to think removing certain statues and renaming certain street names is not erasing our history?

[chomalungma]

It's just not celebrating people who are seen as controversial.
People can still learn about these people in books.
In films
At school.

It's just that they aren't being celebrated by having public recognition and the honour of a statue or a street name.

I would link to a story - but there would be so many of them as the Government (and certain media organisations) seem to think that it's a war on our history.

I guess a lot of it is down to the person being celebrated. And whether that celebration is still deemed 'worthy' 100s of years later.

Statues have been removed in the past for a range of reasons. I wonder how many of the Victorian statues will still be up in 200 years time?

Interestingly the museum where I’ve seen the most warts and all (we owe that to the much reviled Cromwell - perhaps we should stop saying it) exploration of slavery is in the museum in Hull dedicated to Wilberforce.

If those so concerned with statues and street names turned their attention to the slavery that’s happening right now in sweatshops all over the world, it might actually be stopped.

@VinylDetective
If those so concerned with statues and street names turned their attention to the slavery that’s happening right now in sweatshops all over the world, it might actually be stopped.
That would actually be HARD though. And their campaigning might actually take them to some backwater countries where you can still get beaten or worse for protesting.

It's easier to just generate likes and feel persecuted in one of the worlds most tolerant and progressive countries.

Very true.

@CrotchBurn I love the cut of your gib.

@Stripesnomore
We are in a strange time where people are more interested in creating a spectacle than actually make demands for material change in people’s lives.

I'm convinced it's the Twitter effect, as you've mentioned. Everybody is a star, everybody is living their own iconic moment. Everybody wants to be Rosa Parks.

I feel frustrated engaging with most that fit that description because they're not well endowed with critical thinking/debating skills. Just acres of narcissism and ego that you can't break through.

@HijabiVenus

If statues are proposed to be removed and placed in museums, or if streets are proposed to be renamed, the decision should be be that of the local people who live there, following majority democratic means. It should not be at the diktat of a baying mob of unrepresentative, self appointed moralists.

Which never happened when they were put up/named. And your language betrays you.

[quote CrotchBurn]@VinylDetective
If those so concerned with statues and street names turned their attention to the slavery that’s happening right now in sweatshops all over the world, it might actually be stopped.
That would actually be HARD though. And their campaigning might actually take them to some backwater countries where you can still get beaten or worse for protesting.

It's easier to just generate likes and feel persecuted in one of the worlds most tolerant and progressive countries.[/quote]
Absolutely

Or 'jib' even @Crotchburn

There are slaves in this country too, as I write.

I wonder how much the people who tipped the statue of Colston into the harbour (golly, what a labour! It wasn't at the harbourside, afaik, and they took it to a particular bridge as well) have done or plan to do to help them; the oppressed housekeepers and the prostitutes and the agricultural labourers and the builders' labourers and the people doing the carwash and working in the nail bars could all use a bit of effort made for them.

Which never happened when they were put up/named. And your language betrays you

It did. A lot of statues that are being objected to were funded by public subscription.

*The suffragettes aren’t remembered because they defaced art or threw themselves in front of horses. They are remembered because they fought for a cause and won.

If some actual major change happens in the lives of black people in the U.K. then BLM will be remembered in a similar way. They are not going to be remembered for chucking a statue in some water.*

And yet.....I remember Emily WIlding Davison because she threw herself under a horse. I remember Constance Lytton because she carved a V into herself whilst imprisoned. Those brave, but lawless, acts are what they are remembered for with (hopefully) gratitude.

Hopefully we come to see that it is entirely inappropriate to celebrate the acts of slavery. Sometimes acting outside the law is necessary to bring about social change.
The Capitol hill thugs are not the same thing at all.

Hopefully we come to see that it is entirely inappropriate to celebrate the acts of slavery

Ffs, how many times do you need to be told that nobody is celebrating them? You’re like a broken record.

@AskingQuestionsAllTheTime

There are slaves in this country too, as I write.

I wonder how much the people who tipped the statue of Colston into the harbour (golly, what a labour! It wasn't at the harbourside, afaik, and they took it to a particular bridge as well) have done or plan to do to help them; the oppressed housekeepers and the prostitutes and the agricultural labourers and the builders' labourers and the people doing the carwash and working in the nail bars could all use a bit of effort made for them.

I completely agree with this. Where is the focus on the living slaves in virtually every town in this country? The attention this receives compared to statues is depressing. It's almost like the statues are a fig leaf which allow us to virtue signal how progressive we are as a society, when we are anything but. So much easier to deal with the past than the present.

The attention this receives compared to statues is depressing. It's almost like the statues are a fig leaf which allow us to virtue signal how progressive we are as a society, when we are anything but. So much easier to deal with the past than the present.

One thing that clearly bought this cognitive dissonance to my attention was an American athlete tweeting about slavery. Somebody wrote underneath his tweet that his branded trainers (Nike I think, from memory) were made in a sweatshop by children in Asia and that was happening today, as we speak.

Humans eh?

It absolutely is a fig leaf! Marching against statutes - an impotent gesture. Real politics demands institutions change, laws change.

History is written by winners - the winners being deemed most often by the encouragement of majority opinion. Churchill knew that.

@CherryRoulade
Sometimes acting outside the law is necessary to bring about social change.

But the vast majority of people aren't interested in the social change you're proposing which is why it'll never happen

The other thing, of course, is that whilst slavery was undeniably horrible and something which is a shame on all our nations, on average three people per day in London under one or other Pitt (I think the Younger, but I'm not sure it matters) were dying of starvation. Black slaves were not the only ones to suffer under the regimes of that time. It's just that the Southern States in America were keeping slaves more recently and were even nastier.

And we mustn't forget how the slave trade got its slaves: they didn't go into the interior to capture people from their villages, they bought them from other locals or from slave traders from further nother and east, as a rule. Nobody at that time had clean hands -- but I was not alive then, and I neither sold nor bought. Many of my ancestors were trying to stay alive in shtetls through the pogroms, back then. I am rather tired of competitive oppression; only a very few people can be said to have enjoyed the Good Life in any century. What matters is what happens now, isn't it?

People protest against statues because they have cultural and social meaning. And they are not usually torn down without context - it is one element of a social or political movement. And yes for some people it is about the spectacle (where others would rather have debate and a nuanced removal or extra informatuin about statues) but that is not a new thing. A pp mentioned suffragettes- some of their protests were purely about spectacle. And there was plenty of disagreement within the movement about whether violence and spectacle worked with different approaches being advocated.

It is possible to be concerned both about historic slavery and modern slavery but anyway, I very much dislike the attitude of 'well you can't complain about x when y is also an issue' or 'why are you not also talking about s and t'. If people can't speak up about one issue that concerns them without also making sure that they have mentioned at the same time 5 other issues that people consider important', then they just won't bother speaking out about anything.

Sometimes acting outside the law is necessary to bring about social change. it’s been done but never ended well. So I’d say it might have been necessary in our bloody pasts, but not today. I’d like to think humans have evolved to change through peaceful means instead of illegal violent means.

The Capitol hill thugs are not the same thing at all.. Yes they are. They just happen to be from the extreme right wing instead of the extreme left wing. Any person with a cause that advocates breaking the law and disturbing the peace is still extremism.

I don't think that all the people either the BLM in America or in their offshoots in other countries are necessarily left wing, are they?

@Terrywynne

I get that ('you can't care about one thing unless you care about x, y, z' ). I also hate that attitude. So if your comment about that was in response to my last comment, I do agree with you.

But what I'm talking about is hypocrisy on the same issue. So for example, Beyonce releasing new music on Juneteenth to commemorate the abolishment of slavery in the US, whilst running sweatshops in developing nations to produce her Ivy Park range of clothing. www.google.com/amp/s/www.vogue.co.uk/article/ivy-park-beyonce-athleisure-sweatshop-claims%3famp

Bizarre cognitive dissonance. I wish more people were concerned about what's happening to human beings right here in the present.

I get what some people are saying about contemporary issues.

It would be interesting to see the reaction if an institution such as The National Trust or a University took a strong action against modern slavery by refusing to buy goods from companies unless they ensured that there were no issues, that they supported local action to ensure there was no slavery or racism going on.

@chomalungma

I get what some people are saying about contemporary issues.

It would be interesting to see the reaction if an institution such as The National Trust or a University took a strong action against modern slavery by refusing to buy goods from companies unless they ensured that there were no issues, that they supported local action to ensure there was no slavery or racism going on.

They’d be applauded. Why wouldn’t they?

Yes they are. They just happen to be from the extreme right wing instead of the extreme left wing. Any person with a cause that advocates breaking the law and disturbing the peace is still extremism.

Precisely @PlanDeRaccordement

They’d be applauded. Why wouldn’t they

I am sure that some papers would try to catch them out on something that they weren't tackling - or accuse them of virtue signalling.

I just wonder if removing statues has any impact on the quality of people's day to day lives. To me it felt as though it was people of "privilege" making a statement and felt slightly pointless - who did it actually make feel better?