Jump to content

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Hoddie said:

A person who held racist views back when they were common, when almost everyone held those views, cannot realistically be judged by today's standards. People were taught that the white man was superior. It was a genuinely held belief for many, the same as many believed that the British were superior to the French, well superior to everyone. Nationalist chauvinism was how you displayed loyalty.

However, someone who earned their fortune from slavery or who otherwise supported slavery at a time when it was already controversial - as it was even then - can and should be judged, especially if they never showed any contrition for their acts or opinions.

It's like those governments who allow their country's rainforests to be torn down. They will be judged by history to have done wrong and to have knowingly done so.

Churchill held racist views, that's not up for dispute. Most were formed by experience. He believed Afghans to be uncivilised which would arguably be a fair comment even today, but he held the Japanese and Chinese in high regard. His views of the people of the Indian subcontinent have been heavily criticised, and while his generalisations were abhorrent, he had huge respect for many individuals from India. He was pro-Jewish and didn't have a high opinion of Arabs, but was adamant that both should be treated equally in Palestine. He was a man of his time, but it has to be said, a modern politician would be unable to admit holding the same views.

In a nutshell. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 361
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Dont worry, Ive worked out what you are like. We are repeatedly told by people like yourself how divided we are as a country. But this division is stoked and encouraged by people like yourself. A

I've copied this, author unknown, but I agree with every word:- According to the BBC today, I'm complicit in hate and racist crimes because I'm White and I won't join in with the meaningless piec

And when we cut through all the ****, this is the main problem. We should be offended that in 2020 people are not being treated equal. We should be looking at how we resolve this, how we stop the

Posted Images

13 minutes ago, chrisbo61 said:

Absolutely! And I've yet to hear one tangible, evidence based benefit of leaving!

On a purely selfish note, I dont care, my plan has been to retire to my place in spain, I dont think that will be very easy now, due to income levels etc! Very frustrating.

It makes my future life choices much more difficult. I can live in Belgium for as long as I want but travelling to the non-Schengen EU countries is now more difficult, though admittedly not impossible. Being able to permanently return to the UK with my wife, who is the mother of three British kids, is not guaranteed either just as me being able to retire to Spain with them (she's Spanish) is not guaranteed. I accept people voted for Brexit but the reasons some people gave and continue to give for their choice, often incoherent sentences and often said in jest as though it doesn't matter either way, are incredibly frustrating.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hunsworthhound said:

Just heard on LBC the BLM lot want to change the name of Downing Street as the bloke who gave it to the nation in the 18th Century had some connection to the slave trade. When will it end pull down Stonehenge  as no doubt our ancient ancestors must have had some slaves didn't  everybody back then.

Slavery is evil but there is no race on earth that does not have it somewhere in its past. Even the current protesters if they look far enough back in history will find they have some connection to owning slaves.

 

 

15 million African slaves taken to Arabia by Arabs over 1000 years. It only stopped in 1990 when a treaty was signed in Egypt. No mention of that from the British BLM movement because it doesn't fit the neo marxist narrative. 

Dublin was the centre of world slavery during the Viking era and it was Celts and Anglo Saxons from mainly Scotland and the north of England that were enslaved. 

Lots of different races taken as slaves over the last 3000 years but I feel the worst statistic is that nearly 20 million people around the world are STILL held as slaves right now. 

Not a mention by any anti slavery movement. 

Many black people living in the UK are wising up to this movement and the people that have infiltrated it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I read yesterday that the last zoos where black people were displayed as living exhibits, like animals do in zoos today, where people could throw bananas at black kids, didn't close until the 1950s. I don't care which side of the debate you're on, that's far too recent for comfort if you ask me. There will be people alive today, maybe even relatives, who went to these attractions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hoddie said:

I read yesterday that the last zoos where black people were displayed as living exhibits, like animals do in zoos today, where people could throw bananas at black kids, didn't close until the 1950s. I don't care which side of the debate you're on, that's far too recent for comfort if you ask me. There will be people alive today, maybe even relatives, who went to these attractions.

Where was that and can you provide the source material ? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Hoddie said:

I read yesterday that the last zoos where black people were displayed as living exhibits, like animals do in zoos today, where people could throw bananas at black kids, didn't close until the 1950s. I don't care which side of the debate you're on, that's far too recent for comfort if you ask me. There will be people alive today, maybe even relatives, who went to these attractions.

Blimey, I've never heard of this before, not in the 1950's. Was it in the UK? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Hoddie said:

I read yesterday that the last zoos where black people were displayed as living exhibits, like animals do in zoos today, where people could throw bananas at black kids, didn't close until the 1950s. I don't care which side of the debate you're on, that's far too recent for comfort if you ask me. There will be people alive today, maybe even relatives, who went to these attractions.

What about the bearded ladies?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Erik Everhard said:

Blimey, I've never heard of this before, not in the 1950's. Was it in the UK? 

