Bristol 'should apologise for slave trade'.

[STFC]

Surprised nobody has commented on this story yet as far as I can see:

Bristol should apologise for its role in the slave trade, a high-profile debate in the city has concluded.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/4760803.stm

What do people think of this? Is an apology a good thing, or a pointless exercise?

 

[fractionMan]

pointless. Anyway, how can a city apologise for anything?

 

[Sunspots]

I'll not be happy if Bristol City Council decides to apologise on behalf of the city, because by implication that'd include me, and I have nothing to apologise for.

A rich elite profited, not everybody. If there is to be an apology, let it come from them.

I'd rather the focus was on modern slavery, such as who makes the clothes we wear, etc. That's far more relevant, because that's happening now.

 

[zenie]

I'll not be happy if Bristol City Council decides to apologise on behalf of the city, because by implication that'd include me, and I have nothing to apologise for.

A rich elite profited, not everybody. If there is to be an apology, let it come from them.

I'd rather the focus was on modern slavery, such as who makes the clothes we wear, etc. That's far more relevant, because that's happening now.

*Applauds *

 

[Zaskar]

It is clearly a pointless and daft exercise. If 'Bristol' was a person who had maintained the slave trade and was alive today it would make some sense.

An apology formulated by a comitee if handwringers on behalf of a non existent imaginary 'person' doesnt seem like something that makes any sense.

Makes about as much sense as waking up angry cos one of your ancestors was a slave. Given that we are all related after 6 genrations back it seems mad.

What I do understand is the power and symbolism that the genocide of the slave trade has for people today, especially when reacism continues to blight society but I dont think the custard should be over egged or it just looks daft.

 

[Zaskar]

Just found this clip. I presume this is one of the main movers behind this fiasco. Looks like we are not done yet, appears we might be in for a slave tax too.

http://www.zaskarfilms.com/Films/Temp/slaveclip.wmv

 

[Donna Ferentes]

It is clearly a pointless and daft exercise.

Well, not "clearly" at any rate. Given that the effects of the slave trade are still felt today, there are many people who think it might be good if the past were properly and squarely faced up to rather than left alone.

 

[fractionMan]

What you going to be apologising for then donna?

 

[djbombscare]

I always thought apologies were so much better if you actually meant them.

As no one around today was around when the slaving that they are apolgising for was happening. I dont see how there can be any meaning behind it.

Just a kind of "that makes us feel better cos we've apologised so were good people now" And how many descendants of slaves will be wow that has made my life so much better now.

Nope its a shallow faceless non cost act to make some fucking official feel better and appease probably a load of white christian voters IMO

If they really want to apologise, why not pay the descendants of slaves, the wages that they would have earned if they had been paid. Plus the interest it would have accrued. The money could be claimed from the families that employed the slaves at the time.

This could keep a dept of local govt in work for fecking years.

 

[editor]

iven that the effects of the slave trade are still felt today, there are many people who think it might be good if the past were properly and squarely faced up to rather than left alone.

I want an apology from the English for invading Wales, then.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

Suits me. There must be a Plantagenet Society or something you could ask. Actually it could be the basis for an extremely amusing correspondence.

 

[Sunspots]

I want an apology from the English for invading Wales, then.

Exactly. Where will all these apologies end!??

I want an apology from the Anglo-Saxons, The Vikings, etc...

 

[Donna Ferentes]

The reason it's a serious issue is that there's the question of restitution: there's a certain amount political activity by people who believe that finanical compensation should be paid by the nations and peoples who benefitted from slavery to those who suffered from it (and continue to suffer from its consequences).

Personaly I don't know what I think about this but I do not think it appropriate to be dismissive of it: otherwise you're in the position of people saying well yes, this happened but it was a long time ago so we're not going to do anything about it. Said to people who, as I say, are still on the wrong end of the relations that slavery produced, and who have strong feelings about this, I think this is at best tactless and conceivably arrogant.

History matters, because its interpretation and its consequences matter.

 

[djbombscare]

Exactly. Where will all these apologies end!??

I want an apology from the Anglo-Saxons, The Vikings, etc...

I aint apolgising for fuck all. You can kiss my axe first.

Anyway we fought off the Romans for ya so a thank you wouldn't go amiss now would it.

Without us you'd all be riding mopeds and eating cornettos

 

[Sunspots]

I aint apolgising for fuck all. You can kiss my axe first.

Anyway we fought off the Romans for ya so a thank you wouldn't go amiss now would it.

Without us you'd all be riding mopeds and eating cornettos

It's like Asterix all over again!

(My only apology is to STFC, for derailing what was a serious thread. -Then again, it's in the Bristol & SW forum, where things do tend to get silly quite quickly... )

 

[djbombscare]

I'm not apolgising for that either

 

[munkeeunit]

The problem with politically correct apologies is that they are almost inariably insincere and empty. What does it mean to apolgise? what changes? How do black people benefit?

The additional concern is that when apologies are made they often are often worse than empty gestures, and in fact a smokescreen or apologetic foil for modern day abuses.

In another 200 years people will be clamouring for apologies for the brutal dehumanising defacto slavery of neo-liberal free market economics, and the crushinging inequalities thrown up by the cold breed of globalisation on offer.

Forget about the apologising for slavery past.

Challenge the economic slavery of the present.

 

[editor]

The reason it's a serious issue is that there's the question of restitution: there's a certain amount political activity by people who believe that finanical compensation should be paid by the nations and peoples who benefitted from slavery to those who suffered from it (and continue to suffer from its consequences).

So will you be advocating that all nations - including African nations - who indulged in slave trading (both black and white) start dishing out the apologies too?

And how far back in history should the 'need' for these apologies go?

1800?
1600?
2,000 years BC?

I'm not proud of some of Britain's past but the world was a totally difference place then and I'll be fucked if I'm going to apologise for anything that happened centuries before I was even born.

 

[editor]

Forget about the apologising for slavery past.
Challenge the economic slavery of the present.

Spot on.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

So will you be advocating that all nations - including African nations - who indulged in slave trading (both black and white) start dishing out the apologies too?

It certainly raises the question, doesn't it? And anybody who's acquainted with the question knows that these complications exist and have to be addressed. But I don't thin kwe can always deal with questions by saying "them too!".

And how far back in history should the 'need' for these apologies go?

As far as seems pertinent to the world we live in now.

I'm not proud of some of Britain's past but the world was a totally different place then

I think there are many African people - and peeople of African origin - who would dispute that. The balance of power now is in some very obvious ways a consequence of what hapened then.

and I'll be fucked if I'm going to apologise for anything that happened centuries before I was even born.

Nobody's asking you to. But people are asking that insitututions, collective bodies, do that, and that sems a reasonable request to make.

I do think it's wrong simply to say "fuck off" to people who are the contemporary victims of a deep historical injustice when they say it should be accounted and apologised for. It takes no account of people's position or people's feelings.

 

[munkeeunit]

And how far back in history should the 'need' for these apologies go?

Living memory seems reasonable, which applies to Ireland.

But apologies for the colonisation of Ireland which it is still (depending on your perspective) in part colonised, and for the stamping out of gaelic (which is something still just within living memory) wouldn't cut much ice with me, and would represent the apologetic foil I mentioned in relation to the abuses being carried out in Iraq for example.

The only thing the English (British?) seemed to have learnt is that to stamp out a language is an inefficient use of resources, and that's about it. Everything else remains much the same, if slightly altered.

 

[editor]

I do thin kit's wrong simply to say "fuuck off" to people who are the contemporary victims of a deep historical injustice when they say it should be accounted and apologised for. It takes no account of people's position or people's feelings.

As a Welshman, I could work up a fair head of steam about my country being victim to a deep historical injustice and start demanding apologies.

But seeing as it happened way before even my grandfather was born and the people responsible have long since turned to dust, I'd rather focus on the injustices happening now.

But if you think an empty, insincere apology coming from people who had absolutely zero to do with the crimes of the past is actually going to achieve anything, that's your call.

 

[Idaho]

And how far back in history should the 'need' for these apologies go?

As far as seems pertinent to the world we live in now.

That is beyond glib and well into the territory of meaningless. How can you ever determine an absolute historical pertinence? The fate of the beaker folk and the early celtic migrations from central europe is fundamentallly pertinent to the very make-up of the whole continent.

It would be hard to refute the pertinence of Culloden or the English Civil war, but how would we try and all agree who should apologise to whom about what? There were certainly plenty of crimes.

Fishing through history looking for wrongs, and trying to ascribe those wrongs to people who live now is not only pointless, but as an attempt at justice, entirely self-deafeating.

 

[Sunspots]

But people are asking that insitututions, collective bodies, do that, and that sems a reasonable request to make.

Yeah, but as I stated earlier: as a resident of Bristol, I don't want the City Council offering an apology on my behalf. I wasn't around at the time, and so have nothing to apologise for.

If there has to be an apology, I'd rather it came specifically from the organisations set up by the rich elite who profited. The same unelected organisations that continue to benefit now, by their wielding of unhealthy influence in the city today.

As I also said, and as Munkeeunit and editor have said too: let's concentrate instead on the issue of modern slavery.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

But if you think an empty, insincere apology coming from people who had absolutely zero to do with the crimes of the past is actually going to achieve anything, that's your call.

Personally, I don't have an clear opinion either way. On the one hand, I think it's a reasonable think to ask for, insofar as it represents something people feel strongly about and have every reason to feel strongly about. On the other hand, I'm aware of the potential emptiness of any apology (I can imagine, for instance, the current Prime Minister doing it very well indeed). My position is simply that's it's a serious issue, to be taken seriously and not dismissed without thought or tact.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

That is beyond glib and well into the territory of meaningless. How can you ever determine an absolute historical pertinence?

The fact that things cannot be determined absolutely is no reason not to try and do the best one can. It's a very common debating fallacy to suggest otherwise.

 

[gentlegreen]

This should provide plenty of fodder for the right wing press - "political correctness gone mad blah blah...."

My elderly neighbour used to trot the pointlessness of apologising as an excuse for his own racism.

.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

Yeah, but as I stated earlier: as a resident of Bristol, I don't want the City Council offering an apology on my behalf. I wasn't around at the time, and so have nothing to apologise for.

There's a position - not necessarily mine, but a not unreasonable one - which says that as a citizen of one of the countries which continues to benefit from the relationships slavery created, you too benefit from them and can't just disaossicate yourself from the past just because you were in no sense actually responsible.

 

[Idaho]

The fact that things cannot be determined absolutely is no reason not to try and do the best one can. It's a very common debating fallacy to suggest otherwise.

OK - say we move from an absolute standard to something more lax. Are we going to come up with anything other than a crude approximation of pertinent? Isn't that approximation going to be entirely subjective to the person or group making it?

 

[Idaho]

There's a position - not necessarily mine, but a not unreasonable one - which says that as a citizen of one of the countries which continues to benefit from the relationships slavery created

Surely this is an arguement to deal with continuing injustice and not dredge looking for people to apologise about things they didn't do?