Cecil Rhodes and removing traces of colonialism/bad things

steddyeddy

Some of you might have heard of a chap called Cecil Rhodes. Well basically Rhodes was a white supremacist and imperialist who paved the way for the apartheid regime in South Africa.

Cecil came out with beauties such as this

"I contend that we are the first race in the world, and that the more of the world we inhabit the better it is for the human race...If there be a God, I think that what he would like me to do is paint as much of the map of Africa British Red as possible...".

Now that's grand and not really newsworthy as history has had plenty of d1cks in its time. Cecil became news when a group of students at Oxford university campaigned to have his statue removed as he was a bit of a d1ck. The student's wishes were ignored and Oxford now says the matter is not open for discussion. Article here.

I'm not exactly sure how to feel. I don't think we should honour people like Cecil but I'm not in favour of blanking out history I don't like either. What you think?

brummytom

I don't think removing the statue is white-washing (whoops) history.

If they want, the college can always put a little plaque saying something like "There used to be a statue of Cecil Rhodes here, but we got rid of it, because he was a horrible racist cúnt."

One eyed Jack

brummytom wrote: »

I don't think removing the statue is white-washing (whoops) history.

If they want, the college can always put a little plaque saying something like "There used to be a statue of Cecil Rhodes here, but we got rid of it, because he was a horrible racist cúnt." it served as a reminder that he had achieved more in his lifetime, and contributed more to society than any of you ever will...

Fixed that.

recipio

Rhodes was an arch imperialist but he lived in a time of Empire. The motives of the British Empire were mostly exploitative but they genuinely believed that they should spread the 'Christian' message as well.
There is little point in trying to apply contemporary standards to history and his statue should serve as a reminder of that particular era.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Ghandi needs to go too considering his abhorrent bigoted views towards black Africans. When need to get a student protest up and running on this issue immediately.

Washington State and Washington DC should change their names to stop commemorating that slave owner...

BigJackC

History is ugly, it is full of horrendous acts and archaic mindsets. But we can't just cherry pick which bits we want to keep, as there is something to be learned from all of it.

Nodin

brummytom wrote: »

I don't think removing the statue is white-washing (whoops) history.

If they want, the college can always put a little plaque saying something like "There used to be a statue of Cecil Rhodes here, but we got rid of it, because he was a horrible racist cúnt."

Could always be moved just out of the place of prominence and given a plaque explain why and so forth. Put all the dodgy ones in it, in a place where people can see them and refer to it as "Cunt's Corner".

Nodin

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Ghandi needs to go too considering his abhorrent bigoted views towards black Africans. When need to get a student protest up and running on this issue immediately.

Well Gandhi did more good than harm, in fairness. Can't really say that about Rhodes & co. If this discussion referred to a statue of Walter Model or Herman Goering, there'd be no notion of it staying, but because non-Europeans were the primary victims, its seems to be "ahh leave it". The idea has to percolate that invading Belgium and invading (whats now) South Africa, for instance, are both equally repugnant.

Nodin

Nodin wrote: »

Well Gandhi did more good than harm, in fairness. Can't really say that about Rhodes & co. If this discussion referred to a statue of Walter Model or Herman Goering, there'd be no notion of it staying, but because non-Europeans were the primary victims, its seems to be "ahh leave it". The idea has to percolate that invading Belgium and invading (whats now) South Africa, for instance, are both equally repugnant.

I presume if Goering and co limited their actions to military ones, invading Belgium and the like, then there would be statues to him. I think the Final Solution pushed Goering and his colleagues a bit beyond the pale.

steddyeddy

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Ghandi needs to go too considering his abhorrent bigoted views towards black Africans. When need to get a student protest up and running on this issue immediately.

But wasn't Ghandi famous for something else ? I'm struggling to find much commendable about Cecil. I'll admit though he is interesting.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

I'd leave Cecil on place as a piece of history. We shouldn't whitewash history. His being there would spark discussion and accounts of his life and times and remind us of the dreadful characters that were once held on regard.

