Laura Trevelyan makes formal apology on behalf of the Trevelyan family for their involvement in the period of enslavement in Grenada
NOW Grenada is not responsible for the opinions, statements or media content presented by contributors. In case of abuse, click here to report.
As for Laura Trevelyan, she confessed on camera to her family having owned a THOUSAND slaves and that this was the source of her inherited wealth. According to Wikipedia, adjusted for inflation, what the government of Grenada paid her family translates to approximately GBP 3.5 million for the taking of their “property” in all of those slaves when they were emancipated. In her “grand” gesture to the Grenadian people to make amends, she donated a ridiculous GBP 100,000 while now campaigning on behalf of reparations. That was beyond insulting.
“I came here to apologize?” This woman is a hypocrite’s hypocrite. GBP 3.4 million would put her square on RESTITUTION for the money her family never should have received in the first place. After that, we talk about REPARATIONS for the thousand lives her ancestors ruined by her own account, and which she publicly says is a really good idea.
As with those (e.g., Bill Gates) who want population control, she should either go first on reparations (and restitution), or stop talking.
It has been something like ten generations since slavery was abolished in Grenada. The following questions come to mind (not an exhaustive list):
1. Precisely what percentage of one’s lineage must be traced to a former slave to entitle one to reparations, and on what basis, if any, would such reparations be allocated based on that lineage?
2. If a person’s lineage also includes slave owners and/or traders (e.g., Kamala Harris), should they be required to remit funds and, again, on what basis, if any, would such remissions be calculated?
3. Entire nations are mentioned by these speakers as potential targets for funds. Certainly the current citizens of those nations had nothing to do with slavery, so on what conceivable basis would Grenada demand that these taxpayers, presently existing, be forced to pay reparations?
4. How would Grenada propose to enforce a demand for reparations from other nations whose leaders simply find such a demand nonsensical? (Hint: This contemplates demanding nuclear powers to tax its existing citizens to build infrastructure that Grenada has not bothered to construct in 190 years.)
5. To the extent that Grenadians consider themselves a “developing country” – as at least one speaker put it – 190 years on, are there any other possible reasons for lagging in such development other than slavery and, if so, to what extent is the long-past (albeit disgusting) practice of slavery to be blamed, rather than those other reasons?
6. Presumably, the U.S. is also a target for funding. Roughly half of the country actively fought to abolish slavery in one of the bloodiest civil wars in history. Should their descendants receive reparations as well and, if not, why?
Again, this is far from an exhaustive list of questions. To those who might consider them rhetorical, they are not. They only seem that way because this entire concept is so abjectly stupid, obviously unworkable and profoundly unjust. Nevertheless, if anyone can answer them with coherence and civility, I would greatly appreciate it, but I wholeheartedly agree with the first comment. Blaming the past will not solve the present problem, or manifest a positive future. Looking forward, however, just might.
If the islands started looking forward and stopped looking back with greedy eye’s all your live might improve