By Bob Newland
In 1833 the House of Commons voted to abolish enslavement in the British colonies but in the Act to do so compounded the crime of centuries of the slave trade and enslavement by awarding £20 million in compensation not to the slaves but to their enslavers.
In seeking to define ‘Britain’s Slavery Debt’ and make the case for reparations Banner addresses the horror of the slave trade, the abuse, mistreatment and exploitation of those enslaved and challenges the many arguments made against reparations both trivial and worthy of greater consideration.
He argues that racism was at the very heart of this pernicious system. This prompts him to begin by challenging and changing the language used in the telling of this story. Most important in this is to use ‘enslaved peoples’ rather than slaves a term which suggests that the victims were not people when taken into captivity but rather less than human ‘slaves’. Next to fall is ‘slave owners’ somehow giving the monsters responsible for the Transatlantic slave trade and the exploitation of those who survived the journey to become enslaved in the colonies a professional standing. They quite rightly become ‘enslavers’.
Banner challenges the image given in British history and more widely of the outstanding goodness of abolition of the slave trade. He points out that this firstly ignores the centuries of enslavement carried out by Britain before this and the decades of continued enslavement after it before ‘slavery’ was finally abolished. Furthermore, not only were the enslavers given vast amounts of ‘compensation’ for the loss of their slaves and the super profits they generated for them but provision was made for ongoing indentured labour by those ’freed’ from enslavement.
To make the case for reparations Banner highlights the extent to which the triangular Transatlantic trade fuelled the development of British colonies in the Americas, funded the industrial revolution in Britain and assisted the export of goods to Africa and the colonies. He brings the case forward to today by identifying companies, institutions and families whose riches are dependent on the profits from enslavement.
The book focusses primarily on the Caribbean where according to Higman, ‘the Caribbean sugar plantation colonies gobbled up enslaved people, and were never satisfied’. Banner identifies many arguments against reparations including ‘It’s a long time ago – time to move on’, ‘Everyone thought slavery was morally acceptable back then’, ‘Slavery was legal back then, so there can be no question of making amends for it now’, ‘We weren’t the worst’ and remarkably ‘Reparations are objectionable in principle- since they cannot be commensurate with the wrong’.
Being a specialist in the field of ethics, much of Banner’s case for reparations is based around moral arguments. As part of this he considers the questions of the need for apologies and contrition alongside that of financial compensation. He does however spell out very powerfully the economic case for reparations not just to the descendants of the enslaved but also to the countries which suffered the consequences of the slave trade. He includes in this the impact of the imposition of one crop economies and the destruction of traditions culture and economic activities in the Caribbean as well as the long term effect of the tearing of millions of men and women from Africa.
The arguments around reparations have gained a powerful new life in recent years. Debates about how much and how, to whom and by whom abound. Banner suggests that the case for reparations has become unanswerable but acknowledges that it is much harder to reach agreement on how these should be made. He suggests that the substantial proposal put forward by the Caricom Reparations Commission is a good place to start.
He adds as a postscript a reference to the Brattle ‘Report on Reparations for Transatlantic Chattel Slavery in the Americas and the Caribbean’ which was released after his book was completed. This seeks to quantify the appropriate level of compensation.
In conclusion Banner considers the pessimistic view current among some in the debate which says ‘It ain’t gonna happen…’. He suggests these defeatists should consider that ‘In 1785 no one would have thought the slave trade would be abolished some thirty years later and slavery within the British empire some 20 years after that’.
This is a small volume yet it is the succinctness of the argument which makes it so powerful. The book challenges effectively any opponents of reparations and provides extensive material for those who wish to support them. Every word makes the case for reparations for slavery and as the subtitle suggests, ‘Reparations Now’.
Britain’s Slavery Debt: Reparations Now! Michael Banner, Oxford University Press £14.99.
Bob Newland is a Liberation member and London Recruit
Support our work – donate, become a member, affiliate your local organisation’s branch or volunteer
The views expressed in the articles published on this website do not necessarily represent those of Liberation
Interested in a reviewing a book for us? Or a film, play or exhibition? Get in touch at info@liberationorg.co.uk
