Black Lives Matter

Originally Posted by downquark1

Except that is a lie. When I was in school there was nothing about those periods at all. In the last ten years people are falling over themselves to lecture me about Mary Seacole.

When I want to learn about the British Raj I pretty much have to find a Hindu nationalist to yell facts at me.

Hugh didn't mention school. Neither did I. Hugh just mentioned this country and how we reflect on our history and that is a much wider discussion that just what we teach in basic history lessons.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

And what would be so wrong in realising that most of the people in the UK today have connections with somewhere else in the world at some point in the their family tree?

Hey you're right, i guess we're all related to some slimy thing that crawled out of the primal ooze . . . unless, like me, you're the distant offspring of aliens who crashed near Sherwood forest in 1632 . . but we don't like to talk about that in case you get agitated

[pip08456]

More statues some people want removed.

https://www.toppletheracists.org/

Originally Posted by pip08456

More statues some people want removed.

https://www.toppletheracists.org/

Yep, mob mentality rules.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

Well here's an example
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ufmann-history

It doesn't take away anything that we already know about the Tudor period, but adds to our understanding. But it would have likely been excluded in later history records as didn't align to the views expressed within society at the time.

Nelsons Column, another monument supposedly lined up for termination by black skynet. Clearly depicts black sailors in the battle, fighting for Britain.

[downquark1]

The statue of slave trader Robert Milligan has now been removed from West India Quay

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Nelsons Column, another monument supposedly lined up for termination by black skynet. Clearly depicts black sailors in the battle, fighting for Britain.

And there are reasons for that. Whatever else Nelson achieved, he was pro the status quo of the slave trade:

https://www.historyextra.com/period/...rce-dark-side/

Guided by racist assumptions about the violent character of black people, Taylor presented Nelson with lurid warnings of how white slaveholders could be “butchered, massacred, and murdered” by slave uprisings inspired by misguided reformers acting “under the pretence of humanity”. Reflecting those prejudiced fantasies back to Taylor in his letter from the Victory, Nelson contemplated that the success of Wilberforce and his allies “would certainly cause the murder of all our friends and fellow-subjects in the colonies”.

Now the context of that is that within his strata of society, that was the prevalent view. However it shouldn't now stop us from re-evaluating how we celebrate historical figures with additional knowledge.

Should all monuments to those who held views we don't now agree with be taken down? No. Should we have reasoned and rational debate about them? Yes.

[downquark1]

“The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history.” ― George Orwell.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Nelsons Column, another monument supposedly lined up for termination by black skynet. Clearly depicts black sailors in the battle, fighting for Britain.

“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”
― George Orwell, 1984


“Day by day and almost minute by minute the past was brought up to date.”
― George Orwell, 1984

Originally Posted by downquark1

“The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history.” ― George Orwell.

I don't remember what that is from, it's been a while since I read Orwell, but that point could be argued either way.

After all, what is being argued for now is a greater understanding of our history. To start talking about slavery, racism and empire in a way that we typically have not. The people who've been destroyed are not those whose crimes nevertheless inspired statues but those who've been written out of history because we would rather not address what happened to them.

Besides, Orwell was not a fan of Empire and Imperialism and wrote against it often. I am not sure he is the best author to cite when discussing this.

[downquark1]

Originally Posted by Damien

I don't remember what that is from, it's been a while since I read Orwell, but that point could be argued either way.

After all, what is being argued for now is a greater understanding of our history. To start talking about slavery, racism and empire in a way that we typically have not. The people who've been destroyed are not those whose crimes nevertheless inspired statues but those who've been written out of history because we would rather not address what happened to them.

The guardian has literally been talking about this stuff my entire life. To claim otherwise is bullshit.

Should we take down Alfred the great because he killed Viking hostages?

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by downquark1

Should we take down Alfred the great because he killed Viking hostages?

You seem aware of that already and so have context around his life and history.

How many people know that Nelson was pro slavery for instance. Or that the other people that are being mentioned when it comes to their statues were directly connected to the slave trade.

Originally Posted by downquark1

The guardian has literally been talking about this stuff my entire life. To claim otherwise is bullshit.

Should we take down Alfred the great because he killed Viking hostages?

The Guardian is perceived as a pretty left-wing and liberal paper for doing so (amongst other things) but good for them I guess. However, it's certainly not an example of us destroying our history to discuss it more.

As people have pointed out the toppling of the statue of Colston adds to our history now, people are talking of him as being a slave trader as opposed to just a philanthropist. I am guessing actually that a lot more people know who he is and what he did now than they did a week ago. The statue itself will likely end up a museum to further educate people into his and our history.

The people who removed him don't want his name gone from the history books, they want people to know precisely who he was.

Originally Posted by downquark1

Should we take down Alfred the great because he killed Viking hostages?

My view on statues is that it depends on why they're there in the first place. Almost everyone in history will have had racist views or otherwise 'problematic' views but if they're being commemorated for something else then that achievement still stands. As I said earlier Churchill's racist comments are insignificant compared to what he did so vandalise his statue was both stupid and morally wrong. Nelson is there for different reasons as well. Most of the founding fathers of America had slaves but given they founded America then their moments remain whilst those who led the confederacy are taken down.

To be honest I am rather unbothered if these statues remain or not. My own view is that our history is what it is, we can't go back and fix it all, but we should discuss the parts that are bad more than we do. If it takes the statue coming down then fine but I would also be fine with the statue being recontextualised to highlight the link to slavery for example and if it is taken down I would rather it not be done by a crowd of people like this.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

And there are reasons for that. Whatever else Nelson achieved, he was pro the status quo of the slave trade:

https://www.historyextra.com/period/...rce-dark-side/
Now the context of that is that within his strata of society, that was the prevalent view. However it shouldn't now stop us from re-evaluating how we celebrate historical figures with additional knowledge.

Should all monuments to those who held views we don't now agree with be taken down? No. Should we have reasoned and rational debate about them? Yes.

that monument is part of black history, it depicts black people fighting at Trafalgar.

The insanity and censorship continues ;

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52983319

Personally I never liked the show, not my kind of humour, but this is just moronic.