Replies

""There's a same sort of "policy" for the German Holocaust. So why not for this?""

Because the Germans themselves did not end the Holocaust. The Allies defeated the Nazis, bringing the Holocaust to an end.

The British on the other hand, while not even starting slavery, became the leading force in trying to stamp it out.

You do bring up a point there.

Still, personally of the opinion that the history of slavery be still put someplace close to "front and center" and not shoved aside with "that was in the past--time to move on" so as to prevent such a (as the article aptly put it) crime against humanity cropping up again, and stopping it where it still exists.

P.S. Just as the British didn't start slavery of Africans, the Germans didn't start anti-Semitism or genocide of the Jews either. Notably, one English king expelled English Jews who were subsequently drowned. And while they were a major force in driving slavery toward extinction, the country still has, and will continue to have that particular stain on their history. Stopping the crime doesn't exculpate the criminal from having done the crime. And no, the British people today are not responsible for the slave trade some 200 years ago--the country is, in that the country is almost one millennium old (for England, after the Battle of Hastings).

From an historical standpoint, rather than an emotional or propagandistic standpoint, the west should be congratulated for ending slavery, not villified. It's interesting to me at least that more attention is paid to events hundreds of years ago - when as a point of fact slavery is still practiced today. As a practical matter maybe that is where energies should be focused.