14 Caribbean nations sue European countries for slavery reparations

[conlang returns]

Yeah, right? If we're gonna start getting into blaming people for shit their dead ancestors did, lets be fair and do it to everyone. And by that I mean, EVERYONE. 

My father buys a house.  He mortgages the house.  He dies before the mortgage is paid off.  I inherit the house.  Why shouldn't I inherit the mortgage?

[TheoK]

Yeah, right? If we're gonna start getting into blaming people for shit their dead ancestors did, lets be fair and do it to everyone. And by that I mean, EVERYONE. 

My father buys a house.  He mortgages the house.  He dies before the mortgage is paid off.  I inherit the house.  Why shouldn't I inherit the mortgage?

The mortgage is on the house, though, not on your deceased father himself, so to speak.

[RageBeoulve]

Yeah, right? If we're gonna start getting into blaming people for shit their dead ancestors did, lets be fair and do it to everyone. And by that I mean, EVERYONE. 

My father buys a house.  He mortgages the house.  He dies before the mortgage is paid off.  I inherit the house.  Why shouldn't I inherit the mortgage?

No. Its not even real money anyway.

[Semicolon]

Yeah, right? If we're gonna start getting into blaming people for shit their dead ancestors did, lets be fair and do it to everyone. And by that I mean, EVERYONE. 

My father buys a house.  He mortgages the house.  He dies before the mortgage is paid off.  I inherit the house.  Why shouldn't I inherit the mortgage?

Your father commits a crime. He goes to jail. He dies before his sentence is completed. You are imprisoned and forced to finish his sentence.

Can the harm done by slavery be undone by money? Usually, harms that impair liberty are dealt with in criminal systems, not civil systems. As far as reparations go, I'm not aware of any legal system that forces anyone to pay for the crimes of their ancestors. Furthermore, the ones suing aren't the ones who were slaves.

In terms of actually repairing the harm, it's important to remember what has happened and how easy it was for it to happen. Otherwise, it will happen again. It's regrettable, but I don't believe that something like slavery can be paid for in money. Wouldn't that cheapen the wrongness of it, to suggest that that guilt could be paid off?

[conlang returns]

Your father commits a crime. He goes to jail.

The slave trade was legal and promoted by these nations' governments.  They were never punished for it.  The owning class of these countries was happily enriched by it, and had no problem passing on the profits they made to their children. 

You are imprisoned and forced to finish his sentence.

Name one person who will go to jail if the Caribbean nations win their suit.

Can the harm done by slavery be undone by money?

I don't think people living in absolute poverty are likely to turn their noses up at money just on principle.  Would you?

Usually, harms that impair liberty are dealt with in criminal systems, not civil systems. As far as reparations go, I'm not aware of any legal system that forces anyone to pay for the crimes of their ancestors. Furthermore, the ones suing aren't the ones who were slaves.

You can choose to interpret it that way.  But that interpretation ignores the financial benefit to the nations being sued.  Going back to the mortgage, do you think the bank is going to let me have a free house just because the guy who mortgaged it kicks the bucket? 

[P7PSP]

Yeah, right? If we're gonna start getting into blaming people for shit their dead ancestors did, lets be fair and do it to everyone. And by that I mean, EVERYONE. 

My father buys a house.  He mortgages the house.  He dies before the mortgage is paid off.  I inherit the house.  Why shouldn't I inherit the mortgage?

You don't have to accept the inheritance. If you do accept the inheritance than what you have actually been given by your father is the equity or portion he actually owned. The bank still owns the rest. 

As far as slavery goes if you wish to personally apologize to every black person you meet and give them money because their ancestors either were or may have been slaves go right ahead. Just don't try to drag me into that white guilt bs with you.

[Parts]

Your father commits a crime. He goes to jail.

The slave trade was legal and promoted by these nations' governments.  They were never punished for it.  The owning class of these countries was happily enriched by it, and had no problem passing on the profits they made to their children. 

You are imprisoned and forced to finish his sentence.

Name one person who will go to jail if the Caribbean nations win their suit.

Can the harm done by slavery be undone by money?

I don't think people living in absolute poverty are likely to turn their noses up at money just on principle.  Would you?

Usually, harms that impair liberty are dealt with in criminal systems, not civil systems. As far as reparations go, I'm not aware of any legal system that forces anyone to pay for the crimes of their ancestors. Furthermore, the ones suing aren't the ones who were slaves.

You can choose to interpret it that way.  But that interpretation ignores the financial benefit to the nations being sued.  Going back to the mortgage, do you think the bank is going to let me have a free house just because the guy who mortgaged it kicks the bucket?

Do you really  believe any actual poor people will ever see any money or real benefit from this  if there is a settlement? 

How many generations will people be held accountable for the crimes of their ancestors?  The Atlantic slave trade was pretty much outlawed in the very early 1800s by most nations and the Royal Navy actively patrolled and sized ships involved in it from not long after that.

[sg1008]

First of all, they aren't suing Greece or all of Europe.

Second of all, the apology is ... it goes like this. When you build an empire on the backs of people, 100 years later, those people on whose backs you used are living in abject poverty as a direct result of their enslavement, displacement, policies which stood to keep the elite on top and others on the bottom. Meanwhile the empires which benefitted from the wealth are now internationally known for their good wealth, opportunities, and "developed" nations. Their people are living quite well and in and international economy fair better because of their connections, skills, etc. Meanwhile those in poverty are expected to pick themselves up by the boot straps in a world where the odds are not even, but in fact stacked against them. Not only that the legacy of slavery and displacement is still felt immediately in the families and descendants.

Now you, mighty men of incredible good luck and opportunities are reluctant to help, and eager to wash your hands of the abuses which your fathers household inflicted upon your poor neighbor. And it is so easy to 'cop' out and say, well every had slaves right?

Thats like a thief being held accountable saying, 'but hey other people steal, shouldn't you be going after them instead?'
Thats not a defense lol.

As for the apology, one highly underestimates the power of such a thing if you feel you are only apologising to dead people, and feel you have no place in the legacy of that. A lack of compassion and responsibility is what that is.

[sg1008]

Just pointing out- in case anyone missed it- they aren't suing the people. They are suing governments whose coffers are full of gold which is directly connected to the profits of the slave trade.

Same for apologies, although it would be a fantasy if all people were sorry for such things- the apology comes from government which- again- has foundations and wealth directly related to either slavery, genocide, or the legal exploitation of minorities.

[Al Swearegen]

Now you, mighty men of incredible good luck and opportunities are reluctant to help, and eager to wash your hands of the abuses which your fathers household inflicted upon your poor neighbor. And it is so easy to 'cop' out and say, well every had slaves right?

Who is these  people that you are talking of? Who are the mighty men?

[Semicolon]

Just pointing out- in case anyone missed it- they aren't suing the people. They are suing governments whose coffers are full of gold which is directly connected to the profits of the slave trade.

Same for apologies, although it would be a fantasy if all people were sorry for such things- the apology comes from government which- again- has foundations and wealth directly related to either slavery, genocide, or the legal exploitation of minorities.

That's very misleading. They are suing the people, as a whole. Furthermore, Great Britain doesn't have "cellars full of gold". They have a national debt of £1.16 trillion, which is about 75% of their GDP. Source France had 91.7% of their GDP as debt in the first quarter of 2013. Source This money is coming directly from the taxpayers.

[Parts]

Just pointing out- in case anyone missed it- they aren't suing the people. They are suing governments whose coffers are full of gold which is directly connected to the profits of the slave trade.

Same for apologies, although it would be a fantasy if all people were sorry for such things- the apology comes from government which- again- has foundations and wealth directly related to either slavery, genocide, or the legal exploitation of minorities.

That's very misleading. They are suing the people, as a whole. Furthermore, Great Britain doesn't have "cellars full of gold". They have a national debt of £1.16 trillion, which is about 75% of their GDP. Source France had 91.7% of their GDP as debt in the first quarter of 2013. Source This money is coming directly from the taxpayers.

That is one of the things that drives me nuts and I hear it all the time in regards to 'free stuff' from the government

[Semicolon]

Your father commits a crime. He goes to jail.

The slave trade was legal and promoted by these nations' governments.  They were never punished for it.  The owning class of these countries was happily enriched by it, and had no problem passing on the profits they made to their children. 

You are imprisoned and forced to finish his sentence.

Name one person who will go to jail if the Caribbean nations win their suit.

Mortgage is a bad analogy. A mortgage is a special ownership agreement between a bank and a buyer where the bank agrees to pay for the house up front in exchange for small, regular payments from the buyer. Usually, mortgages include a clause that allows the bank to request immediate repayment of the entire mortgage upon the death of the buyer. Unless you reach a special arrangement with the bank, the bank will try to collect on any outstanding savings, IRA benefits, etc. to satisfy the debt. For relatives, there is a special law that would allow you to take up the mortgage if you want to. Source

If you want to continue with the bad analogy, then the answer is that you don't owe anything that you don't want to pay. Of course, the bank may foreclose.

Can the harm done by slavery be undone by money?

I don't think people living in absolute poverty are likely to turn their noses up at money just on principle.  Would you?

That's not what I asked. I'm asking whether you think that you'd be unfairly penalizing current citizens in the countries being sued.

Usually, harms that impair liberty are dealt with in criminal systems, not civil systems. As far as reparations go, I'm not aware of any legal system that forces anyone to pay for the crimes of their ancestors. Furthermore, the ones suing aren't the ones who were slaves.

You can choose to interpret it that way.  But that interpretation ignores the financial benefit to the nations being sued.  Going back to the mortgage, do you think the bank is going to let me have a free house just because the guy who mortgaged it kicks the bucket?

As long as the bank gets paid by someone, they don't care. But that's extending the analogy too far. Was the harm done to the slaves primarily financial? I think that the harm done to them is greater in the area of civil rights. They were denied freedom.