The last one closed in 1958 in Brussels, which was a particularly disgusting example apparently. The last one in the UK, in Edinburgh, was closed in 1910. A safari park in Nantes, France had an authentic, populated African village as late as the 90s, but the actual African villagers who lived there supposedly did so voluntarily. Still makes my skin itch. They still have the village but it's uninhabited now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Hoddie said:

The last one closed in 1958 in Brussels, which was a particularly disgusting example apparently. The last one in the UK, in Edinburgh, was closed in 1910. A safari park in Nantes, France had an authentic, populated African village as late as the 90s, but the actual African villagers who lived there supposedly did so voluntarily. Still makes my skin itch. They still have the village but it's uninhabited now.

I'd heard of it happening before but back in the 19th century, Victorian Britain. 

I'm amazed it was still going on in Belgium till the 50's. Awful. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Erik Everhard said:

Blimey, I've never heard of this before, not in the 1950's. Was it in the UK? 

Belgium and their colonies in the 1950s at the hands of King Leopold, who killed 15 million Africans.

Screenshot_20200611-142100_Twitter.jpg

Screenshot_20200611-141946_Twitter.jpg

Screenshot_20200611-141937_Twitter.jpg

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, never_shay_die said:

Belgium and their colonies in the 1950s at the hands of King Leopold, who killed 15 million Africans.

Screenshot_20200611-142100_Twitter.jpg

Screenshot_20200611-141946_Twitter.jpg

Screenshot_20200611-141937_Twitter.jpg

Wow :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

That last picture of the lad in the cage shows how easy it is for kids to be taught these things are OK. Its totally abhorrent but would it be fair to revise it now to say the two white kids outside of the cage are racist - Or is it a ‘sign of the times’ and more a case of cultural norms and ignorance at the time? 
 

Would it be better to try re-educate those kids mindsets in being more accepting and explaining that its not acceptable, or is it better to try hunt them down now and brand them racist? 
 

This is kind of where we are now. We cant change shameful parts of our past but we can shape how we act in the future. Those three kids there are just that - kids. Its no more fair to brand any of them racist as it is to have one of them in a cage. Yet that does not excuse or make the picture any more right or comfortable. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Belgium has a complicated history with their territorial possessions, much as the UK does. It's just that their atrocities were much more recent, though in fairness, the Congo was a personal possession of the monarch and was administered by the royal household rather than the government, and much of what went on there was unknown to the people of Belgium. When word did get out, the government were forced to take over responsibility for administering it and things did improve, though not by much. Then they got kicked out in 1960 I believe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If people take the trouble to read history there are a lot of facts that come out about the British Empire on the whole our involvement in most countries was generally for the good especially when we left on our terms and were not forced out before we wanted to go.

A number of years ago I read a book called  "The State of Africa" and it was most enlightening. When I was a child most atlases had large area's of Africa coloured red as they were still part of the British Empire. In the early sixties we gave most of them independence  usually leaving them with a British model of Parliamentary Democracy. In most cases within  a few years they had become one state Dictatorships (ask the ordinary people of Zimbabwe if they have British rule back and they'd jump at the chance) .  We never intended to give independence to most of the African countries until the 1990's this was because by then there would have been at least two generations  of government officials who would have been loyal to their country and able to implement fair government. 

What actually happened was the Americans put pressure on us to get rid of the Empire as they didn't like colonialism. At that time we were heavily in debt to the USA and they threatened to turn the tap off.  Most Africans who can remember know that all though not independent their lives were far safer under British rule.  If we are the ogres protesters say we are why does most of the world want to come and live here.

Before anyone jumps down my throat yes we made mistakes and there were some awful people who were involved in our Empire building but I stand by my original statement .

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, hunsworthhound said:

If people take the trouble to read history there are a lot of facts that come out about the British Empire on the whole our involvement in most countries was generally for the good especially when we left on our terms and were not forced out before we wanted to go.

A number of years ago I read a book called  "The State of Africa" and it was most enlightening. When I was a child most atlases had large area's of Africa coloured red as they were still part of the British Empire. In the early sixties we gave most of them independence  usually leaving them with a British model of Parliamentary Democracy. In most cases within  a few years they had become one state Dictatorships (ask the ordinary people of Zimbabwe if they have British rule back and they'd jump at the chance) .  We never intended to give independence to most of the African countries until the 1990's this was because by then there would have been at least two generations  of government officials who would have been loyal to their country and able to implement fair government. 

What actually happened was the Americans put pressure on us to get rid of the Empire as they didn't like colonialism. At that time we were heavily in debt to the USA and they threatened to turn the tap off.  Most Africans who can remember know that all though not independent their lives were far safer under British rule.  If we are the ogres protesters say we are why does most of the world want to come and live here.

Before anyone jumps down my throat yes we made mistakes and there were some awful people who were involved in our Empire building but I stand by my original statement .

Some interesting points made.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, hunsworthhound said:

If people take the trouble to read history there are a lot of facts that come out about the British Empire on the whole our involvement in most countries was generally for the good especially when we left on our terms and were not forced out before we wanted to go.

