Glenn vs. Hitch

A debate over reparations

Back in November 2001, I was invited by Boston University—where I was a professor of economics and ran the Institute on Race and Social Division—to participate in a debate on the question of reparations for African Americans. I was very much in my progressive phase at the time. I had recently delivered the lectures that would become The Anatomy of Racial Inequality, and I had been embraced by other black progressives as one of their own. To a casual observer, it would appear that I was in the midst of a pendulum swing that took me from the right to left (and eventually back again).

But that trajectory is a little too clean. Then as now, it was quite common to find support for reparations on the left. But the idea didn’t sit right with me (it still doesn’t), and the debate gave me a chance to explain why. There were several debaters taking up either side of the issue that night, but I found my most formidable opponent in Christopher Hitchens, who argued in favor of reparations with his trademark wit and savoir faire. Hitchens apparently felt the same about me, as he devoted a significant chunk of his time arguing directly against the positions I put forward. Ironic, then, that we would both soon find ourselves swinging rightward in our own ways, he in regard to American foreign policy and me in regard to domestic issues.

I do wonder if Hitchens would have eventually changed his mind about reparations, as he did about many other things. Below I’m presenting an edited version of the debate. You can see the full version here, but I wanted to highlight my exchange with Hitchens, as I think it distills some of the core issues at play.

---

This post is free and available to the public. To receive early access to TGS episodes, an ad-free podcast feed, Q&As, and other exclusive content and benefits, click below.

---