Horowitz's argument was about as provocative as civil discourse can be: "To focus the social passions of African-Americans on what some other Americans may have done to their ancestors 50 or 150 years ago is to burden them with a crippling sense of victimhood," the ad copy reads. "How are the millions of non-black refugees from tyranny and genocide who are now living in America going to receive these claims, moreover, except as demands for special treatment -- an extravagant new handout that is only necessary because some blacks can't seem to locate the ladder of opportunity within reach of others -- many of whom are less privileged than themselves?"
Black Americans' GNP, the ad points out, is equivalent to that of the 10th most prosperous nation in the world, and the average income of African-Americans is 20 to 50 times greater than that of Africans living in nations from which slaves were so unjustly abducted. Moreover, 350,000 Union soldiers died to correct the Founders' error, or inability, to guarantee freedom to all Americans. Who should pay their descendants?
I do not agree with all of Horowitz's arguments. But he's right: Attributing moral guilt on the basis of race is a very dangerous, false and destructive idea. Too many African-American children live in neighborhoods riddled with too much crime, drug abuse, sorry schools, broken families and crippled dreams. But the reason we should do what we can to help is not that "their" ancestors were injured by "our" ancestors, but quite the opposite: because they are all America's children.