations” lies in the failure of specification in why reparations are beneficial. Part of this problem stems from the subject being discussed, as the positive effects of reparations can be considered both in a moral, social sense, and a tangible, economic sense. Throughout the work Coates provides evidence for both, and does not marry the two ideas until the conclusion of the work, the idea encapsulated in the quote “What I’m talking about is more than a recompense for past injustices-more than a handout, a payoff, hush money, or a reluctant bribe. What I’m talking about is a national reckoning”. By not establishing how he considers reparations until the end, Coates relies solely on his evidence and the inference of the reader for the majority of his work, adversely impacting the articles
Structure is what binds readers’ attention to the text, and plays an important role in the development of thoughts and opinions, a significant …show more content…
This lack of chronological order does not necessarily sacrifice efficient, if an alternative structure is used, including developed aspects of injustice. The various aspects introduced in the text, include injustices in a physical, social, political, and economic regards, which unfortunately hold little cohesiveness in structure as well. The only connection seen between the two comes near the conclusion of the work, represented in the quote “The idea of reparations threatens something much deeper- America’s heritage, history, and standing in the world”(Coates, 56). This convergence of economic and social effects of reparations is powerful, yet this power through synergism is not prevalent in the text. Coates approaches the topics by describing how African-Americans fell victim to multiple aspects of injustice, but for the most part describes them as separate entities. For example, the case of Clyde Ross (Coates, 1-13) describes the experiences political, economic, and social injustices Ross faced, in regards to Jim Crowe laws, theft and predatory mortgages, and the …show more content…
The title of the work implies to the reader that Coates will describe why reparations are a relevant and beneficial solution to be considered. In such a work, a thesis is expected, with a clear description of the author’s consideration of the thesis. The problem with “The Case for Reparations” lies in the failure of specification in why reparations are beneficial. Part of this problem stems from the subject being discussed, as the positive effects of reparations can be considered both in a moral, social sense, and a tangible, economic sense. Throughout the work Coates provides evidence for both, and does not marry the two ideas until the conclusion of the work, the idea encapsulated in the quote “What I’m talking about is more than a recompense for past injustices-more than a handout, a payoff, hush money, or a reluctant bribe. What I’m talking about is a national reckoning”. By not establishing how he considers reparations until the end, Coates relies solely on his evidence and the inference of the reader for the majority of his work, adversely impacting the articles