The principal difference between individual and consensus opinions is the amount of scrutiny each normally receives before opinions are published. Opinions that may harm the public if implemented should be examined under the tension of opposing ideas, to allow convergence to a consensus opinion through an evidence-based discussion.

To force the public to be exposed to only one side of an argument is classic propaganda, where the main aim is not to inform, but rather to damage opposing views. To claim a view that is protected from scrutiny as the consensus view, is the equivalent of claiming victory in a game of tug-of-war, where only one side was allowed to hold the rope.

ONE-SIDED PREPARATION.

Reparations is one issue where Barbadians are not supposed to be lined up on the opposing end of the rope of discussion. The CARICOM Reparations Commission was established in 2013. National reparations committees were set up in various Caribbean countries and regional leaders renewed their commitment to the cause at the third CARICM Reparations Conference held in Barbados in September 2026.

The declared strategy is to pursue a legal case. It has a strong chance of losing because those managing the reparations movement do not see value in the tension of opposing ideas. If someone happens to wander near the other end of the rope, they are quickly chased off with threats and insults.

Every time I attend an event discussing reparations I try to be the first to put up my hand to ask a question. I have never been allowed to ask any. The only non-negotiable rule in discussing the case for reparations seems to be that we must never upset the ancestors with any opposing ideas.

QUANTIFYING DAMAGES.

The most glaring example of our limp-rope strategy is quantifying damages. We paid a consultant who calculated that Barbados was owed $4 trillion for the harmful economic, social and psychological impacts of slavery [1]. We ignore the other end of the rope which conservatively estimates our likely debt to England at $9.4 trillion [2].

England are not requesting this debt since giving us the island at our Independence was supposed to address all reparations claims. However, if it is adjudicated in court, then setting off the $4 T owed to us against the $9.4 T we owe results in us having to legally pay England $5.6 trillion – which we cannot afford and which England will likely enforce. So, they get the island and we, dissatisfied with the certain bone in our mouths which we dropped to chase the illusion of reparations, get to claim that we did not upset the ancestors.

A CANCER.

The claim made by the rope holders is that receiving reparations will improve us – our dignity and self-esteem will be restored. A similar claim was made when we were forced into becoming a republic. Since greater self-esteem was not realised from that initiative, it may be another illusion.

The other end of the self-esteem rope lies the physical and emotional cancer of unforgiveness. Jesus noted that He will judge everyone at the end of the age, and the main criterion on which we will be judged is forgiveness. Jesus repeatedly and explicitly warned that: (i) those who did not forgive others in this world would spend an eternity away from God in the after-life, (ii) hell is a place of everlasting torment where the inhabitants weep and gnash their teeth and (iii) satan is the deceiver of all mankind.

The weeping seems to be regret for being deceived that unforgiveness did not matter. Gnashing teeth seems to be aimed at their deceivers – who also deceived themselves and found themselves in the same unhappy place. One thing seems certain. Our ancestors know with certainty that forgiveness is critical and would beg us to forgive while we can.

RESOLUTION.

When the court case commences with England, we should all be on the same side. However, while preparing the case, all sides should contend so that the strongest case may be developed.

Tension is required to develop consensus opinions. Ignoring the tension created by the foreseen: (i) $9.4 trillion counterclaim, (ii) consequences of unforgiveness and (iii) host of other opposing issues can only weaken our claim. Discussing them can only strengthen it.

We are failing badly in developing a consensus case because those managing this process seem terrified to discuss different views lest the ancestors become angry. To stop making a further mess of reparations, offending the ancestors and African spiritism should be put under tension as soon as possible.

Grenville Phillips II is a Doctor of Engineering and Chartered Arbitrator. He can be reached at NextParty246@gmail.com

^{[1] Dr. Coleman Bazelon’s 2026 study on the economic impact of slavery in Barbados.
[2] Difficult Conversations – A Bigger Bone, July 2026.}