glutto
Peter GleickThe United Nations General Assembly this week overwhelmingly backed a resolution declaring the transatlantic slave trade "the gravest crime against humanity".
Three countries voted against it.
The US, Argentina, and Israel.
oscarfalcon"Three countries voted against it.
The US, Argentina, and Israel."
Big. Fucking. Surprise!
Ivan DjansazovIn US defense ... Maybe they think Hiroshima and Nagasaki were gravest.
divVerent@idjansazov @petergleick In a similar vein, Germany cannot have voted yes to that as they consider the Holocaust the gravest.
Although I agree with you, Germany paid reparations and now only have just beer and wursts, but US still have Guantanamo.
@idjansazov @petergleick And as far as I know beer and wurst is no crime against humanity.
I also have a general issue with the concept of reparations that late - it is wrong to punish people who have nothing to do with it anymore.
For the US it may be different though - I'd at least want everyone who flew a confederate flag in the last decade to pay reparations. They do deserve it.
I also have a general issue with the concept of reparations that late - it is wrong to punish people who have nothing to do with it anymore.
For the US it may be different though - I'd at least want everyone who flew a confederate flag in the last decade to pay reparations. They do deserve it.
That's what i meant. Contemporary Germany has nothing to do with these crimes and condemns them. They pay their dues.
I feel you about the reparations, but in this world the only tangible justice for crime you can get is money.
The sad thing is that Germany's history is world history and Germany has learned, changed and evolved (although not sure what are they doing with AfD ), USA not.
@petergleick @idjansazov I definitely do not like that they do not seem to be able to ban the AfD. Even if the problem is that not all AfD members are provably neonazis - can't they at least remove the "passive election right" from the known neonazis?
You realize that the problem is not AfD per say. It's the mind of the Germans. I think EU has to start to push the narrative that they need a strong EU in this world. There are countries in EU that are half or less of the population of New York. How they can parley with China and India if EU is not a solid block ?
@petergleick @idjansazov And yet we have the AfD specifically because the EU has pushed that narrative. Remember, it started as an anti EU party...
Well that's where all far right is going.
Before for global crisis all far right ( Meloni, Le Pen, AfD ) were against EU, now they want to reform EU, because they know that separated countries that are with population of Chinese village, worth nothing on the global stage and if they are not on the table, they are on the menu.
EU has to federate, get its own defensive structure and respect the human rights. This will make it a global super power.
@petergleick @idjansazov The other problem is a lack of unity in the EU. Like right now Hungary is blocking most efforts of the EU to do any good. Hope Orban loses and the replacement is at least slightly better.
Which is particularly interesting, as multiple times German politicians have been "caught" at bringing up efforts that failed to get sufficient votes in Germany up to EU level, where they have neen unanimously approved, and then going back to Germany and saying "unfortunately the EU is forcing our hand there, we now need this measure that infringes on your human rights". Had happened e.g. with some iterations of Vorratsdatenspeicherung and DMCA, and a bunch of other surveillance stuff. So apparently when it is against its own citizens, the EU can unite...
So IMHO the EU does need reforming. Away from the unanimity principle, towards e.g. a 2/3 majority system. This allows it to move faster. Also it needs democratic elections for all of its bodies, not just the parliament. It needs more legitimacy, not more power. Also, as NATO has shown to provide no benefits to Europe, as its biggest member would block any defense if attacked anyway, the Treaty of Lisbon has to be built out to replace it. It is already in theory accepted and ratified - now it is time for practice.
Which is particularly interesting, as multiple times German politicians have been "caught" at bringing up efforts that failed to get sufficient votes in Germany up to EU level, where they have neen unanimously approved, and then going back to Germany and saying "unfortunately the EU is forcing our hand there, we now need this measure that infringes on your human rights". Had happened e.g. with some iterations of Vorratsdatenspeicherung and DMCA, and a bunch of other surveillance stuff. So apparently when it is against its own citizens, the EU can unite...
So IMHO the EU does need reforming. Away from the unanimity principle, towards e.g. a 2/3 majority system. This allows it to move faster. Also it needs democratic elections for all of its bodies, not just the parliament. It needs more legitimacy, not more power. Also, as NATO has shown to provide no benefits to Europe, as its biggest member would block any defense if attacked anyway, the Treaty of Lisbon has to be built out to replace it. It is already in theory accepted and ratified - now it is time for practice.
Personally I believe Trump, Putin, Orban even Farrage did good for EU.
Can you imagine back in the days someone propose that EU has to cut Russia's gas because of political influence ?
Can you imagine someone propose EU does not have to rely solely on NATO for defense ?
Can you imagine if Germany and France broke from EU before UK ?
Can you Imagine Putin got someone more powerful in EU than Orban to twist it ?
These are threats that are now debatable in EU.
@idjansazov @petergleick Yeah, indeed. All in the all the EU is already doing good - it now has to grow in influence without growing in power (i.e. without requiring changes to the constitution of individual countries to remove rights of their people).
E.g. the Treaty of Lisbon has already been ratified. IMPLEMENT IT. It will replace NATO.
Make it able to implement trade sanctions that actually work - and cannot just be made impossible by a single Kremlin-controlled member state. As said, the 2/3 majority principle will achieve that.
And add an ultima ratio - a way to "kick out" a member state that clearly no longer identifies with EU values, and turned into an impediment. Also add an intermediate measure, e.g. to temporarily suspend some of such a country's rights in the EU.
Once that is achieved, the EU becomes a trade and a military superpower, while retaining the individual nations' rights to their own democracy.
E.g. the Treaty of Lisbon has already been ratified. IMPLEMENT IT. It will replace NATO.
Make it able to implement trade sanctions that actually work - and cannot just be made impossible by a single Kremlin-controlled member state. As said, the 2/3 majority principle will achieve that.
And add an ultima ratio - a way to "kick out" a member state that clearly no longer identifies with EU values, and turned into an impediment. Also add an intermediate measure, e.g. to temporarily suspend some of such a country's rights in the EU.
Once that is achieved, the EU becomes a trade and a military superpower, while retaining the individual nations' rights to their own democracy.
To put it bluntly. Everything is economics and political influence is no different. General rule of thumb is "cost < value". If EU create a structure that the cost is too high for the value, nobody will do it.
For example Russia is an aggressor and you see how fast the bills were passed for suspension of the assets.
There will always be people like Orban to trade power for money, just EU has to made it super expensive to block the general path of EU.
freeluna@petergleick it will be interesting to see how a financial amount is determined and who pays. With the Japanese Internment, there were clear records of the US government policies and records of the people who were interred and what they owned prior to internment. I imagine there may still be records of the slave trade and who was funding it, especially if involved royal houses or country governments. But it will be difficult to figure out how the payout would work.
Hans Bril@petergleick [...] 52 countries abstained, including the United Kingdom and EU member states.
Amir Khan@hans5524 @petergleick
Huh? Ok, this part shouldn’t be left out in the original post, Peter.
The fact that the core European slave-trading nations abstained from voting speaks volumes.
We still have a long ways to go…
Huh? Ok, this part shouldn’t be left out in the original post, Peter.
The fact that the core European slave-trading nations abstained from voting speaks volumes.
We still have a long ways to go…
Regendans@amirbkhan @hans5524 @petergleick According to a news outlet a Dutch minister said about the Dutch abstaining : First they do not like the financial aspect about paying money, second they don't like the title because for example (yes, "for example") the Holocaust was worse in their view (Note that the current Dutch economic trade with Israel is by far number one in Europe).
Quote from an article 25th of March 2026 in El Pais :
"In Africa, at least 12.5 million people were victims of trafficking and slavery over a period of 300 years."
That is 300 years of suffering with possibly ongoing racism as aftermath.
Flipper 🐬🏳️🌈@petergleick also: all the countries involved in the Atlantic slave trade abstained, hoping that it would deflect attention from them.
woollypigs@petergleick and 52 abstained, I would have thought this vote would have been a easy one to vote in. (Would like to see who these 52 are, I understand many are European)
Le personified devil@petergleick To me the weirdest part is who the reparations should go to, its not like the descendents of the slaves mainly live in africa. And this is being pushed by Ghana so I see clear intend of the reparations going to the countries of origin... When it should instead be going to current african americans because those are the actual descendents of the slaves.
This honestly feels like a bit of a money grab to me, especially considering the means like declaring it the gravest crime against humanity.
This honestly feels like a bit of a money grab to me, especially considering the means like declaring it the gravest crime against humanity.
Dino@petergleick it's not as simple as it sounds. Slave trade is still ongoing in some African countries and the middle East. The ancient peoples traded slaves for centuries, longer than the Americans and British did. Why aren't any of those a bigger crime?
Fenix@petergleick I think apologizing is nothing more than the right thing to do. But linking reparations directly to that goes too far for me, especially in this day and age when it’s no longer possible to distinguish between the source of the claim and what is right and wrong—certainly when it comes down to a matter of money.
@petergleick During World War II, my father was pulled off his bicycle and put to work as a forced laborer. He also lost his bicycle. In fact, he performed slave labor for the Germans. No reparations were ever paid, and his bicycle was never returned.