Re Writing Of History

[the_bloke]

24 minutes ago, Halibut said:

How does the following sound to you ''I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place."?

So it's clear you think that Churchill was a racist. Should his statues and other commemorative installations be removed? Does his racism carry more weight than his accomplishments? 

[Halibut]

Just now, the_bloke said:

So it's clear you think that Churchill was a racist. Should his statues and other commemorative installations be removed? Does his racism carry more weight than his accomplishments? 

It's clear by his own words that he was. Should statues of him be removed? They can stay for me - but I think it's time we were more honest about our history. We should be giving schoolchildren the full picture, not just the glossy, palatable bits. It's clear that some people still regard it as almost sacriligeous pointing out Churchill's racism and his other flaws, but I think we need to be honest about such things.

[tinfoilhat]

3 hours ago, West 77 said:

Sorry I don't understand what you mean?  I have found the following information which contains reasons why the statue was Grade II listed.

https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1202137

And you said it can’t be moved from 1977. It was moved after 1977 - mid 90s I think.

3 hours ago, the_bloke said:

We still don't know who should decide if a statue stays or goes.

 

The statue of Colston for example; apparently he was a huge beneficiary to the city, which is why roads were named after him. Charities, hospitals, schools all received vast sums of money (70 grand in the late 1600s was a lot of money) all after he sold his shares in the Royal African Company in 1869 to William, Prince of Orange after only being involved with it for 9 years.  There are charities and schools today that have links to his money.

 

Going back to the comment I made about the Guardian and it's roots in pro-slavery, the consensus is that the newspaper changed it's viewpoint so it's forgiven. Like a politician saying 'sorry'. Did Colston redeem himself through his charitable works?

 

Are people trying to destroy all statues of James II too? He headed the Royal African Company.

Those charities were very selective. No catholic charities received anything.

[tinfoilhat]

1 hour ago, carosio said:

It depends what you mean by racist, Halibut. Before WW2, half the country could have been racist (or rather prejudiced) in some sense. In Sheffield, my mother told me that black people were relatively rare and people would stop in the street and stare. In fact, it was considered amongst many that it would encourage bad luck to befall any houshold that let a black man over the threshold. Prejudice I know, but that's how it was.  Africans in there own countries would be thought of as natives or savages wearing a loin cloth and holding a spear.

I’d say a bit more than half. I recall spike Milligan’s wartime memoirs and is was funny, moving and, to be honest, pretty racist in places. 

[Michael_W]

It's amazing how many people seem to have gained so much knowledge of history in the last week or so, the thing is history has to be kept in context too, there are still far too many generalisations about British history and history in general, we are where we are as a consequence of history and it's a very complex tapestry that has been woven, it surprises me how so many of the so called 'educated' amongst us are happy to only focus on selective aspects of it, I would take a guess that not that many actually know much about the history of the town or city they live in, never mind the world.

The targeting of statues is all well and good but many, many people have walked past those statues on a daily basis without realising who they are of or what they are there for, in fact I would say many simply didn't care because these statues have no actual bearing on their lives whatsoever, the decision to take some down is purely symbolic and will not make any persons life any better.

Anyone on here ever visited other European cities or places around the world where things were done and thought those places would be better for removing their historical artefacts ?

Most of them actually attract millions of tourists to see these things and get to know the history without it being hidden in a museum in most cases, try Berlin or Krakow for starters, though I'm sure all our Remain voters already will have 

 

 

[RollingJ]

Good points, @Michael_W. I was sent an interesting Twitter link earlier - when my phones recharged and I've got a couple of spare minutes, I'll see if I can find it on the laptop and repost.

[tinfoilhat]

9 minutes ago, Michael_W said:

It's amazing how many people seem to have gained so much knowledge of history in the last week or so, the thing is history has to be kept in context too, there are still far too many generalisations about British history and history in general, we are where we are as a consequence of history and it's a very complex tapestry that has been woven, it surprises me how so many of the so called 'educated' amongst us are happy to only focus on selective aspects of it, I would take a guess that not that many actually know much about the history of the town or city they live in, never mind the world.

The targeting of statues is all well and good but many, many people have walked past those statues on a daily basis without realising who they are of or what they are there for, in fact I would say many simply didn't care because these statues have no actual bearing on their lives whatsoever, the decision to take some down is purely symbolic and will not make any persons life any better.

Anyone on here ever visited other European cities or places around the world where things were done and thought those places would be better for removing their historical artefacts ?

Most of them actually attract millions of tourists to see these things and get to know the history without it being hidden in a museum in most cases, try Berlin or Krakow for starters, though I'm sure all our Remain voters already will have 

 

 

The Soviets took down quite a few bits of historical decoration in 1945. Should they have left it up?

[Michael_W]

13 minutes ago, tinfoilhat said:

The Soviets took down quite a few bits of historical decoration in 1945. Should they have left it up?

Not quite the same context though is it, they didn't just roll up in their tanks to take down the trimmings fella !

[carosio]

1 hour ago, Halibut said:

How does the following sound to you ''I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place."?

Certainly, that was racist thinking (socal Darwinism); the white man superior to the black man. The UK which was running the Empire were superior in organization, military, technology and (arguably) the arts etc, and like other Empirists (an age he was born into) he believed that it was in the best interests of the afformentioned to be dominated but it didn't mean he hated them. 

 

The Red Indians weren't peaceful, the tribes were at constant war with one another

[tinfoilhat]

23 minutes ago, carosio said:

Certainly, that was racist thinking (socal Darwinism); the white man superior to the black man. The UK which was running the Empire were superior in organization, military, technology and (arguably) the arts etc, and like other Empirists (an age he was born into) he believed that it was in the best interests of the afformentioned to be dominated but it didn't mean he hated them. 

 

The Red Indians weren't peaceful, the tribes were at constant war with one another

Native Americans.