· 169 comments · Save ·
Announcements Mar 26, 2026 at 1:29 PM

U.S. is one of three countries to vote against U.N. resolution calling slavery a 'crime against humanity'

Posted by kootles10

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/us-votes-against-un-resolution-calling-slavery-crime-humanity-rcna265240
🚩 Report this post

169 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
shoplifterfpd Mar 26, 2026 +110
Reads title: “WTF” Reads details: “That actually makes a lot of sense”
110
smellybrit Mar 26, 2026 +10
While I applaud the attempt to equate the transatlantic slave trade to other forms of slavery, historians generally agree that it is the most extreme form of slavery as it combined race, heredity, total ownership, and industrial scale into one uniquely rigid system. In most other forms of slavery freedom was possible (through manumission in case of Arab-Berbers) and sometimes expected, whereas in the transatlantic system freedom was rare and the system was designed to be permanent and hereditary.
10
HearYourTune Mar 26, 2026 +104
It's because they tied reparations to it, that's why all of Europe abstained. If it was just the declaration they were against then that would be different.
104
gorginhanson Mar 26, 2026 +42
“The United States also strongly objects to the resolution’s attempt to rank crimes against humanity in any type of hierarchy. The assertion that some crimes against humanity are less severe than others objectively diminishes the suffering of countless victims and survivors of other atrocities throughout history.” Actually that makes sense Also agree that the EU is not down for reparations
42
imreallyjazzed Mar 26, 2026 +11
Idk we love hierarchies in America. We would face accountability with this one though.
11
smellybrit Mar 26, 2026 -1
It’s about accountability and unwillingness to take responsibility for your own actions
-1
Blate_Slank Mar 26, 2026 +4
Libya has openly operating slave markets now and they're part of the UN. E: You seem to have replied and blocked me, which is a pretty wussy thing to do. The problem, genius, is that this UN declaration says the defunct transatlantic slave trade to the Americas is specifically the worst ever crime against humanity (rather than others like the Holocaust, holodomor, CURRENT slave trades) and calls for reperations. Don't you feel like a silly goose now?
4
smellybrit Mar 26, 2026 -2
Yes and? It’s okay to care about more than one thing. Nice attempt at a deflection
-2
gorginhanson Mar 26, 2026
they want accountability for over 100 years ago, I would settle for accountability for the last 20 years
0
nikfra Mar 26, 2026 +21
>It's because they tied reparations to it, that's why all of Europe abstained. The EU put out a statement on why they abstained and that wasn't it. The real reason is calling it "the greatest crime against humanity" is introducing a ranking in crimes against humanity that could lessen other crimes.
21
Ok-Conversation2707 Mar 26, 2026 +5
The EU objected to the same things as the U.S., U.K., Canada, and others. Reparatory compensation was indeed one of the reasons for not supporting the resolution, which included “retroactive application of international rules which was non-existent at the time and *claims for reparations*.”
5
nikfra Mar 26, 2026 +1
Yes it was also a point but especially when reading the statement it was a minor one.
1
DrSpraynard Mar 26, 2026 +2
What's the reason for abstaining when you disagree and can vote against it?
2
nikfra Mar 26, 2026 +7
Because the EU doesn't actually disagree with the sentiment that it was a crime against humanity and a vote against could and probably would be construed as such. Just look at the comments here. The vast majority obviously didn't even bother reading past the headline let alone look any deeper into it.
7
DrSpraynard Mar 26, 2026 +2
Reminds me of the 2021 UN vote on making food a human right
2
Visible_Device7187 Mar 26, 2026 +4
Also doesn't acknowledge any other slave trade just solely Atlantic
4
TheWizard Mar 26, 2026 -7
What would be [your excuse for this](https://www.npr.org/2026/01/25/nx-s1-5686524/national-park-service-dismantles-slavery-exhibit-in-philadelphia)? We're a nation run by racist bastards. European countries abstained from voting. USA voted against it.
-7
HearYourTune Mar 26, 2026 +12
So you are saying we should have abstained?
12
TheWizard Mar 26, 2026 +5
Yes, Europe did (and you used them in the argument). Abstainment points at concerns and that is perfectly fine. To vote AGAINST something is more of certainty, and falls in line with the track this administration has had regarding slavery (you didn't care about the link I provided, did you?)
5
Clutteredmind275 Mar 26, 2026 -11
We should have agreed. We do owe reparations to countries we’ve abused and plundered
-11
darkmoncns Mar 26, 2026 +6
Ignoring that the country in question to be paid was responsible themselves for sourcing the slaves used in the slave trade*
6
Clutteredmind275 Mar 26, 2026 -3
The reparations being asked are literally just the cultural artifacts that we took from those countries. Did you not read the article?
