Statues and our tolerance of history
Discussion
BrundanBianchi said:
I quite like it that Vera Lynn’s version of Land of hope and glory has been propelled up the charts, thus forcing the BBC to play it. That’s the majority, shouting down the vocal minority, and doing it the ‘British way’. I absolutely love the last night of the Proms, and really don’t appreciate being dictated to by a bunch of virtue signalling nobodies. Hopefully all this will calm down, as the idiots causing the issue will move on to something else, as they are brainless sheep, who don’t care about ‘now’ just what’s ‘next’.Then the people who’ve caused it can be ‘encouraged’ to leave their posts, nice and quietly.
I think The Proms is still being shown on TV but has to be different this year because of CV19. I guess you knew that though. 
tangerine_sedge said:
Fair comment, they didn't actually buy /sell/use slaves, they only enabled and hugely profited from the trade of slaves and the produce of their labour. 
Still, they gave some of their dirty money away, so that makes them OK....
Can you tell me how that is any different from Apple and modern clothing houses? Maximising profit from the cheapest labour?Still, they gave some of their dirty money away, so that makes them OK....
No it doesn't make them ok, but it does establish the full context not a narrative.
Where do you want to cleanse from? Whom do you believe started slaving as a concept? When did it end?
saaby93 said:
Would it work to think of slaves as servants being moved from a business in one country to another?
Or as workers - how many say east europeans are brought in to pick fruit and veg this time of year?
If we buy fruit and veg are we contributary?
Not really.Or as workers - how many say east europeans are brought in to pick fruit and veg this time of year?
If we buy fruit and veg are we contributary?
The east European fruit pickers choose to come here and can return home if they wish.
However, some of the incredibly cheap car washes do rely on modern slavery to operate - https://www.salvationarmy.org.uk/modern-slavery/sp...
tangerine_sedge said:
Fair comment, they didn't actually buy /sell/use slaves, they only enabled and hugely profited from the trade of slaves and the produce of their labour.
Still, they gave some of their dirty money away, so that makes them OK....
Where do you separate an slave owner/ ship owner/ importer/ mill owner/ local economy/ whole country?Still, they gave some of their dirty money away, so that makes them OK....
Many don't which is why the UK must pay reparations.
T6 vanman said:
Just to pick you up …. (lost cause ..I know) …. but the statues were erected to honour the charitable and philanthropic activities of the person, I've yet to see the statues honouring the slave activity,
Just so were clear regarding history
If that's the case would it be considered acceptable to have a statue for Jimmy Saville?Just so were clear regarding history
tangerine_sedge said:
Fair comment, they didn't actually buy /sell/use slaves, they only enabled and hugely profited from the trade of slaves and the produce of their labour.
Still, they gave some of their dirty money away, so that makes them OK....
Hope you're typing that on a FairPhone using electricity powered by ethical energy sources whilst wearing sweatshop-free clothing.Still, they gave some of their dirty money away, so that makes them OK....
Phud said:
tangerine_sedge said:
Just to pick you up....
The reason they could be charitable is because they made their fortunes from (surprise twist) trading slaves. I know, it's crazy isn't it!
Just to pick you up. The reason they could be charitable is because they made their fortunes from (surprise twist) trading slaves. I know, it's crazy isn't it!
They made their fortunes being related to the slave trade, very few of the people were actual slavers that was a local custom, the whites whom bought the slaves directly tend not to be these folks.
Slave owners, do you include surfs and indentured slaves?
But its easy to say "trading slaves" rather than having as clue about it.
Countdown said:
Drug dealers don't actually make the stuff. All they do is transport it from one place to the other.....
Where are you declaring the dealer, grower, cutter, refiner, wholesaler and what is your point here? Slaving was legal, normal and there were various styles of slave. Transporting slaves was legal.
Drug dealing is both legal, medical and illegal class A and synthetic, who are you on about?
Phud said:
Countdown said:
Drug dealers don't actually make the stuff. All they do is transport it from one place to the other.....
Where are you declaring the dealer, grower, cutter, refiner, wholesaler and what is your point here? Slaving was legal, normal and there were various styles of slave. Transporting slaves was legal.
Drug dealing is both legal, medical and illegal class A and synthetic, who are you on about?
Phud said:
Where are you declaring the dealer, grower, cutter, refiner, wholesaler and what is your point here?
My point is that just because it was "legal" doesn't mean it was morally right 9and I'd be surprised if they weren't aware of this at the time). In response to your point that they weren't actually ENSLAVING people doesn't suddenly make what they did "Ok".Countdown said:
My point is that just because it was "legal" doesn't mean it was morally right 9and I'd be surprised if they weren't aware of this at the time). In response to your point that they weren't actually ENSLAVING people doesn't suddenly make what they did "Ok".
So you use an illegal act to try to highlight that your moral stance should be the right one.At the time and into the 1940's, actually still, slaving in Africa was normal and there are no morals around it, the moral aspect resulted in the West African squadron and the abolition of slaving. In case you are not aware it was the British who stopped, limited actually, the Arab slavery routes in Africa.
You have an issue with what people did in history fine, I say it is history and suggest that it is learnt from. You cannot change history, you can hide it, re write it but never change what happened, yes you can change the narrative, but that is just whose story gets read. However what is required is a truthful history, not narrative, in the UK we have a lot of history, however there is always a narrative, the truth of it is harder to find.
Rather than look back, I would strongly recommend that the energy goes into stopping modern slavery of all sorts. A bad day in the western world is far better than most of the world can hope for as the best day ever.
R Mutt said:
Phud said:
Countdown said:
Drug dealers don't actually make the stuff. All they do is transport it from one place to the other.....
Where are you declaring the dealer, grower, cutter, refiner, wholesaler and what is your point here? Slaving was legal, normal and there were various styles of slave. Transporting slaves was legal.
Drug dealing is both legal, medical and illegal class A and synthetic, who are you on about?
Countdown said:
Drug dealers don't actually make the stuff. All they do is transport it from one place to the other.....
Apart from the Mexican/Columbian cartels, obviously. The biggest drug dealers in the world, they control the production of opium, cannabis and cocaine in Meso/South America from growing the product to its distribution.According to this Welsh government-ordered audit Churchill is now a “person of interest” who requires further examination.
“ Wales has 209 streets, buildings, portraits or monuments commemorating people directly involved with the slave trade or who opposed its abolition.
An audit also found "commemoration of people of colour" to be "negligible".
The review was ordered by First Minister Mark Drakeford following protests prompted by the killing of George Floyd in the US.
Mr Drakeford said the audit "helps us establish an honest picture of our history".”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-55077736
“ Wales has 209 streets, buildings, portraits or monuments commemorating people directly involved with the slave trade or who opposed its abolition.
An audit also found "commemoration of people of colour" to be "negligible".
The review was ordered by First Minister Mark Drakeford following protests prompted by the killing of George Floyd in the US.
Mr Drakeford said the audit "helps us establish an honest picture of our history".”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-55077736
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff