Slave descendants sue Lloyds

[HS Thomas]

Ten Americans whose ancestors were slaves are suing Lloyds of London the world's oldest insurance firm for having under-written slaving ventures. Around ten million Africans were forcibly transported to the Americas during the 18th and 19th centuries and many of the slaving ships were insured by Lloyd's.
10 litigants who have used DNA techniques to link their ancestors to specific slave ships are demanding $1m each in compensation as well as $1 bn to set up a fund to trace their ancestry with the help of Edward Fagan the feared New York lawyer who extracted huge Nazi gold settlements from German and Swiss companies. If it is successful the case could lead to a flood of claims from the 30 million Americans descended from slaves.
A time for a call to "normalcy" as after every barbaric event in history ?

---

not revolution, but restoration; not agitation, but adjustment; not surgery, but serenity; not the dramatic, but the dispassionate; not experiment, but equipoise; not submergence in internationality, but sustainment in triumphant nationality.

---

Warren G. Harding calls for a "Return to Normalcy," Boston, MA, May 14, 1920
Or is it high time to get rid of that ancient institution Lloyds of London ?

---

The world needs to be reminded that all human ills are not curable by legislation, and that quantity of statutory enactment and excess of government offer no substitute for quality of citizenship.
The problems of maintained civilization are not to be solved by a transfer of responsibility from citizenship to government, and no eminent page in history was ever drafted by the standards of mediocrity. More, no government is worthy of the name which is directed by influence on the one hand, or moved by intimidation on the other.

---

[ April 03, 2004: Message edited by: HS Thomas ]

[Jeroen Wenting]

One word: GREED.
Let's all sue the Vatican for failing to crush the Muslims during the crusades which is what ultimately led to Muslim fundamentalists not liking the West.
Let's sue Spain for sending Columbus on a mission which led to the discovery of America without which we'd never have had the Great Satan, the US of A.

[Tony Alicea]

From the This must be one of the weirdest posts that you ever read! Dept.
You know...
I am against, very strongly, about slavery and will always be.
So without loosing sight of that perspective, an African-American friend of mine a couple of years ago told me in a very private conversation, that the cause of him doing so well as a black man in this our country (the USA) was a direct consequence of American slavery in the past.
In short he recognized that slavery was hell for the first and maybe second generation of black africans brought here against their will to work for free.
He told me that if it was not for slavery, the great majority of people of his race would still be in Africa with all the disadvantages that that entails.
He was blunt enough to say to me that slavery was hell to the original people brought from Africa, but that it was a blessing to the descendants that are now driving, to use him an example, a better car (Mercedes) than I do (for example).
The only thing he didn't say was "thank you America for slavery"
I was so taken aback by his comments that I went home and meditated upon that. Luckily it was a Saturday.
After that, I knew that I understood what he said.

[HS Thomas]

Isn't that a bit like saying "Thank God for the World Wars" otherwise long haul flight travel may never have been possible.

[Axel Janssen]

I am very against slavery, too.
But if those people win, I sue italian state, because the city I am from was occupied in year 30 a.C. (or so) by Romans and I am sure those italian rats obliged my ancestors to do some forced labor.
[ April 03, 2004: Message edited by: Axel Janssen ]

[Alan Labout]

Originally posted by Tony Alicea:
From the This must be one of the weirdest posts that you ever read! Dept.

This is not weird, it is repulsive. By that same logic Israeli Jews should be erecting monuments to Hitler. ("Of course Adolf did cause a bit of inconvenience for a few generations of European jews...but hey, without him we wouldn't have our own sovereign state!") Your friend needs to spend less time admiring his Mercedes and more time studying the history of his people.

Alan
[ April 03, 2004: Message edited by: Alan Labout ]

[HS Thomas]

It would start a whole domino-effect of suings. Morroccons used to capture slaves from a part of Ireland that was mostly settled by people of English descent. Well-to-do landlords set aside a tithe for ransom-money to help pay ransoms to release captives. Very few actually made it back home. The numbers captured were apparantly much larger than African slaves.
Arabia was well known for it's slave trade and possibly this is where the West learnt the practice on a large scale. Slaves of Arabs were,perhaps, treated better.
[ April 04, 2004: Message edited by: HS Thomas ]

[Jeroen Wenting]

Little publicised is the fact that most people transported as slaves to the Americas from Africa were NOT the victims of ruthless slave traders rounding up entire villages or innocent African people in cattle drives but rather were sold to those slave traders by African tribal leaders.
The origin of these people was probably varried. Part would have been war booty and prisoners of war (those were typically enslaved in large parts of the world as late as WW2 and beyond, remember the Japanese and Germans using prisoners of war as slave labour?), part may have been the greed of the tribal elders causing them to sell their own people.
While there may have been incidents of slave traders going out hunting for wares, most of the time they didn't have to.
They were intermediaries in an economic venture that was thousands of years old and quite accepted by most everyone at the time.
Lloyds did nothing wrong, either legally or morally, in insuring the ships in the setting of the age.

