So it’s not about slavery, is it?
Caribbean nations are set to demand that Britain make reparations for indentured labour in addition to slavery, in a major expansion of the campaign to address colonialism.
Countries that have pushed for payments on slavery are now planning to seek reparative justice surrounding the 500,000 indentured workers shipped from India to work on sugar plantations after African slaves were freed.
It’s about having had the temerity to leave our isles and go to other places. We should all have stayed home, obviously.
Where were all the former slaves working , then ?
There are plenty of Cornish and Irishmens’ families that could also claim, in that case.
Ooga booga, me want free money.
It doesn’t really matter what the demands are, as long as the response is: ‘fuck off.’
Oh good!! Now we Aussies can have a go at you too!!
“You know that stupid idea about indentured labourers that I said would never work? Well, dust it off, because the word is that they’re going to get a new Labour government with a brother as Foreign Secretary…”
Just a minute, here (brushes off 50-year-old law school notes) . . . ah, yes, here we are. An indenture is a contract, with considerations specified. Is there a suggestion that such contracts were not performed as specified? If there is not, then what is the basis for the claim?
And then perhaps someone can explain to me on what basis Caribbean nations can now claim reparations in respect of the citizens of other nations, who freely came to the lands which they now govern, but which they did not govern then, presumably performed labour in accordance with a contract freely entered into, and were presumably free to leave, stay or do anything else lawful once the contract was fulfilled? What’s the injury here? To anyone?
And – just for S&G – will this fanciful claim for reparations also apply in respect of the multiple thousands of young people who came to these Caribbean islands as indentured servants from Britain – principally, as apprentices in various trades and as domestic servants? Their indentures are identical (in law) as those of the plantation workers.
The folks who run those Caribbean islands might want to think twice about driving a coach and horses through 500 years of contract law, given the economic basis of many of their nations today. I’m just sayin’ . . . .
llater,
llamas
Reparations: taking money from people who are not guilty and giving to people who have not suffered.
The moral rights & wrongs, impact on contract law or the darkies being chancers are irrelevant in all of this. What matters is whether someone with white guilt/privilege gets near to the pot of taxpayers money so they can give it away to assuage their guilt irrespective of whether the majority want them to or not.
Labour are coming and the taxpayers can be squeezed for more cash to spunk on worthless crap.
Undeniable, but which is worse?
a) They give it all to a bunch of foreign chancers in foreign; or
b) They bring over a load of illiterate foreign goatfuckers and spend it all making sure they feel at home
Given that it’s going to be a labour government, and our cash will be firehosed at anything except that which the British wish, I’d pick a) any time.
My great-great-grandmother was an indentured servant. It’s just what you did as a 16-year-old back then. GIMMIE COMPENSATION!!!!!!
Interesting demo coming up on Sunday at Cirencester Park Estate.
Private park, previously free to enter much of the grounds, is now going to charge and the Right To Roam campaign aren’t happy and aren’t going to let it wash.
They claim the Estate was bought in the 1690s by a Bathurst chappie, deputy governor or something in the Royal African Company that traded 100k slaves.
Would a job at that level really have paid enough money after expenses to get you a big enough pile to buy and then develop your own Estate?
Or was it more likely the other way round – where well connected people with already big piles from other sources got the director level jobs in big trading companies, so the association is backwards and he might have been buying that Estate whatever field he went into so long as he wasn’t a waster.
And will the Caribbean Countries be paying reparations/compensation to the descendants – mostly resident in South America – whose islands they now own. None of the African descendants are ab orange gibe, have no historic, ancestral claim to the islands.
Their islands were occupied by indigenous peoples who either died resisting colonisers, died of disease or as slaves, or fled to the mainland. And it wasn’t the British who originally took most of the islands.
So please can the original inhabitants’ descendants have their islands back.
It never was about slavery as such. Or else we would have been demanding enormous amounts from all of the Muslim countries for many more slaves over a much longer period of time.
No, it was always about anti-West (especially anti-American) feeling.
Comments are closed.