Jump to content

Exclusive: 'Sorry is not enough', Caribbean states say of British slavery apologies


snoop1130

Recommended Posts

Anyone know the difference between the word "Slave" and the word "Indentured Servant"?

Just been told off on another site,  for using the word Slave, in relation to the Irish people being captured and shipped overseas. But in the books and Folklore they use the word Slaves when talking about the Irish and the Vikings,, But it seems the words "Indentured Servants" should be used for these folk. Is this a word we should now use for all these black "Slaves "  
Got to admit, it makes it sound so much better 

 

Edited by Joinaman
  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, transam said:

Back then us British sent their own to Australia for stealing a loaf of bread, or even hanged them, press gangs lifted drunks off the streets and threw them aboard ships to be away for months on end.

Sailors were keel hauled for being naughty too. Occupied gallows were at crossroads to warn naughty folk of their possible demise. Folk were even put on the "Rack" to be stretched, pull their bones out of their sockets, hung drawn and quartered whilst still alive even..

 

Things have changed a tad since then though...????

Ah the Good Ole Days!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The workers choose to get on the ships and were given a wage and housing.  The slave owners didn't see any point in harming the workers.  Some of them moved as families.

 

The work on the plantations was seen as better than back in their own country.

 

Ironically with the abolishment of slavery many of them continued working by choice.  Some returned home.

 

The boat trip from India took about 3 months and some died on the ship of disease.  Not because they were beaten.

 

British colonization was a good thing.

Edited by johnray
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There has to a point at which claims against  acts in  historical past  be denied but  noted as significant  of the injustices as a reference point which can be used  to eliminate  the need for ongoing accusations, guilt , and denial and instead to  agree  to the elimination  of any future  continuance of abuses based on assumed right of racial or cultural superiority.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, worgeordie said:

Saying sorry on a bended knee is all we can offer,

bent knee? 

 

What's after that, baubles and trinkets in 2020?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sheer genius on the part of Lloyds of London, et al.

 

Keep 'em so focused on the sins from 10 generations ago that we completely miss the fact that the Banksters are still robbing all of us blind to this day.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CorpusChristie said:

It is, people who are alive can go though the courts of law , dead people cannot do that

Firstly, it doesn't necessarily go through courts. It's negotiations between state and victim organizations.

 

Second, the dead people's descendants are perfectly able to claim, this is what happened at the Jewish material claims conference. Of course many of the victims were dead and gone. Their descendants however received compensation.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, faraday said:

Right then, let's go back to Roman times when they enslaved the British people, & we can get a few quid.

Just to be clear I think reparations are wrong in principle. However, from a legal perspective if the actual victim is dead is no bar to compensation.

 

Indeed the reparation claim from Italians would take the whole concept ad absurdum because remoteness has to kick in somewhere. The 19th century is probably too early for that. Roman times is not.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, worgeordie said:

If they are looking for money, Saying sorry on a bended knee is all we can offer,

as i think the UK has run out of money, due to the Government paying Millions

of workers for doing nothing.

regards worgeordie

 

           Civil servants , come to mind ..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, transam said:

So do we pursue the Romans, Normans, Germans for financial closure regarding their atrocities...?

Let’s see the Roman Empire was overrun and Rome itself sacked and pillaged, leading to the destruction of most of the institutions that profited from slavery but good luck with your campaign to hold those institutions culpable. Which ones are you thinking of in particular?

 

The Normans, well as many of the uks aristocratic families are descendants of these invaders, I whole heartedly support bankrupting them into poverty to atone. Count me in on that campaign. 

Edited by Bluespunk
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, bannork said:

 The Briti didn't want the Romans to leave, they knew what the Viking hordes would do to them once the Romans had gone.

 

Then surely Italy, as the geographical descendants of the Romans, should pay for the damage which the Vikings caused. Maybe they can persuade the Danes and Norwegians to chip in...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, bannork said:

 The Briti didn't want the Romans to leave, they knew what the Viking hordes would do to them once the Romans had gone.

 

The Roman Empire's rule over Britain lasted until around 410 AD, the first recorded Viking raid was 793 AD.  The Angles, Saxons and Jutes stepped in to provide the necessary hordes during that period.

Those Druids were really good at seeing the future.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, geriatrickid said:

The UK provides  approximately £14 billion+ in foreign aid with about , £250 million landing in the coffers of Carribean states. This does not include the financial benefits of preferred trading status and waivers of tariffs and duties.  These states already receive generous handouts every year.

 

The money these states, must come from somewhere, right? Someone in the UK must pay for this additional largesse. One way of financing the  demand for payment would be to add a destination tax on UK travelers. Add a tax of £10 a day and the  tourists will bring in the money these people seek. It will also negatively impact tourism, but such is life. Again, the money must come from someone.

 

And while they are at,  have these immigrants decided on the compensation that will be paid to the locals and natives who were slaughtered and displaced with the arrival of the Africans and Europeans? I notice that these folks do not address the Arawaks and Caribe  original inhabitants. Shouldn't these socially aware  Caribbean folk be addressing the ongoing injustice and agree to return the lands and to pay compensation or at least rent? 

 

 

It's 15 billion Pounds now, but of course one third of that goes to the UN and other multilateral organizations, while the rest is spread over many countries so each only gets millions. Not billions.

 

As for the Caribs, obviously they were not displaced by the current inhabitants of the Caribbean, whose ancestors were themselves brought against their will to the Caribbean as slaves. Rather the Caribs were displaced by the usual colonial pirates, thieves and exploiters, the Spanish, Dutch, French and British. So if anyone would compensate the Caribs, it would again be these nations.

 

However, remoteness has to kick in at some point and the period of Carib displacement is too long ago. The 19th century probably is not.

Edited by Logosone
  • Sad 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Let’s see the Roman Empire was overrun and Rome itself sacked and pillaged, leading to the destruction of most of the institutions that profited from slavery but good luck with your campaign to hold those institutions culpable. Which ones are you thinking of in particular?

 

The Normans, well as many of the uks aristocratic families are descendants of these invaders, I whole heartedly support bankrupting them into poverty to atone. Count me in on that campaign. 

You missed out the German government of the day, you know, the government that rounded up 6,000,000 people and executed them, plus their purge for stardom killed tens of millions. Why no comment...?

  • Sad 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The president of United States mentioned I assume is Obama. His father was from Kenya and were not shipped across the Atlantic as slaves. Considering his mother was white, he could have been classed as white or black, a 50-50 thing.

Yes, Africans war lords etc were involved in capturing slaves for the trade. And slavery was there before Europeans came & they were "spoils" of war. The trade made "wars" very profitable. Europeans gave just enough weapons to facilitate round ups, but not enough to throw out the white traders. Think supply and demand. Slaves were in demand more than cocoa.

Think of drug cartels: they wouldn't pervert and destroy local governments, engage in killings & terror if it weren't for the demand from users and the money that flows from users to enable the cartels. Slavery would have remained a relatively small side  'benefit" of war just the same as coke leaves were a local stimulant until demand distorted market beyond recognition.

Maybe reparations for Caribbean nations could be found from N African nations that enslaved more than 1 million Europeans (based on religion, not race) back in 18th century. Collect it and pass it on. "... to the shores of Tripoli" in US Marine hymn was talking about going to a Sandals resort.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...