UK Politics #5

[monga]

That old chestnut. Very convenient as there will always be more recent events, because that's how life and history work.

However, I think people have the mental and cognitive capacity to do both. Let's not underestimate the British mind.

It's lazy to say "oh it happened X number of years ago" because if you look at these people and countries today, the lasting effects are very much current.



Another atrocity which needs correcting.

Modern day atrocities haven’t been acknowledged nor corrected ,I’d doubt we’d see history rewritten.

 

[Blueblue123]

It's estimated that 70% of wealthy families will lose their wealth by the second generation and 90% will lose it by the third. So seeking reparations from the descendants of slave owners is bullsh1t. Plus, the British government didn't just end paying slave owners compensation in 2015, it was the debt they incurred in abolishing slavery in the early 19th century that was finally settled, not payments to slave owners! Which was an enoromous figure for the time, accounting for 40% of Britain's budget. Britain paid an almost crippling financial cost to lead the way and abolish slavery, at a time when slavery was commonplace everywhere in the entire world... but still 1807 isn't woke enough by 2023 standards for some. Britain has nothing to be ashamed about in leading the world in ending slavery.

And speaking of slavery being commonplace, Africa had a long tradition of slavery centuries before European slavers arrived. Rival tribes routinely enslaved conquered enemies as an accepted and expected part of warfare of the region. Chieftains were happy to supply such slaves to the Europeans for a suitable price and similarly provide assistance in raiding parties. So much so that many slave traders had no need to ever venture into the interior, relying entirely on the already indigenous slavers.

Slavery continued in Africa well into the 20th century long after it was abolished in Europe and America. Payment reparations can begin in Africa and I want Africa to pay reparations for the enslavement of Europeans by the Moors too, given the Barbary slave trade was comparable to the transatlantic slave trade and in full swing during the same period. It's from the Barbary slave trade that we get the word "kidnapped" as they merrily enslaved entire populations of southern European coastal regions from Italy to Ireland. I wonder how many descendants of the 2 million or so Europeans who were sold in the slave markets of north Africa and the Middle East would be owed financial redress? Will you lead the campaign on their behalf, Blueblue123?

Then I want the Arab states to pay reparations for European and African enslavement. I want the Egyptians to pay reparations, I want the Mauritania, China, India and Russia to pay reparations. I want the descendants of the native American tribes who enslaved European settlers, torturing men and women to death in the most barbaric ways imaginable, to pay reparations. I want black slave owners in the Antebellum South, who per capita out numbered white slave owners, to pay reparations. I want the freed American black slaves who immigrated to Liberia, and who then promptly enslaved the black local populace, to pay reparations.

I want immigrants to the UK who would undoubtedly be the descendants of Ottoman slave owners or Indian slave-owners or Chinese slave-owners to pay their share, too.

The Bible and the Quran both clearly support slavery, so Jews, Christians and Muslims have all owned slaves at some point in history - pay up! Most ancient Greek cities were about 30% slave population at least. The Spartans had slaves (helots outnumbered Spartans by a factor of 7). The Slavic people is where the term "slave" comes from, and as Islam expanded during the 7th and 8th century Slavic slaves were imported from Italian merchants. 10% - 20% of the population of the Roman empire were slaves after all. The Mongols enslaved thousands in the 13th century and Genghis Kahn owned slaves with 1 in 200 men on Earth today estimated to be directly descended from him... so very likely you're a descendant of a slave owner too, Blueblue123. Get your money out.

Slavery is actually more globally widespread *today* than it was through the 18th & 19th centuries; there are more slaves alive today than there were at the height of slavery in the US. Except that's not in the West, doesn't fit the narrative, and the hypocrites agitating for reparations don't get worked up about that, a tangible evil to address in the here and now, instead of this grievance, gimme-a-handout, bullsh1t.

Good, me and you are on the same page. People who commit wrongs should have to correct them and if that requires reparations, then that's what it takes. Glad we agree.

 

[thegirlscout]

Good, me and you are on the same page. People who commit wrongs should have to correct them and if that requires reparations, then that's what it takes. Glad we agree.

Reparations would cost trillions - that would bankrupt the country and damage the most vulnerable in society.

