Slavery and Colonialism Are Everyone’s History

[GodessOfThunder]

I was on a thread recently where posters were complaining of slavery and colonialism being “shoehorned” into exhibitions, and were strongly “pushing back” against it being given prominence as a topic in museums and at historic sites. Indeed, transatlantic slavery and colonialism often seem to be regarded as niche historical subjects of interest more to people of colour, and involving only a small number of rich white slave owners and colonial officials.

This perception however, does not reflect reality. Transatlantic slavery effected not only millions of Africans, but pretty much everyone in Britain too. Similarly, colonialism effected not only millions of subjects in the British Empire, but everyone “at home” also. The economy these projects fuelled changed what ordinary people ate and drank and what they wore. They changed how British people thought about non-European people in ways that continue to shape their mindset and create injustice today. Slavery and colonialism helped fund the Industrial Revolution and the jobs people in Britain performed, and much more too.

I’m not suggesting anyone today should feel guilty for these activities. But, these subjects are still all too often not regarded as part of all of our histories. This means attempts to give them proper prominence are met with resistance. If we are to understand British history at a public level properly there is still a great deal of work to do.

In the context of slavery and colonisation, the 'white European'=bad narrative' would be entirely appropriate. No?

@Middlelanehogger

As taught in school, British Values' have a racist term in their definition. The notion that the government can inform us what our values are, and claim them to belong to the British somehow uniquely is also problematic.

Are all of your moral judgments based on storybook heroes and villains?

Utter codswallop. Every Country has it's own set of values and should of course teach them.

@CallumDansTransitVan

So countries should teach their citizens values decided upon by governments? Bad news for Poland. Bad news for Russia. Bad news for Syrians, Somalis and the Sudanese.

In Countries like ours with a democratically elected Government. Yes their DfE has to be the lead on education. It is clear given my last two links, that if you want changes. This can and does happen. Is that behaviour unreasonable?

@CallumDansTransitVan

Poland has democratic elections. My values are not the same as this government's. My values differ from many on this thread due to me not being an apologist for slavery. Universal human rights are important.

That's the point of elections & having access to a member of parliament. If the majority feel change is needed they can lobby for that to take place. Not a perfect system sometimes, but if you can suggest a better one, I'm all ears.

@CallumDansTransitVan
I did, I referred to universal human rights. This current government doesn't want them. According to you I should suck it up. Returning to the thread, what if an elected government reintroduced slavery and taught that some humans were of less value than others?

@Lndnmummy

isn't that to simple a narrative?

I think that is partially a problem with the teaching of slavery and colonisation in that a lot of those in power at the time are highlighted as leading figures in an enlightened world. We adulate the great explorers from Columbus to Cook yet the exploration of Europeans was the precursor to colonisation. George Washington was a slaver and the founder of the most influential country in the world. Elizabeth 1st was a great Queen in many ways but during her reign there was a start to colonisation and slavery. I could go on.

the concern with teaching of colonisation and slavery is that there now those that wish the topics to be taught in a lot more condmenatory fashion and to link these subjects with modern racial relationships and I think we have to think hard about whether this is desirable or whether it will have the desired consequences?

what if an elected government reintroduced slavery and taught that some humans were of less value than others?

Is a Government like that likely to be elected in the UK? Don't like the current lot in charge, that's why we have elections every 4 or 5 years.

Quite.

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/michael-goves-war-on-historians/

@CallumDansTransitVan

A few years ago it would have been unthinkable for the UK to reject the UDHR, but here we are. Our electoral system also elects a government that most people don't vote for and makes many votes irrelevant due to the FPTP constituency system. I'm not saying that we will descend into totalitarianism but suggesting that any party centric government should dictate my values is extremely problematic.

@mids2019

There are already many studies which have evidenced that an increased exposure to people of different races decreases racism. You cannot simply increase the number of poc in different areas but you can increase exposure through education. Many a government policy has been implemented with far less robust evidence.

I think what you were describing is the sanitisation of the teaching of slavery. That in itself is an equally political act. There is no academic understanding that won’t be in some way emotive because human suffering was integral to the system. Extreme violence is what drive profits and made it a tenable.

