Reparations as Philanthropy: Radically Rethinking “Giving” in Africa

by Ibrahima Faye

This essay from Le Monde challenges the way people often confuse philanthropy with reparations. It argues that giving aid or charity to Africa is not the same as repairing the deep historical harm caused by slavery, colonialism, and exploitation. I found this essay refreshing because it forces us to think differently about what “help” really means.

The first important point is that traditional philanthropy often repeats colonial power dynamics. In normal aid models, it is donors who decide what Africa needs, where money goes, and how it is spent. This keeps power in the hands of outsiders instead of empowering Africans. The essay argues that this is not real justice but another form of control. Reparations must be different. They are not gifts or acts of kindness, but rightful redress for stolen wealth and centuries of oppression.

The second point is that reparations must be unconditional and based on justice. Unlike charity, which comes with strings attached, reparations should not be used as a way for the West to gain influence or dictate policy. Reparations must restore agency to Africans, giving them the ability to choose their own priorities and solutions. In short, reparations are about fairness and dignity, not pity.

The third point is that Africa needs a new model of giving and investment that supports long-term structural change. Instead of short-term projects or donations that make donors feel good, the essay calls for real commitments: funding African-led institutions, supporting industrialization, strengthening infrastructure, and empowering local leadership. Reparations should rebuild systems, not maintain dependency.

My feelings about this essay are very positive. As a humanist, I believe in dignity, fairness, and respect for autonomy. Philanthropy, while sometimes helpful, often comes with a paternalistic mindset that assumes Africans cannot solve their own problems. This essay is right to say reparations must break that cycle. They should be about restitution, not charity.

I also agree with the point about unconditionality. Too often, aid comes with political or economic conditions that serve donor interests rather than African needs. For reparations to be meaningful, they must recognize that Africa is owed, not begging. True reparations must therefore be respectful and focused on empowering African agency.

At the same time, I think philanthropy can still play a role if it changes its approach. Donors should stop acting like saviors and instead act like partners. They should fund African-led solutions, back public goods such as healthcare and education, and avoid imposing their own models. But I agree with the essay’s central message: philanthropy cannot replace reparations.

In conclusion, this essay makes an important distinction. Reparations are not about charity or generosity. They are about justice, dignity, and restoring Africa’s rightful control over its destiny. For reparations to succeed, they must avoid repeating old patterns of dependency and instead support real structural change.