Cambridge University Slavery Research

[CallumDansTransitVan]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/aug/31/ex-tory-mp-threatens-sue-cambridge-university-slavery-research-antoinette-sandbach

Read this article today & I'm sure it will bring mixed feelings. Interested to know other peoples thoughts on it.

My personal feeling is if I had been the lady in question. I would of ignored her name being included, as the likelihood was that the paper in question would of been fogotten about fairly quickly.
But I do believe she should not be outed for the actions of ancestors who were dead long before she came into existence. Nor do I see any justification for including her name on the paper.

Before anyone starts on oh but she has family wealth due to the history. None of these families were exactly paupers even before slavery.

Exactly, she’s an idiot.

He’s using her as an example of a descendant who appears to be still benefitting from wealth got from slavery.. and that’s it. So what?

The discussion is wherever the posters involved take it isn’t it?

Absolutely! It's just interesting where and why people choose to direct the subject.

Again, you personally are not being stopped from saying what you want to here. You are posting freely about this area of your interest. You are not being silenced.

No question some of the wealth created in the early 1800's was made by the families use of slaves. But there is no way in this world, you could confidently say any money or property held today came directly from it.

I don't think you can confidently say the wealth has no impact...

A very well thought out post so thank you.

Absolutely! It's just interesting where and why people choose to direct the subject.

it's pretty odd!

Of course you bear no responsibility- no one alive does. But you have benefitted from it.

Oh boo hoo

She has as her family have benefitted greatly frok slavery

no one is saying she is responsible but at least acknowledge this

You’re right, but I did qualify later that doing so usually results being told that is “whataboutery” and implications that to do so is racist. Both of which claims you confirmed.

It is interesting where people take discussions on slavery. To me, they always head the same direction. Its so boring. Its really hard to discuss the trans atlantic slave trade and its legacy as every time its a topic people want to discuss barbaries, other slave trades, werent the british navy good, that we paid to free the slaves, other countries did it too, its not my fault, my family were poor and badly treated.

The discussion never goes 'oh i didnt know that particular bank was set up as result of the payment to free slaves, what a shocking building design with all its symbolism'

I've not called anyone racist on this thread and I've not said anyone is engaging in whataboutery on this thread. I said I've seen it used as whataboutery elsewhere on MN and Twitter.

I am not stopping you from thinking, saying or doing anything.

whistle...Come here Fido there's a good dog whistle

She’s not responsible for the generational wealth that has benefited her.

But she’s wholly responsible for being a total dick in her response to presentation of historical research.

Wealthy elites hold power for many generations in the UK.

Beneficiaries of the vast sums of “compensation” paid to slave owners on top of their prior earnings, and of the forced unpaid labour of slave for years after abolition are government right now - lots and lots of them. Including this woman.

Tax payers, the overwhelming majority of whom did not experience generational wealth benefits, have been paying back that compensation up until 2015, so were directly and generationally impoverished as a direct consequence of those wealthy elites getting their “compensation”. You, me, all of us.

She seems like a litigious person, doing her litigation thing, as is the wont of wealthy elites who are accustomed to getting their way. And she’s being a total dick about this.

How about enlightening us on which bank and why then?

So do half our aristocracy. Don't mistake me, I would be the first to cheer if wealth inequality in the UK was ironed out by confiscating the ill-gotten gains of history - including those belonging to the Royal Family - but I still see no reason to single out this woman in particular.

Looking at this thread so far it's only a couple of posters carrying on as per your first paragraph. Not the second, but then this thread is not about any bank in particular. Most people tend to agree with the anti-slavery sentiment.

There's no such thing as a general 'discussion of slavery' it's made up of many different questions. Not everyone will agree with ALL of them. 'Should Britain's role in benefitting from the slave trade be acknowledged' is a different question from 'should Britain pay reparations to the descendants of former slaves' which is also not the same question as 'should statues of men who made their money from slaves be torn down'.

In relation to the topic of this thread while as @Titerama said all of us taxpayers have been fattening the pockets of the wealthy elite so I'm not exactly on her side. The wider question is, should individual people currently alive be singled out in academic research? What are the ethical concerns surrounding this? As a PP said they are usually anonymised, not named.

