Current Affairs The Landmarks of Slavery;

[Barnfred 55]

That would be fine if the sole issue in the election was whether to change dozens of street names. In reality, the matter woudn't be foremost in anybody's mind when casting their votes at a local election.

Fair comment. But then I would argue that if they then tried to change street names, that they will have no mandate to do so without going through the cost of a mini referendum.

All I'm doing is trying to come up with some ideas of how to deal with this sensitive issue democratically. How would you deal with it? Or wouldn't you bother.?

In all honesty it isn't something I have a particularly strong opinion on one way or the other. I'd much rather we did something about the actual slavery that is still going on in our society today.

 

[Wizard]

 

[Aberblue]

Fair comment. But then I would argue that if they then tried to change street names, that they will have no mandate to do so without going through the cost of a mini referendum.

All I'm doing is trying to come up with some ideas of how to deal with this sensitive issue democratically. How would you deal with it? Or wouldn't you bother.?

In all honesty it isn't something I have a particularly strong opinion on one way or the other. I'd much rather we did something about the actual slavery that is still going on in our society today.

I agree with you. It's not the easiest question; on one hand there's no reason to glorify slavers by having statues of them on display, while on the other hand virtually nobody connects street names to slavers - "Penny Lane" is a case in point, and it would obviously be daft to research every street name and rename every one that had any possible connection to slavery or other dark deeds.

 

[Barnfred 55]

I agree with you. It's not the easiest question; on one hand there's no reason to glorify slavers by having statues of them on display, while on the other hand virtually nobody connects street names to slavers - "Penny Lane" is a case in point, and it would obviously be daft to research every street name and rename every one that had any possible connection to slavery or other dark deeds.

Having lived a stone throw away from Penny Lane for nearly 30 years, I can assure you that I was ignorant of it's links to slavery until I saw an article in the Echo a couple of years ago on the subject. I'm equally certain that if ever that street name was changed, there would be 10s of millions of Beatles fans worldwide who would be up in arms over it.

 

[dublinbluenose]

 

[Wizard]

 

[kenada_blue]

I don't understand this. Why do people get so sure that these things are mutually exclusive? I'm fairly sure those campaigning to remove the statues have done more than most for pushing other avenues of change.

Because removing some architecture is just a glorified publicity stunt to me. In 30+ years time, generations won't remember what statue was there or even if there was one in the first place. That's for anything that gets torn down, good or bad historically.

I do believe it erases awareness of what the monument represents. Until it happened, I bet 90% of people outside of Bristol even knew that statue was there and who it was.

And of course. I do hope these people are doing more than the average to push change. But to me, directing it towards century years old stone/metal isn't beneficial in the long run (especially in an elitist institute like Oxford).

And also, personally im just not a fan of destroying/pulling down architecture thats been around for 100s of years regardless of affinity to religion/race/creed etc.

 

[roydo]

I have been giving the change of streets some thought, and I have decided its a daft idea. Reason is, when roads are built, they are usually named along the lines of a common theme.

The streets around that statue in Bristol are, I reckon, named after members of Bristol Merchant Ventures. Colston Avenue, Augustines Parade, Trenchard Street, Frogmore Street, and Baldwin Street.

They then lead into Princes Street, Queens Square, Kings Street. Get the idea?

Keep the statue in a museum or docks, arsed either way, rename the Colston Hall, (being done anyrate), but leave the streets as is.

Oh, Liam Rosenior was on earlier, (local lad), and said he educated himself on slavery and stuff, then added "there is still a street in Bristol called Black Boy Hill". There is, but is named after a pub, which is named after King James 1st.

Better in this thread.

 

[dead_soft]

Because removing some architecture is just a glorified publicity stunt to me. In 30+ years time, generations won't remember what statue was there or even if there was one in the first place. That's for anything that gets torn down, good or bad historically.

I do believe it erases awareness of what the monument represents. Until it happened, I bet 90% of people outside of Bristol even knew that statue was there and who it was.

And of course. I do hope these people are doing more than the average to push change. But to me, directing it towards century years old stone/metal isn't beneficial in the long run (especially in an elitist institute like Oxford).

And also, personally im just not a fan of destroying/pulling down architecture thats been around for 100s of years regardless of affinity to religion/race/creed etc.

A publicity stunt would suggest it's a good thing if your below idea of 'awareness' being good? I don't think it's particularly sad that in 30 years people might not remember him.

So 90% of people didn't know about him when the statue was up, but NOW they really won't be aware of him?

But I don't think anyone is directing it solely at a statue (though if they are, fine).

We live in a country which will happily tear things down if it helps the economy so I don't really buy that argument much

 

[kenada_blue]

A publicity stunt would suggest it's a good thing if your below idea of 'awareness' being good? I don't think it's particularly sad that in 30 years people might not remember him

So 90% of people didn't know about him when the statue was up, but NOW they really won't be aware of him?

But I don't think anyone is directing it solely at a statue (though if they are, fine).

We live in a country which will happily tear things down if it helps the economy so I don't really buy that argument much

Because its historical association with the town/city. You visit the city, you see, and learn. You remove chunks of it, you get half a story. So if 90% of people outside don't know about it, when they visit they now won't get to know as openly as they should in my view.

As for tearing down centuries old buildings for to help the economy...I ain't a fan of that either.

Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow, any dockland city will have been built or benefitted from slavery. Unless you want to start erasing everything they were built from and just leave anything associated with the Beatles...that's cool.

 

[kenada_blue]

Fair comment. But then I would argue that if they then tried to change street names, that they will have no mandate to do so without going through the cost of a mini referendum.

All I'm doing is trying to come up with some ideas of how to deal with this sensitive issue democratically. How would you deal with it? Or wouldn't you bother.?

In all honesty it isn't something I have a particularly strong opinion on one way or the other. I'd much rather we did something about the actual slavery that is still going on in our society today.

Own and iPhone or any phone to be fair, you've funded modern slavery in some respects

 

[Connor mcloud]

The pubs need to open up so everyone can chill out.

They’ll rob all the street signs when they’ve had a few

 

[Barnfred 55]

Because its historical association with the town/city. You visit the city, you see, and learn. You remove chunks of it, you get half a story. So if 90% of people outside don't know about it, when they visit they now won't get to know as openly as they should in my view.

As for tearing down centuries old buildings for to help the economy...I ain't a fan of that either.

Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow, any dockland city will have been built or benefitted from slavery. Unless you want to start erasing everything they were built from and just leave anything associated with the Beatles...that's cool.

Don't forget London

 

[PhilM]

The University of Liverpool have agreed to rename Gladstone Hall, named after the prominent ex-PM William Gladstone, due to his families links to slavery.

Although his father owned slaves on his plantations, Gladstone was never a slave owner himself; his politics with regards to slavery are questionable.

If you're an old blue of the Blue Coat, there's calls for Blundell's name to be removed too although he was a captain of a slave ship.

 

[Barnfred 55]

Own and iPhone or any phone to be fair, you've funded modern slavery in some respects

I'm not even talking about low paid labour. I'm talking about real slaves who have been smuggled into the country illegally, had their passports withheld and forced to work in various areas including the sex trade. There are believed to be 1000s of real slaves in the U.K right nowhere