Keir Starmer Labour Leader

They should, if they had any sense, even from the head if not the heart, entertain reparations because the UK (other than the US) is somewhat isolated and the commonwealth is a international bloc of sorts which can become more than it is based on equality through shared cultural experiences (which experiences stress a post-colonial equality). 20 trillion over the next few years is roughly where the EU's economy is at and not far off the US itself (9 trillion or so).

Problems? As a pure economic bloc it faces BRICS and other potential and existent groupings which are entirely economic. But there is still something there regarding foreign direct investment opportunities across the commonwealth. I wouldn't alienate them, personally (for the sake of a right-wing ethos which thinks any entertainment of reparations is some variety of capitulation).
 
neverdie said:
They should, if they had any sense, even from the head if not the heart, entertain reparations because the UK (other than the US) is somewhat isolated and the commonwealth is a international bloc of sorts which can become more than it is based on equality through shared cultural experiences (which experiences stress a post-colonial equality). 20 trillion over the next few years is roughly where the EU's economy is at and not far off the US itself (9 trillion or so).

Problems? As a pure economic bloc it faces BRICS and other potential and existent groupings which are entirely economic. But there is still something there regarding foreign direct investment opportunities across the commonwealth. I wouldn't alienate them, personally (for the sake of a right-wing ethos which thinks any entertainment of reparations is some variety of capitulation).
Click to expand...
I don't support reparations for this, and I think any government that did would get murdered at the election.
 
nickm said:
I don't support reparations for this, and I think any government that did would get murdered at the election.
Click to expand...
The election is five years away. If reparations leads to better international tie among one of the few somewhat solid groups the UK actually seems to "lead" (in partnership) then it's worth doing. The general interest of the CW as investment bloc over time (and it will be massive if it is held together in economic terms: 5-8 times the UK economy in a few years) is worth it (reparations). Even symbolic amounts (hundreds of millions over time as a leveling gesture) You get this back easily (assuming there is a competent investment strategy which is a jump given the state of "politics" in the UK over the past god knows how long).

Also the right thing to do. Why would the UK not want to better itself in the Global South given how easily it alienates itself there by all the manner of nonsense it either leads or barks (is led into)? And this is what those nations, affected by UK slavery practices, want. Otherwise, why not dissolve the CW altogether? It will go that way (can) very easily.
 
neverdie said:
The election is five years away. If reparations leads to better international tie among one of the few somewhat solid groups the UK actually seems to "lead" (in partnership) then it's worth doing. The general interest of the CW as investment bloc over time (and it will be massive if it is held together in economic terms: 5-8 times the UK economy in a few years) is worth it (reparations). Even symbolic amounts (hundreds of millions over time as a leveling gesture) You get this back easily (assuming there is a competent investment strategy which is a jump given the state of "politics" in the UK over the past god knows how long).

Also the right thing to do. Why would the UK not want to better itself in the Global South given how easily it alienates itself there by all the manner of nonsense it either leads or barks (is led into)? And this is what those nations, affected by UK slavery practices, want. Otherwise, why not dissolve the CW altogether? It will go that way (can) very easily.
Click to expand...
To paraphrase The Princess Bride, these countries are trying to kidnap what we have rightfully stolen.
 
neverdie said:
The election is five years away. If reparations leads to better international tie among one of the few somewhat solid groups the UK actually seems to "lead" (in partnership) then it's worth doing. The general interest of the CW as investment bloc over time (and it will be massive if it is held together in economic terms: 5-8 times the UK economy in a few years) is worth it (reparations). Even symbolic amounts (hundreds of millions over time as a leveling gesture) You get this back easily (assuming there is a competent investment strategy which is a jump given the state of "politics" in the UK over the past god knows how long).

Also the right thing to do. Why would the UK not want to better itself in the Global South given how easily it alienates itself there by all the manner of nonsense it either leads or barks (is led into)? And this is what those nations, affected by UK slavery practices, want. Otherwise, why not dissolve the CW altogether? It will go that way (can) very easily.
Click to expand...
The UK already spends 15bn a year on foreign aid. Whether we spend that in the right places, or well, I don't know, but a large chunk goes to the global south already, with recipients including CW countries.
 
neverdie said:
The election is five years away. If reparations leads to better international tie among one of the few somewhat solid groups the UK actually seems to "lead" (in partnership) then it's worth doing. The general interest of the CW as investment bloc over time (and it will be massive if it is held together in economic terms: 5-8 times the UK economy in a few years) is worth it (reparations). Even symbolic amounts (hundreds of millions over time as a leveling gesture) You get this back easily (assuming there is a competent investment strategy which is a jump given the state of "politics" in the UK over the past god knows how long).

Also the right thing to do. Why would the UK not want to better itself in the Global South given how easily it alienates itself there by all the manner of nonsense it either leads or barks (is led into)? And this is what those nations, affected by UK slavery practices, want. Otherwise, why not dissolve the CW altogether? It will go that way (can) very easily.
Click to expand...
The Caribbean countries alone have talked about wanting $18tn of reparations, more than six times the size of the UK's economy. The likelihood of a UK prime minister agreeing is minimal and probably diminishing year by year as slavery sinks deeper into the past. Aligning with Asia Pacific would be far more lucrative.
 
Jippy said:
The Caribbean countries alone have talked about wanting $18tn of reparations, more than six times the size of the UK's economy. The likelihood of a UK prime minister agreeing is minimal and probably diminishing year by year as slavery sinks deeper into the past. Aligning with Asia Pacific would be far more lucrative.
Click to expand...
They're never going to get trillions and they know this. It's the political opening statement.
 
nickm said:
The UK already spends 15bn a year on foreign aid. Whether we spend that in the right places, or well, I don't know, but a large chunk goes to the global south already, with recipients including CW countries.
Click to expand...
Strategic foreign investment funds (governmental) is/are not foreign aid. You no doubt know this already. And that's the frame to consider it in.
 
neverdie said:
They're never going to get trillions and they know this. It's the political opening statement.
Click to expand...
Indeed, but you know it's unlikely. They aren't going to want to set precedents and open those floodgates, even if they agreed 'only' billions spread over years.
 
Jippy said:
Indeed, but you know it's unlikely. They aren't going to want to set precedents and open those floodgates, even if they agreed 'only' billions spread over years.
Click to expand...
I don't think Starmer's government is going to do it, no. I do think it will cause problems with the CW long-term, particularly with the new generations, which contra to sentiment (elsewhere in this thread), will only learn more and more about their histories (as is the case already qua the last/current generation) and will seek departures.

The CW has to have something - like the CW sporting events - to make it hold as a supranational/cultural group with economic-investment (mutual) potential. It could, not all nations, unravel with grievances regarding the structure of the CW. Maybe not. Just a potentiality.
 
neverdie said:
They're never going to get trillions and they know this. It's the political opening statement.
Click to expand...
Suggest our counter offer is the bill our navy racked up patrolling the seas for 70 years to enforce the abolition of the slave trade...
 
What’s Keir going to do about Mike Amesbury? ….‘Fist of Fury’

Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee.
 
neverdie said:
They should, if they had any sense, even from the head if not the heart, entertain reparations because the UK (other than the US) is somewhat isolated and the commonwealth is a international bloc of sorts which can become more than it is based on equality through shared cultural experiences (which experiences stress a post-colonial equality). 20 trillion over the next few years is roughly where the EU's economy is at and not far off the US itself (9 trillion or so).

Problems? As a pure economic bloc it faces BRICS and other potential and existent groupings which are entirely economic. But there is still something there regarding foreign direct investment opportunities across the commonwealth. I wouldn't alienate them, personally (for the sake of a right-wing ethos which thinks any entertainment of reparations is some variety of capitulation).
Click to expand...
I think reparations should be considered seriously from a moral standpoint.

But economically and politically it would be a big challenge for the UK. Given its current position as a politically centre right nation with right wing media, and in the latter stages of post colonial economical decline.
 
Finally, a tax on buses. About time we clamped down on the poor and elderly who use the buses every day.

This man is a weasel.
 
nickm said:
Today's generations bear no moral responsibility for the slave trade, quite apart from the endless practical problems.
Click to expand...
Today's generations benefit from historical exploitation. They are absolutely morally responsible for the actions of the government, historical or otherwise.
 
nickm said:
Today's generations bear no moral responsibility for the slave trade, quite apart from the endless practical problems.
Click to expand...
Not individually no, but collectively we have benefited from it, the strong economic position of Britain over the last few centuries has been built on it, from which we (Brits) have all benefited from, in one way or another. Whether that be the investment in British infrastructure, roads, rail, education, healthcare etc.

Conversely populations from the countries that have been exploited, having their resources stripped (raw materials, mining, labour, crops etc) and profits sent back to Britain over centuries have not had the same economic benefits, they've had economic detriment. Great wealth has been transferred over many years to build and maintain Britain.

To summarise, the moral responsibility is not on modern day individuals in Britain, but in the collective benefit which we experience.
 
Herman Toothrot said:
Finally, a tax on buses. About time we clamped down on the poor and elderly who use the buses every day.

This man is a weasel.
Click to expand...
I can't believe the PM of the UK has to concern himself with the maximum price of a bus ticket. Just seems an odd way to run a country.
 
Fluctuation0161 said:
Not individually no, but collectively we have benefited from it, the strong economic position of Britain over the last few centuries has been built on it, from which we (Brits) have all benefited from, in one way or another. Whether that be the investment in British infrastructure, roads, rail, education, healthcare etc.
Click to expand...
Try telling people who are using food banks that they need to cough up for those reasons.
 
Fluctuation0161 said:
Not individually no, but collectively we have benefited from it, the strong economic position of Britain over the last few centuries has been built on it, from which we (Brits) have all benefited from, in one way or another. Whether that be the investment in British infrastructure, roads, rail, education, healthcare etc.

Conversely populations from the countries that have been exploited, having their resources stripped (raw materials, mining, labour, crops etc) and profits sent back to Britain over centuries have not had the same economic benefits, they've had economic detriment. Great wealth has been transferred over many years to build and maintain Britain.

To summarise, the moral responsibility is not on modern day individuals in Britain, but in the collective benefit which we experience.
Click to expand...
We have no responsibility over the acts of the British Empire. Except when it comes to the national debt, when every politician insists today's citizens and future citizens have to pay back what we borrow and have borrowed.
 
nickm said:
I don't support reparations for this, and I think any government that did would get murdered at the election.
Click to expand...
Agreed, it is a complete nonsense that no UK government is ever going to enter into. Starmer is being clear on this.
I just wish he had been as clear over the 'working people' issue, when he really means the 'working poor' (a phrase many politicians have/are afraid to use) who should have living wage, and his government will give them one, end of!
 
nickm said:
Try telling people who are using food banks that they need to cough up for those reasons.
Click to expand...
A country like the UK shouldn't have people using food banks, thats immoral in itself. They clearly wont be paying the bill but the British Crown, Government and Museums are well able to pick up the bill and bear far more responsibility so thats not a problem.
I dont expect you to attempt to make reparations, your country is run by selfish, exploitative shitbags. I reserve the right to say your country is run by shitbags and point out your perfectly capable of paying reparations and its perfectly reasonable to expect you to do so though.
 
caid said:
A country like the UK shouldn't have people using food banks, thats immoral in itself. They clearly wont be paying the bill but the British Crown, Government and Museums are well able to pick up the bill and bear far more responsibility so thats not a problem.
I dont expect you to attempt to make reparations, your country is run by selfish, exploitative shitbags. I reserve the right to say your country is run by shitbags and point out your perfectly capable of paying reparations and its perfectly reasonable to expect you to do so though.
Click to expand...

It says you live in Dublin so I presume you will be chipping in given it was created as a slave port?
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
It says you live in Dublin so I presume you will be chipping in given it was created as a slave port?
Click to expand...
Sure, suits me.
My willingness to chip in isn't even relevant. He said britain has no moral responsbility for historical crimes. Even if i dont like or support paying reparations i can recognise theres a moral responsibility towards it.
Its basically handling stolen goods. Its pretty black and white.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
It says you live in Dublin so I presume you will be chipping in given it was created as a slave port?
Click to expand...
The Irish raided Britain for slaves for centuries after the Romans left, and later the Vikings established Dublin as one of Europe's main slave-trading centres. St Patrick himself was a slave taken from what is now Wales to Ireland. The Romans occupied England partly as a source of slaves. The Scots and Picts also took slaves from England, and later Vikings from what is now Norway and Denmark carried more off. The Normans put a stop to all that but in the 17th century North Africans also took slaves from the English coastal towns.

When that lot have acknowledged their moral responsibility for historical crimes and paid up I'll consider whether I owe anything.
 
caid said:
Sure, suits me.
My willingness to chip in isn't even relevant. He said britain has no moral responsbility for historical crimes. Even if i dont like or support paying reparations i can recognise theres a moral responsibility towards it.
Its basically handling stolen goods. Its pretty black and white.
Click to expand...

Then we all handle stolen goods.

The other day I was reading about cuneiform writing and some of the detail we have of lives lived 4000 years plus in the past.

The price a slave girl then was 1500 grains of barley.

You can dwell on the reparations needed for the slave or the debt we owe for the invention of written history or maybe accept its kind of both for everyone.
 
Last edited:
caid said:
Sure, suits me.
My willingness to chip in isn't even relevant. He said britain has no moral responsbility for historical crimes. Even if i dont like or support paying reparations i can recognise theres a moral responsibility towards it.
Its basically handling stolen goods. Its pretty black and white.
Click to expand...
To be precise, I said this generation has no moral responsibility for the slave trade. The generations that did have culpability should have paid. Reparations should have been paid at the time, by those who were most responsible and by those whose fortunes could be most directly linked to the trade. That is how moral responsibility works,.IMO.

(Also I don't think Germany, for example, should pay reparations to Greece, similar reasons.)

All these attempts to make descendents atone for the crimes of their ancestors, just perpetuates grievance. I think it's wrong.
 
Last edited:
711 said:
The Irish raided Britain for slaves for centuries after the Romans left, and later the Vikings established Dublin as one of Europe's main slave-trading centres. St Patrick himself was a slave taken from what is now Wales to Ireland. The Romans occupied England partly as a source of slaves. The Scots and Picts also took slaves from England, and later Vikings from what is now Norway and Denmark carried more off. The Normans put a stop to all that but in the 17th century North Africans also took slaves from the English coastal towns.

When that lot have acknowledged their moral responsibility for historical crimes and paid up I'll consider whether I owe anything.
Click to expand...

The Welsh moved inland up the mountains away from the coast because it wasn't worth settling anywhere near the coast. Some of the Cornish moved across the Channel to Brittany which is why its called Brittany.
 
711 said:
The Irish raided Britain for slaves for centuries after the Romans left, and later the Vikings established Dublin as one of Europe's main slave-trading centres. St Patrick himself was a slave taken from what is now Wales to Ireland. The Romans occupied England partly as a source of slaves. The Scots and Picts also took slaves from England, and later Vikings from what is now Norway and Denmark carried more off. The Normans put a stop to all that but in the 17th century North Africans also took slaves from the English coastal towns.

When that lot have acknowledged their moral responsibility for historical crimes and paid up I'll consider whether I owe anything.
Click to expand...
I'd say most have. The Romans, Picts, Celts and Vikings dont really exist anymore. I suppose the British government could shuffle some resources around from Scotland if they can find someone to compensate. This is a bit redundant anyway, whataboutism.
The line is so much clearer with the British Government and Crown and the history is much more recent. They were colonies and under the authority and responsibility of still existing power structures.
 
nickm said:
To be precise, I said this generation has no moral responsibility for the slave trade. The generations that did have culpability should have paid. Reparations should have been paid at the time, by those who were most responsible and by those whose fortunes could be most directly linked to the trade. That is how moral responsibility works,.IMO.

(Also I don't think Germany, for example, should pay reparations to Greece, similar reasons.)

All these attempts to make descendents atone for the crimes of their ancestors, just perpetuates grievance. I think it's wrong.
Click to expand...
Yeah but they didn't. And they didn't because they knew they could make that argument a few years later. Its kind of bad faith. Your precise statement is much fairer and i dont think i'd argue with that.
I think theres room for trying to atone for past crimes, that you didn't commit but do benefit from. I accept its a high bar for moral responsibility.
 
nickm said:
To be precise, I said this generation has no moral responsibility for the slave trade. The generations that did have culpability should have paid. Reparations should have been paid at the time, by those who were most responsible and by those whose fortunes could be most directly linked to the trade. That is how moral responsibility works,.IMO.

(Also I don't think Germany, for example, should pay reparations to Greece, similar reasons.)

All these attempts to make descendents atone for the crimes of their ancestors, just perpetuates grievance. I think it's wrong.
Click to expand...

I would agree with this. Its long since time to leave the past in the past. Wars and other injustices have existed since the dawn of time - it seems very arbitrary to decide that the acts of the British Empire are precisely when we should start and stop holding nations to account.

Slavery was a global issue, not restricted to the British Empire, and one that we have thankfully now left in the past and hopefully learned from, some 200 years ago. The idea of reparations is frankly a nonsense.
 
caid said:
I'd say most have. The Romans, Picts, Celts and Vikings dont really exist anymore. I suppose the British government could shuffle some resources around from Scotland if they can find someone to compensate. This is a bit redundant anyway, whataboutism.
The line is so much clearer with the British Government and Crown and the history is much more recent. They were colonies and under the authority and responsibility of still existing power structures.
Click to expand...
What is considered recent and who gets to choose is indeed at the heart of it. I guess everyone wants to be the one that chooses what is recent and what is not but for me when many generations have passed, with their wars and population movements and change and inventions I'd class that as not.

Picking one situation then calling everything else whataboutism doesn't work by the way.
 
711 said:
What is considered recent and who gets to choose is indeed at the heart of it. I guess everyone wants to be the one that chooses what is recent and what is not but for me when many generations have passed, with their wars and population movements and change and inventions I'd class that as not.

Picking one situation then calling everything else whataboutism doesn't work by the way.
Click to expand...
How about still existing as a cut off point?
Its redundant and whataboutism because i clearly, obviously object to the picts practicising the slave trade and If some line between beneficiary and victim could be traced to today then i'd support attempts to compensate as with any other comparable example. As with other cases of whataboutism.
 
caid said:
How about still existing as a cut off point?
Its redundant and whataboutism because i clearly, obviously object to the picts practicising the slave trade and If some line between beneficiary and victim could be traced to today then i'd support attempts to compensate as with any other comparable example. As with other cases of whataboutism.
Click to expand...
The people responsible are not still existing, they're dead, and their children and children's children, etc, all dead. The fact some institutions haven't changed their name or location since is irrelevant, the people they are responsible for today are totally different, from different parts of Britain and the world. You can't establish some line between beneficiary and victim in the first place. I suspect given my ancestry I'm more victim than beneficiary but I can't demonstrate that, any more than you can demonstrate the opposite, or I could about you.
 
711 said:
The people responsible are not still existing, they're dead, and their children and children's children, etc, all dead. The fact some institutions haven't changed their name or location since is irrelevant, the people they are responsible for today are totally different, from different parts of Britain and the world. You can't establish some line between beneficiary and victim in the first place. I suspect given my ancestry I'm more victim than beneficiary but I can't demonstrate that, any more than you can demonstrate the opposite, or I could about you.
Click to expand...
Then its pretty irrelevant isn't it. You cant compensate for a crime that cant be defined to a victim that doesn't exist. Arguments of morality aren't bound by practicality though and if it was possible to demonstrate the above then i dont think theres any strong arguments against.
I mean if you dont think its possible to establish a link then why not just humour it and let them hit a brick wall trying to demonstrate it.
 
711 said:
The people responsible are not still existing, they're dead, and their children and children's children, etc, all dead. The fact some institutions haven't changed their name or location since is irrelevant, the people they are responsible for today are totally different, from different parts of Britain and the world. You can't establish some line between beneficiary and victim in the first place. I suspect given my ancestry I'm more victim than beneficiary but I can't demonstrate that, any more than you can demonstrate the opposite, or I could about you.
Click to expand...

The state was benefiting, and the state would be repaying. Not you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.