The truth about the British Empire and slavery: Mehdi Hasan and Nigel Biggar | Head to Head

Key Concepts

• British Empire: The largest empire in history, spanning a quarter of the globe at its peak.
• Colonialism: The practice of acquiring full or partial political control over another country, occupying it with settlers, and exploiting it economically.
• Reparations: Compensation for past wrongs, particularly in the context of slavery and colonialism.
• Moral Reckoning: A process of examining and confronting past actions and their ethical implications.
• Extractive Empires: Empires focused on extracting resources and wealth from colonized territories.
• Incorporation Empires: Empires that integrated conquered territories and populations more fully into their structure.
• Abolition Movement: The historical movement to end the slave trade and slavery.
• Cancel Culture: A contemporary phenomenon where individuals or groups are ostracized or boycotted for perceived offensive actions or statements.
• Free Speech: The right to express opinions without censorship or restraint.

Summary

This transcript details a debate on the legacy of the British Empire, focusing on its moral implications, historical interpretation, and the ongoing calls for reparations. The discussion features Nigel Bigger, an emeritus professor and conservative peer, who argues for a more positive and nuanced view of the empire, contrasting with the critical perspectives presented by the host, Meredi Hassan, and a panel of experts.

The Case for a "Fairer, More Positive Story" of the British Empire

Nigel Bigger, in his book "Colonialism, a Moral Reckoning," contends that critics of the British Empire overstate its vices and ignore its virtues. He argues that:

• Universality of Empire and Slavery: Empire, slavery, and racism are universal phenomena, not unique to the British. No long-standing state, including the British Empire, is free of "very bad stuff."
• Liberal and Humanitarian Achievements: The British Empire achieved significant liberal and humanitarian milestones. Notably, Britain was among the first to abolish slavery and then used its imperial power for over a century to suppress the slave trade globally.
• Resistance to Nazism: The British Empire played a crucial role in resisting Nazi Germany, offering the sole military resistance for a significant period between May 1940 and June 1941 (with the exception of Greece).
• Modern Societal Values: According to the World Value Survey 2023, Britain, Australia, and Canada are among the least racist countries, contrasting with Russia, China, and Iran.
• Motivations for Empire: Bigger suggests that motivations for the empire included adventure, a desire for peace, and the establishment of self-government, which he deems innocent or admirable in some cases.

Critiques of Bigger's Perspective

The host and experts challenge Bigger's defense of the empire, raising several key points:

• Cecil Rhodes as a Case Study: While Bigger acknowledges Cecil Rhodes as a "mixed bag" and not a "poster boy," he defends him against accusations of being "South Africa's Hitler" or guilty of genocide. However, critics highlight Rhodes' explicitly racist statements and his belief in racial superiority, questioning Bigger's "critical defense" as a "weird defense."
• The "Not the Nazis" Bar: Critics argue that comparing the British Empire to Nazi Germany sets a very low moral bar. Bigger's repeated assertion that the British Empire was not Nazi Germany is seen as a deflection from acknowledging the empire's own significant wrongdoings. The fact that Hitler admired the British Empire is presented as a counterpoint.
• Historical Omission and "Whataboutism": Meredi Hassan argues that British education often omits atrocities like the Amritsar massacre or concentration camps in South Africa, contrary to Bigger's claim that these are widely known. Critics accuse Bigger of "cherry-picking" and employing "whataboutism" by downplaying British actions by comparing them to worse atrocities committed by other regimes (e.g., Mao's China, Soviet gulags).
• Intent vs. Impact: While Bigger emphasizes intent, arguing that unintended consequences like disease spread are different from deliberate massacres, critics point to instances like the Amritsar massacre or torture in Kenya as clear examples of intent and therefore evil.
• Extractive vs. Incorporative Empires: Ginda Bambra distinguishes between "empires of incorporation" (Ottoman, Chinese, Mughal) and "empires of extraction" (British, French, Dutch). She cites the Bengal famine under the East India Company, which killed over 10 million people while taxes were increased, as evidence of the extractive nature of British rule, contrasting it with the absence of significant famines under Mughal rule.
• Economic Motivations: Kojo Karam highlights that many colonial ventures were driven by private chartered companies aiming to maximize profits for shareholders, not by admirable intentions of self-government or trade alone. He cites Edmund Burke's acknowledgment of the Caribbean's wealth generation for Britain.
• Contribution to Industrialization: Bigger downplays the contribution of slave trading and slavery to Britain's industrialization, citing economic historians who deem it "trivial." This is contested by the notion that it was "enormous" or "central" by others.

