News Americas, NEW YORK, NY, Tues. Aug. 5, 2025: I have listened recently to several sophisticated arguments against reparations that were, quite frankly, painfully stunning in their bold yet crude reasoning. Beneath the polished veneers of legal ambiguity and diplomatic restraint lies a deeper refusal to confront the truth. These arguments seek to dress centuries of violent exploitation in the language of development, to intellectualize theft, and to rationalize injustice. In doing so, they render historical crimes invisible and present moral absurdities as reasoned objections.
Among the most disturbing claims is the idea that the colonized somehow benefited from slavery and colonialism. This logic is not only false, it is profoundly immoral. The infrastructure imposed under colonial rule: roads, ports, schools, and courts, was never built for the upliftment of native populations. These were instruments of extraction, designed to enrich empires and entrench racial hierarchies. To suggest that enslaved peoples should be grateful for the means of their own subjugation is to confuse the brutality of empire with the blessings of progress.
Equally evasive is the argument that reparations are unworkable because the harms are too distant or difficult to measure. Yet, we live in a world that routinely tracks wealth accumulation, economic inequality, and institutional privilege across generations. If we can trace prosperity, we can certainly trace pain. The legacy of slavery is alive in the structural deficits of public health, education, and economic agency across the Global South. The challenge is not lack of evidence, it is lack of ethical courage and political conviction.
More audacious still is the claim that former colonial powers should be compensated for the infrastructure they left behind. This is moral acrobatics of the highest order. One does not compensate a thief for improving the driveway during a robbery. Colonial infrastructure was never an act of charity. It was a tool of dominion, built to transport stolen goods and enforce the terms of subjugation. To reframe that as a contribution is to turn history on its head.
There is also the notion that reparations are unnecessary because some nations maintain ties with Britain or remain in the Commonwealth by choice. But diplomatic arrangements born of postcolonial necessity do not erase historical debt. Association is not absolution. A handshake in the present does not heal the wounds of the past, especially when the hands were first bound in chains. Peaceful relations today cannot substitute for justice long delayed.
These arguments are not merely flawed. They are dangerous. They justify historic robbery, protect inherited privilege, and purge responsibility for the structural inequities that persist to this day. Reparations are focused less on revenge and solely on repair. They are not punitive, they are redemptive. Justice is not a relic of the past; it is the path to a truly shared future. Until we confront the truth with honesty, humility, and action, we will remain trapped in a cycle of historical amnesia and moral evasion. Reparations are not optional. They are overdue.