What about my charge that this suit cheapens the wrong done by slavery?

[Al Swearegen]

I can go one better.

If we assume that the suit goes well and the countries that are supposedly supposed to come up with the cash have not got it aside in their coffers. How about a special slavery tax. But some of the citizens in European countries are ancestors of slaves themselves. So let's make them exempt. Some of them may also be of ancestors that arrived AFTER the 1800's, so let's make them exempt too, but then some will have ancestors on some of their family lines that were not there in 1800's and some that were and others will have both ancestors in one line that were slave owners and others as slaves....so maybe we apportion liability of these people on evidence. Others will have had non-slaves on any lineage AND have ancestry that goes back to the 1800's BUT were in no way involved in slaving and perhaps in industries and locations such as a small rural village where it did not affect them and them may not have even been aware of slavery being in existence, so these people should also be exempt.


So......who do we tax and what?

I am more interested in how they are going to qualify reparations to other slaves? Which other slaves? Well there has been slaves throughout history? In Ancient Egypt, Greece, Rome, Byzantine Empire, Carolingian Empire, Viking ruled Scandanavia, , Mongol Empire, Persian Empire, Ottoman Empire,  Sumer, , Ancient China, the Akkadian Empire, Assyria, Ancient India, the Islamic Caliphate, the Hebrew kingdoms in Palestine, and the pre-Columbian civilizations of the Americas

Records of slavery in Ancient Greece go as far back as Mycenaean Greece. It is certain that Classical Athens had the largest slave population, with as many as 80,000 in the 6th and 5th centuries BC;[37] two to four-fifths of the population were slaves.[38] As the Roman Republic expanded outward, entire populations were enslaved, thus creating an ample supply from all over Europe and the Mediterranean. Greeks, Illyrians, Berbers, Germans, Britons, Thracians, Gauls, Jews, Arabs, and many more were slaves used not only for labour, but also for amusement (e. g. gladiators and sex slaves)

By the late Republican era, slavery had become a vital economic pillar in the wealth of Rome, as well as a very significant part of Roman society.[39] At the least, some 25% of the population of Ancient Rome was enslaved.[40] According to some scholars, slaves represented 35% or more of Italy's population.[41] In the city of Rome alone, under the Roman Empire, there were about 400,000 slaves.[42] During the millennium from the emergence of the Roman Empire to its eventual decline, at least 100 million people were captured or sold as slaves throughout the Mediterranean and its hinterlands.[43]

At the time of the Domesday Book (1086), nearly 10% of the English population were slaves.

The Byzantine-Ottoman wars and the Ottoman wars in Europe brought large numbers of slaves into the Islamic world.[59] From the mid to late 14th, through early 18th centuries, the Ottoman devşirme–janissary system enslaved and forcibly converted to Islam an estimated 500,000 to one million

Approximately 10–20% of the rural population of Carolingian Europe consisted of slaves

In early Islamic states of the western Sudan, including Ghana (750–1076), Mali (1235–1645), Segou (1712–1861), and Songhai (1275–1591), about a third of the population were enslaved.[71]

OK So presuming this is fair and workable and that no slave descendant's claim is better than another's....AND it may just take a little work. Go back a few hundred years and see just how many direct descendants any on slave that will produce.

OK now let track them all from Ancient Greece or Sumeria so that no one is left out.

[RageBeoulve]

First of all, they aren't suing Greece or all of Europe.

Second of all, the apology is ... it goes like this. When you build an empire on the backs of people, 100 years later, those people on whose backs you used are living in abject poverty as a direct result of their enslavement, displacement, policies which stood to keep the elite on top and others on the bottom. Meanwhile the empires which benefitted from the wealth are now internationally known for their good wealth, opportunities, and "developed" nations. Their people are living quite well and in and international economy fair better because of their connections, skills, etc. Meanwhile those in poverty are expected to pick themselves up by the boot straps in a world where the odds are not even, but in fact stacked against them. Not only that the legacy of slavery and displacement is still felt immediately in the families and descendants.

Now you, mighty men of incredible good luck and opportunities are reluctant to help, and eager to wash your hands of the abuses which your fathers household inflicted upon your poor neighbor. And it is so easy to 'cop' out and say, well every had slaves right?

Thats like a thief being held accountable saying, 'but hey other people steal, shouldn't you be going after them instead?'
Thats not a defense lol.

As for the apology, one highly underestimates the power of such a thing if you feel you are only apologising to dead people, and feel you have no place in the legacy of that. A lack of compassion and responsibility is what that is.

If those people were honestly trying to repair the damage done to their culture, they would not be going after "money". They would be trying to get their fair share of resources. As it is, when people go after money because of "reperations" I always think of them as beggars and fools. They're just looking for a handout. Its like the beggar that accumulates some money, then goes and buys liquor with it.

TL;DR: Because they are asking for debt certificates instead of physical resources, I think they're cunts and have no respect for them. Then there is also the argument Al made. EVERY CULTURE HAS OWNED SLAVES AT SOME POINT.