Disingenuous headline - they’re not blocking anything as they’re not in any kind of power.
129
Joyous-Volume-672 days ago
+8
came here to say this
8
Paraphrasing_2 days ago
+6
I thought I missed the elections for a moment.
Spectacularly dumb ones if those clowns winning was the result.
6
NateBerukAnjing2 days ago
+40
they should ask reparations from algeria as well for Barbary corsairs
40
Realistic_Swan_68012 days ago
+25
Or from Ghana itself? A former capital of the slave trade.
25
justaheatattack2 days ago
+9
who has more seats? Reform or SNP?
9
Kindly_Teach93352 days ago
-28
They got half as many votes as Labour and 1% of the seats that's not a particularly good question when the system is dogshit, clearly they are far more relevant as they are leading the polls and pushing the overton window rightwards.
-28
BadNameThinkerOfer2 days ago
+11
Well, they've changed their tune about FPTP now that it looks like they might actually win under it so... 🤷
11
[deleted]2 days ago
+20
[removed]
20
faffc2602 days ago
+12
well, some colonial powers still hold a lot of economic and political pull in their former colonies. france famously tied a lot of it's newly independent colonies currency on their own so it was much more favorable for them to trade to france than other nations or something similar, read about it awhile ago, for an example, but the slave trade is so long ago and the decendants of the victims of said trade mostly aren't in africa anymore for obvious reasons.
12
CaseOk2942 days ago
+5
France has been actively manipulating currencies and extorting resources from francophone africa post ww2, with no discernible difference from colonial era but even better because they don't have to afford to manage the countries. Of course the francophone countries didn't just sit there and there have been attempts to rectify this, especially to decouple themselves from french writing their monetary policies, but France has been successful so far ordering Action Service to assassinate any opposition candidates and installing a dictator or bribing them to maintain its power projection in the sahel and west africa.
As for UK, I do not know of anything like this being done, but that could be my own ignorance.
5
faffc2602 days ago
-2
the british did more harm in maliciously (or ineptly, you choose) choosing the borders of their newly released colonies for the most part. india/pakistan, israel, probably many more I could name if I bothered to look it up...
-2
CaseOk2942 days ago
+5
Ah yes, the bordergore part, I agree. It slipped my mind as I was thinking of French style of actively meddling. But I'm not sure there's practical possibility of any reparations to be done in British case. In French case it's simpler to alleviate the situation; stop assassinating democratically elected officials and let go of monetary subjugation.
5
NA_0_10_never_forget2 days ago
+2
Yes and no, but mostly no. Not sure about these specifically, but many developing or 3rd world countries have/had a lot opportunities to set things right, but they also have the most corrupt governments. "Reparations" would mostly just be phat paychecks for the heads of state and their families, without much to actually improve the country or the situations for the citizens.
Not that the UK, or as the other commenter said, France, shouldn't be obligated to assist, but it's kinda hopeless either way.
2
GfunkWarrior282 days ago
Don't let Trump know, he's on a "remove head-of-state" streak of late.
0
Mechasteel2 days ago
+3
Trump would demand Africa pay America reparations for the slave trade. After all, descendants of the slaves live in America, and descendants of people who captured and sold the slaves live in Africa. Naturally, that money has to go through Trump's personal bank account, for reasons.
3
ElTejon_TheDestroyer2 days ago
+4
Reform can’t do shit, they are not in power and I sincerely hope they never are. We do however have a lot of stupid and gullible people in the UK so it is not as impossible as I would like.
4
nerdyPagaman2 days ago
+4
If you say the British empire lasted 200 years.
And you pretend that recorded history started with the roman invasion of England 2000 years ago.
1) Every historian will hate the over simplification.
2) 90% of recorded history is other people invading and colonising England.
3) Someone will comment about the name "England" not being correct.
4) No one in England wants compensation from any of the other invading countries.
4
[deleted]2 days ago
+1
[deleted]
1
faffc2602 days ago
+8
the vote called for reparations. that's why it singled out the transatlantic slave trade and not just slavery, it was a way to push for reparations from the UK (who abstained i believe), us, and other nations that were a part of said trade.
8
MetalBawx1 day ago
+2
Also apart of the trade were most west African nations of the time. who hunted and captured each others people both for their own slave labour pools and for export.
None of them are being asked for repartitions oddly enough.
It doesn't really matter though. the UN has zero power to actually enforce any of this c*** and no political party in the UK would agree anyway. Doing so would be electoral suicide not to mention fan the flames of the far right.
2
Silver_Middle_72402 days ago
+9
It's pretty ridiculous seeing as the descendants of the enslavers are in Ghana and Nigeria, while the descendants of the victims in the US would be paying the reparations.
"Pay me for what I did to you"
9
Loose_Skill66412 days ago
+2
As someone else pointed out, 20%-30% of the US population are descendants of said slaves, they were victims, if the US government pays reparations then its using taxes collected from former slavery victims to pay countries asking for reparations, which seems counter intuitive, also would it not make more sense if they were going to do reparations to pay those reparations to black people in the USA instead of sending it overseas
2
[deleted]2 days ago
-4
[deleted]
-4
ITAdministratorHB2 days ago
-4
So you want to increase taxes and make everyone around you poorer then? Because that's what your actions would imply if you want to pursue this 'reparations' thing.
-4
BuilderMysterious7622 days ago
-4
Wasnt the uk already paying reparations to the families of slave owners up until 2015?
-4
MetalBawx2 days ago
+7
No we bought the slaves and freed them because the alternative was a massive civil war. What we finished paying for was the loan to buy them.
7
[deleted]2 days ago
-7
[deleted]
-7
MetalBawx2 days ago
+7
These countries are demanding billions upon billions in "repartitions" so where do you think the money for such a thing would come from if we actually submitted to this opportunistic cash grab?
7
[deleted]1 day ago
[deleted]
0
MetalBawx1 day ago
Hypothetically.
0
ITAdministratorHB1 day ago
Not as dumb as you apparently as you think money will just magically appear from thin air.
This is why kids shouldn't be allowed on listnook tbh...
0
Kichae1 day ago
-1
Yeah, but the racists do seem to be entertained, if the comments here are any indication.
-1
fairyam4z2 days ago
-66
Anyone who says Britain has ended its colonial slavery exploitation is no better than Israelis. You ignore current politics and economics of Africa that replaces slavery from under royal decree to under mysterious third party corporations and how Britain and France crush any indigenous/native leadership that even attempts to limit them.
Just say you don’t want to pay because you don’t want to. Why disrespect reality when it will only breed hate and vengeance?
-66
LostnFoundAgainAgain2 days ago
+26
So you're saying that the average British person has to pay because of private corporations which mostly are international?
Well that definitely settles it.
26
faffc2602 days ago
+11
the british government already paid for their slaves to be freed, I don't think the UK needs to pay further than buying every slaves freedom and then virtually ending the trade with it's navy afterwards.
edit: to be clear, I mean every slave in the UK itself.
11
fairyam4z2 days ago
-15
Well there goes my whole argument! The corporations have no ties to Britain or other imperialist . Neocolonialism is not real!
-15
brother_number12 days ago
+13
UK not in anyway the same with France, which has been much more direct and systematic in doing this. UK generally much more hands off vs France. Possibly from the UK only really tangibly against Ghana with anti Nkrumah propaganda in the 60s. The time it "crushed" anything was Sierra Leone when they crushed the coup and restored the elected government.
That aside remember this when you think about slavery next time:
* Slaves were primarily capture and sold by Africans, not anyone else
* African kingdoms made billions adjusted for modern PP selling slaves
* Some African kingdoms, such as Sokoto Caliphate had as similar number of slaves to the US in the 1860s.
* There are still 7 million Africans in slavery in Africa
I'm all for condemning the Atlantic Slave Trade and economic fairness in the world, but these people asking for reparations, perhaps need some introspection. As they say change begins at home and Africa clearly has a long journey to go on this.
13
fairyam4z1 day ago
-1
If the UK is active as France please explain Shell, BHP, or Glencore horrific actions (historically and current) in Africa and why the UK not only allows them to do so but profits off of them?
Who has more control over these evil corporate bastards the UK public or the citizens of African countries?
-1
DawnSennin2 days ago
-14
> I'm all for condemning the Atlantic Slave Trade and economic fairness in the world, but these people asking for reparations, perhaps need some introspection.
You can’t condemn the slave trade without being an advocate for reparations.
-14
MetalBawx2 days ago
+5
Yes you can.
We paid for our slaves to be freed as the alternative was civil war. We never paid repartitions instead we took out a loan to cover the cost of freeing our own slaves and spent almost two centuries paying it back.
We also paid for the Royal Navy to destroy the trans atlantic trade and pursecured multiple wars in Africa against slave states who wanted to keep the trade going. None of those African nations are being asked for repartitions oddly enough.
