Since HN is the world of programming analogies:
I inherit a broken, bug-filled codebase when signing on for a new job. A year into continued development, a team mentions to me that the codebase is utterly broken for one of the tasks it was designed to do.
I respond, "why are you trying to make me feel guilty about code I didn't even write? The problem with programming 'outrage culture' is we have all these people talking about the flaws of jQuery and coupled interfaces and inadequate testing. It's not my fault the codebase suffers from those problems. I'm a good programmer."
The argument stops sounding reasonable in that context, because we recognize that fixing the code isn't about anybody's ego. Similarly, it is impossible to have a productive conversation about reparations when someone is spending all of their time trying to defend that they're a good person.
In reality, nobody cares about your guilt and nobody cares about whether or not you pass some kind of magic threshold where you can be considered 'good' or 'bad'. The entire question is worthless. They just want the problems fixed, and "we" collectively as a nation are responsible for refactoring and addressing problems that exist in the current systemically biased laws/treaties that we inherited.
But my instinct is that if someone says to me, "I don't want to deal with fixing inherited broken systems", at the very least my response to that is going to be something along the lines of, "that's fine, but then don't get in the way of other people who are fixing them."
This is true, but only because liens are special, not because it's a contract. You're not a party to your ancestors' debts or contracts if they die. At most, their estate is.