Slave Trade Apology

andych

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6185176.stm?ls

As a democratic liberal (so to speak) i`m finding this news story a little difficult to deal with.As a scotsman i`m thinking of filing suit against the British government for over 400 years of oppression..i mean,where does this stop?



opinions?

farfromglorified

No man should apologize for the sins of his father.

jlew24asu

I read recently that there are more slaves today then ever before in history. thats scary huh.

Abuskedti

farfromglorified wrote:

No man should apologize for the sins of his father.

I wonder... If a man steals a collection of priceless art - say from a Jewish family in Germany during WWII - sells the art for $20,000,000 and promptly dies..
The jewish family had a surviving child - and the thief had a child

which child should get the $20,000,000 sitting in the dead mans bank account?

Sonja_S

Abuskedti wrote:

I wonder... If a man steals a collection of priceless art - say from a Jewish family in Germany during WWII - sells the art for $20,000,000 and promptly dies..
The jewish family had a surviving child - and the thief had a child

which child should get the $20,000,000 sitting in the dead mans bank account?

Most of the time the art has to be given back to the jewish owner's children. I don't think they would ask for the money though. There were a lot of cases where paintings had to be given back to the families of their former owners in the last years. Klimt and Schiele paintings made a lot of noise in that regard lately.

farfromglorified

Abuskedti wrote:

I wonder... If a man steals a collection of priceless art - say from a Jewish family in Germany during WWII - sells the art for $20,000,000 and promptly dies..
The jewish family had a surviving child - and the thief had a child

which child should get the $20,000,000 sitting in the dead mans bank account?

The child of the thief, of course. Receiving an inheritance is not a crime. Stealing is.

chopitdown

farfromglorified wrote:

No man should apologize for the sins of his father.

or in this case the sins of a great-great-grandfather.

Abuskedti

farfromglorified wrote:

The child of the thief, of course. Receiving an inheritance is not a crime. Stealing is.

There has been no accusation of a crime against the thief's son. Simply a claim for the ill gotten gains.

farfromglorified

Abuskedti wrote:

There has been no accusation of a crime against the thief's son. Simply a claim for the ill gotten gains.

You cannot seek justice against a man in the absence of a crime. If his gains were "ill-gotten", then a crime happened. In your example, there was no such crime since receiving an inheritence is not a crime.

rebornFixer

farfromglorified stated it much more eloquently than I could.

Abuskedti

farfromglorified wrote:

You cannot seek justice against a man in the absence of a crime. If his gains were "ill-gotten", then a crime happened. In your example, there was no such crime since receiving an inheritence is not a crime.

you confuse yourself so easily. A crime did happen. It was not committed by the son. Do you feel inheritance is somehow sacred? The 20,000,000 was earned by the Jewish family, not by the family of the thief.

farfromglorified

Abuskedti wrote:

you confuse yourself so easily.

Really? Let's see who's confused.

A crime did happen.

Yep.

It was not committed by the son.

Yep.

Do you feel inheritance is somehow sacred?

Nope. I simply feel that it is not a crime.

The 20,000,000 was earned by the Jewish family, not by the family of the thief.

Really? What did they do to earn it?

FinsburyParkCarrots

farfromglorified wrote:

No man should apologize for the sins of his father.

But should Lloyd's of London - a bank that founded its fortunes on the Middle Passage - pay substantial reparations to people, who can be proven to be direct ancestors of those slaves listed in the annals of slave trade? If so, and if one thinks about the rate of inflation, every individual claimant would stand to earn millions. It'd be in the best interest of the banks to say, "We're not responsible for what our fathers did". What are your thoughts on this? I'm thinking about British cases here, rather than American ones, but the situation is similar.

Abuskedti

farfromglorified wrote:

Really? Let's see who's confused.



Yep.



Yep.



Nope. I simply feel that it is not a crime.



Really? What did they do to earn it?

are you dizzy? hmmm What did they do to earn it? Well, I don't know it was hypothetical.. perhaps they created the art.. perhaps they earned money and purchaced the art - perhaps it was inherited? again you bring up irrelevant points.

The art belonged to the jewish familiy and it was stolen. If it is found - it should be returned - and if money was made from its sale - that money should be returned to the owner.

I know you are not interested in discussing this -

if I stole your bicycle and gave it to a stranger - the stranger now has a stolen bicycle -

I realize these are simple examples - and the issue of reparations are far more complicated.

However, crimes were committed. You sit in money that was earned through unthinkable crimes included torture - and the abduction of people - children were stolen from families and sold - and you and I wallow in the riches - though I realize you refuse to see how you have benefitted from the work of those before you...

there is certainly a beef - we have inherited riches from horrible crimes.. its tough to undo.. but there is no question there is a wrong that has been done and the decendents of the criminals play in the plunder with a grin and ridicule the decendants of the victims...

Its very ugly and very complicated - however, any attempt to address this issue - even if only for understanding or learning - can not be wrong - no matter how it may make you feel.

rebornFixer

AbuskedtiIts very ugly and very complicated - however, any attempt to address this issue - even if only for understanding or learning - can not be wrong - no matter how it may make you feel.[/quote wrote:

Are you serious? ANY attempt cannot be wrong? Why would you even think that, let alone say it? Maybe I misunderstand. There are any number of ways to address this situation, including doing nothing directly at all, someone (who, though?) making a public apology, financial reparations ... Castrating all decendants of slave owners. All have their potential pros and cons ... My belief is that the cons outweight the pros in most cases. I don't think we should foreclose constructive criticism by saying that no attempt could be wrong.

rebornFixer

FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:

But should Lloyd's of London - a bank that founded its fortunes on the Middle Passage - pay substantial reparations to people, who can be proven to be direct ancestors of those slaves listed in the annals of slave trade? If so, and if one thinks about the rate of inflation, every individual claimant would stand to earn millions. It'd be in the best interest of the banks to say, "We're not responsible for what our fathers did". What are your thoughts on this? I'm thinking about British cases here, rather than American ones, but the situation is similar.

