Slavery Reparations.
Discussion
Strocky said:
A fair compromise would appear for the UK to free herself of the current residual vestiges of the Old Empire in our current constitution, apologise for offence caused and save ourselves a fair few quid in restitution
Win-Win
Id feel guilty if I were Scottish tooWin-Win
"In 1796, Scots owned nearly 30 per cent of the estates in Jamaica and by 1817, a staggering 32 per cent of the slaves"
In reality I struggle to see what difference such payments would make to historical wrongdoings.
barryrs said:
Id feel guilty if I were Scottish too
"In 1796, Scots owned nearly 30 per cent of the estates in Jamaica and by 1817, a staggering 32 per cent of the slaves"
In reality I struggle to see what difference such payments would make to historical wrongdoings.
I'm happy to sign the letter of apology, what about your good self?"In 1796, Scots owned nearly 30 per cent of the estates in Jamaica and by 1817, a staggering 32 per cent of the slaves"
In reality I struggle to see what difference such payments would make to historical wrongdoings.
Strocky said:
barryrs said:
Id feel guilty if I were Scottish too
"In 1796, Scots owned nearly 30 per cent of the estates in Jamaica and by 1817, a staggering 32 per cent of the slaves"
In reality I struggle to see what difference such payments would make to historical wrongdoings.
I'm happy to sign the letter of apology, what about your good self?"In 1796, Scots owned nearly 30 per cent of the estates in Jamaica and by 1817, a staggering 32 per cent of the slaves"
In reality I struggle to see what difference such payments would make to historical wrongdoings.
Burwood said:
apologise for what? when i went to school our teachers were allowed to whip us with a cane. Parents could smack kicks and until the 60's the State executed certain criminals. A time before that it was legal to buy a slave. A time before that it was legal to do all sorts of depraved things no doubt. We have nothing to apologise for. We didn't do it.
Your missing the point, if you wish to celebrate the great and the good of the Empire in the present day, then you should also take stock of the bad as wellIt's not a buffet
This historical issue has come up several times, but every time it does, I always wonder why this particular buck has to stop with the UK?
The UK was not the only country to use slaves at this particular time, as the Dutch, Portuguese, as well as America all took and used slave labour, So why aren't these people looking for reparation from all the other countries, Including Arabia, and Africa itself which was as involved in taking and using slaves as any other country?
Even Greece, (the home of democracy) took and used slaves, but their `democracy' didn't extend as far as their slaves.
Also there is the question of `where does the time `buck' stop'
The Vikings took over large parts of the UK, killing many locals, and took the natives of what is now the UK as slaves. The Romans invaded this country, killing thousands and taking and using thousands more as slaves.
Then the Normans invaded the country, again killing thousands, and using the local population as slave labour.
To keep everything equal and in order, must this country now seek reparations from the countries that the Vikings, Romans and French came from, for all the slaves from this country that they took?
Where does one draw the line, or is it the case, that buck always stops only with the UK, and the line ALWAYS stops only at the UK`s doorstep, for actions taken by people hundreds of years ago, over which we had no control or responsibility for their actions.
Should the UK be rewarded for bringing slavery to an end?
If we do pay reparations to Jamaica, does this mean Jamaica has to pay back all the billions it has received over the many years, that the UK has been sending Jamaica in foreign aid?
there are some interesting legal questions in there.
The UK was not the only country to use slaves at this particular time, as the Dutch, Portuguese, as well as America all took and used slave labour, So why aren't these people looking for reparation from all the other countries, Including Arabia, and Africa itself which was as involved in taking and using slaves as any other country?
Even Greece, (the home of democracy) took and used slaves, but their `democracy' didn't extend as far as their slaves.
Also there is the question of `where does the time `buck' stop'
The Vikings took over large parts of the UK, killing many locals, and took the natives of what is now the UK as slaves. The Romans invaded this country, killing thousands and taking and using thousands more as slaves.
Then the Normans invaded the country, again killing thousands, and using the local population as slave labour.
To keep everything equal and in order, must this country now seek reparations from the countries that the Vikings, Romans and French came from, for all the slaves from this country that they took?
Where does one draw the line, or is it the case, that buck always stops only with the UK, and the line ALWAYS stops only at the UK`s doorstep, for actions taken by people hundreds of years ago, over which we had no control or responsibility for their actions.
Should the UK be rewarded for bringing slavery to an end?
If we do pay reparations to Jamaica, does this mean Jamaica has to pay back all the billions it has received over the many years, that the UK has been sending Jamaica in foreign aid?
there are some interesting legal questions in there.
Edited by Pan Pan Pan on Wednesday 30th September 14:19
Edited by Pan Pan Pan on Wednesday 30th September 14:20
Pan Pan Pan said:
This historical issue has come up several times, but every time it does, I always wonder why this particular buck has to stop with the UK?
The UK was not the only country to use slaves at this particular time, as the Dutch, Portuguese, as well as America all took and used slave labour, So why aren't these people looking for reparation from all the other countries, Including Arabia, and Africa itself which was as involved in taking and using slaves as any other country?
Even Greece, (the home of democracy) took and used slaves, but their `democracy' didn't extend as far as their slaves.
Also there is the question of `where does the time `buck' stop'
The Vikings took over large parts of the UK, killing many locals, and took the natives of what is now the UK as slaves. The Romans invaded this country, killing thousands and taking and using thousands more as slaves.
Then the Normans invaded the country, again killing thousands, and using the local population as slave labour.
To keep everything equal and in order, must this country now seek reparations from the countries that the Vikings, Romans and French came from, for all the slaves from this country that they took?
Where does one draw the line, or is it the case, that buck always stops only with the UK, and the line ALWAYS stops only at the UK`s doorstep, for actions taken by people hundreds of years ago, over which we had no control or responsibility for their actions.
Should the UK be rewarded for bringing slavery to an end?
If we do pay reparations to Jamaica, does this mean Jamaica has to pay back all the billions it has received over the many years, that the UK has been sending Jamaica foreign aid?
there are some interesting legal questions in there.
The UK was not the only country to use slaves at this particular time, as the Dutch, Portuguese, as well as America all took and used slave labour, So why aren't these people looking for reparation from all the other countries, Including Arabia, and Africa itself which was as involved in taking and using slaves as any other country?
Even Greece, (the home of democracy) took and used slaves, but their `democracy' didn't extend as far as their slaves.
Also there is the question of `where does the time `buck' stop'
The Vikings took over large parts of the UK, killing many locals, and took the natives of what is now the UK as slaves. The Romans invaded this country, killing thousands and taking and using thousands more as slaves.
Then the Normans invaded the country, again killing thousands, and using the local population as slave labour.
To keep everything equal and in order, must this country now seek reparations from the countries that the Vikings, Romans and French came from, for all the slaves from this country that they took?
Where does one draw the line, or is it the case, that buck always stops only with the UK, and the line ALWAYS stops only at the UK`s doorstep, for actions taken by people hundreds of years ago, over which we had no control or responsibility for their actions.
Should the UK be rewarded for bringing slavery to an end?
If we do pay reparations to Jamaica, does this mean Jamaica has to pay back all the billions it has received over the many years, that the UK has been sending Jamaica foreign aid?
there are some interesting legal questions in there.
Edited by Pan Pan Pan on Wednesday 30th September 14:19
Edited by Pan Pan Pan on Wednesday 30th September 14:20
otolith said:
Tell them we will dig up the plantation owners and send through anything we find in the pockets of their shrouds.
A simple but fair solution to the issue, given the time passed since slavery was a common occurrence, and used by most if not all countries of the world at the time.
Derek Smith said:
The point is that for most of us plebs, we got nothing from slavery. Ten years after its abolition there were Irish dying due to the potato famine, and 15 years before that there were people starving in the hedgerows of this country. What should not be forgotten was that at the same time when money and power was flooding into this country from the slave trade, the English/Welsh (could not find the rate for Scotland) death rate from starvation and poor diet was higher than for the Irish potato famine, and that was rather high.
We - that is those in Ireland and those in England/Wales - were victims as much as anyone. I am quite happy to pay back the benefits my family got from the slave trade.
King Tegbesu (of Bennin as is now) made £250,000 a year selling people into slavery in 1750. King Gezo said in the 1840's he would do anything the British wanted him to do apart from giving up slave trade:
"The slave trade is the ruling principle of my people. It is the source and the glory of their wealth . . . the mother lulls the child to sleep with notes of triumph over an enemy reduced to slavery . . ."
It is a complex subject but whilst there are arguments that some of the poor benefited in some ways, for the majority it meant nothing other than reinforcing the gap between the rich and poor with regards power and influence.
That supposition is simply not true. The importance of the slave trade (inluding tobacco & sugar) to Britain's explosion of wealth and global economic, trading & military dominance cannot possibly be underestimated. Indeed, the Industrial Revolution would not even had occured without the emergence of the slave trade. Sure, money didn't not flow directly to the poor but the wealth created, made everything else that followed possible. It's akin to saying that because I don't work for a bank, I don't benefit from Britian's global finance dominance.We - that is those in Ireland and those in England/Wales - were victims as much as anyone. I am quite happy to pay back the benefits my family got from the slave trade.
King Tegbesu (of Bennin as is now) made £250,000 a year selling people into slavery in 1750. King Gezo said in the 1840's he would do anything the British wanted him to do apart from giving up slave trade:
"The slave trade is the ruling principle of my people. It is the source and the glory of their wealth . . . the mother lulls the child to sleep with notes of triumph over an enemy reduced to slavery . . ."
It is a complex subject but whilst there are arguments that some of the poor benefited in some ways, for the majority it meant nothing other than reinforcing the gap between the rich and poor with regards power and influence.
The Europe-wide famine of post Waterloo 1817 has nothing to do with the slave trade or wealth in the country - not sure how you have made that leap.
mybrainhurts said:
FFS...next, the Romans will be wanting to charge us tolls for the roads they built here.
Good point! but as mentioned before why does the buck always have stop at England in this issue, when other countries have done exactly the same to England in the past? and other countries including Africa were just as involved, if not more so, in the trading of slaves.Pan Pan Pan said:
mybrainhurts said:
FFS...next, the Romans will be wanting to charge us tolls for the roads they built here.
Good point! but as mentioned before why does the buck always have stop at England in this issue, when other countries have done exactly the same to England in the past? and other countries including Africa were just as involved, if not more so, in the trading of slaves.Strocky said:
Burwood said:
apologise for what? when i went to school our teachers were allowed to whip us with a cane. Parents could smack kicks and until the 60's the State executed certain criminals. A time before that it was legal to buy a slave. A time before that it was legal to do all sorts of depraved things no doubt. We have nothing to apologise for. We didn't do it.
Your missing the point, if you wish to celebrate the great and the good of the Empire in the present day, then you should also take stock of the bad as wellIt's not a buffet
Just how far back should apologies go and what qualifies? Should the Italians and Norwegians apologise for the Roman and Viking invasions of Britain? Should the descendants of black and Asian slavers of the Barbary, Arab and Ottoman slave trades apologise to the white descendants of those slaves? Many of those calling for an apology may in fact be descended from black slavers - where is their apology?
As you say - it's not a buffet.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff