National Trust AGM

[PRAMtran]

I’ve received an email from the National Trust inviting me and all other members to vote in their AGM. Does anyone know if there are any things a woman’s rights advocate should vote for or against. Eg TWAW by stealth.

I’ve been there, yes, and many slavery-related historic sites / museums in the US, Caribbean and Africa.

I have also curated exhibitions regarding the history slavery.

So, your over-riding focus is on curating exhibitions so that they have an over-riding focus on slavery. We get that! You are coming from a Critical Race Theory and Reparations/Equity persepctive. (originated in the U.S, as I originally aserted)

What many of us here are doing, is critiquing that.

I don’t think it matters that, yes, some of the momentum for recognising Britain’s involvement in slavery more explicitly has come from the US/critical race theory/BLM.

In the post-war period many of the leading social historians such as EP Thompson were Marxists / Communists. Many of their readers were not but they appreciated their efforts to take history from just being about “great men” to understand working class history. Their efforts made out museums sit up and take notice and many of the industrial and working people’s museums etc are as a result of their legacy.

As with any movement we can take elements from it without swallowing the whole.

@RebelliousCow

Why are you critiquing, the history of slavery in particular?

Why that topic?

What do you want the heritage industry to do with it?

No, you didn't us those terms directly, but you suggested that the reason that you don't think that the legacy of slavery in Britain has been addressed ( which is very a much contested view) is because of " shame" and. "avoidance of reparation". You do seem fully absorbed into the critical social justice/critical race theory mind-set.

A) that is not my over riding professional focus. It is one thing I do.

B) My intellectual influences are more in post-colonialism and post-structuralism, both of which have been around for decades and are more Indian and French in origin, if anything

What the world of today absolutely needs, is more post-structuralism.

But what you are doing is transplanting a current american social pre-occupation/ trend around CRT into Britain - as if Britain has never addressed that it had any involvement with the atlantic slave trade. Or not to your liking, anyway.

And what you arec finding is that people are pushing back. -and you assume this is because of shame and wanting to avoid reparations - because that aligns with your ideological framework.

This is what I wrote:

“There are several reasons Britains slave trading past has been played down:

Shame for some, especially descendants of slave owning families.

A naive sense that cos Britain was involved in abolition, we can just forget about the nasty stuff before.

A naive belief Britain has no ongoing racial injustice that is a legacy of the slave trade. Ie “we’re not like America”.

An expedient need in the Cold War to keep Commonwealth countries on our side.

Avoidance of reparations”

I don’t think any of these points are especially contentious.

@RebelliousCow

Why are you "pushing back"?

What is the benefit of it?

All I want, is a reasonably accurate and meaningful history of the UK and its people.

That must include the bad bits.

That made me snigger 🤭

I think your absorption in post modernism/structuralism has been very clear throughout......we tend, on this particular board, to be very critical of that because it goes hand in hand with other post modernistic constructs and ideologies such as 'Queer Theory' ( in particular gender identity theory) and Intersectionalism - which has sadly morphed into nothing but " Listen to my truth"

You can't have been looking very hard. There are multiple museums and galleries which deal with various aspects of British social history and the impact of the British Empire, and have been for years. And galleries and museums have long held special exhibitions which focus on specific aspects of that history.

I think the premise is contentious, yes. That is what we have been conversing about all day, isn't

Isn't it?

Patronising, much? Why do you think you’re qualified to call anyone naïve I wonder? How can you tell people they are ashamed? Based on what? You have an obsession and you are viewing everything through that prism. Most people, thankfully, are not.

How many of us, yourself excluded, have woken up thinking their expedient need during the Cold War to keep Commonwealth countries on their side? Very few, I can assure you.

You say your points are not contentious, so why are so many on here contending them do you think? Do you have any other hobbies or fixations or have you given your all to this single topic?

Sure Britain’s role has been acknowledged in some ways. But historical research leads to new knowledge. And we’ve learnt more about the scale of investment in slavery and the dynamics by which it operated.

Why do you want to “push back” against this? If it’s supported by robust historical research (which despite claims to contrary, in my experience in NT properties it is) why do you not want a fuller and more accurate account of slavery? What is your motivation for resisting? Is it better to know less?

Those factors were of differing importance to different groups of people.

Why is this special focus on slavery in the British context, ie museums and stately homes? Is it because 200 years is still relatively recent, that there are so many institutions and buildings where we can directly trace the funding to that of trades related to slavery?

I've been to the ruins at Pompeii which was full of slaves, and they don't get any more of a special mention over the other population that were there. Is that because it was 2000 years not 200 years ago? Not in Britain? Was slavery any more inherently good or bad at that time?

I am very much in favour of learning from the mistakes of the past, but very much against judging our ancestors by our current morality because we can be assured that our descendants will be judging us just as hard.

It seems to me that post colonial studies just ends up eating itself:

https://scholarblogs.emory.edu/postcolonialstudies/about-postcolonial-studies/

@RebelliousCow

Why are you pushing back?

And no, I don't think the public really understands the impact of slavery.

Watch David Olusoga on this- I learnt a lot!

GOT - Because it’s boring being served up the same sandwich when others are available. The first time I saw the drilling down into the slavery angle (one of the London museums I think) I was interested, but I don’t want it to be the focus all the time and every time I go to a museum or NT place. Because then it feels less informative and more punitive.

I think you've answered your own question.

There are entire nations that only exist due to the Atlantic slave trade.

There are millions of people alive today that can trace their families back to it one way or another.

The twisted, pseudo-science and bastardised philosophies that were used to justify it were forerunners of modern racism.

It, matters.

What maltravers said. And especially so when it's tenuous drivel about "queer hair" when there is a nit comb dredged up from the depths.

Shrug. It’s a long established and respected approach in the humanities across the world.

If this is the first time you’ve heard of it I suggest you read a little before debating its worth. You will end up looking silly :)