I don’t think that there’s anything wrong with the conclusion that slavery was financially beneficial to Britain. This is accepted fact and even those who hold some of the more subtle white supremacist views will rarely be so callous as to argue that slavery itself was good. That being said people will argue that they were some silver lining outcomes for poc. They have already been at least three or four on previous pages. I agree this is not good for poc but this is a direct result of the exclusion of poc in narratives about British history. They are not caused by attempting to teach slavery in an academic manner.

Regarding avoiding condemnation and guilt personally I don’t think there is a conundrum here. It is a political act to prioritise the avoidance of white guilt over and above reducing inequalities that negatively impact minorities. The consequences of these two things are not equal. It is possible to acknowledge that while some actors have done bad things, some of what they have achieved has been positive. I do recognise that there are people who argue the extreme position, however, let us not pretend the established positions are sometimes not equally extreme. It is not just the purview of white people to take a balance viewpoint.

Students are also not static beings. They engage with the material so if children are indicating that they’re taking a narrow view, teachers will have the opportunity to combat this. Yes there may be a level of discomfort on all sides, but if that is a good knowledge and dealt with appropriately it is in no way going to be a problem. Anecdotally, I did not walk away from lessons thinking all my white friends were bad. Some poc (and I admit less so of late) who have matured In the UK have had to go a lifetime seeing negative portrayals of their culture constantly, white kids will be fine for a few lessons. Then, to be clear, I have absolutely no problem with the common knowledge that slavery existed in Africa being taught, it is factual. Not once has the Atlantic slave trade been taught in which this is not brought up and it does not negate the role Britain played or it’s impact.

Respect and consideration does not require guilt. Basic empathy and compassion is fine.

@CallumDansTransitVan

Errr at which point did I say it was wrong to teach British values in British schools? I specifically said this is never been seen as negative.

Not everyone has studied slavery and while improvements have been made teaching poc British history remains discretionary. This to me is not good enough. I have already been very clear that I have an agenda and I’m willing to own it.

I’m sorry, but you are the ONLY person on this thread that I am happy to say is actively and consciously racist. A few people have slipped up and revealed that they have biases that maybe they want to think about but no one else has completely denied the existence of racism and has victim blamed in the way you have.

Regarding having an agenda, it takes a racist person to decide to start two threads with the purpose of victim blaming and denying anti black racism. From Scotland. Where black people are few and far between.

What was it the other day, strangling black women is sometimes acceptable? People can make their own mind up, but that is my opinion and I stand by it.

Correct.

Thanks for the response.

If we were teaching the Reformation would we have to spell out burning someone at the stake for their religious beliefs is a bad thing (by today’s standards)? Or that denying Catholics the same rights as everyone else is bad (again, by today’s standards).

I think kids come to understand moral norms through the multitude of influences they come across in day to day life. History lessons don’t need to include these sort of presentist interventions into past events.

What helps reduce racism in studying slavery and empire is, for instance, coming to know that the idea of race itself is merely a social construct, or that prejudice didn’t die out after abolition (undermining the “any inequality today is purely Black people’s fault”) nonsense we’ve seen on this thread.

To summarise your comment, you seem to be arguing: ”Some know, some don’t know, and it makes no difference either way because people don’t care and won’t change.”

Having slept on it, I think the “outcomes” I would like to see are: a) a better understanding of empire and slavery as shapers of Britain (there are degrees of knowing - I’ve mentioned these in other comments) and b) as a consequence less prejudice against POC

Are some always going to be s lost cause? Yes. But social attitudes can be changed through education and activism and there is ample evidence for that.

Empire and slavery have been a significant influence on the world we inhabit today. Why wouldn’t that be taught?

due to more modern events that shape the world further than events previously ? and with so many hours in the day it then could influence which topics are included

I’m not sure I follow you.

Many white Europeans had nothing to do with transatlantic slavery and colonisation, many were historically the ones being sold.

Can we stop putting whole continent into one bag?

if there are only so many hours in a year for teaching certain topics of history then as important as it is to teach about slavey based on your quote

"Empire and slavery have been a significant influence on the world we inhabit today. Why wouldn’t that be taught?"

there are it could also be debated many other points in history to consider and those events also could have been of various importance, eg how the cold war shaped the world etc.

therefore it could be that its not always possible to include all of the most influential aspects of history to be taught in the curriculum.

Out of interest what would your personal pecking order of events be?

the beginnings of civilizations
the rise and development of science and technology
the importance of a one world government
the development of the space race
the importance of humans colonizing the galaxies