The_Valeyard

Then we need to also get rid of Cromwells coat of arms in Dublin castle.

No?

Of course not, it's a part of history.

steddyeddy

steddyeddy wrote: »

But wasn't Ghandi famous for something else ? I'm struggling to find much commendable about Cecil. I'll admit though he is interesting.

He gave people with limp first names everywhere hope.

Percys and Cyrils love him.

Sand

The people behind this sort of thing are cut from the same sort of cloth as ISIS and the Taliban. There seems to be an extremist element amongst students who go to University not to be challenged by views other than their own but to live in a safe place where only views they agree with will be heard. Wont be too long before students are burning books.

As for Rhodes, he's a little more complex than the caricature presented. He was a man of his time. A huge supporter of the Irish Parliamentary Party and Parnell - donated lots of money to "the cause".

steddyeddy

Deleted User wrote: »

He gave people with limp first names everywhere hope.

Percys and Cyrils love him.

He was also most likely a homosexual. Like I said I don't agree with his views (I'm not sure he really believed what he said either) but he's an interesting character.

Nodin

Deleted User wrote: »

I presume if Goering and co limited their actions to military ones, invading Belgium and the like, then there would be statues to him. I think the Final Solution pushed Goering and his colleagues a bit beyond the pale.

.....true. However its also true that you'd be hard put to find a monument to Stalin etc in Poland. I'd say instituting a racist regime ,treating the inhabitants as second class citizens with appalling brutality over the years - while crimes not at the scale of the Nazi regime - would require Mr Rhodes and co to sent to some sort of sin bin.

steddyeddy

In fairness this also features in the the argument for people who want to change the Irish flag or anthem.

bnt

Calling Cecil John Rhodes a White Supremacist is a bit like calling George W Bush an American Supremacist. It might be true, but that was hardly "out there" by the standards of his time. The Victorian attitude towards other races wasn't hatred, it was casual paternalism: they were treated like kids, to be seen and not heard, or spanked if they got stroppy. Being actively racist would have taken time and energy away from the pursuit of wealth.

I'm not from South Africa originally, but went to school there, and we learned quite a bit of local history. For a textboox example of the way he operated, have a read about the Jameson Raid that took place over New Year 1895. (Yes, that's where the band got their name.) Rhodes basically sent an armed gang in to the Transvaal to incite a rebellion among British expatriate workers, but the timing was blown and the expatriates didn't get the memo. (Oops.)

Bulbous Salutation

The French should remove that statue of Charlemagne in Paris. Should have a word with the Mongolians about Genghis Khan as well.

Harry Palmr

Demented college students, what can one say?

steddyeddy

bnt wrote: »

Calling Cecil John Rhodes a White Supremacist is a bit like calling George W Bush an American Supremacist. It might be true, but that was hardly "out there" by the standards of his time. The Victorian attitude towards other races wasn't hatred, it was casual paternalism: they were treated like kids, to be seen and not heard, or spanked if they got stroppy. Being actively racist would have taken time and energy away from the pursuit of wealth.

I'm not from South Africa originally, but went to school there, and we learned quite a bit of local history. For a textboox example of the way he operated, have a read about the Jameson Raid that took place over New Year 1895. (Yes, that's where the band got their name.) Rhodes basically sent an armed gang in to the Transvaal to incite a rebellion among British expatriate workers, but the timing was blown and the expatriates didn't get the memo. (Oops.)

Well it wasn't common place amongst Africans and he did bring it there. His views may have been common but nothing seems to stand out about the man that we should honour?

kowloon

Emberly Chilly Finch wrote: »

I'd leave Cecil on place as a piece of history. We shouldn't whitewash history. His being there would spark discussion and accounts of his life and times and remind us of the dreadful characters that were once held on regard.

Agreed, taking away the statue and replacing it with a plaque would be much less in your face. We need to be reminded that it's not just bad individuals that are responsible, it's the crowds that cheer them and put up statues.

Letree

Leave it where it is its part of history. Besides the majority of the students want it left there. Can't always be pandering to the hysterical few.

Nodin

Letree wrote: »

Leave it where it is its part of history. Besides the majority of the students want it left there. Can't always be pandering to the hysterical few.

Think you're confused there - the vote was a majority for removal.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-35359530

Badly Drunk Boy

I hear the also want the Rhodesian Ridgeback renamed the Zimbabwean Ridgeback, and are putting pressure on the Kennel Club to make this happen. *




* May not be true.

Azalea

Sand wrote: »

The people behind this sort of thing are cut from the same sort of cloth as ISIS and the Taliban.

They're really really not.

The Backwards Man

Replace it with a statue of Nick Price and Peter Ndlovu kicking seven shades of shíte out of Bruce Grobelaar for besmirching the good name of Zimbabwean sportspeople.

We could all get behind that.

Sand

steddyeddy wrote: »

Well it wasn't common place amongst Africans and he did bring it there. His views may have been common but nothing seems to stand out about the man that we should honour?

No one is asking you to honour the man. The statue is on Oxfords grounds. The man setup the Rhodes scholarship at Oxford, the first international study scholarship of its kinds. Hence he gets a statue as a major benefactor of Oxford.

You can choose to pass on by without concern.

RDM_83 again

Nodin wrote: »

Think you're confused there - the vote was a majority for removal.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-35359530

It was a SU vote, doesn't tell you much about what the average student thinks, I would presume that the wider student body at the college hold them.in the same contempt that most uni's do

K-9

A statue hardly needs to be there, historical records and infamy still goes on.

I wouldn't expect a big statue of Craig to be kept at Stormont, because, well, that's just history.

K-9

Yep, the Carson statue is still at Stormont. I'd have no problem with it going.

JupiterKid

We can't just airbrush history away by getting rid of statues.

What they did in Hungary after 1989 was to put all the Soviet era communist statues into a small park just outside Budapest. Quite interesting.

RDM_83 again

K-9 wrote: »

Yep, the Carson statue is still at Stormont. I'd have no problem with it going.

There is a false equivalency that has popped up a few times already in this thread (statues of Stalin in Poland also mentioned), this isn't a statue of Rhodes in Africa its in a college in England, its geographically far removed from where he was a symbol of oppression.

Eugene Norman

Nodin wrote: »

Think you're confused there - the vote was a majority for removal.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-35359530

That's the Oxford Union. Not a plebiscite of all students.

One thing to note. The "race" that Rhodes is referring to is not the white race but part of it, the Anglo Saxon race. Also his opinions were far from unique, Churchill held them years later.

We have form removing imperialist statues in this country of course, but it's just a stupid white washing of history.

That said communist statues were torn down across Eastern Europe, including ones of guys who were mere functionaries or bureaucrats. In a park outside Budapest they keep the communist era statues and it struck me that some of these guys were hardly evil. A transport czar for Budapest -- which has a decent integrated and cheap system -- who was in office from 1950-1970 had his statue removed because he was a communist. If he can go, Rhodes can go.

But there's an amount of hypocrisy here from the Oxford students. Rhodes funded the place. His funded estate still does. Take his statue down and forgo the money, or neither.

Eugene Norman

JupiterKid wrote: »

We can't just airbrush history away by getting rid of statues.

What they did in Hungary after 1989 was to put all the Soviet era communist statues into a small park just outside Budapest. Quite interesting.

That's pretty much getting rid of them though.

Nodin

RDM_83 again wrote: »

There is a false equivalency that has popped up a few times already in this thread (statues of Stalin in Poland also mentioned), this isn't a statue of Rhodes in Africa its in a college in England, its geographically far removed from where he was a symbol of oppression.

Grand. We'll put up the statues of Stalin, the Poles can have Cromwell and the Chinese Hitler.

Eugene Norman wrote:

That's the Oxford Union. Not a plebiscite of all students.

