154

This relates to the BBC article [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66596790] which states "the UK should pay $24tn (£18.8tn) for its slavery involvement in 14 countries".

The UK abolished slavery in 1833. That's 190 years ago. So nobody alive today has a slave, and nobody alive today was a slave.

Dividing £18tn by the number of UK taxpayers (31.6m) gives £569 each. Why do I, who have never owned a slave, have to give £569 to someone who similarly is not a slave?

When I've paid my £569 is that the end of the matter forever or will it just open the floodgates of other similar claims?

Isn't this just a country that isn't doing too well, looking at the UK doing reasonably well (cost of living crisis excluded of course), and saying "oh there's this historical thing that affects nobody alive today but you still have to give us trillions of Sterling"?

Shouldn't payment of reparations be limited to those who still benefit from the slave trade today, and paid to those who still suffer from it?

(Please don't flame me. This is NSQ. I genuinely don't know why this is something I should have to pay. I agree slavery is terrible and condemn it in all its forms, and we were right to abolish it.)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Dave@lemmy.nz 8 points 1 year ago

That's the feedback loop argument, right?

Some countries collonised others: crime of ancestor

But those countries used slaves and stole resources, making those countries wealthier. That wealth allowed them to develop better technologies, making them even wealthier.

So the argument is that while the original crime is not the responsibility of those alive today, the proceeds of crime should not be kept - they should be returned. In this case the proceeds are wealth, so a monetary reparation is appropriate.

Is my train of thought right? Because it seems to make sense to me.

[-] DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 1 year ago

Pretty much my take.

OPs position is based on the idea that the reparations are punitive, which they are not.

No one alive in England today was engaged in slaving, but everyone is the beneficiary of the practice.

[-] Jamie@jamie.moe 4 points 1 year ago

Disclaimer that I'm not English and don't particularly have a dog in this fight, and my opinions are a little mixed. On the one hand, I agree on the morality there, a lot of people were damaged in the very long term by slavery. But on the other, even if you can say that it's an act to attempt to return the wealth to the wronged people, that doesn't mean the wealth has simply been sitting there for nearly 200 years, waiting for return. That money has to come out of some budget, somewhere.

So where are they going to pull 18 trillion to give reparations from? Certainly, cuts will need to be made somewhere to make it happen, and often, those cuts are usually made along the lines of political agendas rather than things that are objectively bloated.

[-] DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago

But the ability to pay reparations isn't really considered in deciding whether reparations should be made.

You're right that the money isn't just sitting there, it's embedded in the development of the nation.

[-] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

This is true. Also, remember that some African kingdoms were the sellers of slaves. Modern countries there are not direct analogs, and they don't really have any money, but they deserve some of the blame.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashanti_Empire

[-] DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 year ago

Yes, but the few dollars per slave that a trader would have received is nothing in comparison to the value a slave would generate through their lifetime.

[-] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

Compensation is based on damages, not on how much money the crime made. People routinely owe damages for assault or vandalism that makes them no money.

[-] DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago

You may have misunderstood me. By removing someone from their home nation, the damages would be the value they would have produced in their home nation.

this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2023
154 points (76.9% liked)

No Stupid Questions

36171 readers
619 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS