Ashanti, Ghana (Accredited Times) – Progressive visionary and author, George Orwell, wrote that ‘He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past’.
Whilst there is no evidence to support our assertion, it is nonetheless an absolute fact that Orwell was referring to black slavery. His famous quote is frequently misunderstood so we will try to bring clarity. Here is the truth: without remedial action, any population that has been cruelly subjugated in the past is destined to remain enslaved in the present and the future.
Let us test this theory. Despite the occasional minor military or sporting victory, the fact is that the English people have exploited the Scotch and the other Celtic nations for centuries. When the Scotch first discovered bountiful North Sea Oil and gas in the 1960s, they naively believed that their liberation from the yolk of the English was at hand. Those of us who study history, however, knew differently. Since the English already controlled the past, and had powerful infrastructure in place, their corporations found no resistance when exploiting the newly found oil. Whether through taxation, direct investment in North Sea Oil or outright expropriation of Scotch oil interests, the English remain in firm control.
If it is tough for the Scotch, imagine the lot of the descendants of African slaves. Having been behind almost all mankind’s notable inventions, philosophical ideas and medical discoveries, the great African peoples were scattered to the four winds through the slave trade at the hands of the White Man. Although modern day African-Americans have begun to pick up the pieces (and are credited with rap music and twerking among other developments), there is a general sense that a historic debt is owed.
The example of Mandela in post-apartheid South Africa shows us that forgiveness and reconciliation are tremendously important. Without reparations, however, true economic equilibrium can never be attained. Since the majority white population of the West have most of the resources, how can the descendants of black slaves ever catch up?
In an ideal world, we would propose a one-off windfall tax of white businesses and peoples followed by mass restribution to people of color. This is similar to the climate change proposals whereby the developed west effectively bears the full burden of reducing economic activity (in order to cut CO2 emissions) but leaving the likes of mass-polluters India and China free to do what they want. However, a number of accredited economists object that this solution is sub-optimal because of a possible risk of ensuing economic depression.
We therefore propose (with our noses firmly pinched) a market-based solution. We invite consumers to buy only products with a special symbol on the labels. The symbol will make it clear to the customer that a percentage of the price paid will be distributed to people of color and needy black charities. A mass advertising campaign will be needed to launch this initiative, part of which will remind white people of the guilt they should feel for historical wrongs. Only through guilt will consumers be willing to pay the higher prices of goods marked with ‘reparations’ symbols.
As for the symbol itself, we have conducted a number of market surveys and historic research. It will be important to use a symbol that is instantly recognizable and will be associated with our racist past.
Whilst we had a number of interesting possibilities, we were struck by the popularity of the ‘gollywog’ symbol that was, until 1992, widely used in Britain and elsewhere by a jam maker called Robinsons:
The gollywog was actually “a black fictional character created by Florence Kate Upton that appears in children’s books in the late 19th century usually depicted as a type of rag doll” For a while, the gollywog was a much loved toy of British children. It even appeared in children’s stories, including some by popular author Enid Blyton. Alas, Blyton besmirched the gollywog’s reputation in one story in which gollywogs were portrayed “as naughty thieves who once pinched Noddy’s prized yellow car.”
In 1992, Robinsons decided no longer to use the gollywog symbol following threats from various extreme right-wing groups in Britain. These groups, rumoured to be supported ideologically by journalist James Delingpole, were upset at what they believed to be moves towards ‘substitution of the white population’ by ‘immigrants’. For them, the gollywog was a symbol of oppression against the ‘native stock’. Shockingly, Robinsons caved into these demands.
We now believe it is time for the gollywog to reclaim its rightful place on all types of consumer products. We are certain that people worldwide will want to buy gollywog-endorsed products, knowing that their money will go towards much needed reparations.