Reparations advocacy must tie social change to the dominant group’s cherished values.

Evidence

First and most obviously, the necessary conditions for collective guilt must be created – the dominant group must see their ingroup as having committed or being complicit in some moral violation. Thus, the most basic strategy would be to make a strong and clear case for the illegitimacy of past actions or the present intergroup situation. Because dominant groups are likely to be motivated to see their own behavior as just, and because the dominant culture is likely to provide justifications for the ingroup’s harmful actions, this in itself is a substantial goal. Secondly, because the subjective importance of making reparations sets the maximum potential intensity for collective guilt, those advocating reparations would be wise to connect social change with the dominant group’s cherished values and ideologies, regardless of how well it currently lives up to them. — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt, 615

Categorization

  • SEED: The practical-strategy framing here reads almost like advice for political persuaders; connects to how attachers (who critique ingroup) but not glorifiers might respond to value-framed appeals.
  • XREF: connects to: Economic policy change requires reframing the moral meaning a community ascribes to its world. — Angus Burgin, The Great Persuasion: Reinventing Free…, 29; Groups that self-stereotype as fair feel stronger pressure toward reparations. — Nyla R. Branscombe and Bertjan Doosje (eds.), Collective Guilt: International…, 593; Peace between civilizations requires proactive expansion of shared values (+1 more)

Broader Connections