THE question of how much is enough has been asked time and again, often in relation to the insatiable appetite of those who already have most and always want, even thirst for, more.
Be it money, property, or fame, some just can’t ever have enough after becoming addicted to the powers they bring, investing in fastest rates-of-return on investments in whatever field, legal or illegal, because in their lives, the maxim is ‘The more the merrier!’

Of late, there have been questions on matters closer to heart and home, this time having to do with money and compromises, new or changed positions, all relating to estimating the inestimable.

Be it about environmental and developmental clashes and contradictions, religious, socio-political or philosophical/ideological positions, compromises have always been in short supply for some – and same with CARICOM’s 2013 call for reparations from the UK and Europe for Slavery and Native Genocide, which has got to the stage of ‘talking money…’

King Charles says he’s ready to translate his mother’s expressions of royal sorrow over slavery into elements sounding or looking like elements of apology and atonement.

But many of the initial responses from friends and colleagues on both sides of The Atlantic and in the US, has been to find words to also say it’s ‘not enough’, with suggestions he should instead ‘Apologise to us’, to ‘instruct the UK Government to fall in line…’ to ‘Tell Downing Street to not only apologise, but also join the Royal Family to paying us…’

Fortunately, it would seem more have welcomed than thrown cold water on Charles’ words, but such situations can (and do most times) end-up in consequential stalemates that could have been avoided, with preparedness to listen more and talk less, to give-and-take and not just wanting to take all, or insisting on all or nothing!

Even British entities are saying what Charles has said was ‘not enough…’
The owners of The Guardian newspaper, for example, recently published a document proving royal slavery connections and called on Buckingham Palace to dig-up and publicly share information about royal enslavement.

But King Charles would reveal that six months earlier he’d started doing just that by commissioning the research since last October; and said was not only willing to go where the findings sent him, but also to consider reparations.

But the king was not the first to be rebuffed that way this year…
A veteran US-based BBC journalist and international news presenter of UK origin, who traced her family’s involvement in slavery in the Caribbean, quit her job in February after 30 long years becoming a reparations ambassador between the UK and the Caribbean, also dedicating her entire pension earnings to opening a reparations account in her family’s name in Grenada, where the family owned over 1,000 slaves — but here too, there were (and still are) those who’ve said it’s ‘not enough…’

An Irish entrepreneur who built a 20th Century fortune in the Caribbean says he’s ready to dip into his deep pockets to help repair the generational damage done by UK enslavers in the region — but here again, some feel that’s ‘not enough…’

Pope Francis announced, ahead of Easter 2023 observances that the Vatican had rescinded the “Doctrine of Discovery” used by European states to justify genocide and territorial conquest in the name of God, but here too, some said The Vatican hadn’t gone ‘far enough…’

Same with the Apology for Slavery by The Netherlands last December, in which the Prime Minister indicated an intent to compensate Surinam – no sum has been mentioned, but critics have already said it’s ‘not enough…’

Examples abound, but more aren’t needed to say that agitators, advocates and strong proponents for change need to re-examine approaches to such incremental, even unwilling adjustments by leaders and political directorates, often under pressure, that may offer an inch of compromise, only to be rejected with demands for a mile — not even 100 yards.

Politicians in elected governments, often torn between right and left or right and wrong, most-often keep their eyes on the next general elections and settle for the lowest denominator in the offers they make.

Like in any negotiation, the hope is always that the initial offer is accepted, but those offering also always expect fightback, especially where the opposition — be they parties or trade unions – are divided.

Advocates will always be contacted for comment when newsworthy statements are made, but initial automatic kneejerk responses without waiting for details can be more harmful than helpful, as engagement always trumps disengagement.

Take the difference between an ‘apology’ and expressions of ‘sorrow’ and/or ‘regret’: Reparations advocates demand the former, but European governments of nations that built empires off slavery (with eyes always on elections) prefer the latter, mindful of legal interpretation as admissions of guilt (as if they aren’t guilty).

However, time and history are always on the side of those who support CARICOM’s historic and unprecedented call on the UK and European governments that built empires on slavery to apologise, amend and atone.

A decade ago, no one anywhere even dreamed that universities, companies, families and institutions linked to slavery would have been going heads-over-heels like now, to belatedly make admissions and amends.

However, these snowballing elements of surprise should not be met with automatic outdated responses based more on historical suspicion and mistrust than a will to discuss possibilities that always exist to turn challenges into opportunities.

Instead, it’s always better determine how much (of anything) is enough; and if nothing is — as many feel about a quantum figure for reparations for Slavery and Native Genocide — the word should be avoided, with more emphasis on thinking and talking about what is possible now, to advance the process and keep it going forward.

Like the fight against climate change and the global struggle for racial equity and justice, every drop counts and every action adds.