To think there is a worrying trend to cancel folk for opinions and thoughts

[ConnieLinggusThe69th]

I'm not saying I agree with the opinions of Roald Dahl (I dont) but I understand if people want to cancel folk for their actions - don't like cancel culture but that seems reasonable somewhat to react to someone's actions

But why the fuck are we extending cancel culture to the thoughts that someone expressed? He hardly evangelised his anti semitic beliefs- he simply held them... but chose to write fiction books... the impact he left on the world was some good stories for most people

Just read they were putting a sign up to apologise for his beliefs in the Roald Dahl museum - he's dead now, how can you apologise post death for someone else's thoughts?!

I mean... think what you want, even if I disagree you're entitled to that in my book but it doesn't worry you that it could happen to you over some belief you hold one day if we carry on this trend?

I understand he has released documents where coutts have admitted that there was no threshold issue and although he was polite and professional to staff they decided he didn’t want to be associated with his views.

I don’t agree with Nigel Farages views or anti semitism. But I do agree with freedom of thought and expression.

Also there’s just no need to mention roald Dahls anti semitic comments as the central theme of his museum - it was a comment he made a long time ago. We don’t know if he was ever sorry or not and there’s no benefit in others apologizing on his behalf. He didn’t do anything, just made some comments. As a Jewish person I obviously don’t agree with that but plenty of people have said such things- it doesn’t mean that there is nothing about their lives to be enjoyed or that all their contributions to the world are worthless. I agree we should stop the purity spirals.

I find it ironic when the 'right' makes comments and tries to control the 'left' is just as controlling with 'oh we don't like this you cannot say that' so they want to control just as much

I think we are in an incredibly intolerant moment. I can't stand this concept of persistently judging historical figures by today's standards - its like no one has read a history book properly. Activists seems to have hijacked the entire conversation. Every news piece is laced with the the papers "editorial pov". There is not necessarily lying from big news organizations like BBC (or CBC in Canada) but there is a lot of omitting and selective air time and once you see it you can't un-see it. No one representing us seems to fall in the centre - everything is far left or far right.

Personally, I feel totally silenced, unrepresented and fed up.

Erm, he reported what the banks said. So both.

I detest Farage but he hasn't done anything illegal, and has the same right to a bank account as everyone. Even mass murderers get that benefit.

What did he even say that is antisemitic?

Roald Dahl was a writer. Everything he wrote was imbued with his thoughts, ideas, ethics, and politics. You cannot seperate the writer from the person, just as you cannot separate the artist and person, Monet, from his paintings. It is perfectly fine to enjoy Dahl's work, but it is helpful to understand the complexity of the psyche they came from.

There are plenty of essays on Google, but here's a summary:

forward.com/fast-forward/349771/roald-dahls-family-has-apologized-for-his-jew-hatred-what-were-the-5-worst/

Exactly

Welcome to COMMUNISM - because that's where we are heading folks.

'You cannot separate the writer from the person, just as you cannot separate the artist and the person'

I guess to a degree but like @SueVineer pointed out we don't know if he ever changed his mind. He just said some comments- don't we allow for the possibility people ever change opinion anymore, we need to shame them even post death not for any action they took, he was hardly inciting anything to happen simply for thinking it once whether he ever stuck to it or not and it wasn't his life's work to promote that thought? @OCaptain

I guess maybe if the museum has an exhibit around it then it makes sense they might want to say sorry for unexpectedly confronting you with anti semitism when you were expecting fantastic mr fox and Willy Wonker but I still question if they've been open long why its now necessary to start apologising for something he thought

Any authoritarian regime will do, @LOSTAN. For every Communist "cultural purge" there has been a Fascist "cleansing", both involving ruthless persecution of people suspected of having the wrong thoughts. Then you have all the religious and ethnic genocides, also predicated on wrong beliefs.

In every case, a populace has meandered into the ghastly situation by not wanting to rock the boat, trying to be fair to both sides, and/or thinking it'll just blow over ...

@ConnieLinggusThe69th

I guess maybe if the museum has an exhibit around it then it makes sense they might want to say sorry for unexpectedly confronting you with anti semitism when you were expecting fantastic mr fox and Willy Wonker but I still question if they've been open long why its now necessary to start apologising for something he thought

I suppose if you're expecting fluffy bright things and you're confronted with the reality of an actual person behind the work, I can see that could be upsetting for some people. Others would understand that, yes, what he thought deeply influenced his work, and this should be acknowledged rather than never mentioned.