-3
Ok-Conversation2707 Mar 26, 2026 +1
The resolution explicitly includes “financial compensation” for “Africans and people of African descent in all parts of the world.”
1
idkmyusernameagain Mar 26, 2026 +1
It also says compensation. Did you not read the article?
1
maxintos Mar 26, 2026 +3
What a childish take. Should arabs pay for their slave trade? British? Portuguese? Spanish? There are plenty of examples of African nations running slave trade for profit. Should they also pay back? It's a very dumb take to think that countries should pay reparations for something that happened 200 years ago. Should Italy pay for the damage Romans did?
3
Clutteredmind275 Mar 26, 2026 +2
You didn’t read the article. The reparations are literally just sending them back the cultural artifacts these countries stole and still have in their possession
2
wha-haa Mar 26, 2026 +3
No. Go read the article again. Maybe go slowly this time. It pushes for compensation, and “satisfaction “. “The resolution calls on U.N. member nations to engage in talks “on reparatory justice, including a full and formal apology, measures of restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction, guarantees of non-repetition and changes to laws, programs and services to address racism and systemic discrimination.”
3
Clutteredmind275 Mar 26, 2026 +3
And then it goes on to define the compensation and satisfaction From the article: \>The compensation urges “the prompt and unhindered restitution” of cultural items — including artworks, monuments, museum pieces, documents and national archives — to their countries of origin WITHOUT charge. It has to be declared as compensation as the current system for returning cultural artifacts requires the countries of origin to PAY for the artifacts to be returned
3
Ok-Conversation2707 Mar 26, 2026 +2
The resolution explicitly includes “*financial compensation*” as a form of reparations. The resolution states that “*claims for reparations represent a concrete step towards remedying historical wrongs against Africans and people of African descent*.” The stated intent is to “*address socioeconomic disparities affecting Africans and people of African descent in all parts of the world*.”
2
idkmyusernameagain Mar 26, 2026 +1
As referenced in the article and resolution, Restitution includes cultural items, it’s not limited to. It specifically includes financial payments.
1
BiscottiEastern220 Mar 26, 2026 +1
The Italian government should pay me because the romans enslaved my Gaul ancestors!!! Lol that's how they think
1
spastichobo Mar 26, 2026 -11
Yes, yes, yes, yes. Also yes. No there is no roman empire that still exists. Hope that helps
-11
maxintos Mar 26, 2026 +1
Why does it matter if no Roman empire exists? Isn't the idea here that people that benefitted should pay back? So find all the descendents of Romans and make them pay back to all the descendents of the slaves Romans owned. No one alive in US owns or has owned slaves so it's just paying back for what some people 5 generations back did on the same land you live on.
1
TotallyNotHitler Mar 26, 2026 +1
Everyone owes money to everyone! Kinda how it is now.
1
spastichobo Mar 26, 2026 -16
Nah not everyone. There's definitively people owed and people who owe
-16
BiscottiEastern220 Mar 26, 2026 +3
Agreed. Any former slaveowner should pay anyone they had enslaved. That's the only outcome that's fair.
3
TotallyNotHitler Mar 26, 2026 +3
How far back we gonna go?
3
joe5joe7 Mar 26, 2026
I mean the simple answer is as far back as there is continuity to the government. So the US has been. The same 'state' since independence and has an obligation to answer for things it's done as an entity. This wasnt even drawing a hard line at what that needed to be, just encouraging engaging in talks. Ridiculous they wouldn't vote yes, and voting no is crazy.
0
spastichobo Mar 26, 2026 -9
As far back as it takes
-9
wha-haa Mar 26, 2026 +1
Pay up. No one will stop you from giving away YOUR money.
1
Clutteredmind275 Mar 26, 2026 -1
I have given donations to most of the countries involved through UNICEF and will continue to do so if I ever have the financial means to do it again. I feel now it should be governments’ turns
-1
wha-haa Mar 26, 2026 +2
The government doesn’t have its own money, it’s the people’s money.
2
Clutteredmind275 Mar 26, 2026 -1
You’re a fool if you believe that. Governments have individual reserves and assets. Additionally, if you REALLY wanna get specific, various European royal families and major western corporations have their own independent wealth and funds tied directly into the government that they directly gained from this slave trade. So if you don’t like the generalized term “government”, then how about you stop guilt tripping impoverished people and demand our elites and nobles pay back what THEY owe, which is what everyone MEANS when they say “the government should pay reparations”. It’s means the individuals who insist on controlling our governments should pay for the sins they caused
-1
wha-haa Mar 26, 2026
Can you repeat this. I can’t hear you.
