What do you think?
Rate this book
Reparations for Slavery and the Slave Trade: A Transnational and Comparative History
Slavery and the Atlantic slave trade are among the most heinous crimes against humanity committed in the modern era. Yet, to this day no former slave society in the Americas has paid reparations to former slaves or their descendants. European countries have never compensated their former colonies in the Americas, whose wealth relied on slave labor, to a greater or lesser extent. Likewise, no African nation ever obtained any form of reparations for the Atlantic slave trade. Ana Lucia Araujo argues that these calls for reparations are not only not dead, but have a long and persevering history. She persuasively demonstrates that since the 18th century, enslaved and freed individuals started conceptualizing the idea of reparations in petitions, correspondences, pamphlets, public speeches, slave narratives, and judicial claims, written in English, French, Spanish, and Portuguese. In different periods, despite the legality of slavery, slaves and freed people were conscious of having been victims of a great injustice. This is the first book to offer a transnational narrative history of the financial, material, and symbolic reparations for slavery and the Atlantic slave trade. Drawing from the voices of various social actors who identified themselves as the victims of the Atlantic slave trade and slavery, Araujo illuminates the multiple dimensions of the demands of reparations, including the period of slavery, the emancipation era, the post-abolition period, and the present.
- GenresHistoryRaceNonfiction
271 pages, Kindle Edition
Published November 2, 2017
7 people are currently reading
174 people want to read
About the author
Ana Lucia Araujo
16 books21 followersAna Lucia Araujo (PhD in History, Université Laval, Canada) is a social and cultural historian writing transnational and comparative history and serves as Professor and Director of Graduate Studies in the Department of History at Howard University.
Her work explores the history of slavery and the Atlantic slave trade and their present-day legacies, including the long history of demands of reparations for slavery and colonialism. She has a particular interest in memory, heritage, and visual culture of slavery.
Her work explores the history of slavery and the Atlantic slave trade and their present-day legacies, including the long history of demands of reparations for slavery and colonialism. She has a particular interest in memory, heritage, and visual culture of slavery.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
July 13, 2021
A detailed look at the history of reparations along with a historical review of transnational slavery. Araujo starts from the beginning with the advent of slavery and the transatlantic slave trade, and the long struggle for reclamation of payment for time worked/served and benefits due to those who endured enslavement globally. The lack of payment, the horrors of treatment, and the lack of human and civil rights have led to insurrections and wars throughout history. Today, the discussion of reparations is still forefront across the nations that contributed to slavery and the Atlantic slave trade. Araujo uncovers the many discussions and attempts to gain reparations throughout history.
I think this is a well-written and well-researched book that is very topical still today. I don't think I had considered the calls for reparations as far back as the eighteenth century, so looking at the entire history of the subject was enlightening and certainly give food for thought on what can/should be done today.
I think this is a well-written and well-researched book that is very topical still today. I don't think I had considered the calls for reparations as far back as the eighteenth century, so looking at the entire history of the subject was enlightening and certainly give food for thought on what can/should be done today.
August 16, 2019
This is the second book on reparations I have read this year. The first one was Dr. Sir Hilary Beckles book “Britain’s Black Debt: Reparations for Slavery and Native Genocide.” My first thoughts are to compare the two books. If you have read my review of Dr. Beckles book, then you’ll have some insight into the comparisons I’m making. If you haven’t read it, this link will get you there if you wish: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
The most important way in which Dr. Beckles book differs from Dr. Araujo’s book is that, in addition to reparations for descendants of enslaved Africans, “Britain’s Black Debt” addresses reparations to indigenous people for genocide while “Reparations for Slavery and the Slave Trade” does not. The scope of Dr. Araujo’s book wasn’t intended to address crimes against indigenous people – and so its scope was not as broad. This distinction caused me to have an unresolved question which I will bring out at the end of the review. The other way in which the two books differ is in focus. Dr. Beckles’ work was aimed solely at Britain. Dr. Araujo’s book covered all nations which profited from the Atlantic slave trade, including the United States down to Brazil. This allowed her to present the contrasting circumstances of the various societies which enslaved people and how each nation dealt with (or rather has not dealt with) the matter of reparations; or as Dr. Beckles has referred to it, reparatory justice. (see Address Delivered By Professor Sir Hilary Beckles, Chairman Of The CARICOM Reparations Commission, House Of Commons, Parliament Of Great Britain, Committee Room 14, Thursday, July 16, 2014 https://caricom.org/media-center/comm...).
The policies and practices of the various countries, and the information presented about their history as it related to reparations, were interesting and positive features of this book. It provided the reader with significant insight into the variety of approaches to reparations among the countries studied. Throughout the historical journey Dr. Araujo also introduces the reader to many important persons who played roles in the effort to ensure reparations were made to descendants of enslaved people as well as people who strove to suppress movements for reparations in all of the countries discussed in the book. With my interest in some of the people piqued I wandered off on several side trips via Google to find out more about them. To me the most interesting of all of these people was Queen Mother Audley Moore, who fought for reparations well into her 90s. Of course there were connections to other books from which she drew insights, some of which I have read and several of which I placed in my “Want to Read” category on Goodreads.
There are three drawbacks of this book. One, it does not engage in much detail about the Dutch profits from enslavement of people. Certainly in their colonization the Dutch did engage in the slave trade and exploitation of enslaved people. But not much was presented regarding reparations activism or the response by the Dutch. Considering the amount of detail Dr. Araujo went into with regards to the French, British, American, Spanish and Portuguese slave trade and exploitation, as well as the reparations activism and repression I thought perhaps there could have been a similar amount of detail on the Dutch.
A second drawback was the lack of headings within the chapters. An attentive reader followed the transition between descriptions of activities in countries like the United States and Brazil. Dr. Araujo made these transitions without providing clear signals to the reader. It would have been helpful to the reader to have headings as guides within the chapters. The result was that within the chapters it seemed as though the information was jumping from one country to the next without a clear basis for why information about Brazil was after the United States but before Cuba – for example. This may have affected my perspective about the writing style. Third, although I came away feeling well informed, the style of writing was not captivating. This was a definite difference when compared to Dr. Beckles work, which had clear organization and a captivating style.
Questions. I have so many questions. Throughout the book Dr. Araujo gave instance upon instance of the cases where persons who were strong advocates for reparations became the target of powerful white supremacist institutions such as the FBI. This was consistent with what Dr. Beckles reported in his book. So my first question is, “Is it possible to have governments around the world commit to abstaining from persecution of advocates for reparations?” In theory it should not be difficult to do. If one believes that openly debating ideas is a democratic principle, and if one contends to represent a democracy (great or small) then one should not be insecure about allowing open debate over the issue of reparations. If one is insecure to the point of persecuting and oppressing the supporters of the idea of reparations, one can only claim to represent democratic ideals from the standpoint of the basest hypocrite. That being the case, an oppressor of advocates of reparations completely lacks credibility and should forfeit the position of alleged democratic leadership.
Through the course of this book and Dr. Beckles work there are a number of corporations whose foundation was built on the profits of the slave trade. My second question is, “Has there been research to trace back each and every modern corporation to determine whether or not they were in the group of many beneficiaries of profits from the slave trade?” This would be something like a title search for reparations. The goal would be to trace every major corporation back to its origins. Already much has been done with the organized religions of the era who were enslavers of human beings on a large scale. The same should be done with companies in order to establish a registry of the damned, so to speak, so that when reparations are collected all parties who directly or indirectly profited from the free labor, the lives and the deaths of millions of enslaved people can be called upon to pay their part.
Dr. Araujo touches upon the work done by CARICOM to begin the process of seeking reparations. In fact, she mentions Dr. Beckles work in that capacity. Still I am left to ask two questions at this point: 1) “How many secondary school students of history and social studies within CARICOM are aware of the work CARICOM has done to advocate for reparations?” and 2) “What more can be done to get the work to progress past the point where people discuss it in meetings and it goes no further?” I am reminded of the adage, “When all is said and done, a lot more is said than done.” For instance, it should be a matter of a huge public relations campaign.
I have left the most difficult question for last. Dr. Araujo laces together the perspective of many different countries and the history of the cause of reparations for enslavement of people of African descent in these countries. Dr. Beckles challenges Britain to provide reparatory justice not only for people of African descent but also for the indigenous genocide they committed. The atrocities committed against both groups cannot be compared – the differences are stark. At a minimum, one can argue for restoration of lands to the indigenous people beyond the apartheid-like homelands that they have been relegated to. But where does this leave descendants of African enslaved people? Are these groups going to continue to fight their individual battles separately? Would there be any possibility for them to join forces for some mutually acceptable sharing of the outcome of reparatory justice? White supremacy only benefits from divisions that exist between groups who have just causes for reparatory justice. Presenting a unified front would benefit both groups. So my final question is this, “How would these two groups be able to work together to fight for justice and defend against the usual efforts to divide and oppress peoples who would benefit significantly from an alliance?” The answer is complex and would take people from both groups being able to use their knowledge and lived experiences to attempt to find a common ground from which they could stand together and fight for justice.
The most important way in which Dr. Beckles book differs from Dr. Araujo’s book is that, in addition to reparations for descendants of enslaved Africans, “Britain’s Black Debt” addresses reparations to indigenous people for genocide while “Reparations for Slavery and the Slave Trade” does not. The scope of Dr. Araujo’s book wasn’t intended to address crimes against indigenous people – and so its scope was not as broad. This distinction caused me to have an unresolved question which I will bring out at the end of the review. The other way in which the two books differ is in focus. Dr. Beckles’ work was aimed solely at Britain. Dr. Araujo’s book covered all nations which profited from the Atlantic slave trade, including the United States down to Brazil. This allowed her to present the contrasting circumstances of the various societies which enslaved people and how each nation dealt with (or rather has not dealt with) the matter of reparations; or as Dr. Beckles has referred to it, reparatory justice. (see Address Delivered By Professor Sir Hilary Beckles, Chairman Of The CARICOM Reparations Commission, House Of Commons, Parliament Of Great Britain, Committee Room 14, Thursday, July 16, 2014 https://caricom.org/media-center/comm...).