[Steve Wink]

Originally posted by Axel Janssen:
I am very against slavery, too.
But if those people win, I sue italian state, because the city I am from was occupied in year 30 a.C. (or so) by Romans and I am sure those italian rats obliged my ancestors to do some forced labor.
[ April 03, 2004: Message edited by: Axel Janssen ]

Ah, but they did give you better sanitation and medicine and education and irrigation and public health and roads and a freshwater system and baths and public order. But apart from that...
[ April 05, 2004: Message edited by: Steve Wink ]

[Jeroen Wenting]

Originally posted by Steve Wink:

Ah, but they did give you better sanitation and medicine and education and irrigation and public health and roads and a freshwater system and baths and public order.

yes, and that sanitation and medicine led to lower mortality rates so we're now stuck with a huge number (and ever growing) of unproductive elderly people causing massive economic disruption...
Who's going to pay for it all I ask you?

[Jeff Langr]

I'm of Slavic descent; the word "slave" comes from my ancestors, who have been enslaved and abused throughout time. Hitler wanted us to serve the Third Reich as a permanent slave class. I figure the EU owes me some money (maybe I'll get $600+ million like the EU wants from Microsoft). And if I hear one more joke about a "cancelled Czech," I'm suing.
Shouldn't we be more concerned about eradicating the slavery that exists today in Africa and other places? Instead of demanding money for themselves, perhaps those suing Lloyds might further their cause by asking that Lloyds donate money to the cause of stopping modern slavery.
-Jeff-

[Paul Stevens]

Originally posted by Jeroen Wenting:

yes, and that sanitation and medicine led to lower mortality rates so we're now stuck with a huge number (and ever growing) of unproductive elderly people causing massive economic disruption...
Who's going to pay for it all I ask you?

That was from Monty Python Life of Brian in case you didn't know.

[Jeroen Wenting]

Originally posted by Paul Stevens:

That was from Monty Python Life of Brian in case you didn't know.

thought I recognised it. Still relevant of course...

[Paul Stevens]

Originally posted by Jeroen Wenting:

thought I recognised it. Still relevant of course...

Didn't want you to get into an "arguement" over it.

[HS Thomas]

No argument : Life of Brian was the best Monty Python.
Whether it was thought to be controversial depended on how much guilt was carried.
Guilt : Definition of guilt
The Christian idea of guilt involves three elements: responsibility (Greek aitia, "cause," depending upon a man's real freedom), blameworthiness (Latin reatus culpae, depending upon a man's knowledge and purpose) and the obligation to make good through punishment or compensation (Latin reatus poenae; compare Greek opheilema, "debt," Matthew 6:12).
Christian values teach the Hebrew sense of guilt or shame in a fashionable way while major other views are Buddhist and Muslim ethics, and much more 'neutral' in a knowledge economy.
Interesting page in anotherwise confusing site.
[ April 06, 2004: Message edited by: HS Thomas ]

[Joe King]

One interesting issue this throws up is - can a person/entity be deemed guilty for an act that is illegal now, but not at the time when the act was done?
In the case of Lloyds, their actions were perfectly legal at the time, so one argument is that they cannot be punished for it. On the other hand what about a Saddam Hussein - he changed many of the Iraqi laws to allow him to do some terrible things. We'd all agree that he needs to be punished for them, but they weren't technically illegal.
Back to the main subject, in the case of Lloyds, I don't think that they should be punished - all the people involved in slavery in any way are long dead.
I once went on holiday to The Gambia, and was suprised by how friendly the people were there. I kept thinking "Why aren't you angry? My ancestors enslaved yours?". Not long ago I told this to a Gambian friend of mine and he laughed - he said that most of the slaves taken from that part of Africa had been sold to the slave traders by other Africans.

[Jon McDonald]

Have the descendants of Holocaust victims received reparations? Should they have? I keep hearing conflicting statements about this.
If I have made an agreement to pay your father money, but then I refuse to do so, and he dies never getting the money, do you have the right to receive the money I was to pay your father? What if it was your grandfather?
Just wondering what you guys think.
Jon

[HS Thomas]

Exodus 20: 4-6
�You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.�

This means one can pass sins like hatred of other races or people down generations or substance abuse down generations.
Whether the children should compensate for the sins of the father is a big question. Demanding compensation doesn't sound right either. Though trying to put a value on the damage can help balance the scales on guilt trips.
There are some horrible sites titled "Sins of the fathers" on the Rwanda genocide.
[ April 07, 2004: Message edited by: HS Thomas ]

[Jon McDonald]

Originally posted by Joe King:
I once went on holiday to The Gambia, and was suprised by how friendly the people were there. I kept thinking "Why aren't you angry? My ancestors enslaved yours?". Not long ago I told this to a Gambian friend of mine and he laughed - he said that most of the slaves taken from that part of Africa had been sold to the slave traders by other Africans.

A buddy of mine from Liberia made the same comment. I assumed that because he had an English name, he was a descendent of the freed slaves who colonized Liberia. He explained that he wasn't. He laughed and went on to say his ancestors where probably the ones who sold them into slavery. I made a comment to the effect of "bet it wasn't so funny when those slaves returned and took over your country " He didn't find that very amusing. , but at least I did. It was all in good fun though .
[ April 07, 2004: Message edited by: Jon McDonald ]
[ April 07, 2004: Message edited by: Jon McDonald ]

[Thomas Paul]

Originally posted by HS Thomas:
Whether the children should compensate for the sins of the father is a big question.

In theory that is nice but my ancestors didn't arrive in the US until 1869, 4 years after slavery ended.

[Jeroen Wenting]

Originally posted by Thomas Paul:
In theory that is nice but my ancestors didn't arrive in the US until 1869, 4 years after slavery ended.

Doesn't matter. From your name I guess your lineage can be traced back to the British isles. That makes you guilty by proxy because the British were big in the slave trade (Brits were traders, Dutch and Brit shippers, American customers (Brits and French before independence)).
Of course the entire issue is silly, but if the jury is carefully chosen a few billion will be appointed in damages anyway

[HS Thomas]

Thomas Paul is in the Slav club. And if Jeff's post is anything to go by, he'll be looking for a lawyer.
And it was a Dutch pirateer who marauded Ireland for captives of English descent to sell to the Morroccons.
[ April 08, 2004: Message edited by: HS Thomas ]

[Thomas Paul]

Originally posted by Jeroen Wenting:
Doesn't matter. From your name I guess your lineage can be traced back to the British isles.

You guess incorrectly. My ancestors were from Bohemia (now the Czech Republic). My great grandfather, Anton Paul, left Bohemia first to England in 1864 and then the US in 1869.

[Jeroen Wenting]

Originally posted by HS Thomas:
And it was a Dutch pirateer who marauded Ireland for captives of English descent to sell to the Morroccons.
[ April 08, 2004: Message edited by: HS Thomas ]

We've always been entrepeneurs, always looking for a quick profit
We've also condoned piracy on the high seas as a means to fight the Spanish (and I guess the Brits, French and anyone else), as long as the pirates paid taxes on the loot (in fact some of our national heroes would be considered pirates by others)

[Joe King]

Originally posted by Jeroen Wenting:

We've always been entrepeneurs, always looking for a quick profit
We've also condoned piracy on the high seas as a means to fight the Spanish (and I guess the Brits, French and anyone else), as long as the pirates paid taxes on the loot (in fact some of our national heroes would be considered pirates by others)

Ah, those were the days! The superpowers of the day (England, Spain, France, Portugal, Holland), spent their time attacking each other's ships and then looking the other way saying "Weren't us guvner, was them pirates. Arrrgh.". None of this UN malarkey then, it was cutlasses, cannon balls and parrots all the way.

[Don Stadler]

Originally posted by Thomas Paul:
In theory that is nice but my ancestors didn't arrive in the US until 1869, 4 years after slavery ended.

Doesn't matter, Tom. I could make the same argument with my ancestors being from Ireland and Germany. We will pay regardless because we're part of the 'oppressor class'.

[Jon McDonald]

Originally posted by Don Stadler:

Doesn't matter, Tom. I could make the same argument with my ancestors being from Ireland and Germany. We will pay regardless because we're part of the 'oppressor class'.

Two funny things about government reparations:
First, if the government did pay reparations, they would get the money from our taxes, which would mean that African-Americans would be paying for reparations as well. It could not be paid for only by whites because many whites would argue that their families imigrated here after slavery. Also, those whites whose anscesters where here at the time of slavery would have little trouble in finding a black or native american anscester and change their race label to something non-white.
Second, most of the reparations arguments I've heard haven't envolved giving every black person a check of a certian denomination, they have involved funding some type of social projects in impovrished black communities. In this way, the black physician or attorney you know could be paying about as much, or more money in taxes as you for this program, and get about the same number of benefits as you do from it (i.e. none).
Jon

[frank davis]

Originally posted by Jon McDonald:

Two funny things about government reparations:
First, if the government did pay reparations, they would get the money from our taxes, which would mean that African-Americans would be paying for reparations as well. It could not be paid for only by whites because many whites would argue that their families imigrated here after slavery. Also, those whites whose anscesters where here at the time of slavery would have little trouble in finding a black or native american anscester and change their race label to something non-white.

Jon

Third, most whites never owned slaves during the time of slavery.

[Warren Dew]

Originally posted by Joe King:
One interesting issue this throws up is - can a person/entity be deemed guilty for an act that is illegal now, but not at the time when the act was done?

In the U.S., they theoretically cannot, as our Constitution prohibits ex post facto laws.
The fact that the U.S. Constitution addresses it explicitly kind of indicates that some places allowed it at some point, though. And sometimes there can be strong popular pressure for it - when someone does something outrageous but legal, you'll hear cries along the lines of "that really should have been illegal - hang 'im anyway!"

[Jon McDonald]

Originally posted by herb slocomb:

Third, most whites never owned slaves during the time of slavery.

Yep, Even in the south only 25% of households had slaves.
Jon

[Thomas Paul]

Originally posted by Jon McDonald:
Second, most of the reparations arguments I've heard haven't envolved giving every black person a check of a certian denomination, they have involved funding some type of social projects in impovrished black communities.

I thought that was the purpose of race based quotas?

[Randall Twede]

sorry to skip all the previous responses (call me lazy). i call the suit frivolous. first of all slavery was legal then so Lloyds did nothing wrong. second, it really pises me off how some people think they should get a free ride in life. there have been attempts here in the US to have taxpayers give reparations to descendants of slaves. why should I have to pay their way? my ancestors didnt own slaves. in fact, one of my ancestors had his land stolen by the "white man". i get no reparations for that. actually i neither expect or deserve such reparations because im mostly white myself. my point is the lawsuit is crap, it will never win. it is a total waste of time and money.

[frank davis]

Sorry, earlier I forgot the customary "I am against slavery" disclaimer required by Caucasians in discussing slavery.

[Jeroen Wenting]

Originally posted by Warren Dew:

In the U.S., they theoretically cannot, as our Constitution prohibits ex post facto laws.
The fact that the U.S. Constitution addresses it explicitly kind of indicates that some places allowed it at some point, though. And sometimes there can be strong popular pressure for it - when someone does something outrageous but legal, you'll hear cries along the lines of "that really should have been illegal - hang 'im anyway!"

Communist China allows it (or used to until very recently).
Possibly millions were arrested in the cultural revolution when laws were put into effect that made them guilty post facto of crimes that weren't crimes when they committed them.
In North Korea they take it even further, considering parents and grandparents guilty by proxy of crimes committed by their siblings.
Many other countries have or had similar principles. Most civilised nations do abandon the system at some point as it's simply impossible in many cases to know in advance what will be illegal in the future.
For example: what if they lower the speed limit in the street where I live (they did that here a few years ago), should I now get a speeding ticket for every time I drove through that speed at the old speed limit?

[Paul Stevens]

Originally posted by Jeroen Wenting:

Communist China allows it (or used to until very recently).
Possibly millions were arrested in the cultural revolution when laws were put into effect that made them guilty post facto of crimes that weren't crimes when they committed them.
In North Korea they take it even further, considering parents and grandparents guilty by proxy of crimes committed by their siblings.
Many other countries have or had similar principles. Most civilised nations do abandon the system at some point as it's simply impossible in many cases to know in advance what will be illegal in the future.
For example: what if they lower the speed limit in the street where I live (they did that here a few years ago), should I now get a speeding ticket for every time I drove through that speed at the old speed limit?

What a great way to raise revenue for government.

[Jeroen Wenting]

Originally posted by Paul Stevens:
What a great way to raise revenue for government.

Now you don't go give them ideas OK