To Apologize or to Compensate for Colonial Injustices? The Role of Representations of the Colonial Past, Group-Based Guilt, and In-Group Identification

In the aftermath of an intergroup conflict, along with instrumental reparations, victims may request an apology on behalf of the perpetrators, yet such political apologies are often not given. Whereas we know a lot about the motivations of the victims, less is known about when and why the perpetrators are willing to apologize. In this study, from the perspective of the perpetrator group, we simultaneously examined and compared support for a political apology and for instrumental reparations (e.g., financial support and other forms of assistance) offered to both former colonies and colonial-origin minorities living in the country responsible for the past colonization. We considered the indirect role of positive and negative representations of the colonial past via feelings of group-based guilt. Using a community sample of the native Dutch population (N = 763), we showed that the Dutch were more supportive of instrumental reparations than of political apology. They also agreed with both the positive and negative aspects of their colonial past, but they did not experience much collective guilt. Agreement with positive representations of the Dutch colonial past was, via weaker feelings of group-based guilt, related to less support for both political apology and instrumental reparations. In contrast, negative representations of the past were, via higher guilt, related to more support for these reconciliatory outcomes. These processes were similar for higher and lower in-group identifiers. Importantly, the association between guilt and support for political apology was twice as large as the one between guilt and support for instrumental reparations, suggesting that political apology is more effective in restoring the in-group’s moral self-image.