5
DawnSennin2 days ago
-5
What about the slaves and their descendants? Were they paid? Europe and the Americas built the wealth you see today on the blacks of enslaved peoples from Africa, and their descendants didn’t get a drop of that money. In fact, they were persecuted for being free and terrorized for their skin color. When are the nations who benefited from slavery going to pay them?
-5
MetalBawx1 day ago
+1
By that so called "logic" every single nation should be paying repartitions to everyone else.
Do the Africans who enslaved, sold and killed their fellow Africans have to pay? What about the Arabs who were buying African slaves for thousands of years prior to the Europeans getting involved? What about far eastern slavery?
Slavery has been practiced by almost every single nation in history.
None of these people demanding money have been enslaved so they get NOTHING.
1
DawnSennin1 day ago
Quite a few groups received reparations for the horrors they endured including Japanese Americans and the Jews who endured the Holocaust. Now, it’s beyond time ADOS got what they are owed from their ancestors’ work. And not just that either. They’re owed moneys from post-colonial disenfranchisement, Jim Crow and other apartheid systems, the demonization they endure from the mainstream media, and modern systemic racism. There’s no equality without wealth equality, and the Americas and Europe owe ADOS a huge sum of money from the wealth their ancestors built for them.
0
MetalBawx1 day ago
+1
So no arguement or answers you just stamp your foot and insist your right like a small child.
Concession accepted.
1
DawnSennin1 day ago
A crime was committed and backpay is owed. What argument is there to have?
0
brother_number11 day ago
+1
> Europe and the Americas built the wealth you see today on the blacks of enslaved peoples from Africa, and their descendants didn’t get a drop of that money
In the UK at it's peak the slave trade contributed a few percentage to the British Economy. Of course it played a part, but built their wealth based on it? Most of the wealth from imperialism went to wealthy politically elites not the economy so much as a whole https://books.google.com.au/books/about/Mammon_and_the_Pursuit_of_Empire.html?id=94e1PxsJrOoC
It was, however, more important for wealthy African kingdoms such as the Sokoto Caliphate, who made billions adjusted for modern purchasing power and had similar numbers of slaves as Southern US states, which along with other kingdoms such as Dahomey also had large slave plantation economies. Due to British anti-slavery pressure these kingdom's wealth didn't survive so they are not in a position for paying any reparations unfortunately.
1
fairyam4z2 days ago
+1
The point is to avoid introspection. The argument is set up to imply that people should let it go but in a way that allows them to pretend to have a conscious.
It’s not the 19th or 20th century anymore so the propaganda has to be toned down to palatable.
1
brother_number12 days ago
+9
Don't think anyone is avoiding introspection, in the UK slave trade is widely taught and the history kids learn in school regards British empire is largely negative. Go to any historical building and any links with the slave trade are acknowledged. While it did make some people very wealthy, overall it's economic contribution was small, a few percentage in it's peak.
UK public abolished slavery and paid huge sums to end it. Maybe it doesn't seem fair where the money went to, but that was the only viable way to end it in a country that values predictable and rule of law governance.
9
Eulaylia2 days ago
+4
Ok, then we should pay them to the Americans who are the decendants of the people sold.
Not the people selling them, lol
4
fairyam4z1 day ago
Reparations should be paid through the liquidation of assets from the 1% of Europe who built and currently maintain their wealth through corporate exploitation BHP, Shell, Glencore..etc of Africa and they should pay defendants.
They do nothing with this wealth but hoard it driving up prices everywhere. I don’t understand why this is so hard to understand.
0
brother_number11 day ago
+1
This is where I can agree with you more, although would need a lot of the details worked out.
People can see this wealth hoarding, but you are making a lot of statements about different things. So people probably agree with you on that point, but may not on the others.
The irony is, these same companies are exploiting everyone. In fact what people don't realise is that African countries actually typically get more government share from resource extraction than many developed economies. I know this is the case vs Australia, where when Niger kicked the French out of the Uranium mines I looked into it, the French companies were giving a share could only dream of in Australia for our mining resources. It's important though to understand in mining often a lot of wealth is generated from the periphery companies, insurance, tech, equipment etc than the actual mining itself. The difficulty for much of Africa is it's internal domestic economy is still undeveloped to benefit from this.
And yes you are right UK and other "Western" countries do have more control over these companies, it still is however difficult to really do or change anything on a democratic level. Not saying shouldn't try.
1
ITAdministratorHB2 days ago
+9
TBH the African countries should really be paying reparations to the UK at this point
9
fairyam4z2 days ago
-6
Yes, they do. British Petroleum actually collects it. They just forget to give you a cut. They’re too busy with proxy wars, r***, murder and trafficking.
56 Comments