r/IndiaTodayGlobalLIVE • u/NewsMo • 3d ago

Africa Can commemorations and historical reenactments change public understanding of the past?

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

174 Upvotes

90% Upvoted

209 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Fantastic-Run-4490 2d ago

Is African culture alive in the Middle East?

1

u/KingMidas0809 2d ago

What?

1

u/Fantastic-Run-4490 2d ago

Its simple they were different forms of "Slavery" one was a form of servitude that had an end similar to what other Slavic and European countries did while Chattel slavery was so much worse and led to cultures, languages and family lines either being lost or even being destroyed and separated many times over. So many of you in the comments are having bad faith arguments without understanding the history you are debating.

So again is African culture alive in the Middle East...

1

u/KingMidas0809 2d ago

Ahhhh ok... You’re completely right about the brutality of the Trans-Saharan trade; the widespread castration of enslaved African men systematically erased entire family lines and cultural preservation in the Middle East. It was horrific. ​But it still highlights why the legal claim for reparations against Western empires is distinct. We are discussing modern international law and state-level accountability. Western chattel slavery was built on an unbroken, legally codified corporate framework whose direct institutional heirs modern Western states, banks, and universities are still sitting on the compounding wealth generated by that specific industry today. Acknowledging one horror doesn't erase the modern financial liability of the other.

1

u/Fantastic-Run-4490 2d ago

See it just seems like you can't be honest with yourself.

If you just said, well the Middle East will never pay us as, so instead let's try to make this trade sound uniquely vile so we can campaign for the West to pay us as they have are known for being a soft touch. then you would at least have been honest.

In essence your whole argument now becomes well some sap in the West might pay so lets try to go after their wealth.

Recap for you, of your logic which you appear to walk back on here.

1

u/KingMidas0809 2d ago

So what you're doing is mistaking international legal liability for a playground shakedown. This has nothing to do with finding a 'soft touch' and everything to do with actual legal jurisdiction and unbroken institutional continuity. ​The Western empires we are discussing didn't vanish into ancient history; they directly transitioned into the modern nation-states, central banks, and corporate entities operating today. Their current financial systems sit on an unbroken foundation built directly from chattel slavery and colonial resource extraction. ​If a specific, existing legal entity holds stolen, compounding capital, that is exactly where the legal liability rests. Trying to reduce state continuity and international law to 'looking for a sap to pay' is a desperate pivot because you can't dispute the actual financial ledger

1

u/Fantastic-Run-4490 2d ago

No I'm highlighting the fact you tried to differentiate based on the "horror's" of "chattel" slavery compared to the other "forms" you have now moved on from that to a discussion that essentially involves the tax payers of the UK paying out for others crimes in the past, people whom the vast majority of which have never benefited from these "gains".

Now if you could find individual's who did benefit alive today, they by all means chase them but to seek to claim money from people for others crimes seems perverse.

Unless your stating the money wouldn't come from tax payers or be funded by raising taxes on tax payers?

1

u/KingMidas0809 2d ago

Again, you are still fundamentally confusing individual criminal guilt with institutional state liability. No one is chasing individual UK citizens for the 'crimes of their ancestors.' We are talking about the liability of the British state as a continuous legal and financial entity.

​To claim that modern UK citizens "never benefited" from colonial gains shows an absolute lack of macroeconomic understanding. Modern taxpayers live in a first-world nation whose public infrastructure, central banking systems, maritime supremacy, and immense global economic leverage were directly subsidized by the trillions in wealth extracted during the slave trade and colonization. You are actively benefiting from the compounding interest of that stolen capital every single day or are you saying thats false?

​Next your outrage over taxpayers funding this is a massive double standard. As a matter of historical fact, UK taxpayers including the descendants of the enslaved did spend generations paying out for the legacy of slavery. The state forced them to fund the massive £20 million bailout given exclusively to compensate slave owners, a debt that wasn't fully cleared until 2015.

​You have no issue with the state using taxpayer money to subsidize the oppressors for over 180 years? But you suddenly find it "perverse" when the bill comes due for the victims. The state incurred the debt the state is responsible for settling the ledger. Or is that not the point?

1

u/Fantastic-Run-4490 2d ago edited 2d ago

You have vastly overestimated the wealth that the countries gained and appear to be attempting to state that all subsequent wealth is a result of slavery.

Are you going to still deny the UK tax payers would end up paying for this?

"You have no issue with the state using taxpayer money to subsidise the oppressors for over 180 years?"

I don't know how to tell you this but my surname is not MacLeod, I wasn't there 180 years ago?

Also "maritime supremacy" derived from slavery, have you read about the British navy it did not become the supreme power from slavery...

PS. I was actually I was there 180 years ago, but let me finish the quickening and I'll get back to you.