Should we apologise for our past role in slavery?
Next year marks the bicentenary of the Abolition of the Slave Trade Act. For countries like Britain who played a huge role in the trade, the anniversary is an opportunity to commemorate the beginning of the end of the transatlantic slave trade, and a reminder that this part of our history in Britain still needs to be addressed.
The bicentenary raises the key question of how should we commemorate the event. How exactly should Britain today respond to the darker side of imperialism, to the country’s complicity in the slave trade?
The University of York is hosting an international bicentenary conference in April 2007. Speakers from all over the globe are to address the meaning and impact of the western abolition of slavery and its legacy. David Lammy, MP and Minister for the Department of Culture, Media and Sport, has already visited Hull this year to inspect the preparations for the event.
Yorkshire itself has its own particular connections to the slave trade. William Wilberforce, one of the key leaders in the Emancipation of the Slaves movement, was born in Hull. John Beecroft of Whitby was responsible, as British Consul to West Africa, for persuading local chiefs to discontinue the sale of their fellow Africans into a life of slavery.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, has, this year, apologised on behalf of the Anglican Church for its role in the slave trade. The Church was one of the great profiteers from the slave trade through its sugar plantations in the West Indies. This apology follows in line with the City of Liverpool’s apology in 1999. Bristol, also a key centre for the trade is as yet to follow suit, but before it will do this, a response needs to be made by the government to the fierce debate about the relevance and, even, adequacy of these apologies.
The argument is that if Britain apologises for its role in the slave trade, then should not the Italians apologise for the slavery of the British under the Roman Empire? Should not Africa apologise to its own people for its role in the capture and sale of its own citizens into slavery? Should not an apology be made for the virtual slavery 200 years ago of the British working class?
This debate, while important, detracts from the contemporary nature of slavery. Should we not be concentrating our attention on the slavery that is occurring now, in Africa, South Asia, China and in parts of the Arab world? UN figures show that 12.3 million people are still subjected to modern forms of slavery, be it people trafficking or forced, bonded or child labour.
Continuing the battle begun by the anti-slavery activists, such as William Wilberforce, should be a key part of the commemoration.
Indeed, the recognition of Britain’s not so glorious past is crucial to understanding that much of this nation’s power, then and now, has been built on the back of horrific and unjustifiable exploitation. It is a part of our heritage that we must confront.
These events “have profound meaning for everyone in this country. It is an event of such significance to Britain’s history and our identity today,” MP David Lammy has commented.
James Walvin, speaker at the conference and member of the committee advising the government on the issue, explains, “The bicentenary presents an opportunity for Britain to come to terms with its past.” The British Empire put more slaves into plantations in the Americas than any other imperial power.
The key issue is that it provides a chance to remember that things were not at all as glorious as we are often so keen to imagine. There was barely an institution existing in the eighteenth century that was not in some way connected to the slave trade. For Walvin, while apologies are all very well, Britain’s coming to terms with this heritage is more important.
Apologies will do little to rectify the terrible atrocity of slavery. Reparation payments to descendents of the oppressed will not aid those who are still enslaved. Only by intensifying the fight against modern slavery will the commemoration be fully complete.
