Don Lemon gets schooled on reparations

submitted by [deleted] from (twitter.com)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Site_rly_sux 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The host guy suggests that the royal family's billions might have reparations demands.

The guest lady says, that some africans were involved in slavery, and some royal navy died trying to stop it, so maybe reparations should go the other way.

I would suggest that this is not a great answer for a few reasons.

  1. The question was about the royal family and their wealth. Not the wealth of african warlords. So the answer should be on that topic.

  2. The triangle trade was not, as far as I know, a major contributor to royal family wealth.

  3. Slavery being banned by UK did not eliminate the other terrible things which UK was doing which might be considered for reparations. Opium wars, malay emergency, maumau uprising, Boer wars, etc etc.

  4. I don't think she dealt with the question, I think she avoided it.

  5. The ticker onscreen was about the Duchy of Cornwall, the $1 billion estate mentioned. We should talk about this, because it's a very strange set up. For example, if somebody dies in Cornwall without an heir, the prince gets the money to spend on his gardens or flights or whatever. Should there be reparations to the Cornish community (one of the poorest regions in Europe)? This wasn't dealt with at all.

I think it says a lot that OP gets to call this 'schooled' and move on.

OP (and the tweeter, and the guest woman) doesn't need to deal with any of the points above, because in their dumb minds it's solely a question of the black vs white issues they live in. OP isnt wondering about the opium wars or bengal famine or the Duchy setup. OP wants to live in his comfortable white racist-against-black-peoplw world and never concern himself with nuance or actual history.

So, meh, more upvoted trash from the saidit dipshits

[–]iDontShift 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

i postulate that the british never left anywhere they went, and they only 'left' after they had attained certain assets which allowed them 'controlling share' in whatever land they went

british crown = rot(h)childs or at least they act like it

So, meh, more upvoted trash from the saidit dipshits

it is relevant, it shows the elites methods for avoiding responsibility, and as you point out, all the things omitted

if somebody dies in Cornwall without an heir, the prince gets the money to spend on his gardens or flights or whatever.

the elite have taken the position of 'the house' .. and 'the house' always wins because the game is rigged

the house always pretends they have no power, while literally making up the rules that ensure their victory

play by their rules, and lose, because mathematically impossible to overcome

OP isnt wondering about the opium wars or bengal famine or the Duchy setup.

they did those things to achieve their goals to attain 'controlling shares'

[–]Site_rly_sux 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Well that's just silly isn't it. Because Hong Kong is definitely ran by the reds. Singapore has had generations of the Lees in charge. There's no sense in which India suffers a British controlling stake.

Actually your post totally denies that Indians, Ghanaians, Malays etc have the wherewithal or nous to run their own nations. Why wouldn't the Indians, on achieving independence, take for themselves this "controlling stake", do you just believe they aren't capable of taking it back? Why would they leave it in British hands?

The Rothschilds are not particularly notable or important in British finance or crown affairs. The royal family famously banks with Coutts, which is owned by the Royal Bank of Scotland, not with any scary Jewish bankers from your Goebbels films.

They don't "act like it", you've never seen them "act like it" but you've read some scary internet posts that suggested as much. And because you cannot properly filter the dumb internet posts you consume, you mistook that for them "acting like it"

[–]iDontShift 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Why wouldn't the Indians

why not indeed? they did to a degree more than others. they are the country that asked for Phizer to provide proof their vax worked and exposed them for their inability to do so.

i do see that as more independent than 99% of the nations. and that is because of their long history that has included spirituality within its political framework as part of its culture that makes it harder to erase

site_rly_sux

you think that because your narrative fails to stick