AIBU to ask when a crime against humanity becomes just “history“

[Flyingfish2019]

About me: I have relatives still alive today who had to do forced labour. The regime who did that to them is no longer in power, the statues gone, streets have been renamed. I think it is good that this has been done.
My relatives never talk about that time and out of respect I never discussed it with them.

However: I heard about the statue of that slave owner coming down and the first thing that I thought was that it was a good thing to happen but then when I heard the discussion about erasing history I thought they had a point.

I thought of the king of Egypt who where the worst kind of slave holders yet the pyramids are not demolished though they where build with slave labour. Because we say that this is just history. Same with Roman and Greek sites. Romans and Greeks used slave labour. But most obviously most people think that this is just history.

So my question: do you agree that a crime against humanity becomes just history one day and when is that day reached... and no I cannot answer the question myself and it’s not a rhetorical question.

I would tend to say that yes, it becomes history one day but I could not really say when the time has come.

Part of the answer is when no one is left alive who experienced it (or remembers talking to someone who experienced it)

But it's also about if it has truly ended. There is nothing we in the UK can do about the slave trade and we can't prosecute the descendants of Israelites for the Canaanites.

The current German people are not responsible for the holocaust though there is a responsibility there to keep an eye on right-wing groups that might want to start it up again.

The US it might be argued never quite got over black people being slaves so that isn't quite closed is it. You can think of the current treatment of black people as part of the same ongoing problem.

I agree that it's when everyone involved is dead. Even if there are consequences for their descendants, no-one owes them compensation directly because of their parents victim status.

Erm... So if I kill my neighbours and steal all their stuff - my descendants get to keep it and their descendants don't have ANYTHING to say about the matter?

Tough shit, developing world, we stole all your stuff (including your ancestors) too long ago for you to have any right to feel aggrieved? It's ours now.

That can't be right can it?

Part of the answer is when no one is left alive who experienced it (or remembers talking to someone who experienced it)

Ah, to have a love of history ...

www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-08-08/civil-war-vets-pension-still-remains-on-governments-payroll-151-years-after-last-shot-fired

The Civil War ended more than 150 years ago, but the U.S. government is still paying a veteran's pension from that conflict.

"One beneficiary from the Civil War [is] still alive and receiving benefits," Randy Noller of the Department of Veterans Affairs confirms.

(contd)

from 2016 ..

But it's also about if it has truly ended

And who defines that?

It will always be a crime against humanity. When it becomes history is not a mutually exclusive conversation: modern history, almost immediately as time passes; taught history, when the political era shifts; book history, when long term effects can be assessed.

Statues and street names are not where people learn history. They blend in, becoming part of the loved environment. Much better to have museums full of these items to tell the full story.

Heard a very interesting talk recently where the speaker was at pains to note how few people actually know any history ( especially their own) compared to mythology (again especially their own).

Quite a lot of history (i.e. the facts ) does not support - or even worse contradicts the mythology. And when that happens, guess what is pulled into line ?

Incidentally, statues are mythology, not history.

Where do you draw the line though? Are we going to be punishing just past slavery? Are we going to ignore current one?
There is at least 10000 people in the UK who are slaves. Well, they are not called slaves now. They are victims of slavery.

I don't see anyone lobbying go get rid of uncontrolled car washes. Or farms...

One thing we could probably learn from history is that toppling statues did not make anything better.

Statues, not statutes. Though some should be rewritten. Which takes me back to "not acceptable by today's morals" bit. Property Act still has section labeled "lunatics"🤷🏻

Absolutely Schrodinger, and most of the first statues were images of gods, of course.

@DGRossetti thats a really interesting point thanks! Was the talk on the radio or was it in person?

@DGRossetti thats a really interesting point thanks! Was the talk on the radio or was it in person?

Meet Beau.

It wasn't in this clip he mentioned it but one of his (many) previous.

If there was an award for "most sense talked in the least amount of time" this guy would win hands down.

I think that observation was from this clip:

Thanks - I will check it out Ihave to say his user name is not the kind that would usually appeal...

Sorry, very late to this and laughing a tad hysterically at the thought of the pyramids NOT being for the glory of an individual.

Or that Roman Emperors left no legacy that impacts our lives today.

I think the change happens when living people stop having an emotional response to the history.

The trans-atlantic slave and European imperialism are still 'live' issues because there are still people alive today who feel pain and anger about those things, not least because there are people who are still suffering the consequences today.

On the other hand I doubt that there is anyone alive today who feels deeply about the actions of the Romans or Greeks.

Or that Roman Emperors left no legacy that impacts our lives today.

A Roman Briton scooped up from the 2nd century and plonked down today would recognise more in todays society than they wouldn't ...

The UK government has been abusing the human rights of the Chagos Islanders for decades. They were forcibly deported from the archipelago in the 1960s and 1970s, so the US government could build a top secret military base on the island of Diego Garcia.

Many Chagos Islanders ended up living in dire poverty in Mauritius and the Seychelles. Successive UK governments have refused to let them return home, and the Tories agreed to renew the US’s lease in 2016. They appear to be hoping that when the last survivors of the deportation have died, it will be easy to fob off their descendants.

Anyway, my point is that although this is still happening, it might as well all be history. Few British people know or care about the Chagos Islanders, so nothing will change and no one will be punished.

Well said
In my opinion,
Toppling statues helps no one, anywhere. It does nothing to offset past wrongs or correct today’s inequalities. It’s just virtue signalling with the added benefit of erasing anything that causes white guilt. It makes white people feel better. They feel like they’ve proved they’re “good” white people and they can now walk their city streets without any pesky reminders of what their ancestors got up to.

Oops,
The quote from Shroedinger was erased.
One thing we could probably learn from history is that toppling statues did not make anything better. is what I was saying well said to.

I agree with when those involved are dead. Yes the holocaust is history but there are still people who lived through it, and lives affected by it.

I would probably say longer than 100 years (i.e. not in living memory), maybe closer to 250 to 300 years, for the "ripples" from that particular event to become indistinguishable in the general flow of time. Some cultures and nations have a much longer memory, the Jews remember something that happen thousands of years ago.
I am also from the country where many people from the generation of my grandparents were forced into labour by collectivisation, and weren't allowed ID or freedom of movement. It is still felt now.

It's not really about the statues though is it? Winston Churchill's statue has been defaced a number of times. Colston's statue toppling was a result of a longstanding battle with local council , in addition to the racist connection obs.

It is about how we perceive our History as a nation. How History has been taught to us, who it excludes and includes.

It is about how we perceive our History as a nation. How History has been taught to us, who it excludes and includes.

We don't learn history at school. We learn mythology. Same as the Americans. That's where the problem starts.

Might be outing but my dc’s school was founded by a few philanthropist described as a “prominent slave trader” (he also founded other institutions and his eponymous foundation endows other institutions today). They are going to rename all the institutions that bear his name and have removed his statues from the buildings, as of last week. He lived in the late 17th century.
I don’t know how I feel about this. For one thing his links to the slave trade have always been there to know about and the institutions who received his funding in the modern day clearly didn’t research his history at the time, or they didn’t feel it was a reason enough to not take advantage of that link or campaign for the change before now. It feels a bit knee jerk react. Especially because the name (his surname) is very highly regarded in various industries due to the quality of the education. People may well argue that it’s affecting their prospects in the present, for the sake of a guy who died around 300 years ago. For me it’s frustrating that presumably we will have to buy yet more new uniform, but I know that’s incredibly facetious!!