Should descendants of slave traders give up their inheritance?
Posted by: Mat Cork on 05 December 2009
Interesting discussion about this with a chap I sat next to on a plane yesterday...something I'd not thought about previously.
Should folk in the UK who are the descendants of slave traders, and are sitting on significant amounts of inheritance from this trade, pay it back to african folk?
My initial thought was to say 'no', but I'm not so sure now. Apparently a number of wealthy land owning families in this country live on on estates that were built on slave trading. I tend to think that maybe they should give it back. It's ill gotten wealth.
It's a complex issue though. My grandparents had some extremely unsavoury skeletons in their closets and remained unrepentant to their graves. I don't feel even in the tiniest bit guilty about their actions...and I have benefited from them in terms of chances in life/education etc. But, since I didn't actually inherit money from them...I have nothing to payback. If I had...maybe I would.
An interesting moral dilemma for many so called 'respectable' families in this country...what are your thoughts?
Posted on: 08 December 2009 by Tarquin Maynard - Portly
I have no idea how the slaves first came to the attention of Europeans. What I do know is that those sold into slavery where captured and sold by Africans.
Although by our standards, slavery is just plain hideous, it was just part of life back then ( and as far back as Roman times, come to think of it. ) For example, that great paragon of all things virtuous, George Washington, owned slaves.
Posted on: 08 December 2009 by John M
quote:
Originally posted by Mike Lacey:
I have no idea how the slaves first came to the attention of Europeans. What I do know is that those sold into slavery where captured and sold by Africans.
Although by our standards, slavery is just plain hideous, it was just part of life back then ( and as far back as Roman times, come to think of it. ) For example, that great paragon of all things virtuous, George Washington, owned slaves.
Yes, something that was always brushed over back when I was in school. But I would go quite a bit further and say that my country was by and large built on the backs of slaves.
Cheap or free labor was and still is the super fuel of capitalist economies. We knew exactly what we were doing. Just like the diamonds, and other raw materials - early explorers let everyone know it was there in abundance for anyone with the gumption and the bankroll to go get it. I do not let the traders off the hook as you seem to suggest. Yes I understand that it has been an ages old practice, but it is my understanding that in Africa slavery was a practice largely contained to intertribal heirarchical social systems, and it exploded into transcontinental trade once the demand for labor peaked on through the industrial revolution. I am saying that atrocities including the Ghana Dutch Slave Prisons and the Middle Passage never would have happened without the demand for cheap/free labor and the means to meet those needs. Pretty basic economic principles really.
As for the OP, I think it is a little too late for reparations and recognition and healing are all we can hope for. I felt your message clouded or diverted from the recognition that the slave traders are still at the very least partly culpable, regardless of how/where the slaves where acquired.
Posted on: 08 December 2009 by Mike Dudley
No.
You can't make reparations to dead people. Why should their random descendants be given a free ride off the back of someone elses good luck?
If it were me, I'd be saying "It's mine and I'm keeping it. See you in court."
Posted on: 08 December 2009 by John M
I agree reparations are hopeless. No court system in the world would likely be able to determine an equitable solution. But "free ride" and good "good luck" are not terms I would choose to use in this context.
Posted on: 08 December 2009 by Analogue Rules OK
quote:
Originally posted by Mike Dudley:
No.
You can't make reparations to dead people. Why should their random descendants be given a free ride off the back of someone elses good luck?
And the suffering of millions
Chris N
Posted on: 08 December 2009 by Mike Dudley
... who no longer exist.
I suppose you'd turn down the chance of a lottery win based on the fact that a lot of desperate people in dire circumstances have helped fund it?
Posted on: 08 December 2009 by Mike Dudley
Actually, come to think of it - if I'd inherited land and goods from Nazi persecution victims, I'd probably want to give it back so, O.K. You're right...
Posted on: 08 December 2009 by Don Atkinson
Two factors come to mind
Is there a sensible Time Limit for rectifying ancestral wrongdoings eg by restitution or apology - one generation, 10 generations, 10 years, 100 years....
If at the time of occurance, the event was considered legal or common practice, why should decendants suffer any form of guilt or persecution.
Cheers
Don
Posted on: 10 December 2009 by Mat Cork
quote:
Originally posted by Don Atkinson:
If at the time of occurance, the event was considered legal or common practice, why should decendants suffer any form of guilt or persecution.
The Nazi's would get off scot free for their treatment of gays, jews etc then Don?
Posted on: 10 December 2009 by Steve O
So sending the jews to the gas chamber wasn't illegal then Mat? I don't get where you're coming from on that one.
IIRC from my school history lessons, the Nazis were brought to account for 'crimes against humanity' because of their treatment of the jews and other minorities at the war crime trials in Nuremburg. How is that getting off scot free?
Regards,
Steve
Posted on: 10 December 2009 by Mat Cork
quote:
Originally posted by Steve O:
So sending the jews to the gas chamber wasn't illegal then Mat? I don't get where you're coming from on that one.
Steve...it wasn't against the law in Germany, in fact it was implementing law. But don't get me wrong, I can see both sides of this thread...just think it's an interesting moral conundrum.
...and let's be honest, it would add some warmth to the morning toast to open the Socialist Worker and see some snaps of gentry being marched off their properties...to a one bedroom council flat.
Posted on: 10 December 2009 by Don Atkinson
quote:
The Nazi's would get off scot free for their treatment of gays, jews etc then Don?
Not in my book.
My comments above were questions, to get others thinking.
Cheers
Don
Posted on: 12 December 2009 by NaimDropper
All well and good.
Do something with your fortune to help others for your own sense of morals.
But you can't expect others to follow suit because you feel that way. And making it a law would only make the lawyers rich, who would then have to give that back once this action was deemed wrong.
One underlying assumption here seems to be that all peoples and races have remained to themselves in the time since. That is just not so.
If we're talking about reparations for conquests, seems that England owes the USA for some silliness back about 250 years ago.
And expect some company, all the Europeans in the Americas will be coming home to leave the land back to the natives that were here first.
(Not to say that the USA has not had its share of forced nationbuilding...)
Not to be completely silly, but if you have a sense of moral obligation over this, do something good for your fellow man with your gains.
David
Posted on: 13 December 2009 by Phil Barry
Well, I'm a Rhode Islander, and RI's wealth was based on the triangle trade, but none of my ancestors got to RI until the 20th century, so I'll take the high road (i.e.I'll be as hypocritical as the next guy).
England's wealth isn't based only on the slave trade. Selling opium to the Chinese brought in immense amounts of cash, too.
Jardine, Matheson's profits eventually founded the Hongkong, Shanghai Banking Corporation, now known as HSBC.
Phil Barry
Posted on: 13 December 2009 by u5227470736789439
England's wealth isn't based only on the slave trade. Selling opium to the Chinese brought in immense amounts of cash, too.
And the Industrial Revolution, and having the rule of the waves for centuries, and having some of the most inventive and scientifically astute minds in history.
An extra-ordinary achievement for a small damp island's population.
Probably the strongest case yet for gradual and perpetual immigration that has yet been made.
The Slave Trade was small beer in comparison.
ATB from George
Posted on: 14 December 2009 by Steve O
quote:
Originally posted by Mat Cork:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Steve O:
So sending the jews to the gas chamber wasn't illegal then Mat? I don't get where you're coming from on that one.
Steve...it wasn't against the law in Germany, in fact it was implementing law. But don't get me wrong, I can see both sides of this thread...just think it's an interesting moral conundrum.[QUOTE]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only because the madman carrying out the atrocities was the law maker. Would the European Court of Human Rights allow a law like that to exist now - not a chance. Besides, the rest of the world showed just how 'legal' it actually was when they tried the nazis for crimes against humanity.
Like you Mat I can see the morality of the argument but as many have said on this thread - how far back do you go?
Is it just the slave trade or do we right every historical wrong? What about the guy in Australia who is our rightful King?
It is simply an impossible task to put thimgs right. We just have to hope that the world learns from it's mistakes.
Regards,
Steve.
Posted on: 14 December 2009 by living in lancs yearning for yorks
quote:
When the Vikings go home
Shan't (sorry, am in silly mood today)
Posted on: 14 December 2009 by Mike Dudley
quote:
...and let's be honest, it would add some warmth to the morning toast to open the Socialist Worker and see some snaps of gentry being marched off their properties...to a one bedroom council flat.
1: Can't think of a more irrelevant rag to read.
2: Marching anyone off anywhere against their will is the act of a scumbag dictatorship.
3: Get a life. Of your own. If you've the brain for it...
Posted on: 14 December 2009 by Mat Cork
Oh how very underhand.
Mr Dudley, meet Mr Irony.