Its in one of Malik Al Nasir's longer pieces on the BBC just as he is about to start his phd at cambridge. Its a really interesting article about his personal research. It does include some of the points raised (like paying back the loans to 2015)

It goes Liverpool Bank which became Martins Bank and then into Barclays. I've never really thought much about banks before. I guess i had an idea all the liverpool architecture reflected an era.

You say this as though most people did not cover basic British history at school. We are all aware of the role of the Industrial Revolution in making Britain rich. However, it was raw materials, produced using slave labour that started and enabled that development.

Furthermore, every single time Britain’s role in slavery is bought up there is somebody who pipes up about the various slave trades on the African continent. I always find it amusing because it is a uniquely British behaviour to want to romanticise history and to get upset and defensive when faced with facts. All you are literally doing is deflecting unnecessarily. Again, we all already know our history but thanks anyway.

Lastly, please do not assume the white experience and the feelings of white people are the driving force behind calls for change. It is not about you. Nobody is going to expend precious energy for the purpose of making white British people feel bad. We care about creating a fairer society in which our communities our treated as well as (not better than) white British people. You speak as though it’s your history. The history of the British Empire is OUR history so it being used as an instrument to uplift white British people at expense of poc with heritage from other commonwealth countries is not ok. Consistently portraying empire as great & glorious means it’s being taught that everyone else is inferior even if this isn’t intentional.

It’s not about you. There is literally no need for you to feel defensive. Nobody thinks you were alive then. Everyone is perfectly capable of celebrating the good whilst acknowledging the bad.

Personally I am never going to give the British undue credit for ending slavery, when it was started and endorsed by the state. I’d rather remember the individual abolitionists of both races.

Many of the slave owners who got compensation then invested in the railway boom and various other components of the industrial revolution- lots of cash going from government to rich pockets, who also got the free labour of their freed slaves for many years.

I find this an interesting contrast with the recent "Who Do You Think You Are?" episode for the van Tulleken twins. They learned about a wealthy slave-trader ancestor, though I am not clear whether they benefitted financially from that ancestor to any significant degree. Clearly it was uncomfortable for them to learn about it, but they didn't shy away from it. They came out looking much better than Antoinette Sandbach has done.

Maybe people should concentrate more on what is happening now, ie… rather than what happened in the past

I guess that’s an entire academic discipline - history - declared a waste of time then? Maybe we should inform Cambridge uni (along with all other educational institutions globally)
😆😆

My great x 4 grandfather was a well known colonist ruler responsible for the deaths and misery of many people in Africa. I don't hide from it, I teach my kids about the evil bastard and teach them to be anti-racist as possible.
We have no family money but have definitely benefited in generations past from his money and that sickens me. I would own it and learn more about it and stand up shout about awful it was and start a discussion about it rather than try and hide from it.

Threads like these do really illustrate why modern-day discourse on race/racism in the UK is the way it is.

It's the nature of humans to exploit one another. If it wasn't Britain and Africa it would be (and was) someone else. Having said that it's important to learn about history so that society can improve and to help us understand why the world is the way it is today.

e.g. Why are black African countries generally poor and under developed? Uneducated answer from someone that knows nothing about history: Those people are inferior to us, they are corrupt and incapable of running a country, however much cash we throw at them. Answer from someone with a modicum of knowledge: They were and still are exploited and oppressed for the benefit of developed countries

or, some people ask, Why are lower class British people so poor, why do they struggle to manage in life? Uneducated answer from someone that knows nothing about history: Those people are inferior to us, they are lazy and feckless and incapable of managing, no matter how much benefits money they receive. Answer from someone with a modicum of knowledge: They were and still are exploited and oppressed for the benefit of richer people in society.

Learning about history is the most important thing you can do if you want to understand the world as it is today (and not fall for the divide and rule tactics of the rich elite who rule our country)

Setting black poor people against white poor people is a victory for the rich.

It sounds like she doesn’t have a leg to stand on legally and I’m glad to hear the university ICO is backing the researcher up. It’s births and deaths, public records, of course it’s not a data breach.

The ethics of it might be up for discussion, but the suppression of information like that by people of privilege also has massive ethical implications. It’s got people talking about the research and the ongoing legacy of slavery. Many of us academics would be envious of the impact that the researcher’s generated with his PhD work, good on him!