If a white man murders a black man, and his motive is racism, are other white men responsible for his actions? From an ethical and legal standpoint, the actions of one individual cannot be automatically attributed to others who share similar characteristics, such as race, unless there is direct evidence of complicity or shared responsibility. In a case where a white man murders a black man motivated by racism, the culpability rests solely on the individual who committed the act unless others actively participated, encouraged, or conspired in the crime.
If a white man murders a black man, and his motive is racism, are his offspring responsible for his actions? No, his offspring are not responsible for his actions. Responsibility for a crime or immoral act lies solely with the individual who committed it, not with his descendants. This principle aligns with both legal doctrines, which prohibit assigning guilt to others based on familial ties, and ethical reasoning, which emphasizes individual accountability.
These moral truths apply to all crimes. Individuals are solely responsible for their own actions, and guilt cannot be inherited or transferred to others, including offspring or family members. Ethical frameworks and legal systems universally uphold this principle, emphasizing individual accountability rather than collective or familial blame. The alternatives are barbaric and primitive.
Given these principles, which are correct, how are reparations paid to ethnic or racial groups for wrongs committed against them by members of other ethnic or racial groups acts of justice? Is it not unjust to assign blame to those who committed no wrongdoing, to hold them accountable for the actions of others, most of whom are dead? Who are the living victims? The actual victims are buried in the same ground as the perpetrators. Most are dead and gone. Any perpetrator alive can be help responsible—as an individual.
The same is true with land acknowledgments. A land acknowledgment is a formal statement that recognizes the indigenous peoples as the traditional stewards of the land and pays respect to the history and culture of the communities that lived on and cared for it before colonization. These acknowledgments often highlight specific tribes or nations historically connected to the area and express solidarity with ongoing efforts for justice and reconciliation.
What justice is being sought? To shame those who live today for actions taken by people who are now deceased? To extract from the living reparations for the actions of the dead—to take from those who did nothing to give to those who suffered no injury? What is being reconciled? The historical and ongoing injustices faced by indigenous peoples due to colonization? Colonialism is in the past. The past cannot be changed.
Much of world history involves the conquest, colonization, and domination of one group by another. This pattern has occurred across civilizations, empires, and eras, as societies have often expanded through warfare, subjugation, and exploitation of others. Examples include the Roman Empire’s expansion across Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East; the Mongol conquests across Asia and Europe; the spread of Islamic caliphates; and European colonization of the Americas, Africa, and Asia. Conquest and colonization have shaped borders, cultures, languages, religions, and economies throughout history. The contexts, scales, and consequences of these processes vary widely, but the principles of justice remain firm: no collective or intergenerational penalty allowed.
freedom and reason 