117
Are we condemning modern slave trades or just ones no one living can be held accountable for?
This is about reparations and thats the reason why the countries responsible abstained or voted against it.
Obviously most countries today condemn the modern slave trade. Doesn't mean they'll do anything about it but they do condemn it
I thought Canada was where run-away slaves escaped to. Why abstain in our (Canada's) case?
Oh, duh, we were part of the UK at the time...
Here's a press release from the resolution. The "Transatlantic Slave Trade" as a proper noun refers to the historical kidnapping and taking of Africans to the New World to be enslaved.
The resolution emphasised “the trafficking of enslaved Africans and racialised chattel enslavement of Africans as the gravest crime against humanity by reason of the definitive break in world history, scale, duration, systemic nature, brutality and enduring consequences that continue to structure the lives of all people through racialized regimes of labour, property and capital.”
It doesn't enforce reparations, but:
It affirmed the importance of addressing historical wrongs affecting Africans and people of the diaspora in a manner that promotes justice, human rights, dignity and healing, while emphasising that claims for reparations represent a concrete step towards remedy.
The US objected:
Furthermore [per the ambassador], the US “does not recognise a legal right to reparations for historical wrongs that were not illegal under international law at the time they occurred.”
I'll note for thoroughness' sake that it not having been illegal under international law is basically true but 1000% beside the point (obviously). The US Supreme Court actually heard cases in the early 1800s about how slavery was treated under e.g. the Law of Nations, but evidence was scant that it was prohibited, and the court more or less (oversimplifying) had to make shit up. The important point is that you can't say "Oh, well the perpetrarors collectively didn't prohibit it, so there are no grounds for reparations." It's obviously ridiculous.
The problem is that there's a bunch of people who want to hold living people accountable for what was done by the dead.
So you suggest ignoring how the current status quo is built on the continuous exploitation of racialized and colonized people?
"The status quo is built on the continuous exploitation of people"
*FTFY
I suggest that there's no meaningful benefit to be gained by looking backward rather than forward. If you want to move to a different paradigm, that's fine, but condemnation of the past is performative compared to putting forward laws and resolutions to benefit others. The Bill of Human Rights was forward-looking, this condemnation is backward-looking. Emphasize where we want to go and why we want to be there, rather than where we were and the mistakes we made as a society.
Slavery was evil, so was the destruction of indigenous peoples across the world. But we can't yet change the past. We should reinforce that we will work to eliminate slavery (chattel and indenture), human trafficking, and the abuses related to it. Focus on what we can improve today and how we can improve things.
I suggest that there's no meaningful benefit to be gained by looking backward rather than forward.
Is your stance in any way informed by a privilege you hold?
Because there are a lot of people today who are still disadvantaged by the historic slave trade, who would meaningfully benefit from reparations.
So when you say "no meaningful benefit", who exactly are you talking about?
I suggest that there’s no meaningful benefit to be gained by looking backward rather than forward.
Okay, as long as we also take away all the historical family wealth that goes back generations too.
But that's not how it works, is it? Great great great grandad gets to get rich off of the slave trade, and his great great great grandson gets to inherit that wealth without any complications.
I do not want to be punished for something that other people did in the past before i was born.
But benefiting from it is okay?
This „punishment“ or rather responsibility would not be something that the average wage earning person has to worry about financially whatsoever. There is however a lot of accumulated wealth, that could be used for much better things than the third luxury Yacht in Monaco. So if this extraordinary luxurious wealth can be traced back to exploitation and slavery, and the government would enforce this money to be used for reparations in forms of community centers, museums, research for those who’s ancestors freedom, cultural heritage and often lives were taken, this would not be a punishment. As a German I think there is good reason to individually act responsibly concerning the crimes of e.g. my great grandfather. It is not my crime, but it’s my responsibility to call it such, to do my best in every day live that something like it will not happen again. Calling that a punishment would be unfair compared to the suffering of the victims and their living relatives.
Well, duh. Do you think Mother Nature won't "hold" new generations "accountable" once ours destroy the planet with fossil fuels?
In case it's too small to see, the third country that voted against is Israel.
US, Argentina, Israel may have something common with Germany from last century.
I still only see two real countries. 
The only Trans the US Govt approved of
And Europe abstaining... Still very far from a reckoning, not to mention reparations
US- No to slavery but yes to unpaid overtime or direct unpaid like now.
And yes to slavery for millions of people imprisoned because cops lied about what they did.
this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2026
117 points (99.2% liked)
World News
39995 readers
40 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS