Objections to redress and reparations
Among some of the common objections to the application of redress and reparations for historical injustices are: the routine dismissal of claims made by particular groups and the questioning of the justifications for the claims; the discounting, and in some cases, outright denial of the history of the unjust acts and events that precipitate the call for redress and reparations; the debate on who should be held responsible for the acts and whether descendants should pay for the actions of their ancestors; and, the opinion that the financial obligation that is attached with this kind of compensation is too onerous a burden for any government or corporation. There is also the objection to redress and reparations because the historical events they address occurred in the past and policies and laws have evolved to protect against such policies and practices ever recurring. It has almost become sacrosanct to disavow the linkage between the historical injustices and the contemporary forms of racism that are perpetuated against particular groups; and the consequent interconnectedness to redress and reparations as appropriate and necessary forms of remedy. Nonetheless, the issue of redress and/or paying reparations has continued unabated in many countries, including Canada.