Spam & Scams4 mins ago
British Museum Pushes Founder Off His Pedestal
The British Museum has removed a bust of its founder from prominent display, citing a move to acknowledge the museum’s historical relationship with slavery. Sir Hans Sloane funded his collection of artefacts, books and curiosities with profits from his wife’s sugar plantation. Shortly before his death in 1753, he bequeathed many of his belongings to the nation, and 71,000 of them formed much of what would stock the British Museum.
https:/
The museum’s director says, “We must not hide anything” but that’s exactly what they are doing. Hopefully in years to come no one will ask who founded and financed all the wonderful institutions that are now bowing to the Woke because at this rate the answers will have been forgotten.
What next? The renaming of Sloane Square?
https:/
The museum’s director says, “We must not hide anything” but that’s exactly what they are doing. Hopefully in years to come no one will ask who founded and financed all the wonderful institutions that are now bowing to the Woke because at this rate the answers will have been forgotten.
What next? The renaming of Sloane Square?
Answers
So his wife's family was a slave owner. So what? He also did a great deal of good. I most certainly do not approve of slavery, but on the basis that everyone is tainted you would have to get rid of almost everyone in any position in the last 200 years. Er - George Washington anyone? It's History - get over it, leave it all as it and think whatever you want to think - then...
21:15 Thu 27th Aug 2020
Theland - // Does not a bit of humour call out the ridiculousness and cringing attitude of the museum management? //
It does, if it's directed at the target, and not some random racial stereotyping joke even Bernard Manning would have rejected in 1974 as being utterly unfunny.
// They have made a ridiculous decision and I ridiculed it. //
No, you inserted an off-tangent seriously poor attempt at humour.
There is a time and a place for humour - the trick is knowing them, and what is actually funny.
It does, if it's directed at the target, and not some random racial stereotyping joke even Bernard Manning would have rejected in 1974 as being utterly unfunny.
// They have made a ridiculous decision and I ridiculed it. //
No, you inserted an off-tangent seriously poor attempt at humour.
There is a time and a place for humour - the trick is knowing them, and what is actually funny.
So his wife's family was a slave owner. So what? He also did a great deal of good. I most certainly do not approve of slavery, but on the basis that everyone is tainted you would have to get rid of almost everyone in any position in the last 200 years. Er - George Washington anyone?
It's History - get over it, leave it all as it and think whatever you want to think - then move on. I'm getting tired of all this. Don't forget that the people of this country stopped the slave trade and slavery. Money earned by people involved, directly or indirectly, with slavery paid for a lot of benefits and education here - helping to end 'white slavery' in the mills etc. and those people pressured and helped for slavery to be ended. I have no qualms about supporting leaving Sloan alone and all other statues marking influential figures in our history.
It's History - get over it, leave it all as it and think whatever you want to think - then move on. I'm getting tired of all this. Don't forget that the people of this country stopped the slave trade and slavery. Money earned by people involved, directly or indirectly, with slavery paid for a lot of benefits and education here - helping to end 'white slavery' in the mills etc. and those people pressured and helped for slavery to be ended. I have no qualms about supporting leaving Sloan alone and all other statues marking influential figures in our history.
I watched David Olusoga’s “Britain’s Forgotten Slave Owners”, originally on BBC4, still available on catch-up.
Amazing. A register of the 40,000 individuals who, on Britain’s abolition of slavery in the 1830s, copped the equivalent of £17 billion in compensation for the loss of ‘property’.
Oh, the slaves? No, they didn’t get any compensation for their lives, spent in fear and heavy labour, thousands of miles from their homes. They became indentured servants instead, so probably no better off - maybe worse.
Will any of the tub-thumpers for the likes of the Sloanes watch the TV programme(s)?
Will they ‘eck as like.
Amazing. A register of the 40,000 individuals who, on Britain’s abolition of slavery in the 1830s, copped the equivalent of £17 billion in compensation for the loss of ‘property’.
Oh, the slaves? No, they didn’t get any compensation for their lives, spent in fear and heavy labour, thousands of miles from their homes. They became indentured servants instead, so probably no better off - maybe worse.