What would possibly be the advantage in doing this? If this were science (its not, but bear with me), the onus would be on the people making these sorts of suggestions to highlight the upside. Its not appropriate to throw this stuff out there and then demand that the critics disprove its worth.

FinsburyParkCarrots

reborncareerist wrote:

What would possibly be the advantage in doing this? If this were science (its not, but bear with me), the onus would be on the people making these sorts of suggestions to highlight the upside. Its not appropriate to throw this stuff out there and then demand that the critics disprove its worth.

Read Dr Robert Beckford, on this, because he's one of the most vocal people claiming that reparation is the most important way to achieve racial equality, and redress post-slavery black poverty, crime, poor education and social disadvantage:

http://www.blink.org.uk/print.asp?key=8719
http://www.diverse.tv/programme.aspx?id=76
http://www.uscanada.bham.ac.uk/news/empire.htm

rebornFixer

FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:

Read Dr Robert Beckford, on this, because he's one of the most vocal people claiming that reparation is the most important way to achieve racial equality, and redress post-slavery black poverty, crime, poor education and social disadvantage:

http://www.blink.org.uk/print.asp?key=8719
http://www.diverse.tv/programme.aspx?id=76
http://www.uscanada.bham.ac.uk/news/empire.htm

I will read this stuff, thank you.

rebornFixer

OK, so link number 1 makes it clear that Dr. Beckford (who is black) is a consumate researcher (I don't doubt it). No arguments were put forth about how reparations would accomplish the goal of eliminating or reducing racial inequality.
I will read the others, though.

EDIT: Note the tape depicted in the second link: "African Chiefs Helped in Slave Trade". Maybe some of the proceeds should come from THEIR ancestors as well?

Abuskedti

reborncareerist wrote:

Are you serious? ANY attempt cannot be wrong? Why would you even think that, let alone say it? Maybe I misunderstand. There are any number of ways to address this situation, including doing nothing directly at all, someone (who, though?) making a public apology, financial reparations ... Castrating all decendants of slave owners. All have their potential pros and cons ... My belief is that the cons outweight the pros in most cases. I don't think we should foreclose constructive criticism by saying that no attempt could be wrong.

don't be silly. An attempt would only include rational discussions negotiations and perhaps a solution. When I say attempt - I really only mean the recognition that it is indeed a fact that America was built in large part on stolen and abused labor - and the wealth is disproportionately distributed among the decendants of the perpetrators of the crime.

I don't say that it would be reasonable for all white people to pay a fine into a pot that is distributed among blacks. But recognizing this fact - discussing it - and even hopeing for some way to try and make a correction is not a bad thing

in fact I don't think the black community is asking for a handout. They are just looking for some leveling... They began the american dream late and with some serious handicaps.

Maybe in the name of recovery and repentance - some serious efforts can be undertaken to help disadvantaged americans - with race not even an issue - but only as a gesture of understanding by the people that have been blessed by the success of America.

Our poor are entitled to some breaks - some mentoring - and some preparation for them to have a go at existing opportunities.

farfromglorified

Abuskedti wrote:

are you dizzy?

Not at all.

hmmm What did they do to earn it? Well, I don't know it was hypothetical.. perhaps they created the art.. perhaps they earned money and purchaced the art - perhaps it was inherited? again you bring up irrelevant points.

Umm...you brought up the fact that they "earned" it, not me.

The art belonged to the jewish familiy and it was stolen. If it is found - it should be returned - and if money was made from its sale - that money should be returned to the owner.

I know you are not interested in discussing this -

if I stole your bicycle and gave it to a stranger - the stranger now has a stolen bicycle -

I realize these are simple examples - and the issue of reparations are far more complicated.

You seem to be confusing revenge or ethics with justice. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it's ethics.

Justice is a process of dealing with men as they are. You are proposing stealing $20M from a man who committed no crime. That would make you the criminal.

I'm curious -- why are you not proposing that the purchaser of the paintings return them??? He stands on exactly the same moral ground as the son of the thief.

I'll demonstrate the simple error in your logic by extending your analogy a bit. Let's say that it was discovered that the painter stole the paint he used. Would you be proposing then that the $20M be returned to the paint store?

You keep using the word "owned", but unfortunately you've destroyed its meaning. By expropriating $20M from a man who committed no crime other than to be related to a criminal, you've stated that ownership belongs to only he who is strong enough to hold onto something and, in effect, put yourself in bed with the dead thief whose tactics you're pretending to reject.

However, crimes were committed. You sit in money that was earned through unthinkable crimes included torture - and the abduction of people - children were stolen from families and sold - and you and I wallow in the riches - though I realize you refuse to see how you have benefitted from the work of those before you...

If you actually believed in the moral code you're proposing, you would have returned it all. The sad part of your code is that you want me to return what I earned instead and hope no one will notice you.

there is certainly a beef - we have inherited riches from horrible crimes.. its tough to undo.. but there is no question there is a wrong that has been done and the decendents of the criminals play in the plunder with a grin and ridicule the decendants of the victims...

It's completely easy to undo, under your code. Give everything you own to the next black person you see. Feel free to steal it right back though since your code allows that as well. Just don't expect to hold onto it for long.

Its very ugly and very complicated - however, any attempt to address this issue - even if only for understanding or learning - can not be wrong - no matter how it may make you feel.

Any attempt? Then I propose that we the living all be hanged at daybreak and our property redistributed to the bottom of the sea. I'm sure that will serve appropriate "justice" for the crimes of the dead.