this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2023
160 points (77.4% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35728 readers
886 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

This relates to the BBC article [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66596790] which states "the UK should pay $24tn (£18.8tn) for its slavery involvement in 14 countries".

The UK abolished slavery in 1833. That's 190 years ago. So nobody alive today has a slave, and nobody alive today was a slave.

Dividing £18tn by the number of UK taxpayers (31.6m) gives £569 each. Why do I, who have never owned a slave, have to give £569 to someone who similarly is not a slave?

When I've paid my £569 is that the end of the matter forever or will it just open the floodgates of other similar claims?

Isn't this just a country that isn't doing too well, looking at the UK doing reasonably well (cost of living crisis excluded of course), and saying "oh there's this historical thing that affects nobody alive today but you still have to give us trillions of Sterling"?

Shouldn't payment of reparations be limited to those who still benefit from the slave trade today, and paid to those who still suffer from it?

(Please don't flame me. This is NSQ. I genuinely don't know why this is something I should have to pay. I agree slavery is terrible and condemn it in all its forms, and we were right to abolish it.)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Thatsalotofpotatoes@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's not intended to be punitive. The idea is that slavery generated a massive amount of wealth for slave owning economies that left us richer and the descendants of slaves poorer. Think of it as being the child of a crime boss. You haven't committed any crimes but the hosue you live in and the school that gave you the education to get ahead were paid for with dirty money. The idea is fair, but just not likely to ever happen. I think the point is more so to make people recognize the problem so that more is done to catch up the people on the wrong end of the generational wealth spectrum

[–] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

This.

OP is correct in the statement that any person alive has not been alive to either own slaves or be slaves. But that's not the point of reparations.

The point is that you have and continue to benefit from the times when slaves were legally permitted. It might not seem like it, and maybe someone along the line blew a bunch of that money on booze and gambling... But someone you are related to, and by proxy you are benefiting from the proceeds of slavery.

By extension, all of those proceeds from the work that slaves performed was robbed from them by their masters. Making most of the slaves insanely poor while the former masters were able to keep the money those slaves earned for them. So they started from nothing. Sure, they were "free" to some variation of free (not sure all the racism made it feel like much of a change)... Fact is, they started at zero, at a time when most established families were sitting pretty.

After all this time.... There's interest.

I don't know where they got these numbers and I haven't looked into it all that closely, but it doesn't seem too unreasonable given all of that.

[–] Kaleunt17@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That kids or later generations are liable for past crimes or wrong doings (by todays standards!!!) is not fair and it is no justice.

In German it is called Sippenhaftung and was even used by the Nazis.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sippenhaft

I think you missed my point. This is not about punishing white people, it's about getting the victims caught up.

[–] orrk@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

by your logic, if someone stole something, have it to his brother and then got caught, having the brother give back the stolen goods is something Nazis would have done.

But this isn't Sippenhaftung, also known as gilt by association in English, this is a societal thing, you, even if your great great gandpappy didn't himself own slaves, the society is still at fault and needs to right the wrongs done to a whole ethnic group

[–] Kaleunt17@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

by your logic, if someone stole something, have it to his brother and then got caught, having the brother give back the stolen goods is something Nazis would have done.

According to Sippenhaftung the Nazis would probably have shot the thieve, his brother, their parents, other family members and burned down their houses.

In case of societies you mean collective liability then?

The society in question (which exactly?) of today is not the same compared to the society of the past. How can it be at fault?

[–] orrk@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

look, YOU are the person framing this as some form of individually targeted thing.

as for the idea that the society is different, how can it be at fault? because the foundations of the society we have now are built on these injustices, to go back to the earlier example, "look, you can't take the stolen stuff back from the thief, he's a different person 10 years later"