I'd say they've done this now as many phrases in Dahl books have very recently been revised by the publisher, so he's in the news.

I used to work at the high end of the wine trade and a lot of my clients banked with Coutts: a lot of them would have made Nigel Farage look like Jeremy Corbyn on a bad day.

I've missed this story - what has the RD museum done/said? In any rate, assuming you mean the one in Bucks... it's been open over 20 years, so it's not newly opened!

I last went a couple of months ago and don't remember seeing anything about his antisemitic views while there (granted, I was with toddler dd). If you're in the area and enjoyed RD's books, it's really worth a visit.

Cancel culture is eroding free speech . Not good .

Roald Dahl hasn’t been cancelled though op, they’re just acknowledging his views were antisemitic and unacceptable. I don’t agree that it’s only thoughts and they’re not harmful either: thoughts influence action.

I’m more surprised they’re making a Michael Jackson musical tbh

My interpretation (Caveat: I haven't read the news article)

This could be the family, the descendants of Dahl, wanting to ensure people know that their ancestors' views don't align with their own and to express some form of sincere regret and embarrassment about the distasteful views he may have expressed, especially if they were antisemitic.

Opinions that are deemed acceptable in one era, that are now wholly unacceptable and distasteful may sit badly with generations to come. A sincere apology by the family is just that, any apology can be expressed and people can either accept it for what it's worth, ignore it or whatever. The apology will only be meaningful to those insulted by the views, for those not impacted, the apology isn't for them. I think it's a no harm done situation.

The RD museum is indeed in Bucks, Great Missenden to be precise.

Ive been to the museum loads of times as I used to live within 2 miles of there, and I've never seen anything offensive or antisemitic, just exhibits of his children's stories.

As previous posters have mentioned it's not a good example because literally nobody is trying to cancel RD. In fact his books are still widely used in primary schools.

I think it's worth thinking though, whatever your religion or race, if there was an author who had argued that somebody who had committed a mass genocide against your race of religion 'had a point' and then your kids had to sit in school reading his lovely little books it might make you a tad uncomfortable. I certainly can't think of any authors who've spoken that way against white people being used in primary schools.

It seems more like his family who are still making money from his legacy I assume, acknowledging that he was a complex man.

I think all these apologies on behalf of people that you had no control over come across as really fake. Don't blame people who feel pressurised into making them but it does devalue apologies in general.

If they feel that much distaste for him, I guess they could always refuse the money?
what’s the betting that won’t happen

We know this. People know that views of what is acceptable have changed over time. We don’t need to be told this. The whole approach is infantilising and morally illiterate. So it does do harm.

We know this. People know that views of what is acceptable have changed over time. We don’t need to be told this. The whole approach is infantilising and morally illiterate. So it does do harm.

Yes and it has a chilling effect when everyone is terrified to ever express their view. It creates an atmosphere where people will not speak out about injustice and terrible things can happen.

What is ironic is that the attitude displayed by people 'cancelling' for wrongthink is actually reminiscent of those they claim to be against. Cancelling the bank accounts of people you disagree with because of their religion and expression of religious views is the sort of thing the Nazi's might have done to the Jews had it been in a time when having a bank account was as essential as it now it. You can't really function in society without a bank account these days. The Nazi's did do things to harm the Jews economically (IIRC they forced all Jews into the highest tax bracket regardless of income and a number of other things to control and strip them of equal rights with others... they didn't start off with a 'we don't think these people deserve to live and want to kill them' it was with things very much like this)

What happens if the person whose bank account is cancelled doesn't have another account to transfer his money to? Does he have to take massive amounts of cash? Then what does he do if he needs to buy something in a shop that only accepts cards? It's very totalitarian and will put people in the position of not being able to participate fully in society. Given the banks in question are partly owned by the UK government, having been bailed out, I really hope the government will step in. The banks are really undermining our democracy if they are allowed to do this.

I think we’re confusing different things here. Depriving someone of banking facilities is a great deal worse than sticking an asinine plaque in a museum.