Reparations based on something that happened 160 years ago is repugnant to most, races neutral on the issue and perhaps slanted in favor of reparations to stick it to racists like asians and hispanics still view it as petty and disagree.

Imagine a lawyer presenting this case, a gangster earned a little scratch in the 1920s, his son had a better upbringing, education and inheritance and in turn his grandson, great grandson and finally the great great grandson whose wealth is blood money owed to the great great grandchild of some dude the gangster shot. After 100 years with so much that has happened and people far wealthier than they were in the 1920s, what proportion of this wealth is blood money? Most here would agree it has been so long it is frivolous, malicious even, to make such a huge stretch to try to gouge money from someone.

Progressives however have a different mentality based on the belief we are all perfectly equal tabula rasa clean slates. They conclude black people would be IQ 100, low crime and able to build wealth like recent immigrants such as east asians were it not for environmental differences. That a full 100% of racial disparity is due to historic inequity and systemic racism, decades of federal aid, affirmative action, DEI and such race based programs were not enough because this conspiracy runs so deep, white people and white privilege are still to blame for black people's problems. Even if white people are bona fide BLM supporters who promote diversity and their ancestors were Ellis islanders or fought in the civil war, they still subconsciously contribute to a system built for white people which grants them their higher IQ and ensures they make better life and financial decisions, according to their theories.

So they have to support reparations, black people have to blame white people for all their problems, because if they do not they have to acknowledge other factors are at play which to them are more repugnant than malicious gouging.