Will any of the tub-thumpers for the likes of the Sloanes watch the TV programme(s)?
Will they ‘eck as like.
allenLondon - // Will any of the tub-thumpers for the likes of the Sloanes watch the TV programme(s)? //
I don't believe there are any 'tub-thumpers for the likes of the Sloanes' as you put it.
My view, having observed and participated in almost all the debates about the arising issues of slavery - is that virtually every AB'er on them is in agreement - slavery is indefensible, but it is a part of history, and cannot be ignored.
Acknowledging it is not the same as approving it, or approving of the people who conducted it, but it is a matter of accepting that history is full of dreadful events and suffering, but there is nothing that can be done to change what happened, merely learn from it.
Speaking personally, i already understand that slavery was a horrible time in the world's history, and the injustices and cruelties are incalculable - I don't need to watch a BBC programme to tell me that.
I don't believe there are any 'tub-thumpers for the likes of the Sloanes' as you put it.
My view, having observed and participated in almost all the debates about the arising issues of slavery - is that virtually every AB'er on them is in agreement - slavery is indefensible, but it is a part of history, and cannot be ignored.
Acknowledging it is not the same as approving it, or approving of the people who conducted it, but it is a matter of accepting that history is full of dreadful events and suffering, but there is nothing that can be done to change what happened, merely learn from it.
Speaking personally, i already understand that slavery was a horrible time in the world's history, and the injustices and cruelties are incalculable - I don't need to watch a BBC programme to tell me that.
allenLondon - // Oh Andy, surely you can’t mean you have nothing to learn, that the world has nothing more to teach you? //
You're quite right, I can't mean that, which is probably a very good reason for why I didn't say it.
I said I understood the evils of slavery, and i don;t need a BBC programme to educate me about that - I mentioned nothing about having nothing else to learn, so why you are making that up and asking me about it, I have no idea.
// Shame, shame, shame, on every level. ///
Nonsense, nonsense, nonsense, on every level.
You're quite right, I can't mean that, which is probably a very good reason for why I didn't say it.
I said I understood the evils of slavery, and i don;t need a BBC programme to educate me about that - I mentioned nothing about having nothing else to learn, so why you are making that up and asking me about it, I have no idea.
// Shame, shame, shame, on every level. ///
Nonsense, nonsense, nonsense, on every level.
allenLondon - // Well, take a couple of hours out of your oh-so-important day, and watch the $odding programme then!
Come back when you've seen it, and tell me you've learnt nothing. //
You are letting your hysteria blind you to the point I am making.
I did not say I would not learn anything from watching the programme you have highlighted.
What I said was - I understand the evils and suffering of slavery, I don't need a programme to teach me that.
Could I learn from a programme - yes of course I could, I would never suggest otherwise, and didn't on this occasion.
Hopefully you will calm down, re-read what I actually said, and where I pointed out your error, and then you will remember your manners, and address me without the nasty language.
Come back when you've seen it, and tell me you've learnt nothing. //
You are letting your hysteria blind you to the point I am making.
I did not say I would not learn anything from watching the programme you have highlighted.
What I said was - I understand the evils and suffering of slavery, I don't need a programme to teach me that.
Could I learn from a programme - yes of course I could, I would never suggest otherwise, and didn't on this occasion.
Hopefully you will calm down, re-read what I actually said, and where I pointed out your error, and then you will remember your manners, and address me without the nasty language.
allen - // Andy, and friends.
I know when I'm banging my head against a brick wall. //
Why don't you knock off banging your head and put your time to good use - reading and understanding posts that are in simple English and only evade you because to understand them would mean you would not be able to pick a pointless nit-picking thread-derailing fight.
I know when I'm banging my head against a brick wall. //
Why don't you knock off banging your head and put your time to good use - reading and understanding posts that are in simple English and only evade you because to understand them would mean you would not be able to pick a pointless nit-picking thread-derailing fight.
Latest Posts
Reeves Is Now After Your Pension Funds
News12 mins ago
Editor's Blog38 mins ago
Body & Soul40 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles44 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.