The Guardian's Cotton Capital and the West's belated attempt to come to terms with its dark past

Every now and then, we are forced to learn from history. It could be because of current events that coerce us to read up on a topic or because someone, or some people, used their platform and resources to offer the world pretty damning newly-uncovered history. 

The recent report on the dark past of one the most progressive and revered newspapers in the world - The Guardian - falls very much in the category of the latter. 

In an investigation carried out by the publication itself, it was revealed that The Guardian's founder John Edward Taylor (journalist and cotton merchant) and nine out of 11 Manchester businessmen who financially backed the erstwhile Manchester Guardian newspaper (precursor to The Guardian) had links to slavery – primarily through the textile industry.

The report is part of the Guardian's special series "Cotton Capital" – a two-year research by commissioned historians to look into the newspaper's 202-year-old origin, to investigate and uncover The Guardian's link to transatlantic slavery. 

The Guardian is the latest among many institutions in the West, including Ivy League universities and multinational corporations, who are coming to terms with their history, especially their links to some of the most despicable phenomena, such as slavery, colonialism and eugenics. Even historical behemoths such as Thomas Jefferson, Winston Churchill and even Abraham Lincoln have not been spared the harsh spotlight of such historical reckoning. 

But why are these centuries-old institutions suddenly looking back at the past? 

Why now 

For the uninitiated, the summer of 2020 (yes, the pandemic year) saw a protest against police brutality disproportionately targeting African Americans evolve into a movement of phenomenal proportions in the United States. 

This Black Lives Matter movement grew into perhaps a watershed moment, which was much larger in scale than America's BLM protests from earlier. And it all started from the filmed footage of George Floyd's death at the hands of the police in Minnesota, US in May 2020. 

It reignited conversations and discourses in public and private spaces across America, and also in newsrooms, forcing them to look inwards and recognise not only its own origins and past mistakes but also current staff makeup and how respective news outlets cover different ethnic groups and races. 

Many took on measures, albeit late, to make amends and promote inclusion and diversity. For instance, Los Angeles Times published an editorial apologising for racism in its news coverage. 

In the following weeks of George Floyd's death, the discourse on racism, slavery and its legacy affected all spheres and industries in the West.      

The rigorous and explosive spread of George Floyd protests crossed state lines across America and then borders; and made its way across the Atlantic — to, what many consider, the epicentre of racism and white supremacy, Britain. 

For instance, in Britain, Greene King (which operates more than 2,500 pubs, restaurants and hotels in Britain) publicly acknowledged its history in 2020. Its founder (Benjamin Greene) owned several plantations in the West Indies and was a vigorous supporter of slavery. He was one of the many to receive compensation from the British government for having owned 225 enslaved people in the 1830s following Slavery Abolition Act. 

"Its acknowledgement came the month after the murder of Floyd. On both sides of the Atlantic, demands to address centuries of racism were loud and heartfelt. But these demands were not new" wrote Olivette Otele in "The Logic of Slavery Reparations" under the Guardian's Cotton Capital series. 

"The company [Green King] announced a partnership with the International Slavery Museum in Liverpool; it promised to fund Black History Month initiatives, create opportunities for young people from Black and minority ethnic communities and to develop a diversity strategy."

This is one example from a plethora of companies and institutions covering a vast range of industries that made an effort to publicly acknowledge its roots and practices, some apologised, and take "restorative" measures. 

The idea was to make headway for reform and reckoning the legacy of slavery. 

As of October 2022, the amount companies have pledged to support racial justice in America has grown to nearly $340 billion, according to McKinsey & Company senior partner Shelley Stewart, reported CNBC. But how much has been accomplished by each of these companies and institutions is another topic. 

The summer of 2020 also saw the start of the toppling of statues. 

Of toppled statues and the Ivy League  

The Southern Poverty Law Center (an American nonprofit legal advocacy organisation) said that 157 memorials (including 73 Confederate monuments) have so far been removed in the US. A year of heightened awareness about police brutality, nationwide protests and calls for action sparked the most Confederate monument removals in one year, reported CNN. 

Again, this act of reckoning was not limited to America. Europe and others joined in. One of the most popular topplings was that of Edward Colston in Bristol, Britain in June 2020. And one of the latest incidents took place in January 2022, when a statue of Spanish explorer Juan Ponce de León was toppled ahead of a visit of Spain's King Felipe VI to the US Caribbean territory of Puerto Rico.

