This relates to the BBC article [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66596790] which states “the UK should pay $24tn (£18.8tn) for its slavery involvement in 14 countries”.

The UK abolished slavery in 1833. That’s 190 years ago. So nobody alive today has a slave, and nobody alive today was a slave.

Dividing £18tn by the number of UK taxpayers (31.6m) gives £569 each. Why do I, who have never owned a slave, have to give £569 to someone who similarly is not a slave?

When I’ve paid my £569 is that the end of the matter forever or will it just open the floodgates of other similar claims?

Isn’t this just a country that isn’t doing too well, looking at the UK doing reasonably well (cost of living crisis excluded of course), and saying “oh there’s this historical thing that affects nobody alive today but you still have to give us trillions of Sterling”?

Shouldn’t payment of reparations be limited to those who still benefit from the slave trade today, and paid to those who still suffer from it?

(Please don’t flame me. This is NSQ. I genuinely don’t know why this is something I should have to pay. I agree slavery is terrible and condemn it in all its forms, and we were right to abolish it.)

  • silentdon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    72
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Imagine you’re running a very long relay race. Just after the race starts, members of the other team jump out of the bushes, beat up your runner and tie them up. This happens for several laps until someone decides that this is probably bad so they stop beating and restraining you. But the race doesn’t stop and the positions aren’t reset, but the other team is like 20 laps ahead and allowed to finish. Is that fair?

    Reparations would theoretically allow your team to catch up but former slaves and their descendants have never been allowed that. What’s more, in the UK, former slave owners were paid for the inconvenience of no longer owning slaves (edit: up until 2015!!!) while the former slaves got to continue living as second-class citizens for a while.

    Also, saying slavery ended hundreds of years ago and no one benefits from it today doesn’t work because all slave-owner countries still benefit from slave labour in the form of generational wealth, advanced infrastructure and old laws that specifically aim to disadvantage black people (whether they were abolished or still on the books the effects are still felt). Imagine your great-granddad was able to build up a fortune, how likely would it be that your family would still be rich? Imagine your great-granddad lost every cent, how likely would it be that your family would be still poor? Sure, it’s possible that situations drastically over time but that’s the exception and not the rule. There are reasons why things are the way they are.

    I believe that reparations should not be any lump sum of money but in the form of education, investment opportunities, resources and infrastructure. That way all persons living in former slave countries can benefit and pass those benefits down to their descendants.

    Edit: I believe that up to last year Barbados went after Richard Drax for reparations due to his family’s direct involvement in slavery in that country. I don’t know how successful that was, but I support it.

    • Slice@lemmy.world
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      10 months ago

      Your analogy and argument is very well organized so I wonder how you think universal basic income could mitigate the negative impacts of generational wealth/poverty? In my mind, it is part of a solution to many social issues but I’m still learning. I know there are arguments that capitalism will just buffer against any implementation but I’m still forming my opinions.

      • silentdon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Thanks, it’s something I’ve been thinking about for a long time since it was a big discussion topic in my circle for a while.

        I haven’t given the same level of thought to universal basic income, but I guess it would be a start. What people really need is a way to not only survive but to build wealth and pass that wealth on to their descendants. Like I said in my previous comment, education, investment opportunities, infrastructure upgrades, etc. will go a long way towards that goal. In my mind, a universal income could be a part of that but not the whole solution. And yes capitalism will find a way to ruin it but we can always hope.

        • Slice@lemmy.world
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Another part in my mind would be estate taxes. If generational wealth wasn’t as impactful on our lives then UBI could serve a bigger purpose. If the playing field were more level for everyone, then hate or fear couldn’t errode it as easily. It’s not something we can see in a lifetime, but I hope that I can see us aiming at a useful target while I am still around.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        I think UBI could help with the problem. It won’t be solved without other things though. If we pay for UBI by increase estate and inheritance taxes, that could go a long way. Basically make it so generational wealth slowly decreases over time. Obviously it’ll never be zero, because education, social connections, and things are also generational wealth, but it’d be an improvement to the way things are.

        Basically, it’s not fair that someone is rich because their parents were rich and someone is poor because their parents were poor. The rich person should be less rich and the poor person should be less poor (on average).

    • Sockenklaus@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Hell, this is the best and most comprehensive argument for the generational debt we as the global north and winners of colonialism owe the global south I’ve ever read.

      I’ll definitely use this analogy whenever this issue comes up in my peer group.

    • hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      Also, saying slavery ended hundreds of years ago and no one benefits from it today doesn’t work because all slave-owner countries still benefit from slave labour in the form of generational wealth

      In addition to that, slavery was never ‘abolished’. Just go take a quick look into the mining or cocoa industry.