He wasn't referring to an alternative vote, so I'd say he's still wrong.

Eugene Norman wrote:

One thing to note. The "race" that Rhodes is referring to is not the white race but part of it, the Anglo Saxon race. Also his opinions were far from unique, Churchill held them years later.

O I'm aware of that, thanks.

Eugene Norman wrote:

Take his statue down and forgo the money, or neither.

Take it down, use the money. Some recompense from the dead.

OldRio

Fascinating and yet tragic place. Rhodesia/Zimbabwe. A terrible lesson in how not to enjoy independence.
Peter Godwin is an author born in that part of the world. I can highly recommend 'Mukiwa. A white boy in Africa' and 'When a crocodile eats the sun'
Very informative. Very funny but ultimately terribly sad.

Wibbs

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Ghandi needs to go too considering his abhorrent bigoted views towards black Africans.

Or his odd sexual practices involving much younger women.

arayess

i for one would love a second statue of Rhodes.

steddyeddy

I think the issue arose here in light of the growing acknowledgement that Oxford doesn't take in as many African students as it could. The fact that they have a statue of a white supremacist there doesn't help their image.

Nodin

arayess wrote: »

i for one would love a second statue of Rhodes.

You'd only get all the junkies hangin round it.

arayess

Nodin wrote: »

You'd only get all the junkies hangin round it.

junkies having feelings too.

Surely your "we are all brothers" mantra has room for junkies too in its' warm embrace...

ohnonotgmail

Nodin wrote: »

Grand. We'll put up the statues of Stalin, the Poles can have Cromwell and the Chinese Hitler.



He wasn't referring to an alternative vote, so I'd say he's still wrong.



O I'm aware of that, thanks.



Take it down, use the money. Some recompense from the dead.

if they are going to use to use his money surely it should be used to help those who suffered because of Rhodes not oxford students? Somehow i cant see the students voting for that.

Fratton Fred

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

if they are going to use to use his money surely it should be used to help those who suffered because of Rhodes not oxford students? Somehow i cant see the students voting for that.

Maybe they should use it to help students from all over the world, who otherwise would not be able to, to attend one of the world's top universities?

Nodin

arayess wrote: »

junkies having feelings too.

Surely your "we are all brothers" mantra has room for junkies too in its' warm embrace...

"we are all buds"

Dyr

Just stick one of his choice quotes below the statue and let people draw their own conclusions about him

ohnonotgmail

Nodin wrote: »

Grand. We'll put up the statues of Stalin, the Poles can have Cromwell and the Chinese Hitler.



He wasn't referring to an alternative vote, so I'd say he's still wrong.



O I'm aware of that, thanks.



Take it down, use the money. Some recompense from the dead.

if they are going to use to use his money surely it should be used to help those who suffered because of Rhodes not oxford students? Somehow i cant see the students voting for that.

ohnonotgmail

Nodin wrote: »

Grand. We'll put up the statues of Stalin, the Poles can have Cromwell and the Chinese Hitler.



He wasn't referring to an alternative vote, so I'd say he's still wrong.



O I'm aware of that, thanks.



Take it down, use the money. Some recompense from the dead.

if they are going to use to use his money surely it should be used to help those who suffered because of Rhodes not oxford students? Somehow i cant see the students voting for that.

riffmongous

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Maybe they should use it to help students from all over the world, who otherwise would not be able to, to attend one of the world's top universities?

This would be noble, I just found out that in the current form, 32 out of 57 are from the usa

ohnonotgmail

Nodin wrote: »

Grand. We'll put up the statues of Stalin, the Poles can have Cromwell and the Chinese Hitler.



He wasn't referring to an alternative vote, so I'd say he's still wrong.



O I'm aware of that, thanks.



Take it down, use the money. Some recompense from the dead.

if they are going to use to use his money surely it should be used to help those who suffered because of Rhodes not oxford students? Somehow i cant see the students voting for that.