The rationale behind removing or replacing such statues was why were confederate statues or monuments of leaders or kings, who evidently benefitted or profited off slavery or advocated for racist policies and legislation, allowed public space in the 21st century? It sends the wrong message, protestors and activists argued. 

"Churchill was a racist" read one of the statues of the former UK prime minister during the summer of 2020. Primarily because of Churchill's role in the 1943 Bengal famine, among other things. The perpetrators were later arrested. 

And speaking of elected leaders, nine American presidents owned slaves, topping the list are George Washington (who is also recorded to have ordered the killing of Native Americans) and Thomas Jefferson. 

A statue of Thomas Jefferson still stands in front of the Pulitzer building of Columbia Journalism School in New York. And while many have spoken up and asked for the statue's removal, it continues to stand as a reminder of America's history of slavery and to what extent institutions have come to recognise that history in the 21st century. 

A year ago it was reported that Columbia will join Harvard Law School, Rutgers University, the University of Mississippi and the University of South Carolina in erecting plaques in recent years acknowledging the institutions' relationship to slavery.

Last year, Harvard University pledged to spend $100 million to study and "atone for its extensive ties with slavery" with plans to identify and support the descendants of enslaved people who laboured at the Ivy League campus.

There had been efforts to recognise ties to slavery earlier than the summer of 2020. For instance, a research project at Columbia University by Professor Eric Foner looked into the university's ties with slavery – describes how profits from the slave trade helped fund the school formerly named King's College. The research project was a measure stemming from a wave of institutions doing the same in 2016. Princeton, Georgetown to name a few. 

The summer of 2020 merely renewed and gave vigour to the demands to address centuries of racism on both sides of the Atlantic – the demands which had been present for decades. 

George Floyd's murder gave firepower to the discourse around racism, slavery legacy and its impacts on the status quo in the 21st century, particularly on minority groups. For instance, it compelled the Guardian (a 200-year-old newspaper) to take a look at its origin. The detailed investigation and findings are inspiring. The Guardian's editorial board published an apology for its ties to slavery and pledged to make amends. It also asked others to follow suit. 

Why resist 

There has been backlash though. The Guardian's objective to unearth a 200+ century-old history is deemed divisive, or unnecessary by some. For instance, one Twitter user commented "slaves built the pyramids. Should we take those down too," on The Guardian's post. But all this counterargument perhaps tells more about resistance to knowing the past than provide a rationale to dismiss or discredit The Guardian's decision to offer Cotton Capital to the world.   

In another instance, The Independent's chief political commentator John Rentoul discussed "the left-wing publication's move" with TalkTV's Mike Graham. He said this revelation is not surprising because two centuries ago in North England, anyone with money will have been connected to the cotton slave trade. And yes, while that is factual – the cotton slave trade was massive and connected countries, does that fact alone make it a nuisance to uncover history, to dig up how systems and institutions ran at the time and exactly how they were connected to what now is considered crimes against humanity? 

If nothing else, this is newly discovered history. The details and the depths of the work can help us better understand the role of the legacy of slavery in today's world. 

This counter-narrative hinges, at best, on why bother digging up the past and confront uncomfortable truths. And at worst, supports the status quo. In many cases, it is easy to keep whatever happened in the past, in the past. It also makes it easier for certain groups to continue benefiting from unequal societies and marginalized or minority groups. 

To effectively create equal systems, it is imperative to have access to series like the Cotton Capital.  

Nesrin Malik said it best "Nobody actually thinks that the people of today are responsible for what happened two centuries ago – but we can be guilty of refusing to learn about it and from it" in an article under the Guardian's special series. 

Why resist learning history, and this is what Cotton Capital is at its core – a history lesson, that we ought to learn from and have access to. 

And while the debate on reparations (whether the descendants of slave owners deserve compensation from the state) is deeply contentious, there have been positive developments on that front as well. Reportedly, San Francisco is backing reparations plans, including $5m to eligible Black adults. Proposals also include financing debt forgiveness and more. 

There have also been other developments such as the island country Barbados severing ties with the British monarchy. Although mostly symbolic, the head of state remained Queen Elizabeth until the Barbadian monarchy was abolished on 30 November 2021. And  Barbados became a republic within the Commonwealth, with a president as its head of state.

These changes are welcome. 

And perhaps Cotton Capital can work as firepower to remind institutions that there's still a lot of work left to do to acknowledge its own ties to slavery and take measures in the right direction to achieve racial justice. 

And for our part of the world, perhaps it can convince institutions to look at these examples in the West and take note. We too can look at our policies and values of discrimination and finally make space for diversity and inclusion of minority groups.