STILL making money from slavery?

[4plusthehound]

AIBU here?

www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/04/british-slave-owners-family-apologise-reparations-trevelyans

It seems so craven

The "wealth" of Britain - in quotes because there really isnt that as much as you think - came from the wool trade and then the industrial revolution. You can argue that some of that benefited from the proceeds of slavery but it's wrong to ignore the contribution of Britain used to manufacture and to sell and to ship goods around the world. Amazing how ignorant so many people are of British history.

This. Slavery didn’t just affect the ones enslaved. The results, which were very negative, trickled down to their ancestors. It may be difficult to perceive that unless you are a part of a minority group that was enslaved.

Of course slavery was wrong. The attitudes behind slavery persisted and were the reason ex slaves and their descendants were denied opportunities available to others. Meanwhile the descendants of slave traders benefited - but that benefit didnt extend significantly beyond those descendants while every tax payer in this country has been paying off slave traders. Similar attitudes were applied to the poor in this country and in others - look up how the Canadians treated British Home Children and how some died of frostbite and malnutrition. Be aware of how Scots were cleared from the land so landowners could run sheep there.

The rich have always exploited people, they still do. Slavery is an extreme form of that exploitation.

Good thread with worthwhile discussion.

Interesting points @anyolddinosaur .

I read a story a while ago about an American slave woman (in Rhode Island I think) who was an amazing baker. She sold her goods at a market with wild success.

Instead of using the profits to start a baking empire, and personify the American Dream like a white poor person would/could have done, she used the money to but her freedom, that of her husband and that of her children.

It took a life time.

That is why I find this idea of the Trevelyan clan so self serving. To me they are still feeding off it.

The "wealth" of Britain - in quotes because there really isnt that as much as you think - came from the wool trade and then the industrial revolution. You can argue that some of that benefited from the proceeds of slavery but it's wrong to ignore the contribution of Britain used to manufacture and to sell and to ship goods around the world. Amazing how ignorant so many people are of British history.

Describe the Industrial Revolution please.

What products were manufactured in Britain purely from raw materials sourced in Britain?

What products were manufactured in Britain from raw materials that came from other parts of the world?

What were the working conditions of the people who produced those raw materials?

What were the political arrangements that facilitated the extraction of raw materials from places outside of Britain and then the sale of finished goods back to those places, or on to other places?

I think it's useless virtue signalling but it certainly seems to be what is being promoted these days. I was at a public ceremony a few days ago for the opening of the local African Heritage month, and the MC at the beginning when on at some length about the necessity of constant acts of reparation both symbolic and material, and called racism the "original sin" responsible for all of the ills in modern society.

I'd say this would be right up her ally.

@mathanxiety I cant be arsed. Making profits from manufacturing raw goods into finished materials was what Britain did. We did it well and we had a large navy that shipped goods around the world. That is what built what wealth Britain had and we spent a lot of it protecting freedom and democracy. We also invested quite a bit in other countries, who tend to forget how much they benefit from that investment.

Very few countries survive on what they produce and manufacture themselves, it's called free trade. Now I dont personally think it is a great idea, as we'll find out when China decided to pull the strings, but it's what made Britain money for a time.

We also invested quite a bit in other countries, who tend to forget how much they benefit from that investment.

Do you mean the British colonies @anyolddinosaur ?

You are making a lot of sense @anyolddinosaur, but beware of continuing with your line of thinking on this thread as you may risk being reported

So a journalist called Trevelyan must be denounced for making money writing about the transatlantic slave trade that involved a certain ancestor. Note that dating back to 1835 only 1 of maybe around 64 ancestors was a Trevelyan - the one following the male line of descent (although this doesn't preclude others of the 64 also benefitting from slavery).

Should another journalist that made millions from writing about the transatlantic slave trade involving ancestors also be denounced? Or does Alex Haley fully deserve the praise and awards for Roots?

@anyolddinosaur It "owned" half the world by that point, and had a market to sell to and resources to take.

Amazing how ignorant so many people are of British history. This is rude. The discussion here is interesting and respectful.

But as you brought it up you could also look at it another way - amazing how naive so many people are of British history.

What do you think?

That is what built what wealth Britain had and we spent a lot of it protecting freedom and democracy.

Freedom and democracy for whom?

Most colonized countries had to go to war with us in order to have a democracy!

We were the bullys, and thieves and murderers.

Horrible to accept but true unfortunately.

I do believe that between then and now we have done a LOT to redeme ourselves. But we should not decieve ourselves about who we were.

Should another journalist that made millions from writing about the transatlantic slave trade involving ancestors also be denounced? Or does Alex Haley fully deserve the praise and awards for Roots? 😂😂Nice try!

It has less to do with writing about slavery and much more to do with the rather dramatic, wide eyed, showy mea culpa. And indeed if it was only 1 of maybe around 64 ancestors was a Trevelyan then it seems even more dramatic for the family to have a collective intake of breath now, no?

*redeem

@4plusthehound British pirates stole from the Spanish and there certainly was some theft and murder. Not exactly true that most colonies had to " go to war" though. America did - where else were you thinking of? Mostly a form of government was established and eventually the colonies were handed back. There was generally a lot of bloodshed, quite a bit of it British blood, before it got to that point but it wasnt open warfare.

Freedom for the world and democracy for those willing to accept it. What do you think would have happened if Britain had not taken the rule of law and the idea of democracy to half the world? Do you think the French, Spanish, Portugeuse, Belgians, Moguls would have done better as those are who the British generally displaced. Would any of them have abolished slavery sooner? Spain kept slavery longer than Britain, India has the largest number of modern slaves. France was a bit better. Read about what the Belgians did in the Congo if you really want to feel sick.

@anyolddinosaur I suppose it could depend on the definition of war. But if we accept a defination as they resorted to violence in order to have self governance then yes, most of ex colonies went to war with us.

I am pretty sure that we must have taken over violently too. I don't imagine our forefathers rocked up and said look - "we will teach you English in exchange for x, y, z" and had the locals jumping for joy.

Without looking anything up and off the top of my head -

Afghanistan
Many African countries including, South Africa, Somalia, Keyna, Rhodesia ( as it was know then), Egypt, Iraq? , Nigeria and where else?
Ireland
Palestine
Obviously the Untied Staes
India

I don't think the white Australians ever bucked, Canada ditto? I am not sure about that and willdo a bit of reading. I am also unsure about the Carribean countires.

Many years ago I read a book called King Leopald's Ghost . The horror of it is with me to this day.

So much of our (human) history is plagued by greed. Our country is a guilty as every other country. Unfortunately.

Not exactly true that most colonies had to " go to war" though. America did - where else were you thinking of?
The UK's closest neighbours maybe?
Ireland's War of Independence was fought just over 100 years ago now.

Freedom for the world and democracy for those willing to accept it.
You really have no idea do you @anyolddinosaur ?

Ireland I grant you.

Afghanistan was never a colony, it always had its
own rulers. Britain wanted to control it's foreign policy.

South Africa – you are presumably thinking of the Boer wars so between 2 colonial powers and partly caused by the British abolition of slavery. The Union of South Africa was an independent Dominion from 1909. If it had been a British colony I doubt they would have had apartheid. for so long.

Somalia- part occupied by Italy, another colonial power. Britain handed British Somaliland independence in 1960 when the area that had been under Italian control became independent.

Kenya – Legislative Council from 1957 before independence in 1963. Some people call the fighting a civil war. It was certainly a very dirty fight.

Rhodesia – was the self governing colony of South Rhodesia from 1923 after the British South African company's charter was revoked. Fighting was against its own government. They were mostly settlers of British origin but it was not a war against Britain. Zambia became independent in 1963 after elections.

Egypt- technically never a colony. Britain withdrew its influence gradually apart from a misguided attempt to capture the Suez canal..

Iraq -Britain was given a League of Nations mandate to govern in 1920, established a hashemite monarchy and Iraq became independent in 1932.

Palestine -Britain had a mandate from 1918-1948, then withdrew. Palestine and Israel are still fighting it out, not a war with Britain.

India from 1919 British policy was to develop self-governing institutions. India had a Legislative Council until independence. Gandhi went for civil disobedience rather than war.

Ones you prefer not to cover - Canada, Australia, Malta (which once voted to integrate with Britain in a referendum but got independence), Bermuda, Gibralter, Falkland Islands – all choosing to stay British. Anguilla preferred to be a British Overseas Territory rather than part of independent St KittsThe Carribbean Islands – all given independence without a war although Haiti fought France. . Botswana, Ghana, Malta and others.

Colston's statue was tossed into the harbour in Bristol for offences to humanity committed 300 years earlier, hundreds of people demonstrated.
When Maros Tancos, and Joanna Gomulska were jailed for keeping slaves in Bristol within the past decade it didn't seem to prompt any kind of public outcry at all.