0
Clutteredmind275 Mar 26, 2026
Make the elites that brought suffering to this world suffer themselves.
0
CaptainAwesome06 Mar 26, 2026
At this point in how the US is being run, I don't have confidence that the US vote would be any different if reparations weren't attached to it. The US could have abstained like the EU.
0
Ok-Conversation2707 Mar 26, 2026 +4
All of those not in favor of the resolution shared the same principle concerns. They all disagreed with its legal assertions, disputed the inclusion of factual inaccuracies, objected to the reparations framework, and emphatically condemned the atrocities slavery while rejecting a moral and legal declaration that it was objectively worse than all others. There’s abstentions had no functional difference in rationale or outcome.
4
CaptainAwesome06 Mar 26, 2026 -1
My point is, I'm not convinced the stated concerns weren't just a convenient excuse. They would have come up with another excuse if the situation were different. These are the same guys who wanted to rename bases back to those that celebrated generals who fought for slavery.
-1
CougdIt Mar 26, 2026 +1
Bit of an assumption at the end there?
1
kootles10 Mar 26, 2026 +31
From the article: The U.N. General Assembly on Wednesday adopted a resolution declaring the trafficking of enslaved Africans “the gravest crime against humanity” and calling for reparations as “a concrete step towards remedying historical wrongs.” The resolution also urges “the prompt and unhindered restitution” of cultural items — including artworks, monuments, museum pieces, documents and national archives — to their countries of origin without charge. The vote in the 193-member world body was 123-3, with 52 abstentions. Argentina, Israel and the United States were the three members voting against the resolution. The United Kingdom and all 27 members of the European Union were among those that abstained. While the United States opposes the past wrongdoing of the transatlantic slave trade and all other forms of slavery, it “does not recognize a legal right to reparations for historical wrongs that were not illegal under international law at the time they occurred,” deputy U.S. ambassador Dan Negrea said before the vote. “The United States also strongly objects to the resolution’s attempt to rank crimes against humanity in any type of hierarchy,” he said. “The assertion that some crimes against humanity are less severe than others objectively diminishes the suffering of countless victims and survivors of other atrocities throughout history.”
31
CmdrMonocle Mar 26, 2026 +31
Its worth mentioning that the US still to this day permits slavery under the 13th amendment, and according to the Global Slavery Index, there were 1.1 million people living in slavery in the US. It places the US in the top 10 nations by number of slaves.
31
dravenonred Mar 26, 2026 +8
I checked multiple sources and your statistics are not supported https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/global-slavery-index-by-country https://www.walkfree.org/global-slavery-index/findings/global-findings/
8
CmdrMonocle Mar 26, 2026 +1
That's because you're looking at prevalence (number of slaves per 1000 population), and then stopping. Just scroll a little more on the link you provided to countries with the most slaves. "The 10 countries with the largest estimated numbers of people in modern slavery include some of the world’s most populous. Collectively, these countries — India (11 million), China (5.8 million), North Korea (2.7 million), Pakistan (2.3 million), Russia (1.9 million), Indonesia (1.8 million), Nigeria (1.6 million), Türkiye (1.3 million), Bangladesh (1.2 million), and the *United States (1.1 million)*"
1
Other-Badger6749 Mar 26, 2026 -2
OK but there’s no slaves so…? We fought a war over it already everyone knows that it’s bad The reason that it’s being passed is because the UN is basically run by China and China wants to disrupt the west because we are disrupting their economy and military supply chain, so they’re trying to cause social unrest here. and this is a documented effort like it’s not a conspiracy it’s literally is something that they’re doing. Noticed that all the European Union countries abstained because the point of it is to try to either force western countries to dump a bunch of money into preparations but at the very least dump a bunch of time and debate and social capital into it instead of focusing on the Middle East and on China, especially what China is doing with the Philippines. It’s not about saying slavery is bad everyone says slavery is bad. But left-wing people, who pretty much dominate politics and culture in most of the western world, are really easy to manipulate by using pointless resolutions like this, so it’s a pretty good way to disrupt western countries is to bring up things everybody already agrees on but in a way where it just is going to force a debate because liberals are gonna say oh my God it’s because of Trump and that is f****** stupid but it’s gonna cause a huge argument anyway
-2
PennysWorthOfTea Mar 26, 2026 +5
>OK but there’s no slaves so…? To the contrary, there are absolutely slaves in the US: >13th Amendment/Amendment XIII Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. ([Cornell Law School](https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiii)) Everyone in prison who is obligated to do uncompensated/undercompensated labor is a slave & being forced to perform slave labor. The gov't even contracts prisoners/slaves out to private companies to do work, just like pre-Civil War slave owners. Modern day slave in the US have marginally better protections than pre-Civil War era slaves but (1) they are not free, (2) they are forced to work without adequate compensation despite their work being incredibly profitable, & (3) are often forced to do work without representation (i.e. they don't have the ability to vote).
5
gorginhanson Mar 26, 2026
Only for prisoners
0
thejimbo56 Mar 26, 2026 +1
Yes, and?
1
CmdrMonocle Mar 26, 2026 +2
The US has a very large prison population and high repeat offender rates.  Now, reasons for this is obviously complex, but when you stand to benefit financially from imprisoning and enslaving people, finding people to put in prison and ensuring high repeat offender rates can become the goal. Private prison owners have shockingly enough, lobbied hard for mandatory minimums for minor crimes and misdemeanours, and reducing crime prevention policies and programs. Because when every prisoner makes you money, you're not wanting to cut crime any more. Crime becomes the goal.
2
thejimbo56 Mar 26, 2026 +2
Absolutely. My question was directed at the “only for prisoners” comment as if any form of slavery for anyone is acceptable.
2
NotTheUsualSuspect Mar 26, 2026 +15
Disagreeing with a legal right for reparations is a good thing. That's ex post facto, which our constitution does not allow.
15
_NoPants Mar 26, 2026 +14
There were other slave trades, but who cares about those.
14
not_bilbo Mar 26, 2026 +2
The vast majority of those societies did not use the wealth, influence, territory, and material gained through that slave trade to situate themselves as global hegemons for nearly four centuries. This is what this argument hinges on, we can absolutely talk about Viking or Arab slave societies and slave trading, but none of those systems led to its primary benefactors becoming global colonial hegemons. Yes, Arab empires expanded and conquered and committed what we’d recognize as ethnic cleansing while participating in part in the Atlantic slave trade, yes the Norse took thralls and treated them little better than human meat. But how many of those slave societies now sit on the UN Security Council for example? Or built colonies in the Americas and Africa through slave labor that they then exerted influence over for centuries?How many of those other, also brutal, examples of slave societies used the economic and political benefits of slavery to provide an almost unprecedented level of global influence and power? The nations that benefited from the transatlantic slave trade, particularly the US, France, the British Empire and to a lessening extent Spain and Portugal, were able to exploit that to a degree of power that has simply not existed before in any other modern slave society.
2
_NoPants Mar 26, 2026 +3
We aren't on the UN security council because of slavery, we are because we won WW2.
3
incide666 Mar 26, 2026 -14
Imagine whatabouting slavery in the Beer of our Lord, 2026.
-14
No-Risk-2584 Mar 26, 2026 +18
I mean denouncing only the transatlantic slave trade as the gravest crime against humanity, but yet not the other brutally cruel and extensive slave trades that were happening around that time is bullshit. It’s not whatsabouting, it’s asking why transatlantic slavery was worse than other slave trades.
18
_NoPants Mar 26, 2026 +1
People should read accounts of how thralls were treated in Viking society. It was f****** brutal.
1
incide666 Mar 26, 2026 -4
There's an entire interet of historians explaining the Transatlantic slave trade and you're here with your best Matt Walsh impression. I'd say "do better" but I don't believe you can.
-4
No-Risk-2584 Mar 26, 2026 +4
Go on then, explain to me why the transatlantic slave trade was worse than the Barbary or Arab slave trades. Why were their plight and suffering not as bad as the plight and suffering of the transatlantic slaves? Since you’re so enlightened.
4
incide666 Mar 26, 2026 -6
I'm not here to do yoir homework for you. If you want to spend your life all lives mattering, that's on you.
-6
No-Risk-2584 Mar 26, 2026 +2
Well there we have it, you have no idea. This isn’t “all lives mattering” This is about the you declaring that the suffering of one people is worse than the suffering of others who had the same fate without anything to back it up. For literally no reason other than you being ignorant about the world outside your bubble. There’s no reason on earth to suggest that the transatlantic slave trade was worse than the Arab or Barbary or any other slave trades throughout history. Including the modern slave trade, where over 7 million Africans are currently being held in modern slavery condition. It’s incredibly ignorant and shows you genuinely have no idea about history at all.
2
S1gorJabjong Mar 26, 2026 -3
Yes it was legal then. But isn't the point of this to look at the past and judge with present moral principles and laws? The f•ck he mean it's not a crime because it was legal then? It ain't the early 1800s anymore dipshit US ambassador.
-3
-Morsmordre- Mar 26, 2026 -3
Reasonable 
-3
Burwylf Mar 26, 2026 -1
Reparations would be impossible, the value of 40 acres and a mule adjusted for inflation is now over 400k, but if we instead adjust the value of those things in 1800 to today's money it's around $2500, which is more reasonable, but people would say it's a cop out. No US administration would've voted yes
-1
Radix2309 Mar 26, 2026 +3
But they werent promised the value of those things, they were promised those things. And then not given those things. So makes sense to err on the side that benefirs them more isntead of the cop out.
3
Burwylf Mar 26, 2026 +1
Yes, but we can't spend twenty trillion dollars today
1
Radix2309 Mar 26, 2026
Well maybe you could if you stopped waging illegal wars. Probably wouldnt happen overnight. But i can be done. Also I doubt it would come to $20 trillion, the reparations should be based on the original number of claimants. If they had 9 grandkids, they dont suddenly get 360 acres and 9 mules, it would be 40 acres and the mule divided among them.
0
Burwylf Mar 26, 2026 +1
US gov doesn't actually have that much land either, it's mostly private owned, so you'd have to settle for annexed territory, or some island that's already US territory, but undeveloped (although a lot of people would enjoy the process of developing it, not everyone will be able to)... Can we just not do the mules btw? A bit outdated technology wise
1
SurroundTiny Mar 26, 2026 +35
The actual text of the resolution is "the gravest crime against humanity", not "a crime against humanity". They should have just abstained like fifty other countries did.
35
ErgoMachina Mar 26, 2026 +48
I don't usually defend the US, but this is clickbait of the highest degree. The resolution was to call it the GREATEST crime against humanity (Seriously?), and requested reparations from the countries. So if your great great grandfather was a slave owning POS, you would be paying for his mistakes with your taxes. Absolutely ridiculous.
48
morodolobo77 Mar 26, 2026 +19
Not to mention, people are still enslaved smh. And it only calls for “western” countries to pay reparations. As if Africans didn’t and are not still enslaving each other
19
Dysc Mar 26, 2026 -18
It isn't THAT ridiculous to think that subjugating generations of humans under brutal conditions for hundreds of years shouldn't be considered a great crime against humanity. Maybe juxtaposed against other great crimes, you can start to rank or whatever, but it should be pretty freaking high up. Either way, I don't think whether it's the greatest crime or not matters - only that it was a crime against humanity. I'm sure coining it as the greatest crime was a way to garner support. The thing about international law and crimes against humanity in particular is that there is no statute of limitations on them at all. So you really can't just hand wave it off as grandpappy stuff. You can only vote against it, which the US did. Well, you could give a compelling argument on why it's not a crime against humanity and convince other voting members. Or you can just buy enough votes off and use political pressure. Or just don't comply with the outcome. International law has no real teeth for powerful countries who can upend a 99% consensus so it really doesn't matter much at the end of the day. There are multiple conflicts across the globe right now where banned weapons by international law are deployed on a daily basis.
-18
morodolobo77 Mar 26, 2026 +5
You clearly didn’t read past the headline
5
CanuckleHeadOG Mar 26, 2026 +9
You're confused on a lot of concepts here. There was no international law when this happened Statute of limitations requires the laws exist prior to the crime. No one alive today was part of it therefore no statute applies
9
veggiesama Mar 26, 2026 -19
What's wrong with using taxes to pay for historical mistakes? That sounds like the primary use case for taxes. Paying to fix things, from social injustice to potholes in the road.
-19
CanuckleHeadOG Mar 26, 2026 +10
Why should people today pay for the crimes of long dead people, to people who were not enslaved?
10
veggiesama Mar 26, 2026 -7
Because the effects of slavery still persist and affect people today, and it is the responsibility of governments to address social problems, so... taxes.
-7
CanuckleHeadOG Mar 26, 2026 +9
Ok but why only African slaves then? Korea had the longest continuous slave trade Why not the Arab slave trade or the Barbary slave trade? And why aren't they calling for reparations from the slave traders, only the slave buyers?
9
veggiesama Mar 26, 2026 -4
Looking forward to your proposals at the next UN session
-4
truffle-tots Mar 26, 2026 +6
Nice job not being able to defend your point lmao.
6
veggiesama Mar 26, 2026 -1
I don't bother with [that kind of arguing](https://youtu.be/bG5IzHQ0SMM) online anymore. He agreed to my point so it didn't need defending.
-1
LunchThreatener Mar 26, 2026 +4
It’s not whataboutism. It’s directly related to the reason countries voted against or abstained. Why is one slave trade considered the “greatest crime against humanity” deserving reparations while others don’t?
4
veggiesama Mar 26, 2026
Let's vote for Sally to get a donut. Does that mean we can't vote for Johnny to get a donut too? Is there only 1 donut to go around here? Make your case for why the others deserve reparations too, or why no one does. "Whatabout" doesn't negate the arguments for the original case. (I don't care about using the superlative "greatest" vs. "great." That's semantics.)
0
humbugonastick Mar 26, 2026 -1
Tell that to countries that had to pay reparations for 100 years.
-1
CanuckleHeadOG Mar 26, 2026 +2
Which countries are those?
2
humbugonastick Mar 26, 2026
Germany for example.
0
CanuckleHeadOG Mar 26, 2026
Has not had to pay a century of reparations. We're not even 100 years for the end of WW2 and Hitler stopped paying WWI in 38, the rest was written off in the 90s when they reunited resulting in a single payment in 2010 for the interest.
0
maxintos Mar 26, 2026 +3
Not at all. Taxes are there to benefit the society as a whole now and in the future.
3
veggiesama Mar 26, 2026 +5
Parts... are part... of the whole. What do you say to a mechanic who says, "I don't fix tires because I only fix cars as a whole"?
5
mnmkdc Mar 26, 2026 -2
The point of reparations is to benefit society as a whole now and in the future. This isn’t a counter argument.
-2
LunchThreatener Mar 26, 2026 +2
You would have to be incredibly stupid to think reparations would do anything other than make racial tensions worse
2
mnmkdc Mar 26, 2026 -1
Lol reminds me of how conservatives say Obama divided America because of his policies involving race. We gotta stop bowing down to the racists. Our country only seems to care about stoking racial divides when it is non-white people benefiting from the decisions. There are actually a lot of people more educated on this than me or you who think reparations would be a net positive. It has a real possibility of reducing inequality and improving racial tensions, and it’s incredibly stupid to act like you know better than everyone else on this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Case_for_Reparations
-1
LunchThreatener Mar 26, 2026 +2
Well Obama actually didn’t do anything that would justify consternation. Reparations are an extremely fringe idea that would be impossible to convince even moderates to support. I really couldn’t care less what some academics have to say about it. Edit: Ta-Nehisi Coates, lol. It was either gonna be him or Ibram X Kendi, I would have bet my life savings on it Also, I just read your article you linked, and it says the article isn’t even focused on reparations for slavery, it’s discussing reparations for redlining and modern structural racism, which would be much more justifiable
2
mnmkdc Mar 26, 2026
Reparations wouldn’t be anything to justify it either, and Obama specifically said reparations would be justified. Are we talking about getting people to vote for this, or are we talking about the effects that they would have on society? I’m talking about the latter. Cool, what’s your dislike of Coates about? He wrote the most notable article about reparations in the last few decades, so it seems weird that you’d even make note of this. It addresses reparations at length. My opinion is that reparations are necessary to make up for Jim Crow, which was still recent enough that we haven’t even had a single president who was born after segregation was ended. I think most of the institutional modern structural racism is a direct result of slavery and the US’s address the problem early.
0
CommentVegetable4703 Mar 26, 2026 +20
The title of this post is reductive to the point of just being false. The resolution was not about if black slavery IS a crime against humanity. BUT HEY, US BAD RIGHT GUYS?
20
Monkcoon Mar 26, 2026 -5
What the bell are you talking about race as not mentioned in the title.
-5
CommentVegetable4703 Mar 26, 2026 +5
The title says that Us rejects slavery as crime against humanity, but that’s not what tthe UN resolution that the US rejected was about
5
Monkcoon Mar 27, 2026 +1
The term you’re looking for is misleading then, not reductive.
1
its0matt Mar 26, 2026 +5
Tell the truth. It was labeled as The GRAVEST crime against humanity. And only focused on African slavery. ROne of the only places where they still have slavery. While trillions of others go unmentioned. And genocide is much worse.
5
CyanConatus Mar 26, 2026 +3
“on reparatory justice, including a full and formal apology, measures of restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction, guarantees of non-repetition and changes to laws, programs and services to address racism and systemic discrimination.” Compensation. Ah there we go that's why. We can talk all day long but in the long run money talks.
3
Weird_Rooster_4307 Mar 26, 2026 +2
Considering that slavery has been around since the beginning of man, more clarification needs to be put into this.
2
Prize_Beach3672 Mar 26, 2026 +6
Slave trade still exists today but nobody talks about it
6
Syndiotactics Mar 26, 2026 +3
A misleading title. It was about the single gravest crime against humanity, which is performative at best. Why do we need to rank atrocities anyway?
3
Traditional-Roof1984 Mar 26, 2026 +4
This is a very misleading and deceptive title. They don't mean 'slavery' in general, specifically only African Slaves traded to the US. The other slaves in history, including the internal slave trade in Africa doesn't matter. And as usual they try to get money out of it by people completely unrelated to the event. Again, excluding internal slave Trade in Africa itself, because they want rich western countries to pay unilaterally, and not Africa nations among themselves. It's an absurd, selective, double standard resolution that undermines any logical sense and accountability of people as individuals, who aren't responsible for what happened hundreds of years ago long before they were born.