The Debate on Slavery and Reparations

The discussion then shifts to slavery and the moral case for reparations.

• Forms of Slavery: Bigger distinguishes between "good and bad forms of slavery," citing domestic slavery in the Islamic world as less inhumane than chattel slavery on West Indian plantations, where slaves could rise to high positions. He clarifies that he believes all slavery where humans are property is wrong, but some forms are "less worse."
• "Christian Slavery": When questioned why he doesn't refer to "Christian slavery" when discussing Islamic slavery, Bigger states he would be happy to use the term.
• Britain's "Penance": Bigger argues that Britain has already paid penance by abolishing slavery and fighting the slave trade. He believes there is no moral case for further reparations.
• Arguments Against Reparations:
  • Universality and African Involvement: Slavery is a universal institution, and Africans were involved in the transatlantic slave trade, necessitating a broader accounting.
  • Abolition and Suppression: Britain was among the first to abolish slavery and spent significant resources and lives suppressing it globally.
  • Impossibility of Making Amends: The victims are dead, and no amount of compensation can truly make up for what happened.
  • "Imaginary Guilt": Bigger argues that current generations cannot feel guilty for actions committed by their ancestors, only responsible for the effects. He prefers "admiration" for past achievements over "guilt."
• Arguments for Reparations:
  • Moral Wrong of Compensation to Slave Owners: Critics highlight the moral wrong of compensating slave owners with £20 million (40% of the government budget) while not compensating the enslaved. Bigger defends this as a necessary political compromise to achieve abolition.
  • Prevalence of Reparations: Kojo Karam points to German reparations for the Holocaust and the genocide in Namibia as examples of mechanisms for transferring resources to victims.
  • Present-Day Inequalities: Ginda Bambra argues that historical injustices manifest as present-day inequalities, necessitating action to rectify past wrongs.
  • Formal Apology: The Association of Caribbean States' primary request is a formal apology, which costs nothing. Bigger suggests that the act of abolition and suppression was a "costly apology" and that adding words might be possible but not essential.
  • Indenture as a Continuation of Enslavement: Bambra points out that the abolition of slavery was followed by a century of indenture, which she argues is morally equivalent to enslavement, involving millions of Indians and Chinese.

Broader Historical and Political Context

• Moralism vs. Historical Analysis: Lawrence Goldman argues against "moralism" in historical analysis, suggesting that imposing contemporary morality on the past is ahistorical. He believes that all societies are good and bad in some ways and that racism was ubiquitous and normal in most of human history.
• China's Rising Empire: The discussion touches upon China's current global influence, particularly its Belt and Road Initiative in Africa, drawing parallels to colonial extraction and questioning who will demand reparations in the future. Kojo Karam argues that countries engage with China due to Britain's refusal to acknowledge colonial violence and offer apologies.
• Free Speech and Cancel Culture: Bigger expresses concern about "cancel culture" threatening free speech, arguing that it prevents views from being challenged and discussed. He advocates for a broad liberal space for the open exchange of ideas, within legal confines.

Conclusion

The debate reveals a fundamental disagreement on how to interpret and reckon with the British Empire's past. Nigel Bigger advocates for a balanced view that acknowledges both the empire's achievements and its flaws, arguing against what he perceives as an overly critical and guilt-ridden narrative. Conversely, Meredi Hassan and the experts emphasize the profound harm caused by colonialism and slavery, highlighting systemic exploitation, racial discrimination, and the ongoing need for accountability and reparations. The discussion underscores the complexity of historical interpretation, the challenges of applying contemporary ethics to the past, and the enduring impact of imperial legacies on present-day societies.