 

[Bobby Chariot]

I am currently writing to dignitaries in every Scandinavian nation about possible recompense, regarding the enslavement of my Pictish ancestors in the 9th Century.

 

[Blueblue123]

Reparations would cost trillions - that would bankrupt the country.

Exactly. Which is why they don't want to do it. Not because it's inappropriate or imbalanced. But oh well, you reap what you sow.
---

I am currently writing to dignitaries in every Scandinavian nation about possible recompense, regarding the enslavement of my Pictish ancestors in the 9th Century.

Have at it.

 

[thegirlscout]

Exactly. Which is why they don't want to do it. Not because it's inappropriate or imbalanced.

And because it would harm the most vulnerable in society! Do you really think the Duke of so and so will be struggling if we send trillions? No, but Mr Smith and Miss Jones will. It would be a catastrophe.

 

[Blueblue123]

And because it would harm the most vulnerable in society! Do you really think the Duke of so and so will be struggling if we send trillions? No, but Mr Smith and Miss Jones will. It would be a catastrophe.

Yes, because no one in the UK is currently struggling. The wealth is distributed evenly and the elite pay the correct taxes to make sure society benefits. Of course.

Those trillions are certainly swirling round to help the vulnerable.
---
And saying it'll bankrupt the UK is a massive exaggeration. Germany wasn't bankrupted by paying reparations to Jewish people.

 

[Piff paff puff]

It's estimated that 70% of wealthy families will lose their wealth by the second generation and 90% will lose it by the third. So seeking reparations from the descendants of slave owners is bullsh1t. Plus, the British government didn't just end paying slave owners compensation in 2015, it was the debt they incurred in abolishing slavery in the early 19th century that was finally settled, not payments to slave owners! Which was an enoromous figure for the time, accounting for 40% of Britain's budget. Britain paid an almost crippling financial cost to lead the way and abolish slavery, at a time when slavery was commonplace everywhere in the entire world... but still 1807 isn't woke enough by 2023 standards for some. Britain has nothing to be ashamed about in leading the world in ending slavery.

And speaking of slavery being commonplace, Africa had a long tradition of slavery centuries before European slavers arrived. Rival tribes routinely enslaved conquered enemies as an accepted and expected part of warfare of the region. Chieftains were happy to supply such slaves to the Europeans for a suitable price and similarly provide assistance in raiding parties. So much so that many slave traders had no need to ever venture into the interior, relying entirely on the already indigenous slavers.

Slavery continued in Africa well into the 20th century long after it was abolished in Europe and America. Payment reparations can begin in Africa and I want Africa to pay reparations for the enslavement of Europeans by the Moors too, given the Barbary slave trade was comparable to the transatlantic slave trade and in full swing during the same period. It's from the Barbary slave trade that we get the word "kidnapped" as they merrily enslaved entire populations of southern European coastal regions from Italy to Ireland. I wonder how many descendants of the 2 million or so Europeans who were sold in the slave markets of north Africa and the Middle East would be owed financial redress? Will you lead the campaign on their behalf, Blueblue123?

Then I want the Arab states to pay reparations for European and African enslavement. I want the Egyptians to pay reparations, I want the Mauritania, China, India and Russia to pay reparations. I want the descendants of the native American tribes who enslaved European settlers, torturing men and women to death in the most barbaric ways imaginable, to pay reparations. I want black slave owners in the Antebellum South, who per capita out numbered white slave owners, to pay reparations. I want the freed American black slaves who immigrated to Liberia, and who then promptly enslaved the black local populace, to pay reparations.

I want immigrants to the UK who would undoubtedly be the descendants of Ottoman slave owners or Indian slave-owners or Chinese slave-owners to pay their share, too.

The Bible and the Quran both clearly support slavery, so Jews, Christians and Muslims have all owned slaves at some point in history - pay up! Most ancient Greek cities were about 30% slave population at least. The Spartans had slaves (helots outnumbered Spartans by a factor of 7). The Slavic people is where the term "slave" comes from, and as Islam expanded during the 7th and 8th century Slavic slaves were imported from Italian merchants. 10% - 20% of the population of the Roman empire were slaves after all. The Mongols enslaved thousands in the 13th century and Genghis Kahn owned slaves with 1 in 200 men on Earth today estimated to be directly descended from him... so very likely you're a descendant of a slave owner too, Blueblue123. Get your money out.