The policies and practices of the various countries, and the information presented about their history as it related to reparations, were interesting and positive features of this book. It provided the reader with significant insight into the variety of approaches to reparations among the countries studied. Throughout the historical journey Dr. Araujo also introduces the reader to many important persons who played roles in the effort to ensure reparations were made to descendants of enslaved people as well as people who strove to suppress movements for reparations in all of the countries discussed in the book. With my interest in some of the people piqued I wandered off on several side trips via Google to find out more about them. To me the most interesting of all of these people was Queen Mother Audley Moore, who fought for reparations well into her 90s. Of course there were connections to other books from which she drew insights, some of which I have read and several of which I placed in my “Want to Read” category on Goodreads.
There are three drawbacks of this book. One, it does not engage in much detail about the Dutch profits from enslavement of people. Certainly in their colonization the Dutch did engage in the slave trade and exploitation of enslaved people. But not much was presented regarding reparations activism or the response by the Dutch. Considering the amount of detail Dr. Araujo went into with regards to the French, British, American, Spanish and Portuguese slave trade and exploitation, as well as the reparations activism and repression I thought perhaps there could have been a similar amount of detail on the Dutch.
A second drawback was the lack of headings within the chapters. An attentive reader followed the transition between descriptions of activities in countries like the United States and Brazil. Dr. Araujo made these transitions without providing clear signals to the reader. It would have been helpful to the reader to have headings as guides within the chapters. The result was that within the chapters it seemed as though the information was jumping from one country to the next without a clear basis for why information about Brazil was after the United States but before Cuba – for example. This may have affected my perspective about the writing style. Third, although I came away feeling well informed, the style of writing was not captivating. This was a definite difference when compared to Dr. Beckles work, which had clear organization and a captivating style.
Questions. I have so many questions. Throughout the book Dr. Araujo gave instance upon instance of the cases where persons who were strong advocates for reparations became the target of powerful white supremacist institutions such as the FBI. This was consistent with what Dr. Beckles reported in his book. So my first question is, “Is it possible to have governments around the world commit to abstaining from persecution of advocates for reparations?” In theory it should not be difficult to do. If one believes that openly debating ideas is a democratic principle, and if one contends to represent a democracy (great or small) then one should not be insecure about allowing open debate over the issue of reparations. If one is insecure to the point of persecuting and oppressing the supporters of the idea of reparations, one can only claim to represent democratic ideals from the standpoint of the basest hypocrite. That being the case, an oppressor of advocates of reparations completely lacks credibility and should forfeit the position of alleged democratic leadership.
Through the course of this book and Dr. Beckles work there are a number of corporations whose foundation was built on the profits of the slave trade. My second question is, “Has there been research to trace back each and every modern corporation to determine whether or not they were in the group of many beneficiaries of profits from the slave trade?” This would be something like a title search for reparations. The goal would be to trace every major corporation back to its origins. Already much has been done with the organized religions of the era who were enslavers of human beings on a large scale. The same should be done with companies in order to establish a registry of the damned, so to speak, so that when reparations are collected all parties who directly or indirectly profited from the free labor, the lives and the deaths of millions of enslaved people can be called upon to pay their part.
Dr. Araujo touches upon the work done by CARICOM to begin the process of seeking reparations. In fact, she mentions Dr. Beckles work in that capacity. Still I am left to ask two questions at this point: 1) “How many secondary school students of history and social studies within CARICOM are aware of the work CARICOM has done to advocate for reparations?” and 2) “What more can be done to get the work to progress past the point where people discuss it in meetings and it goes no further?” I am reminded of the adage, “When all is said and done, a lot more is said than done.” For instance, it should be a matter of a huge public relations campaign.
I have left the most difficult question for last. Dr. Araujo laces together the perspective of many different countries and the history of the cause of reparations for enslavement of people of African descent in these countries. Dr. Beckles challenges Britain to provide reparatory justice not only for people of African descent but also for the indigenous genocide they committed. The atrocities committed against both groups cannot be compared – the differences are stark. At a minimum, one can argue for restoration of lands to the indigenous people beyond the apartheid-like homelands that they have been relegated to. But where does this leave descendants of African enslaved people? Are these groups going to continue to fight their individual battles separately? Would there be any possibility for them to join forces for some mutually acceptable sharing of the outcome of reparatory justice? White supremacy only benefits from divisions that exist between groups who have just causes for reparatory justice. Presenting a unified front would benefit both groups. So my final question is this, “How would these two groups be able to work together to fight for justice and defend against the usual efforts to divide and oppress peoples who would benefit significantly from an alliance?” The answer is complex and would take people from both groups being able to use their knowledge and lived experiences to attempt to find a common ground from which they could stand together and fight for justice.
April 29, 2021
Not particularly well written but just jam packed with information. Useful reference.
Read
August 24, 2018306.36209 A663 2017
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews