Simple question really, if, for some reason, the governments of europe and amerikkka decided to apologize for the Transatlantic Slave Trade and work on offering reparations to those who suffered from it based on work related pay would you accept it?

This isn't to do with how it would be issued, something that couldn't be done individually but would have to be done through a body of some kind, point is would you accept their apology and resulting compensation or would more a point be made by not accepting?

Peace
B.L

My answer to the question of reparations is no.

there is no amount of money that can repair such a devastation. The only reparation I see is to have them suffer the same ordeal but let them suffer doubly.

For me you can't have one without the other, if there is no grounding for what would be done with it then the question of would you accept it is redundant.

Just my time on this forum has made me realise we aint defending anything other than how we look and we scapegoat the cultures of the world in some blind mans bluff attempt to fool anybody that we are worthy of anything.

This also explains why we confuse African militancy with begging for human rights which is probably why reparations will never be an option because evidence suggests it would be the quickest route to our self destruction....if you have any sense you wouldn't take it and opt instead to watch those who do and see how babylonians fall.

If you accept you are a slave you forfeit any rights to reparations, your lack of cultural respect dictates this. If they ever dished it out it should be under a banner Africans only. No doubt there'll be a plethora of money monkey hypocrites tracing their African roots as far back to a single blade of grass on the motherland.

reparations my ares. If it's about money/recompense (and not lost pride, culture and values) then it's already being dished out, by the benefit system.

It's a no brainer really, if reparations means returning back to Africa I guess it's a big fat beached-whale NO all round....I'll take my chances in the west LOL.

i would not give reparatipons to a dog because it is basically a different species that doesn't understand humans. it will not be bothered by what it doesn't understand. it will function properly in the system, give its best at all times, unafected by the past and what it says of the dog in the present.

i voted yes in the poll, on the side of those who see their future in the west, because i think it is just human to want redress for an issue as grand as this. reparations for Jews were based entirely on whether culpability could be proven. remember here that Jews were legal citizens in the countries of residence, meaning all that happened to them later was criminal, and in bringing redress to the issue through reparations, this fact was acknowledged. Africans entered the west without any rights whatsoever, meaning the situation is even worse than it was for the Jews. an entire culture, not just some key nazis, can be held accountable for a crime as heinous as this.

can those who benefited from the free labour of our ancestors not be traced through time, the monies tracked into the present? are there people out there who are better off as a result of this dark past? are there companies out there that are what they are as a result of slavery?

the simple answer to all those questions is yes, and it boggles me as to how whites can take blacks for full humans when the mere fact and impact of a past when a people's (humankind's) rights were trampled upon can be an issue worth burying in the sand when culpability and connection can easily be traced right into the present. make no mistake about this, the situation is in no way similar to the case of a great grandfather who was a criminal, but died 200 years ago and someone wants the descendants to compesate the victim's descendants. this is about bringing redress in a system wide problem where descendants have sat on the produce and denied the fact, while keeping their foot firmly on the heads of the produce creators who have suffered and are somewhat negatively affected as a result. this is about acknowledging the humanity of blacks, that their lives, as indeed rights, are worth the same consideration as that of whites.

only when the western system moves in the direction of offering to blacks what is rightly owed them shall it be clear that they wish to part with this past, otherwise the same that happened to those people back in the day is still in effect to this day, though not clearly expressed for the simple reason the other side has concluded (they are acting that way) that blacks have subhuman intellects and cannot be affected by these things..

i am in no position to talk about rights right now as i have been forced into a position where my actions are hard to defend, but ikeep my head up knowing time will prove me right. what is happening to a lot of Africans who are speaking out is related to this very lack or reluctance by the system to place us on equal footing with everybody else in the system, and it will continue to be the case until Africans grasp the full import of the problem and go for an either or approach to the issue.

I don't really know what to think about this because a lot of black people in the UK came here on their own free will i presume that they would be excluded? A lot of those who may have suffered are also dead.

It might be something that could better offered in some other countries like America or Brazil.

What do you think?


If they were going to do this in the UK they probably would be doing it to give us money to clear of and not really money because we suffered because of the slave trade.

Many of Those blacks Living in the UK are a direct result of Britains Involvement in the Slave trade. Many of the blacks Living in the UK are from the carribean, which was a major stop on the trans atlantic slave trade. The uK as well as france portugal, spain and other european nations played a vital role in the death destruction of black people throughout the world. They were the chief architects of the Slave trade. Who do think islands such as Trinidad, jamaica, Barbados etc got their independence from. yes that's right the good old UK (Their former slave master) So yes England is held accountable and will pay for her attrocities. Don't let England off the hook like it some grand high authority that is squeaky clean.
No No. Britain is the Axis of Evil. America is an extension of the British Empire

Look at South Africa. That has Britains hands written all over it. the Europeans got their vast amount of wealth that they have today off the backs of Black people during slavery and after slavery.

Chosen One i know all about the slave trade but the majority of Caribbean people i think now consider the Caribbean as their home and not really Africa. Maybe there are a very small number of Caribbean’s that might not see it that way though.

The fact is though that the majority of black people today are living in the UK as a result of immigration that was at its height in the 1950's-1960's.

The whole issue of independence is a slightly different one.

Can you imagine, ne$$ress standing in the reparation queue shining off her teeth with her Asian hair sewn into her head...just wouldn't look right, a bit like a 50k car parked outside a council flat

I think there should be a returnee system for any slave descendant who has gone back home to Africa, would like to or intends to. This would be a surefire way to find those who really do love it down a babylon

Difference in the reason why people wouldn't accept... wouldn't our continental brothers and sisters deserve recognition also?

Not much we could do with it all as there would be no where to put it, the A.Americans would be stuck reinvesting it in America for example, making every body rich would turn things on its head not so much because of the mindset needed to handle it but because our countries are capitalist societies we'd need a whole new structure to handle the change, would be interesting to know how the Jews handled their case. Not even sure money can be given as its all national debt anyway, would have to be in assets.

Wouldn't accept it on a moral basis, it would have to involve certain clauses.

Obama says he opposes slavery reparations, apology
By CHRISTOPHER WILLS, Associated Press Writer

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama opposes offering reparations to the descendants of slaves, putting him at odds with some black groups and leaders.

The man with a serious chance to become the nation's first black president argues that government should instead combat the legacy of slavery by improving schools, health care and the economy for all.

"I have said in the past — and I'll repeat again — that the best reparations we can provide are good schools in the inner city and jobs for people who are unemployed," the Illinois Democrat said recently.

Some two dozen members of Congress are co-sponsors of legislation to create a commission that would study reparations — that is, payments and programs to make up for the damage done by slavery.

The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People supports the legislation, too. Cities around the country, including Obama's home of Chicago, have endorsed the idea, and so has a major union, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.

Obama has worked to be seen as someone who will bring people together, not divide them into various interest groups with checklists of demands. Supporting reparations could undermine that image and make him appear to be pandering to black voters.

"Let's not be naive. Sen. Obama is running for president of the United States, and so he is in a constant battle to save his political life," said Kibibi Tyehimba, co-chair of the National Coalition of Blacks for Reparations in America. "In light of the demographics of this country, I don't think it's realistic to expect him to do anything other than what he's done."

But this is not a position Obama adopted just for the presidential campaign. He voiced the same concerns about reparations during his successful run for the Senate in 2004.

There's enough flexibility in the term "reparations" that Obama can oppose them and still have plenty of common ground with supporters.

The NAACP says reparations could take the form of government programs to help struggling people of all races. Efforts to improve schools in the inner city could also aid students in the mountains of West Virginia, said Hilary Shelton, director of the NAACP's Washington bureau.

"The solution could be broad and sweeping," Shelton said.

The National Urban League — a group Obama is to address Saturday — avoids the word "reparations" as too vague and highly charged. But the group advocates government action to close the gaps between white America and black America.

Urban League President Marc Morial said he expects his members to press Obama on how he intends to close those gaps and what action he would take in the first 100 days of his presidency.

"What steps should we take as a nation to alleviate the effects of racial exclusion and racial discrimination?" Morial asked.

The House voted this week to apologize for slavery. The resolution, which was approved on a voice vote, does not mention reparations, but past opponents have argued that an apology would increase pressure for concrete action.

Obama says an apology would be appropriate but not particularly helpful in improving the lives of black Americans. Reparations could also be a distraction, he said.

In a 2004 questionnaire, he told the NAACP, "I fear that reparations would be an excuse for some to say, 'We've paid our debt,' and to avoid the much harder work."

Taking questions Sunday at a conference of minority journalists, Obama said he would be willing to talk to American Indian leaders about an apology for the nation's treatment of their people.

Pressed for his position on apologizing to blacks or offering reparations, Obama said he was more interested in taking action to help people struggling to get by. Because many of them are minorities, he said, that would help the same people who would stand to benefit from reparations.

"If we have a program, for example, of universal health care, that will disproportionately affect people of color, because they're disproportionately uninsured," Obama said. "If we've got an agenda that says every child in America should get — should be able to go to college, regardless of income, that will disproportionately affect people of color, because it's oftentimes our children who can't afford to go to college."

One reparations advocate, Vernellia Randall, a law professor at the University of Dayton, bluntly responded: "I think he's dead wrong."

She said aid to the poor in general won't close the gaps — poor blacks would still trail poor whites, and middle-class blacks would still lag behind middle-class whites. Instead, assistance must be aimed directly at the people facing the after-effects of slavery and Jim Crow laws, she said.

"People say he can't run and get elected if he says those kinds of things," Randall said. "I'm like, well does that mean we're really not ready for a black president?"

Obama says he opposes slavery reparations, apology - Yahoo! News