4
morodolobo77 Mar 26, 2026 +3
Very misleading title that is typical for this sub. The UN is a joke with this “resolution”. If you’re gonna ask for reparations they need to come from countries in Africa, Middle East, Asia, etc that have engaged in the slave trade in the past or are still doing so. Also, do Germans get reparations for the Roman’s enslaving them? What a fuckin joke.
3
CmdrMonocle Mar 26, 2026 +4
The US had approximately 1.1 million people who qualify as slaves back in 2021, and that number has likely only gone up. It puts the US in the top 10 of slave owning nations. The 13th amendment still permits slavery afterall.
4
hasslefree Mar 26, 2026 -2
It follows the choice to withdraw from the International Criminal Court, the landmine treaty, and dozens of other human-centric, benevolent organizations and movements. Totally on brand for an a****** nation. (From an American)
-2
leducrd Mar 26, 2026 -1
Shamefull
-1
L44KSO Mar 26, 2026 +15
It did only condemn transatlantic slavery and nothing else. It is a bit of a shame to do these only halfarsed. Better than nothing, but still...could have done it right. 
15
TaylorFarmsSaladKit Mar 26, 2026 +17
Read the article.
17
TiggTigg07 Mar 26, 2026 -10
That’s the only word for it.
-10
morodolobo77 Mar 26, 2026 +2
Do some reading
2
Mortis_XII Mar 26, 2026 +1
Will they contact countries outside the UN for these reparations?
1
TheWizard Mar 26, 2026 +1
Reagan would be proud... few would have condoned apartheid when he did.
1
njman100 Mar 26, 2026 +1
That’s what Trump 💩 wants slavery of US Citizens
1
Few_Pass2563 Mar 26, 2026 +1
They want us to pay reparations 
1
favnh2011 Mar 27, 2026 +1
Wow
1
WeeklyInterview7180 Mar 26, 2026 +1
There are still slaves on U.S. farms. Farm to Taber yt channel
1
PerniciousPlay Mar 26, 2026
Can someone more knowledgeable about this please explain why would those three countries vote NO and why is there 52 abstentions. Like it makes no sense to me.
0
ahundredpercentbutts Mar 27, 2026 +1
The reasons given by the US and EU for their no votes and abstentions are because the resolution called for declaring the transatlantic slave trade the “gravest crime against humanity”, officially power ranking it over all other slave trades and slavery both historic and modern and things like genocide. And also because it called for reparations.
1
maxintos Mar 26, 2026 +1
Because it's demanding reparations. No country will ever agree to pay for something they did 200 years ago, especially when at that time it wasn't even illegal.
1
veggiesama Mar 26, 2026
Misdemeanor against humanity maybe? A microaggression perhaps? What do you think, MAGA? Do you think slavery was just triggering the Libs or something?
0
Conscious_until_1565 Mar 26, 2026 -2
F****** unbelievable yet totally tracks. I hate this f****** administration so much.
-2
iateyourcake Mar 26, 2026 -1
Well, the US never did away with slavery, we just made it so that it was acceptable to be a slave as a punishment for being convicted of a crime.
-1
1maco Mar 26, 2026 +2
Pretty much every country allows for being sentenced to labor as a thing
2
iateyourcake Mar 26, 2026
But in the US we have made it a point to make sure that brown people are most of the prison population.
0
DT-Sodium Mar 26, 2026 -3
If Hitler was alive today, Trump would have offered him one of his gold card citizenship for free.
-3
TotallyNotHitler Mar 26, 2026
Nah, Hitler couldn’t speak English.
0
DT-Sodium Mar 26, 2026 +2
Doesn't seem to be a problem for him to worship Putin.
2
Buster_xx Mar 26, 2026 -6
The United states still has legalized slavery in the 13th amendment. It's why we have the largest prison population on the planet that does forced labor for for profit companies
-6
frostbird Mar 26, 2026 -1
And Europe abstains because they don't want to be seen
-1
Funny-Company4274 Mar 26, 2026
Flood the zone news of the day.
0
Inform-All Mar 26, 2026 +1
I love how the main perpetrators and their buddies are then only ones against it. Wild to say you oppose the act but to double back and use legality during the act to avoid any reparations. As if the legality wasn’t part of the atrocities.
1
Re_Cy_Cling Mar 26, 2026 -13
The US really wants to be an a******. Just f****** admit you fucked up and slavery was bad. The level of denial is unreal.
-13
CommitteeOld9540 Mar 26, 2026 -6
Psychopaths won't admit to evil because in the eyes of a psychopath, there's nothing evil to begin with. 
