In the modern political landscape, the word "reparations" has become a central pillar of Western diplomatic discourse. From the Caribbean to sub-Saharan Africa, leaders are increasingly vocal in demanding that Britain and other Western powers pay for the historical sins of slavery and colonialism. The rhetoric is often draped in the language of "moral justice" and "unwavering consistency."
However, as Lipton Matthews recently detailed in Aporia, a closer look at the geopolitical landscape reveals a glaring, multi-billion-dollar hypocrisy: the "Curse of Selective Outrage." While African leaders point the finger at London, they are busily shaking hands with Beijing, a civilisation with its own extensive, yet conveniently ignored, history of enslaving Africans.
The Forgotten History of the Kunlun
The narrative that slavery was a uniquely Western enterprise is not just historically inaccurate; it is a calculated omission. Long before the first European ship reached the Swahili Coast, African people were being trafficked into the Far East.
Historical records from the Tang and Song dynasties confirm the presence of African slaves, known in Chinese texts as kunlun. These individuals, described by chroniclers as "black as ink," were prized for their physical strength and forced into gruelling labour, such as diving beneath ships to perform repairs or serving as household guards for the wealthy elite in Guangzhou.
By the 14th century, the trade was so established that the Javanese reportedly sent 300 African slaves as "tribute" to the Ming emperor. This was a systematic, trans-continental trade involving Arab middlemen and Chinese buyers. Yet, where are the museum exhibits in Nairobi or Lagos decrying this "Oriental Middle Passage"? Where are the demands for "restorative justice" from the CCP?
Geopolitics Over Justice
The reason for this silence is simple: Money. African leaders have embraced China as a primary development partner because Beijing offers "no-strings-attached" financing for infrastructure. China builds the bridges, ports, and digital networks that Western banks, laden with bureaucratic "human rights" conditions, often shy away from.
In this transactional relationship, bringing up the fact that Chinese dynasties enslaved East Africans for centuries would be bad for business. It is much more "profitable" to demand reparations from a guilt-ridden Britain, where Left-wing academics and domestic lobbies provide a sympathetic ear, than from a Chinese government that would likely respond to such demands by simply turning off the credit taps.
The Moral Bankruptcy of Selective Reparations
From a conservative viewpoint, the reparations movement is increasingly looking less like a quest for justice and more like a geopolitical shakedown. If the basis for reparations is the historical trauma of a people, then the perpetrator's identity should be irrelevant.
When African leaders condemn Britain, the very nation that spent vast amounts of blood and treasure to abolish the global slave trade, while remaining silent about Arab and Chinese involvement, they reveal their hand. They are treating history as a "one-dimensional narrative of wrongdoing" to be exploited for contemporary political gain.
Furthermore, this selective outrage ignores the role of African elites themselves. As Matthews notes, many descendants of African slave merchants, such as those of King Eyo Honesty II, express pride in their ancestors' "transformative" roles, choosing to see the complexity of history when it involves their own lineage, but demanding "moral purity" only from the West.
A Lesson for the West
The "reparations performance" is a warning to the West. When we allow our history to be reduced to a laundry list of grievances while our competitors' histories are whitewashed for the sake of "development partnerships," we lose our moral standing.
If we are to have a serious conversation about the history of slavery, it must include the whole history. It must include the Swahili Coast, the Arab traders, and the Chinese households of Guangzhou. Until the reparations movement confronts the full spectrum of historical actors, including their current "allies" in Beijing, their claims will continue to lack any genuine moral force.
Justice cannot be bought, and it certainly shouldn't be sold to the highest bidder
https://www.aporiamagazine.com/p/reparations-as-political-performance