A number of years ago I read a book called  "The State of Africa" and it was most enlightening. When I was a child most atlases had large area's of Africa coloured red as they were still part of the British Empire. In the early sixties we gave most of them independence  usually leaving them with a British model of Parliamentary Democracy. In most cases within  a few years they had become one state Dictatorships (ask the ordinary people of Zimbabwe if they have British rule back and they'd jump at the chance) .  We never intended to give independence to most of the African countries until the 1990's this was because by then there would have been at least two generations  of government officials who would have been loyal to their country and able to implement fair government. 

What actually happened was the Americans put pressure on us to get rid of the Empire as they didn't like colonialism. At that time we were heavily in debt to the USA and they threatened to turn the tap off.  Most Africans who can remember know that all though not independent their lives were far safer under British rule.  If we are the ogres protesters say we are why does most of the world want to come and live here.

Before anyone jumps down my throat yes we made mistakes and there were some awful people who were involved in our Empire building but I stand by my original statement .

As daft as it may sound it wasn't all bad. But slavery was inaprehensible as it aleays has been througjout history. 

One of the real scandals of it all was the recomlence the slave owners received when we ended slavery. The money lent to the government by the Rothschilds to pay off slave owners was the equivalent of half a trillion in todays money and it we, the taxpayer, only finished paying it in 2015.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Erik Everhard said:

As daft as it may sound it wasn't all bad. But slavery was inaprehensible as it aleays has been througjout history. 

One of the real scandals of it all was the recomlence the slave owners received when we ended slavery. The money lent to the government by the Rothschilds to pay off slave owners was the equivalent of half a trillion in todays money and it we, the taxpayer, only finished paying it in 2015.

Unbeleivable

Link to post
Share on other sites

My mother and father in law were both born in Poland. When they were young they were forcibly taken by the Germans and made to work on farms in Germany.Whilst they were not mistreated, by definition I suppose that slaves is what they were. After the war ended they were given the choice of returning but to have done so would have been to live under the Russians, who some might argue were worse than the Germans. They chose to come to the UK , where they met but neither felt safe returning for a long time and neither saw their parents again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Lammie said:

My mother and father in law were both born in Poland. When they were young they were forcibly taken by the Germans and made to work on farms in Germany.Whilst they were not mistreated, by definition I suppose that slaves is what they were. After the war ended they were given the choice of returning but to have done so would have been to live under the Russians, who some might argue were worse than the Germans. They chose to come to the UK , where they met but neither felt safe returning for a long time and neither saw their parents again.

Terrible times,  they would almost certainly been murdered by the Russians had they returned, deemed to have helped the Germans.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The British followed a deliberate policy of leaving sectarianism behind so that the peoples of newly independent nations would fight each other rather than seek revenge on the British, who often remained behind as an upper class land-owning minority. In some cases, the majority I believe, active support was given to the least populous group so that they could keep the more populous groups under the thumb. You can see this played out all over the former British Empire. It was straight out of the East India Company playbook and had served us well for centuries.

The point about the American part in recent British history is true, it was down to them that we returned the Suez to the Egyptian authorities even after a hugely successful campaign, thus marking the end of Britain as a genuine world power, a status we only really got back under Thatcher.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Hoddie said:

The British followed a deliberate policy of leaving sectarianism behind so that the peoples of newly independent nations would fight each other rather than seek revenge on the British, who often remained behind as an upper class land-owning minority. In some cases, the majority I believe, active support was given to the least populous group so that they could keep the more populous groups under the thumb. You can see this played out all over the former British Empire. It was straight out of the East India Company playbook and had served us well for centuries.

The point about the American part in recent British history is true, it was down to them that we returned the Suez to the Egyptian authorities even after a hugely successful campaign, thus marking the end of Britain as a genuine world power, a status we only really got back under Thatcher.

Yes, Eisenhower refused to support us alongside the French in 1956.

I should point out that we didn't actually really return the canal it was nationalised by Gen Nassar which caused the Anglo French invasion to return it to private ownership.It was that slapping down by the USA and the loss to the country's prestige that really precipitated the run of independence from the colonies and as you note the reduction of strategic power on the world stage.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hoddie the book I read was the State of Africa by Martin  Meredith it was written in 2005 and covers Africa from each states independence up to about 2000. It is really interesting  and available  on Amazon. Re the minority thing  Nigeria and Zimbabwe  spring to mind the Biafran  Civil war  and Mugabe's  massacre  of the Matabele tribe or the Tutsi Hutu thing in Rwanda. We weren't  perfect far from it although the majority of africans shipped to America were the captives from the constant trible wars in West  Africa. Europeans never physically captured the slaves themselves. Up to the slave trade they were usually killed but then the Europeans provided  a market meaning they  were worth something alive.

One of the reasons the British colonised West Africa was to stop the slave trade.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...