Edward Colston/Trans rights/Stamp collecting
Comments
-
What a surprise. Compulsive contrarian show-off jumps at opportunity to show off with contrarian views.tailwindhome said:TV Historian David Starkey on Darren Grimes new venture..
Notwithstanding the straw man premise, the idea that a genocide must be successful to be considered as such is a new one.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Sure, not disputing that new statues go through the process you described.Pross said:
Rick's comment was 'who is deciding which statues to erect' which implies in current times rather than historically.rjsterry said:
Most statues long predate the Town and Country Planning Act and democratic involvement was pretty limited until the early 20th century. Coincidentally this lack of democracy was the cause of a number of mass protests and riots in 19th century Bristol and establishment worries about the lower orders getting ideas above their station was what led to the Colston statue being erected in the first place.bompington said:
I'm kind of assuming that the final word on statues in public places is down to the elected authorities, and private ground it would be the rightful owner (with the possibility of the council again if planning law says so).rjsterry said:
Looking at history, angry mob is the usual method, but sometimes it is state sanctioned. If self-appointed people can put them up as was the case with the Colston statue, it seems quite fitting that they are pulled down without permission. Better that than have some meaningless public art that offends no one.bompington said:
You can argue this one back and forth as long as you want, but it seems to be getting forgotten that the issue a lot of us had isn't about whether statues stand or fall: it's about whether a self-appointed "vanguard" or random mob have the right to decide for us.rjsterry said:
Removing statues of people who have fallen out of favour has a very long history - as long as there have been statues. The idea that nobody should touch them once they are put up is a modern aberration. The idea that removing them is destroying history is ridiculous. History is not objects.
But if what we actually want is a free market in statue erecting and destroying... I mean, what could possibly go wrong?
So yes, people should go through the proper procedure, but I really can't get that upset about it.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
He certainly uses some emotive language there.rjsterry said:
What a surprise. Compulsive contrarian show-off jumps at opportunity to show off with contrarian views.tailwindhome said:TV Historian David Starkey on Darren Grimes new venture..
Notwithstanding the straw man premise, the idea that a genocide must be successful to be considered as such is a new one.
That aside, what you describe as contrarians views will resonate with many"Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.1 -
Does it resonate with you?blazing_saddles said:
He certainly uses some emotive language there.rjsterry said:
What a surprise. Compulsive contrarian show-off jumps at opportunity to show off with contrarian views.tailwindhome said:TV Historian David Starkey on Darren Grimes new venture..
Notwithstanding the straw man premise, the idea that a genocide must be successful to be considered as such is a new one.
That aside, what you describe as contrarians views will resonate with many0 -
Like I said, it's a strawman argument. Of course slavery wasn't genocide, they were seen as too valuable a commodity and were essential to the prosperity of their owners' businesses.blazing_saddles said:
He certainly uses some emotive language there.rjsterry said:
What a surprise. Compulsive contrarian show-off jumps at opportunity to show off with contrarian views.tailwindhome said:TV Historian David Starkey on Darren Grimes new venture..
Notwithstanding the straw man premise, the idea that a genocide must be successful to be considered as such is a new one.
That aside, what you describe as contrarians views will resonate with many1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
-
the presence of slave breeding farms would suggest it was the opposite of genociderjsterry said:
Like I said, it's a strawman argument. Of course slavery wasn't genocide, they were seen as too valuable a commodity and were essential to the prosperity of their owners' businesses.blazing_saddles said:
He certainly uses some emotive language there.rjsterry said:
What a surprise. Compulsive contrarian show-off jumps at opportunity to show off with contrarian views.tailwindhome said:TV Historian David Starkey on Darren Grimes new venture..
Notwithstanding the straw man premise, the idea that a genocide must be successful to be considered as such is a new one.
That aside, what you describe as contrarians views will resonate with many0 -
Quite. It's gibberish. I think I've said this before, but he really should stick to Tudor history.rick_chasey said:To be clear, by his reasoning the holocaust was not genocide as there were Jews left over.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
No more than your views on this subject resonate with me.rick_chasey said:
Does it resonate with you?blazing_saddles said:
He certainly uses some emotive language there.rjsterry said:
What a surprise. Compulsive contrarian show-off jumps at opportunity to show off with contrarian views.tailwindhome said:TV Historian David Starkey on Darren Grimes new venture..
Notwithstanding the straw man premise, the idea that a genocide must be successful to be considered as such is a new one.
That aside, what you describe as contrarians views will resonate with many
Certainly don't agree with his genocide remark. Hard to dispute that Africa doesn't have a terrible record in this respect.
Only just last week there were fears expressed of another mass event in Nigeria.
I was merely pointing out the obvious that there are many who hold pretty conservative views that would likely line up with Starkey's.
Sorry for the slow reply. I like to at least try to answer direct questions.
Been making the most of a brief appearance of the Sun.
"Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
Genocide is the deliberate murder of a group, with the objective of exterminating them all, surely? That's what the Nazis were trying to do to the Jews, Similarly there was genocide against the Jews on one of the early Crusades that didn't reach the Holy Land. Neither was totally successful in exterminating them all.rick_chasey said:To be clear, by his reasoning the holocaust was not genocide as there were Jews left over.
It's also what the white settlors tried to do in Australia to the indigenous population, and what various places in Africa have tried to do more recently.
Given slaves were a valuable commodity, surely slavery wasn't genocide as the aim wasn't to kill them all off, it was to exploit them.0 -
Sorry, wrong thread.“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!1
-
Is it not a concern that "Slavery was not genocide, otherwise there wouldn't be so many damn blacks in Africa or in Britain would there?" is a view that would 'resonate with many'?
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!1 -
Well quite. Lest anyone think it is just wet liberals like me that think Starkey's comments are disgusting, here's Sajid Javid.tailwindhome said:Is it not a concern that "Slavery was not genocide, otherwise there wouldn't be so many damn blacks in Africa or in Britain would there?" is a view that would 'resonate with many'?
Sadly a lot of the replies just serve to confirm that it is true.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Thanks for explaining the difference between slavery and genocide.Dorset_Boy said:
Genocide is the deliberate murder of a group, with the objective of exterminating them all, surely? That's what the Nazis were trying to do to the Jews, Similarly there was genocide against the Jews on one of the early Crusades that didn't reach the Holy Land. Neither was totally successful in exterminating them all.rick_chasey said:To be clear, by his reasoning the holocaust was not genocide as there were Jews left over.
It's also what the white settlors tried to do in Australia to the indigenous population, and what various places in Africa have tried to do more recently.
Given slaves were a valuable commodity, surely slavery wasn't genocide as the aim wasn't to kill them all off, it was to exploit them.
It was totally unnecessary.0 -
WTF was Starkey on? Pixxed? High? Just being a Rodney? No intention of viewing the YouTube of the 'conservative' host and enhancing his click count.
Fitzwilliam Cambridge will give him the boot; Mary Rose Trust already waved him a 2 finger goodbye.
Where is that shake head icon...?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-532626680 -
Why is anyone shocked about Starkey making comments like this? He's a loon and has form:
Accused of holocaust denial
Stated on Newsnight that 'whites are becoming black' after rioting
Compared the Nazis view of Jews to the Scots view of the English
He's old school media's version of clickbait1 -
I get annoyed he gets TV jobs and fellowships at decent colleges when his history is just very sh!t.
0 -
All the times that he has been stopped should be cataloged, therefore, he (especially in the current climate) should be able to do them for harassment.seanoconn - gruagach craic!0
-
Suing is properly grim though. What a stress.pinno said:All the times that he has been stopped should be cataloged, therefore, he (especially in the current climate) should be able to do them for harassment.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/linford-christie-calls-met-police-racist-after-traffic-stop-chc2l9nc30 -
Sometimes, if someone has the time and money, I think it can be considered their civic duty.rick_chasey said:
Suing is properly grim though. What a stress.pinno said:All the times that he has been stopped should be cataloged, therefore, he (especially in the current climate) should be able to do them for harassment.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/linford-christie-calls-met-police-racist-after-traffic-stop-chc2l9nc30 -
Shouldn’t have to in the first place.TheBigBean said:
Sometimes, if someone has the time and money, I think it can be considered their civic duty.rick_chasey said:
Suing is properly grim though. What a stress.pinno said:All the times that he has been stopped should be cataloged, therefore, he (especially in the current climate) should be able to do them for harassment.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/linford-christie-calls-met-police-racist-after-traffic-stop-chc2l9nc3
0 -
David Starkey saying racist sh!t is hardly new, but it does need to be highlighted when he does.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
-
!00%. He does appear to have been at the forefront of saying sensationalist stuff to promote himself and therefore gain future work.rick_chasey said:
I don’t understand why he was in the positions he was in the first place.pblakeney said:David Starkey saying racist sh!t is hardly new, but it does need to be highlighted when he does.
His work is just not very good.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Slight detour. A thought provoking article (as a lot of them are) from Tom Chivers on problems with unconscious bias training.
https://unherd.com/2020/01/why-do-we-spend-millions-on-bs-tests/
In short, it's not that such biases don't exist - that's well documented - but that the test used to measure them is unreliable on an individual basis and so nobody really knows whether the training offered to businesses to overcome these biases actually works or not.
