Summary

A new book, Ricardo’s Dream by Nat Dyer, reveals that Sir Isaac Newton’s wealth was closely tied to the transatlantic slave trade during his tenure as master of the mint at the Bank of England.

Newton profited from gold mined by enslaved Africans in Brazil, much of which was converted into British currency under his oversight, earning him a fee for each coin minted.

While Newton’s scientific legacy remains untarnished, the book highlights his financial entanglement with slavery, a common thread among Britain’s banking and finance elites of the era.

  • MrNesser@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    92
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    1 month ago

    By our standards he may have been a peice of crap.

    At the time he was born in the society he lived in his wealth gained in a largley accepted manner.

    I see no need to go back over history constantly bringing this shit up.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      64
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 month ago

      Nah, by their standards, he was a colossal piece of crap too. He was very much disliked. He was known to be humorless and just kind of a jerk overall. He was also pretty useless a lot of the time. He was elected to parliament and only spoke one time during his tenure there. He said, “the window needs closing.” Really.

      And then when he took over the mint, he was just ruthless in prosecuting anyone he could for any reason he could find. He had a witch hunt for counterfeiters after there was a change in coinage. It was pretty nuts. So yeah, he was always a piece of shit. This just makes him a bigger piece of shit.

      • wewbull@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 month ago

        Ok, but I think the point is to judge him by the standards of the time. That might still label him a jerk, and so be it.

        Maybe he was a neuro-diverse individual who saw little value in “people problems” and was only interested in maths and science. Today, we’d show more understanding to that, but we don’t know. All we can say was he was a jerk in the eyes of those around him.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          28
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 month ago

          That is not an excuse for his witch hunt. And it was a witch hunt by the standards of the time, although they wouldn’t have called it that obviously. He ruined people’s lives. He literally got people executed. One was certainly guilty of counterfeiting, but he also just made a list of suspects when he was put in charge of the mint and went after them McCarthy style. You cannot argue that drawing up lists of people and having them rounded up on spurious charges based on a list of people you suspected might have been guilty was the norm then because it really wasn’t.

          Also, why should we judge him by the standards of the time? It was essentially “standard” for nobles to rape children who were put into arranged marriages with them because those children were considered property and brood mares all over the place and not just in the Western world. I sure as fuck judge Muhammad for marrying a six-year-old and raping her when she was nine. I don’t care if that was the standard at the time. It’s fucking disgusting.

        • snek_boi@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          It sounds like your point is that we should be context-aware. By being context-aware, we could avoid judging someone unfairly, such as someone who was neuro-diverse. It sounds like you really value accuracy in assessments. It also sounds like you’re saying that judging someone from one’s time with the standards of one’s time is more accurate than judging someone from the past with the standards of one’s time. If so, would you say people from our time accurately judge Donald Trump? Would you say there is consensus about how to judge Donald Trump? In other words, is there consensus in the standards of our time? Zooming out a little bit, if we are truly context-aware, would we not have to judge context-awareness itself as a reflection of who we are?

    • Themadbeagle@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      Newtons part in the slave trade is no less a part of the life and history of Newton then his contributions to science, why would we omit it? Calling him a piece of shit and saying he contributed to an awful system does not alter the fact that modern math and physics are where they are currently due to his contributions. Conversely, his contributions to science doesn’t alter the fact he contributed to one of the worst systems in human history.

      • MrNesser@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 month ago

        I’m not denying it I’m simply tired of the inevitable outcome that this brings

        1. Remove the statues
        2. Better not teach his theories in schools
        3. Someone HAS to apologise
        4. What about recompense in the form of money

        It’s a long fucking list and the guys been dead for a couple hundred years.

        • Fish [Indiana]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Watson and Crick are/were giant pieces of shit. We still teach about them. Many biology teachers will openly state that Watson is a terrible person

        • GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Not excusing the past, OR the present, but people a few centuries from now will call us monsters.

        • Themadbeagle@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          28 days ago

          Lol, I would actually love an example of the “inevitable” outcome everyone always touts. Everyone says it, but I don’t ever see anyone actually stopping talking about these people or making anyone apologize. You are right, he died hundreds of years ago. We don’t need to punish or blame anyone. We also don’t need to stop teaching physics just because it was forged by pieces of shit. If we are going to talk about the people who discovered this stuff at all (which we don’t have to to talk about physics) there is no need to white wash the history. We can be adults and recognize that just because someone did something important doesn’t mean they were perfect or even a good person at all. We don’t chose who makes great changes to our world, but it doesn’t me we have to hide who they or or what they did.

    • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      1 month ago

      I see no need to go back over history constantly bringing this shit up.

      Bringing what up? The truth?

      You might as well say that you don’t see a need to even observe history if you take issue with people discussing the verifiable fact that Newton’s wealth came from slavery.

      If anything, it sounds like you might have a vested interest in downplaying information like this. I would be curious to see where your family’s wealth came from.

      • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Ok, but what do you want anyone to do about it? The guy has been dead for hundreds of years and we can’t just pretend that gravity and calculus don’t exist because he was a dick.

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          People don’t just see Issac Newton as an important scientific contributor. They idolize him. Same for people like Thomas Jefferson. Appreciating history means understanding the full range of the people involved. When things like this are downplayed, it gives in to a narrative of history that supports terrible policies today.

          • catloaf@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 month ago

            I don’t think anyone is idolizing him because of slavery.

          • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            I suspect most people would be hard pressed to name anything about him other than gravity.

        • kryptonite@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Newton wasn’t the only one who developed calculus. Leibnitz developed it independently around the same time, and both of them had prior mathematicians’ work to base their work on. If it weren’t for Newton, we would still have calculus.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_calculus

          That said, we can acknowledge Newton’s mathematical and scientific achievements while still acknowledging problematic or terrible things that he also did. We don’t need to whitewash history in order to recognize someone’s achievements.

      • dumbass@leminal.space
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        This is how I see it, if they were someone from history who was rich, I assume it’s because of slavery. It’s easier to count the amount of people who got rich without slavery on your hands.