The Royal Navy's Campaign Against Slavery - Prof. Andrew Lambert

[@haroldgodwinson9822]

A great topic and one that people need to know more about. Great work. If you could reduce the length of the video or create short highlights then the message would reach a wider audience (and be good for showing as clips in school classrooms).

[@philipford6183]

I do hope we'll get the other half of this lecture - The Royal Navy's Campaign Against Slavery - Part 2: East Africa & Beyond. Also, Prof. Andrew Lambert: Have you written a book on this, and if not are you intending to? What a history - something we never, ever hear about!

[@tompommerel2136]

Great presentation & questions. I'd be interested in getting another perspective (from British sources) of the Dutch slave trade as the recent apology by the King seems to initiate a process that will end in reparation.

[@ParaBellum2024]

I have a couple of suggestions: 1) contact Simon Webb (History Debunked) for future collaboration, and 2) put out videos that are no longer than ten minutes.

[@parker3979]

,,,or don't

[@abuyusef27]

Slavery was finally abolished in Oman in 1970.

[@aegis7368]

Guys, I read your article responding to Utsa Patnaik's claim of 45 trillion being drained from India by the UK. As an Indian, who is in finance, I think it's ludicrous beyond belief. And the way they calculated just seems idi0tic. But, what do you think would be the real number if we were to calculate it properly with the right methodology, you know after adjusting for inflation?

[@trevormorgan2636]

Zero

[@nickelmouse451]

From the studies I have looked at it is perhaps impossible to determine. The Patnaik drain theory relies on treating India’s economy as its net exports, but obviously things are far more complicated than this. Drainage cases are those in which (I) funds were moved from country-x to county-y such that (II) county-x does worse than it would have without county-y’s intervention. It is this second criterion which is difficult to satisfy. What counts as drainage to one (e.g. borrowing money from the British, rather than the Indian, market) is a prudent decision to others (because interest rates were lower in the UK than India). Until someone devises a methodology for assessing the value returned from all of the cases in which money transferred to the UK, it is a hopeless task. Hence why Tirthankar Roy calls it a word posing as a theory.

[@ibatan7243]

I find it weird why, to the best of my knowledge, NO Indian studies were made to calculate the compensation desired from the MOGUL, Ottoman and the Timurian Empire(s) (and their local allies) have killed, raped, enslaved, stolen, confisquated, and squandred of the natural, human, artistic, cultural, agricultural, etc..resources of India? Why NO one is claiming such compensation from Afghanistan, Iran and other arabs countries who invaded, colonised, enslaved, etc...India and its people and mistreated them for several centuries and until they were saved by the British? On the flip-side, we find many Indian historians writing extensively abt. the history of India in those terrible centuries describing such period as a pride for India. Could-it be because of the HYPOCRISY of the POLITICAL CORRECTNESS vastly practiced in India? After all arabs, Persians, Turks and afghanis are mostly White People too?

[@bomberharris1943]

In retrospect, I think it's safe to say that it was our worst idea by far. The results are plainly visible in our streets.