Be interested in your take on this @rick_chasey as I think you have got involved with this before.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Yeah he's right.rjsterry said:Slight detour. A thought provoking article (as a lot of them are) from Tom Chivers on problems with unconscious bias training.
https://unherd.com/2020/01/why-do-we-spend-millions-on-bs-tests/
In short, it's not that such biases don't exist - that's well documented - but that the test used to measure them is unreliable on an individual basis and so nobody really knows whether the training offered to businesses to overcome these biases actually works or not.
Be interested in your take on this @rick_chasey as I think you have got involved with this before.
There are various initiatives in the more forward thinking parts of the corporate world to make it easier to talk about race in the work place (in the context of improving diversity to make it more representative, of course).
There is absolutely a problem in that if say, you or your firm scores badly in whatever test they decide to do (and I agree any testing is of very limited use, but go with me for the argument), then somehow your firm is 'racist', and carries all the associated stigma.
I honestly believe if you want to tackle racism seriously you need to be able to be on a level playing field where everyone is working towards less racism.
When you have that, you can then throw out the social baggage that comes from the term and rather than discuss racism in terms of motives (because, on that level playing field, everyone's motive is to not be), and then discuss it in terms of practical decision making and actions.
So, Mr boss, in hindsight your hiring process led to a lot of unconscious decisions that naturally favoured non-diverse candidates. That doesn't mean Mr boss is racist, but that his actions unconsciously steer him to less even results.
If we could get to that point, we'd be so much closer to sorting things out.
But you literally can't call someone or actions racist without people getting very upset and declaring it a slur.
Then again, I think a lot of people with ulterior motives pretend they are when they're not which makes it all very difficult.
Starky for example, is probably a lost cause, but it would have been much more powerful if the great and the good of the history world gave him a proper good schooling on exactly why his history is so old-fashioned, dated and full of misplaced assumptions.
Then the argument for him losing his job becomes one of his ability to do a good job.1 -
Thanks for your thoughts. One of the points Chivers makes is how carefully you have to write about the subject to avoid people jumping on your first few sentences and assigning you to one or other 'side', and how this makes it harder to address real problems.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Yup. This is much less of a problem face to face, however.rjsterry said:Thanks for your thoughts. One of the points Chivers makes is how carefully you have to write about the subject to avoid people jumping on your first few sentences and assigning you to one or other 'side', and how this makes it harder to address real problems.
0 -
Because it can have serious repercussions for someone's personal and professional life if they're thought of as racist. Also, think about what people think of when you use the term 'racist'. They certainly don't think it's because someone is unconsciously bias.rick_chasey said:
Yeah he's right.rjsterry said:Slight detour. A thought provoking article (as a lot of them are) from Tom Chivers on problems with unconscious bias training.
https://unherd.com/2020/01/why-do-we-spend-millions-on-bs-tests/
In short, it's not that such biases don't exist - that's well documented - but that the test used to measure them is unreliable on an individual basis and so nobody really knows whether the training offered to businesses to overcome these biases actually works or not.
Be interested in your take on this @rick_chasey as I think you have got involved with this before.
There are various initiatives in the more forward thinking parts of the corporate world to make it easier to talk about race in the work place (in the context of improving diversity to make it more representative, of course).
There is absolutely a problem in that if say, you or your firm scores badly in whatever test they decide to do (and I agree any testing is of very limited use, but go with me for the argument), then somehow your firm is 'racist', and carries all the associated stigma.
I honestly believe if you want to tackle racism seriously you need to be able to be on a level playing field where everyone is working towards less racism.
When you have that, you can then throw out the social baggage that comes from the term and rather than discuss racism in terms of motives (because, on that level playing field, everyone's motive is to not be), and then discuss it in terms of practical decision making and actions.
So, Mr boss, in hindsight your hiring process led to a lot of unconscious decisions that naturally favoured non-diverse candidates. That doesn't mean Mr boss is racist, but that his actions unconsciously steer him to less even results.
If we could get to that point, we'd be so much closer to sorting things out.
But you literally can't call someone or actions racist without people getting very upset and declaring it a slur.
Then again, I think a lot of people with ulterior motives pretend they are when they're not which makes it all very difficult.
Starky for example, is probably a lost cause, but it would have been much more powerful if the great and the good of the history world gave him a proper good schooling on exactly why his history is so old-fashioned, dated and full of misplaced assumptions.
Then the argument for him losing his job becomes one of his ability to do a good job.0