-6
buppiejc Mar 26, 2026 -3
During the Cotton Boom of the late 1800s, 1.8 million out of the 3.2 million enslaved people were producing over 2 billion pounds of cotton annually. This resulted in approx $50 billion in exports, and accounted for 58% of all U.S. exports. Cotton accounted for 4% of the total U.S. GDP. In today’s dollars, that would be a 1.2 trillion dollar industry (U.S. GDP is ~28 trillion).
-3
CanaDoug420 Mar 26, 2026
They voted against reparations not claiming it isn’t a crime against humanity. Which is what the US has will always do when reparations is brought up and you are kidding yourself if you think that will ever change. The US will never give reparations for any of the shit it does. That’s just the reality
0
maxintos Mar 26, 2026 +2
Reality is no one is going to do it. You think the Dutch will do it? Spanish? British? Algerians? I assume I'm missing 100 other countries that participated in slave trade and would never even think to pay anything.
2
CanaDoug420 Mar 26, 2026
What does that have to do with what I said? I’m speaking about the US as that’s the relevant country to the clickbait title of this post. And what I said was fact. The US will never voluntarily pay reparations. That’s not how the we roll.
0
LGR- Mar 26, 2026 -3
Well it is still considered legal in regards to prison in th US. So that may be why? Edit I now know that was not the reason Here is as it is written in the 13th Amendment. “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude… shall exist within the United States, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted…”
-3
nikfra Mar 26, 2026 +1
Nope that wouldn't be a problem as the resolution was carefully crafted to just call out one specific historical type of slavery. All modern slavery wasn't condemned.
1
LGR- Mar 26, 2026 +1
Thanks for the info.
1
1maco Mar 26, 2026
You can be convicted of a drone a sentenced to labor in Japan, Vietnam Egypt or Canada as well, not unique to the US.
0
LGR- Mar 26, 2026 +1
Here is a question, do you know if in all those other countries exempt pay for the labor? Thanks for the education on how other countries have the same rules.
1
1maco Mar 26, 2026 +1
Yes, that’s what community service is. You are sentenced to X amount of hours of service as restitution 
1
LGR- Mar 26, 2026 +1
I always considered prison labor different than community service. I thought community service was more of a voluntary alternative to prison. At least in the USA at my location. I am sure at the state level we have some differences.
1
CommitteeOld9540 Mar 26, 2026 -9
I'm not surprised as an African American. I'm surprised by people who find this surprising. And I'm even more surprised by fellow African Americans who think the US is their friend. 
-9
Ok_Violinist_7096 Mar 26, 2026 +1
A tleast one american is willing to take responsibility. Have you considered donating yet?
1
Villageijit Mar 26, 2026 -7
I mean this administration is trying to erase slavery from our history so yeah makes sense
-7
UnguentSlather Mar 26, 2026 -7
Disgusting
-7
SnootSnootBasilisk Mar 26, 2026 -11
Makes sense. MAGA does have plans to bring it back, after all
-11
PeacenotWardude Mar 26, 2026 -6
I’m not that surprised.
-6
Pristine-Ad74 Mar 26, 2026 -6
God bless the united states of America!
-6
DeltaFoxtrot144 Mar 26, 2026 -3
looks like a few countries are gearing up for slavery P2, indebted servitude electric boogaloo
-3
marion85 Mar 26, 2026 -6
Just proving ourselves more openly villinous by the day, aren't we?
-6
Resident-Writing850 Mar 26, 2026 -7
This regime is saying it out loud.
-7
ratione_materiae Mar 27, 2026 +1
>declaring the trafficking of enslaved Africans “the gravest crime against humanity” Out of curiosity, if the transatlantic slave trade was **the** gravest crime against humanity, where do you rank the Holocaust? The Holodomor? The Cambodian genocide? The Rwandan genocide? Israel’s actions in Gaza? The other various slave trades?  If the transatlantic slave trade was a 10/10, where’s Israel’s actions in Gaza? Like a 4.5/10?
1
Exodia_The_Salty Mar 26, 2026 -9
There is a solution. Revolution. And once the current leadership are all imprisoned (for life) who voted against the un resolution saying that slavery is bad, put the exception for slavery as a punishment to GOOD use. 13th amendment. Bring it all back for them. Whips, chains, taskmasters. All of it. And every morning, show them their UN vote for slavery, before their daily whipping. Its not cruel and unusual punishment. Its ironic and appropriate punishment.
-9
Ok_Violinist_7096 Mar 26, 2026 +1
And then distribute the money of those who descended from slave traders / indirectly profited from slavery to these african countries.
1
SSWBGUY Mar 26, 2026 -9
A new low?
-9
← Back to Board