Arguably, the reason you were able to enjoy a career teaching history was because of what your ancestors did, and what they bequeathed you, in terms of social mobility. You may have been left some money in a will that traces its way back to those slave farms. You might have benefited from access to a scholarship fund that directly relates to someone benefiting from a hideous activity (we know the number one name in that regard, but there are a few other Industrailist names there as well). I too have studied family history, going back to the 16th Century. Possibly some disgraced royalty, but the thing is, these Royals spread their seed so much, there are a lot of people related. The last of the Plantagenets is a Canadian carpenter (who donated DNA to confirm King Richard's remains). Matthew Pinsent, the Olympian, is a direct descendant of Catherine Howard, one of Henry VIII's wives, which means he's descended from King Edward I, who, to claim legitimacy, had to show descent from King David, basically right hand of God etc. But where do you, as an historian, stand on the Smithsonian collection and other American museum collections? does it all belong to America. The same question about the British Museum etc. The question of repatriating collections has positives and negatives. The question that these are collections to be enjoyed by the world is rather specious. If they can be enjoyed in London. Washington, New York, they can be enjoyed in Lagos, Harare, Cairo. Tourists can hope on a plane. The places might not be safe right now for such collections, but the principle should remain. You might say to those African descendants "I can't pay you because I don't have the money, but I can buy things from you", that've they've added value to. ie manufactured goods. What that means, is USAid investing in entrepreneurial projects in these countries, with no strings (no expectation of a return on investment, just a friendly good luck). Whats happened; the US government sunk billions into a South African Anglo-Canadian, to import raw materials from Africa, to build up a Nevada business that enabled a Chinese government subsidised investment to build a car factory, to sell electric cars to oil Sheikhs. Just think how Africa would have benefited if those batteries were made in Africa; they add value, through their labour. It is quite possible if Lagos, Capetown and Kinshaha had been turned into EV battery capitals, there wouldn't even be a UN debate on reparations. Instead, American money goes to pay them to fight over extract of raw materials for export. South Africa ships to China iron ore, and at the time, they thought they were getting a pretty sweet deal. China sends back cars. Who had the better deal. The irony is that American money built on a combination of stolen English inventions (Slater the Traitor) and African slavery enriched Chinese corporations to go and build highways and railways in Africa, and then they claim the credit. After taking their cut.
Create an account or sign in to comment