Go woke talk tulip

[Whorty]

Come on peeps ... I thought we agreed that anyone who gets their truth from the wail is Ill educated, easily triggered, xenophobic and best ignored?

[TheDude]

I heard them discussing yesterday on a politics show. To say it doesn't represent historic links to slavery is simply implausible, Manchester was heavily involved and much of its wealth comes from that.

This doesn't mean the football club condones or was involved in slavery of course. It's not woke to be aware of such things anymore than it is for a football club with a golliwog as a mascot or a US team called "Indians" or "Savages" to be aware. Doesn't mean you have to change anything necessarily but if a company finds it has historic links or benefit from slavery, racism, genocide, whatever they should acknowledge that as part of their history.

Everyone in the UK today undoubtedly benefits in some small way from slavery just by living here.

I don't feel any personal responsibility - my ancestors were doing tulip jobs in the UK not creaming off vast profits from plantations and spending it on huge country estates.

Instead we should be going after the families and companies whose wealth was derived from slavery and has been passed through the generations.

Nobody blames Germans as a whole for Nazism - instead those who were involved and/or benefited are held to account.

[SueEllen]

Instead we should be going after the families and companies whose wealth was derived from slavery and has been passed through the generations.

Like the King you mean?

[northernladuk]

No it doesn't. They found a ship for a logo and then wanted to assign meaning to the 3 masts. If there was only one or 5 rivers the ship wouldn't have 1 or 5 masts

That's a pretty good point. It would have been three of something else if they hadn't had three rivers.

[TheDude]

Like the King you mean?

Why not?

[d000hg]

Everyone in the UK today undoubtedly benefits in some small way from slavery just by living here.

I don't feel any personal responsibility - my ancestors were doing tulip jobs in the UK not creaming off vast profits from plantations and spending it on huge country estates.

Instead we should be going after the families and companies whose wealth was derived from slavery and has been passed through the generations.

Nobody blames Germans as a whole for Nazism - instead those who were involved and/or benefited are held to account.

Agree but you don't have any German clubs with logos including swastikas, and if you were to inherit a family fortune based on slaving roots I imagine you'd have some sort of moral twinge what to do about it.

[SueEllen]

Agree but you don't have any German clubs with logos including swastikas, and if you were to inherit a family fortune based on slaving roots I imagine you'd have some sort of moral twinge what to do about it.

Only if you can get more publicity from it - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65125332

[vetran]

Everyone in the UK today undoubtedly benefits in some small way from slavery just by living here.

I don't feel any personal responsibility - my ancestors were doing tulip jobs in the UK not creaming off vast profits from plantations and spending it on huge country estates.

Instead we should be going after the families and companies whose wealth was derived from slavery and has been passed through the generations.

Nobody blames Germans as a whole for Nazism - instead those who were involved and/or benefited are held to account.

If you want to suggest that we look at benefit then everyone left in Africa has undoubtedly benefited in some way from selling slaves. Considering they were doing it as standard for a number of millennia before the British even arrived.

The Egyptians & Arabs were buying African slaves before Christ or BCE as they say and killing them in massive quantities on the sub Saharan route. I see no condemnation of them or demands for reparations. I suspect they would just laugh and say "you sold them to us".

The Portuguese were involved centuries before the British, the Vatican granted them exclusive rights to African Slavery in the 15th century. That is not mentioned much.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...9dd_story.html

For over 200 years, powerful kings in what is now the country of Benin captured and sold slaves to Portuguese, French and British merchants. The slaves were usually men, women and children from rival tribes — gagged and jammed into boats bound for Brazil, Haiti and the United States.

Benin by the way was the first nation to actually apologise for selling their brothers. 9/10 slaves in the US were purchased by Europeans not captured by Europeans.

https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/di...tID=2&psid=445

While Europeans did engage in some slave raiding, the majority of people who were transported to the Americas were enslaved by other Africans. It is important to understand that Europeans were incapable, on their own, of kidnapping 20 million Africans. Indeed, the system became so institutionalized that Europeans had little contact with the actual process of enslavement.

Most people in the UK did not benefit directly from slavery, approximately 10,000 African slaves arrived here. The colonies and the new worlds did use slaves but they started as Irish exports and were replaced by machines during the industrial revolution.

The reality is we (the British) were involved for 300 years , realised it was immoral and spent a year's GDP and countless lives banning it. In reality our conscience is fairly clear compared to the Vikings, Romans , Greeks, Egyptians, Arabs and the Africans themselves.

https://www.dw.com/en/east-africas-f...ade/a-50126759

"Initially, the Arab Muslims in Eastern and Central Europe took white slaves to sell them to Arabia," Senegalese author Tidiane N'Diaye told DW in an interview. "But the growing military power of Europe put an end to Islamic expansion and now that there was a shortage of slaves, Arab Muslims were looking massively to black Africa."

For Abdulazizi Lodhi, Emeritus Professor of Swahili and African Linguistics at the University of Uppsala in Sweden, slavery was part of different African cultures "When it came to exports, tribal Africans themselves were the main actors. In many African societies there were no prisons, so people who were captured were sold."

Yes a few brits made vast sums but as you say most were not to have a country house. The big gains were because of the triangular trade i.e. Britain trading with America and also Africa, slavery was it seems just incidental. If it had been as key as suggested then the Gentry would have not have permitted its abolition. Combined with trade we also made a lot of money out of the industrial revolution which was at the same time, do we count that?

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journ...B3EEFCA8F66C55


Strange I blame the Germans for voting in Hitler and not fighting him, don't you? It became clear from testimony that much of the population understood the 'Final Solution' and complied. Just as the Marquis blamed the Vichy government for its atrocities and many blame the Dutch SS for their following Hitler.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vichy_France

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catego...h_Nazi_Germany

[vetran]

No it doesn't. They found a ship for a logo and then wanted to assign meaning to the 3 masts. If there was only one or 5 rivers the ship wouldn't have 1 or 5 masts

source?

Most sail ships of the period had 3 masts. fore, main and mizen.

https://www.globalsecurity.org/milit...sail-masts.htm

They may have realised link to the number of rivers afterwards.