Comment

Comment on How are slavery reparations fair?

Group A was wronged by entity B. Group A goes to court to seek restitution from entity B. Courts rule that entity B did in fact cause damages to group A and must be held liable.

That’s all reparations are. Entity B is your government. It’s the same legal entity as it was 190 years ago, regardless of the composition of the population it represents. If a group was wronged by their government, this is their only means to legal restitution. Unfortunately since the primary form of income for some governments is taxation, it means people complain about paying for things when that’s not exactly what’s happening.

The alternative is to say that if a government “runs out the clock” and is able to avoid responsibility until the population turns over, then they can no longer be held liable for anything they did prior to that point. That’s not a very good position, in my opinion.

source

Sort:hotnew top

Gsus4@feddit.nl ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
If entity A is the UK and entity B is those hunted and sold to slavery by entity C, why does A have to pay C for stealing labour from B? Pay B for stolen work.

source
- NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
  Because:
  
  1-Supply and demand. The transatlantic slave trade created demand for slaves much higher than what existed before that point. That creates an environment where being a slaver is rewarded, and therefore not being a slaver was punished. If, for example, a republican billionaire says "I'll give 10000$ to anyone who kills a democrat" they can't just claim they're innocent when democrats get systematically killed.
  
  source
  - ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    
    That creates an environment where being a slaver is rewarded, and therefore not being a slaver was punished.
    
    Idk about this line of reasoning. One thing being rewarded doesn’t necessarily mean the absence of the thing is punished. An olympic race has a winner and the winner is rewarded with a medal, but the losers aren’t typically punished, they simply “aren’t rewarded.” It isn’t like you get put in the boo box for coming in 4th, and I wasn’t there but I doubt they put anyone in the boo box (or any “punishment”) for being “a doctor not a slaver.” (Dammit Jim. Couldn’t resist.) At best some slaver dad got mad his kid wanted to be a composer instead of take up the family slaving business, but what else is new?
    
    source
    ZodiacSF1969@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    They have a warped view of supply and demand.
    
    source
    NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    That's true in general, but we're talking geopolitics here. States that participated in the slave trade would conquer their neighbors and sell them as slaves. That's the punishment I was talking about.
    
    source
  - Gsus4@feddit.nl ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    Yes, a lucrative market for a hideous crime was created, and the guys who hunted other groups in order to get paid in that market wronged the enslaved too. (I’m not sure it was all like this all over Africa too, but in the Congo, it seemed to be the case)
    
    source
    NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    Yes, but the thing is: The states that actually sold slaves basically don't exist anymore thanks to colonialism, and even those that still do lost any wealth they had to colonialism. Can't really accumulate generational wealth when you're busy farming rubbers or whatever for your colonial overlords.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
  - ZodiacSF1969@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    I have no idea why you made that idiotic comment about Republicans considering the involvement if Democrats in slavery.
    
    source
    FooBarrington@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
    I have no idea why you made that idiotic comment considering they never talked about Republican slave owners?
    
    source
faintwhenfree@lemmus.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago
I understand what Britain did was wrong and requires corrective measures, but personally I just think financial reparation is not a very bright idea. For

How do you ensure the money actually goes to victims in foreign countries

If its given to their govts, what assurances UK has it’ll be used to improvement of victim’s life

It can very well be used to fill the pockets of rich politician

Even if ignoring all three, UK gets money in hand of ech victim personally, still doesn’t help the fundamental problem of marginalised community, money will run out so far in their hands, they’ll have no real impact.

I my opinion a 100 fully paid scholarships to university specifically for victims is a way better way to help them then just handing cash.
source