Suing Cumberbatch for reparations

Quote: Gandler

This is total insanity, his way back relatives owned slaves and were rich (the article says the family lost the plantation almost 200 years ago), he grew up middle class and made his own money, and yet since he is rich and famous now, he is suddenly responsible for the sins of distant relatives.

Yeah, this is total insanity. I don't even care about the history ofnthe family tree or how it may have been spoiled etc.... I don't care if his parents owned slaves, he did not, and as such cannot be responsible.

If your parents die in massive amounts of debt, are you responsible? Of course not, exact same concept.

At some point in history 100% of our ancestors owned slaves. That is how the world worked, some families may have to go back further than others, but does it really matter? If Barbadosa really cared about slavery they should spend their time in international court targeting countries that still practice slavery (like literally as we speak), but the reality is they are trying to use the courts for easy money from celebrities who can be guilted into not putting up a fight....

If I had to guess, he will give them the one mil just to make this go away, he shouldn't, but he probably will....

The richest descendent doesn't owe the entire amount even if he could pay the entire sum himself. It would be all the relevant Cumberbatch's or however the estate has divided up over time. It might matter if there is still actual property being held, but doesn't sound like there is.

Also it doesn't matter if the injured party is rich as Elon Musk and is going to spend all the money on whores and cocaine when they're paid reparations. It's either owed them or it isn't.

Aside from everything else, is this much ado about something that probably won't happen anyway?

What a bunch of crap the notion of "reparations" is.

Sure, their ancestors were slaves but if you go back far enough in time I suspect ALL of our ancestors were enslaved at one time or another.

If they do sue someone it will have to be in a court in Barbados, and I am quite certain the USA and Britain would NOT give full faith and credit to such a judgment, meaning it would be an uncollectable paper victory.

Instead of suing to get effortless wealth maybe those lazy dogs should do something productive and valuable to the world so as to earn a living and be perceived as being of value.

Quote: rxwine

The richest descendent doesn't owe the entire amount even if he could pay the entire sum himself. It would be all the relevant Cumberbatch's or however the estate has divided up over time. It might matter if there is still actual property being held, but doesn't sound like there is.

Also it doesn't matter if the injured party is rich as Elon Musk and is going to spend all the money on whores and cocaine when they're paid reparations. It's either owed them or it isn't.

No, reparations are owed to living people who experienced harm from a government or organization (IE people in Japanese Interment Camps after release is a good modern example).

Reparations are never owed to or from ancestors. Ancestral reparations is one of the most absurd concepts that I can think of.

Cumberbatch is clearly being targeted so publicly because he has a history of feeling bad about his ancestors (which is absurd, but that is a different issue), so he is viewed as a soft rich target to be guilt-tripped into paying. Again, I would be very surprised if he does not "settle" just to look good and make the issue go away.

Quote: Gandler

No, reparations are owed to living people who experienced harm from a government or organization (IE people in Japanese Interment Camps after release is a good modern example).

Reparations are never owed to or from ancestors. Ancestral reparations is one of the most absurd concepts that I can think of.

Cumberbatch is clearly being targeted so publicly because he has a history of feeling bad about his ancestors (which is absurd, but that is a different issue), so he is viewed as a soft rich target to be guilt-tripped into paying. Again, I would be very surprised if he does not "settle" just to look good and make the issue go away.

German citizens born after ww2 were paying reparations from a war they weren’t part of, and the payments were just as likely benefiting the descendants of people harmed not the original tortured, imprisoned or murdered.

Final payments were in 2010.

Quote: rxwine

German citizens born after ww2 were paying reparations from a war they weren’t part of, and the payments were just as likely benefiting the descendants of people harmed not the original tortured, imprisoned or murdered.

Final payments were in 2010.

In 2010, and even today, many WWII survivors still exist. And, massive infrastructure projects required investment because much of Europe was completely bombed out. These were not just payments to individuals based on the crimes against them, this was for rebuilding Europe.

Japan by contrast had to pay virtually nothing, when they should have payed a lot (more than Germany).

Quote: Gandler

In 2010, and even today, many WWII survivors still exist. And, massive infrastructure projects required investment because much of Europe was completely bombed out. These were not just payments to individuals based on the crimes against them, this was for rebuilding Europe.

Japan by contrast had to pay virtually nothing, when they should have payed a lot (more than Germany).

You can look at it both ways. Plenty of people who had nothing to do with it are paying. Also seems to me targeting individual families of Nazis, makes more sense than having everyone in the country pay into it as far as state vs. individual. If you're going to make descendants pay, no reason to target people outside the
Cumberbatch family if you can trace direct harm from them.

Quote: rxwine

You can look at it both ways. Plenty of people who had nothing to do with it are paying. Also seems to me targeting individual families of Nazis, makes more sense than having everyone in the country pay into it as far as state vs. individual. If you're going to make descendants pay, no reason to target people outside the
Cumberbatch family if you can trace direct harm from them.

I actually could not disagree more. There is a massive difference between targeting individuals and countries. If Germany invaded Poland in the 1930s and caused X amount of damage, Germany should pay for the cleanup and restoration. And, individual Germans in command should face criminal penalties. The children and grandchildren of German officers should not be financially responsible.

The Cumberbatch family owned slaves, nobody denies this, but it was 200 years ago. How, is the current actor responsible for the actions of distant relatives. Even if it were his parents I would say he is not responsible, but that many generations removed is just beyond insanity.

They lost their wealth long after ending their plantation days. The wealth that he has now is wealth he generated from his work (if you think some actors are overpaid is not relevant, I would tend to agree, but that is not the point). The slave wealth was long gone before him, his parents, and even his grandparents. They are obviously targeting him (as opposed to his cousin, etc.... who all by your logic share the same "moral burden") because he is wealthy currently and in the spotlight so they are trying to guilt trip a settlement out of him (and I would guess they will succeed).... If he has endless cousins, and uncles, etc... who have the same moral burden as him why are they so aggressively targeting just him? Come on, it's obvious because he has money and is internationally known. Nobody is going to sue a cousin who is a homeless heroine addict in international court even though by your logic they have the same moral burden (and hence should be on the hook for the exact same amount)..... They are going where the money is.... This is a money play, it is not about equality.

Should I have the right to sue some random Turkish family with the right last name because my ancestors were enslaved during the Ottoman invasion of Spain in the 1500s? Or more recently (also by the Ottomans) merchant marines enslaved in the 1700s in the barbary coast? Of course not, because that would be ridiculous. The idea that people are humoring this from Barbados in 2023 is next level twisted. Every country has it's historical problems, they now have their country and need to get over it.

Crying about the past of your own life is silly (and will not help you improve), crying about the past of lives that you never experienced is pathological.

Quote: Gandler

Should I have the right to sue some random Turkish family with the right last name because my ancestors were enslaved during the Ottoman invasion of Spain in the 1500s? Or more recently (also by the Ottomans) merchant marines enslaved in the 1700s in the barbary coast? Of course not, because that would be ridiculous.

No, the "of course not" is because your lineage cannot be directly traced like the Cumberbatch's. But if it could, then you should be able to make a claim.

Time is arbitrary apparently, at least if I go by the decision to how they judge how long you can prosecute someone. They've changed the statute of limitations. And it's different in different countries.

Where I would agree is, no locking anyone up for sins of the father. It's just a about reclaiming property essentially.

Tracing ancestry is pretty tricky anyway. Family stories aren't always accurate. Even the English Monarchy which has one of the most complete records in human history can't be trusted until you've run all the DNA tests. Somebody wasn't the real baby daddy and all that.