Slavery is actually more globally widespread *today* than it was through the 18th & 19th centuries; there are more slaves alive today than there were at the height of slavery in the US. Except that's not in the West, doesn't fit the narrative, and the hypocrites agitating for reparations don't get worked up about that, a tangible evil to address in the here and now, instead of this grievance, gimme-a-handout, bullsh1t.

Wow! Are you an historian? Amazing knowledge
I'm assuming others besides myself never knew this either. I knew there had to be more to it though as you only ever hear one side and it's very unbalanced.

 

[Pambo]

It's lazy to say "oh it happened X number of years ago" because if you look at these people and countries today, the lasting effects are very much current.

Bullsh1te. All the oppression and ills that Empire didn’t import are still thriving in these countries today: slavery, squalor, exploitation, corruption, famine, pestilence etc. Inhumanity is still rife in great swathes of regions long after the departure of imperial rule.

Those who pretend the world before the British empire was some wonderful utopia, and that Britain should be eternally flagellating itself for having an empire is nonsense. Granted, the British empire was far from a benevolent entity, and was undeniably motivated almost entirely by self interest and profit, but the state of affairs in the rest of the world was much, much worse, and not just in the European colonial empires.

African, Arabic, Asian and even Native American empires almost universally displayed significantly more brutality, ruthlessness and racist subjugation of those they conquered than the British empire. China alone killed tens of millions during the 18th and 19th centuries in brutally suppressing various rebellions through its empire. India's Muhgal, Sikh and Maratha empires also displayed extreme brutality and abuse of those within their conquered territories, which is likely part of the reason why Britain was able to appear benign in comparison for so long.

Similar stories of horrific bloodshed and abuse can be found from Belgium's Congo, to the Ottoman empire, to the Aztec empire. Yet above all others, Britain's empire, which probably killed far fewer and caused less misery than almost any contemporary empire, is targeted disproportionately for criticism and hatred.

The world in the 18th, 19th, and early to mid 20th centuries was an almost unspeakably horrific place, no matter where you were. Britain's empire however, was somewhat less hellish, which is why some historians argue it was objectively a force for good. I guess individual opinion rests on whether you think a historical empire should be judged by modern standards or by the standards at the time of its existence.

And Britain never came up with empire, slavery, colonialism or barbarity, but somehow it gets full credit for these practices and human traits as if it did. The British were certainly responsible for addressing and seeking to abolish many of these evils in the world, and that’s why now we can all sit around endlessly chastising ourselves for not having done better and apologising, ignoring that the luxury of that indulgence wouldn't be possible without the legacy of western education, benevolence and democracy.

I acknowledge that many cultures probably would have preferred to continue without Western interference and we have examples of untouched cultures in the Amazon and Africa... but I don’t want to live like that, though. Neither do I want to live in the conditions of 18th or 19th century Britain.

It was the wealth of empire that funded the social changes necessary to improve conditions in Britain and propagated the evolution of human rights that we all take for granted today – in the West at least. The exploitation of the colonies is bound up in that, without which the technological and social advancements necessary couldn’t have happened so quickly. The Empire illustrates the worst but also the best of the West taken in view our evolving attitude to human rights.

And in the West we are still actively exporting our 'imperial' notions of human rights, along with practical aid, to the 'less civilised'. Still imposing our 'outdated colonial ambitions' in this ongoing crusade to 'save the rest of the world'. Would you prefer we desist?

History isn’t one snapshot that you can examine critically from the perspective and mores of another time. That's what's lazy.

And bullsh1te.

 

[Blueblue123]

And in the West we are still actively exporting our 'imperial' notions of human rights, along with practical aid, to the 'less civilised'.

Absolutely hilarious. This aid wouldn't be needed if Britain and Europe didn't pillage many of these places for all they had in the first place.

All the oppression and ills that Empire didn’t import are still thriving in these countries today: slavery, squalor, exploitation, corruption, famine, pestilence etc. Inhumanity is still rife in great swathes of regions long after the departure of imperial rule.

The imperial rule that ended post-1940? Which is when most nations became officially independent from British rule. So until less than 100 years ago, Britain was directly benefitting and siphoning resources from its colonies, as well as creating wars and conflict to the advantage of Britain.

India and Pakistan? The Biafra war?

Bit hard to recover from over 400 years of having your wealth and resources redirected to and benefitting another country in less than 100 years.
---
Figuring out why Britain is wealthier and more stable than the peoples and countries it used to have ownership of isn't the mystery you think it is.

 

[Pambo]

@Blueblue123 The legacy of that rule couldn’t have been all bad or the Commonwealth simply wouldn’t exist today.

 

[Blueblue123]

@Blueblue123 The legacy of that rule couldn’t have been all bad or the Commonwealth simply wouldn’t exist today.

Oh please, Commonwealth is just colonialism with a smile.

If you weaken a country, make it reliant on Western resources, then offer a support system under a so-called "commonwealth" - where the wealth wasn't common - that's not exactly a fair trade off.

Britain made millions from its ownership and enslavement of peoples and countries all over, and the return has been a pittance in comparison.

I'm not sure why people can't fathom that the ones who were victims of Britain's activities don't look on this period favourably or see it as a benefit. Lives were lost, resources were stolen and many countries have barely recovered as a direct result.

If I robbed you, gave you some of your stuff back but continued to benefit from what I kept, would you think highly of me? If you made it to old age, would you think "what a nice robber" or would you still hold some ill feelings knowing that you weren't properly compensated for what happened to you?

 

[Pambo]

Oh please, Commonwealth is just colonialism with a smile.

If you weaken a country, make it reliant on Western resources, then offer a support system under a so-called "commonwealth" - where the wealth wasn't common - that's not exactly a fair trade off.

Britain made millions from its ownership and enslavement of peoples and countries all over, and the return has been a pittance in comparison.

I'm not sure why people can't fathom that the ones who were victims of Britain's activities don't look on this period favourably or see it as a benefit. Lives were lost, resources were stolen and many countries have barely recovered as a direct result.

If I robbed you, gave you some of your stuff back but continued to benefit from what I kept, would you think highly of me? If you made it to old age, would you think "what a nice robber" or would you still hold some ill feelings knowing that you weren't properly compensated for what happened to you?

As I said, looking at the British Empire by today’s standards leads to charges of "white guilt" and calls for reparations by way of atonement, when the British Empire was arguably as good as empire ever historically got, yet it receives the most criticism.

If you robbed me of resources that I'd neither the knowledge to realise their worth or technology to exploit, then left leaving me with the infrastructure and knowledge with which to now enrich myself with, then if I didn't thank you, I'd at least acknowledge I was in a better position. Oil and diamonds are worthless if you can't get them out of the ground. Oil is worthless without the technology to exploit it.

But looking at what's going in some of these countries today, it's their own governments and officials that are robbing and depriving them, not Britain, and they've been managing that for generations all on their own.

Conversations like this make me think this is how western society will be brought into the dark ages again. It's like when the Barbarians rejected Roman rule and it took them 3-4 centuries to realise maybe the Romans were on to something.

 

[Blueblue123]

As I said, looking at the British Empire by today’s standards leads to charges of "white guilt" and calls for reparations by way of atonement, when the British Empire was arguably as good as empire ever historically got, yet it receives the most criticism.

If you robbed me of resources that I'd neither the knowledge to realise their worth or technology to exploit, then left leaving me with the infrastructure and knowledge with which to now enrich myself with, then if I didn't thank you, I'd at least acknowledge I was in a better position. Oil and diamonds are worthless if you can't get them out of the ground. Oil is worthless without the technology to exploit it.

But looking at what's going in some of these countries today, it's their own governments and officials that are robbing and depriving them, not Britain, and they've been managing that for generations all on their own.

Conversations like this make me think this is how western society will be brought into the dark ages again. It's like when the Barbarians rejected Roman rule and it took them 3-4 centuries to realise maybe the Romans were on to something.

You're wrong but I'll stop clogging up the thread because it's a futile debate.

 

[Pambo]

You're wrong but I'll stop clogging up the thread because it's a futile debate.

I must be if you say so.

 

[thegirlscout]

Yes, because no one in the UK is currently struggling. The wealth is distributed evenly and the elite pay the correct taxes to make sure society benefits. Of course.

Those trillions are certainly swirling round to help the vulnerable.
---
And saying it'll bankrupt the UK is a massive exaggeration. Germany wasn't bankrupted by paying reparations to Jewish people.

I didn’t say that the UK at the moment is a utopia - it isn’t, far from that. But if the government was the pay reparations it would be around the trillion mark and that would come from the taxpayers. The people who benefitted wouldn’t pay and the government wouldn’t force them. We are already struggling and in debt, taking trillions away (which I very much doubt we have) from the system would break it and in these situation the vulnerable will always suffer.
It’s not a massive exaggeration and it’s not really similar to Germany repaying the victims of the Holocaust - they have paid out less money and it’s been over a 70 year period. Due to the nature of the Holocaust there are fewer people to pay money out to. The money being paid is also smaller amounts - I’ve read that each person who was effected by slavery should be awarded millions of dollars. That’s just not feasible. And it will rely sorely on the European governments to cover this, not the African and Middle Eastern nations.

 

[monga]

Richard Sharp has gone.

Richard Sharp resigns as BBC chairman after Boris Johnson £800,000 loan row

A review has found the former Tory donor twice breached the code governing public appointments.

news.sky.com

 

[Blueblue123]

I didn’t say that the UK at the moment is a utopia - it isn’t, far from that. But if the government was the pay reparations it would be around the trillion mark and that would come from the taxpayers. The people who benefitted wouldn’t pay and the government wouldn’t force them. We are already struggling and in debt, taking trillions away (which I very much doubt we have) from the system would break it and in these situation the vulnerable will always suffer.
It’s not a massive exaggeration and it’s not really similar to Germany repaying the victims of the Holocaust - they have paid out less money and it’s been over a 70 year period. Due to the nature of the Holocaust there are fewer people to pay money out to. The money being paid is also smaller amounts - I’ve read that each person who was effected by slavery should be awarded millions of dollars. That’s just not feasible. And it will rely sorely on the European governments to cover this, not the African and Middle Eastern nations.

Oxford, Cambridge, the Bank of England, the British Museum, the Royal Family, the National Gallery, Barclays, Lloyds (of London), Royal Bank of Scotland, the individual families/people who owned slaves and are still wealthy because of it today....

This is just a short list of very wealthy institutions, businesses and people that could contribute to reparations before we even expect the government to put its hands in its pockets.

The tax breaks and director bonuses alone should start to cover it.

Oh, and anyone claiming these people and nations aren't gracious for not accepting an apology is overlooking the fact that Sunak refused to apologise.

 

[thegirlscout]

Oxford, Cambridge, the Bank of England, the British Museum, the Royal Family, the National Gallery, Barclays, Lloyds (of London), Royal Bank of Scotland, the individual families/people who owned slaves and are still wealthy because of it today....

This is just a short list of very wealthy institutions, businesses and people that could contribute to reparations before we even expect the government to put its hands in its pockets.

The problem is I very much doubt these institutions or families are going to contribute to reparations or even a decent amount so if the government agrees and these places fall short then what will happen?

 

[Blueblue123]

The problem is I very much doubt these institutions or families are going to contribute to reparations or even a decent amount so if the government agrees and these places fall short then what will happen?

Some are already doing it voluntarily.

https://www.palatinate.org.uk/treve...-ancestors-involvement-in-african-slave-trade

Thankfully, not everyone wants to hold on to money that was acquired through barbaric means, and they recognise that it can ease tensions and make victims feel like they have some justice.

The same family is being asked to pay for their role in the Irish famine

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...velyan-consider-reparations-Great-Famine.html

**Waits for people to call Irish people money grabbers**


King Charles seems open to the idea, although he could just be saying that to look progressive

https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2...port-for-research-into-monarchys-slavery-ties

But other people who descend from families who benefitted from the transatlantic slave trade aren't against the idea

British aristocrats ask King Charles to join a slavery reparations movement

Two members of U.K. aristocratic families, Laura Trevelyan and David Lascelles, are apologizing for centuries-old injustices in the Caribbean, and asking others to join them in paying reparations.

www.bpr.org

Good to see that the people who have the means and responsibility to pay have more compassion than the keyboard warriors who feel it necessary to defend wealth that isn't theirs.