International News Black Lives Matter

chuckbert said:
You have a very simplistic view of morality. Anyone would think you have chucked out a judgement based on the first few lines of a Wikipedia entry.
Click to expand...
I did my research - more than some of the kids looking to remove history. How about closing Yale University too? Named after a slave trader.

Or is that too "simplistic"?
 
Gary Baldi said:
I did my research - more than some of the kids looking to remove history. How about closing Yale University too? Named after a slave trader.

Or is that too "simplistic"?
Click to expand...

Has anyone suggested closing or shutting down organisations named after such things - wouldn’t they simply suggest renaming them? (Not saying they should in this case)
 
Gary Baldi said:
I did my research - more than some of the kids looking to remove history. How about closing Yale University too? Named after a slave trader.

Or is that too "simplistic"?
Click to expand...
Sorry, thought we were talking about Newton (and Rhodes?).

Did you have a look at this? https://www.cowperandnewtonmuseum.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/thoughtsuponafri00newt.pdf
As a perspective on a hard life in hard times, and a complete remorse, repentence, revelation and enlightenment about what he had done in his past, and how things should change it is hard to beat. The suggestion of banning Amazing Grace because of what he went through in life before this change would seem a bit strange.

I can find nothing conciliatory or repentant about Rhodes, who was in the discussion as a comparison for Newton (before hopping onto Yale). An interesting perspective is in Rhodes's obituary here: https://www.theguardian.com/century/1899-1909/Story/0,,126334,00.html?redirection=century.

Yale seems to be fairly comparable to Rhodes - part of the EIC's corporate raid of Mogal India. I had no idea about that previously. The only reason I could see it not getting airtime with BLM would be that his participation in slavery in India is disputed (albeit by Yale people), and the fact that the focus has been on African slavery thus far ...
 
What a shame that on whatever thread he finds himself on the only debating tactic Mr Baldi seems to have is to distract or try to change the subject.
 
chuckbert said:
Sorry, thought we were talking about Newton (and Rhodes?).

Did you have a look at this? https://www.cowperandnewtonmuseum.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/thoughtsuponafri00newt.pdf
As a perspective on a hard life in hard times, and a complete remorse, repentence, revelation and enlightenment about what he had done in his past, and how things should change it is hard to beat. The suggestion of banning Amazing Grace because of what he went through in life before this change would seem a bit strange.

I can find nothing conciliatory or repentant about Rhodes, who was in the discussion as a comparison for Newton (before hopping onto Yale). An interesting perspective is in Rhodes's obituary here: https://www.theguardian.com/century/1899-1909/Story/0,,126334,00.html?redirection=century.

Yale seems to be fairly comparable to Rhodes - part of the EIC's corporate raid of Mogal India. I had no idea about that previously. The only reason I could see it not getting airtime with BLM would be that his participation in slavery in India is disputed (albeit by Yale people), and the fact that the focus has been on African slavery thus far ...
Click to expand...
The problem is as this has expanded from Confederate Statues a few years ago and now, to founding fathers, to Christopher Columbus, so for the better word, the initial intent and scope has been lost or forgotten about. The mob have put it all on the table and don't care who they consume. So applying those principles, Yale, and the Ivy League as a whole are now up for debate.

It is also very appropriate, bearing in mind the Colston statue being removed, Churchill's statue being persistently defaced, questions over Gandhi's statue, Lincoln's statue being defaced, questions about Nelson's column, Cecil Rhodes statue etc that we carry on the conversation, rather than calling someone obtuse for pointing out the wider issue or the hypocrisy view of BLM. It's moved way past African slavery now.

My preference is this cancel culture to be stopped now and we move on together while we all have a semblance of common ground left in the middle. But so many want to dwell on the past and keep dividing/mobbing up until they get what they want that I can't see it happening. We have to cancel it all, not all.

Some of us have tried to say cancel culture had to stop years ago because of where it would end up, and we were constantly told we were exaggerating. We were right.

Crikey, the sad thing is few people are really angry about the African kids who mine cobalt today or the African Slaves sold in Libya hnow. More important to me than the anger of statues of long dead men and a better way to make Black Lives Matter in Africa?
 
YellowTaxi said:
What a shame that on whatever thread he finds himself on the only debating tactic Mr Baldi seems to have is to distract or try to change the subject.
Click to expand...
All I am doing is pointing out the depth and scope of the issue - where do we stop on this issue? Is the issue done now, or do we have to look deeper? Do we can Islam too? Ban Apple iPhones? Libyan Slave Markets?

People such as yourself set the table, you need to eat your own cooking.
 
Plenty going on to try and stop modern slavery already: https://www.antislavery.org/what-we...l8SM8uZ-oQkz9p9u1m_Ltoe74rfJNK0xoCbrEQAvD_BwE

Undoutedly more needs to be done, but with the likes of Trumps America First agenda and Johnson's extremely short sighted decapitation of our overseas aid efforts through the merger of DFID and FO, it is not exactly getting the buy in or exposure from the leaders of the developed world.

And it is yet another squirrel to prevent a proper reconciliation with our past. Both tackling modern issues AND righting wrongs and injustices of the past are possible at the same time. Both are achievable, but both need open and mature engagement and debate from all sides, no matter how uncomfortable some might be finding the rebalance of the status quo, which will happen no matter how much some might kick and scream.
 
all have a semblance of common ground left in the middle.
Click to expand...

What's the common ground between discussing the role slavery has played in the British Economy, facing up to the cruelties, lootings and crimes of empire and where necessary renaming buildings or taking down or amending statues and street names which honour those who profited from slavery and saying "this cancel culture to be stopped now"?
 
Sheik djibouti said:
Plenty going on to try and stop modern slavery already: https://www.antislavery.org/what-we...l8SM8uZ-oQkz9p9u1m_Ltoe74rfJNK0xoCbrEQAvD_BwE

Undoutedly more needs to be done, but with the likes of Trumps America First agenda and Johnson's extremely short sighted decapitation of our overseas aid efforts through the merger of DFID and FO, it is not exactly getting the buy in or exposure from the leaders of the developed world.

And it is yet another squirrel to prevent a proper reconciliation with our past. Both tackling modern issues AND righting wrongs and injustices of the past are possible at the same time. Both are achievable, but both need open and mature engagement and debate from all sides, no matter how uncomfortable some might be finding the rebalance of the status quo, which will happen no matter how much some might kick and scream.
Click to expand...
I wholeheartedly agree. But we have to assess it all or otherwise it becomes mob rule over collaboration and understanding.

The awful reality is human history is littered with slavery and we don't enough learning from our past to stop it from happening today. Destroying a few statues or renaming a few army bases won't hide that reality.
 
YellowTaxi said:
What's the common ground between discussing the role slavery has played in the British Economy, facing up to the cruelties, lootings and crimes of empire and where necessary renaming buildings or taking down or amending statues and street names which honour those who profited from slavery and saying "this cancel culture to be stopped now"?
Click to expand...
Where do you stop though? Because as I have just posted, slavery is a effectively a human condition? Do we ignore Chattlel Slavery? The crimes of Ottoman Empire? Moor slavery in Spain?

It's a never ending and ceaseless stain our existence.
 
Gary Baldi said:
Where do you stop though? Because as I have just posted, slavery is a effectively a human condition? Do we ignore Chattlel Slavery? The crimes of Ottoman Empire? Moor slavery in Spain?

It's a never ending and ceaseless stain our existence.
Click to expand...
Or you can look at each thing on its merits, using the weight of scholarly analysis that has already happened over decades and centuries, prioritise and pick off the most impactful things to act on at the most opportune time.
Having an existential meltdown that it’s all too much and all to difficult to sort out is not the answer.
 
chuckbert said:
Or you can look at each thing on its merits, using the weight of scholarly analysis that has already happened over decades and centuries, prioritise and pick off the most impactful things to act on at the most opportune time.
Having an existential meltdown that it’s all too much and all to difficult to sort out is not the answer.
Click to expand...

Can only recent scholars as the others will all have been racists. :)
 
chuckbert said:
Or you can look at each thing on its merits, using the weight of scholarly analysis that has already happened over decades and centuries, prioritise and pick off the most impactful things to act on at the most opportune time.
Having an existential meltdown that it’s all too much and all to difficult to sort out is not the answer.
Click to expand...
But it’s so much easier to just capsize the life raft and then blame other people for leaving you with no choice because they didn’t stop complaining.
 
Gary Baldi said:
Cecil Rhodes
Click to expand...
Probably also worth pointing out this isn't a BLM issue, the Rhodes Must Go movement has been trying for this for years and is an entirely different group. They of course used the current climate to their own ends, but worth remembering that it wasn't removed (as now seems likely) directly due to BLM.
 
Gary Baldi said:
I wholeheartedly agree. But we have to assess it all or otherwise it becomes mob rule over collaboration and understanding.

The awful reality is human history is littered with slavery and we don't enough learning from our past to stop it from happening today. Destroying a few statues or renaming a few army bases won't hide that reality.
Click to expand...

The statues were built to hide the reality. People who want to bring them down, or tell the other side of the story do it so we can learn from the past, rather than the whitewashed fairytales- that you seem to want to hang on to.

instead your argument seems to be "there was so much slavery we mustn't talk about the British role in it..."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

LowerSouth
National News Suicide- why are so many of our young men deciding to end there lives ?
Replies
10
Views
2K
RyanioBirdio
RyanioBirdio
Sarge
International News Scouser lives up to stereotyping?
Replies
0
Views
2K
Sarge
Sarge
Back
Top Bottom