Towards Britain’s Year Zero - "When a mob toppled a statue of merchant and slave trader Edward Colston in central Bristol on Sunday, the scenes were reminiscent of the collapse of a tyrannical regime. The mob stamped the fallen statue with rage and delight. Yet the mob was composed of individuals who had experienced no struggle or strife, and live in one of the safest, most prosperous nations in history. Most of the crowd were white, middle-class university students who have never done anything to oppose actual slavery. Not one of those warriors against slavery will offer a word of criticism regarding the (internally disputed) Islamic practice of slavery, which persists in some parts of Africa to this day. Toppling a statue is a summer carnival; researching and criticising a world religion is a little less of a rush. For most people today, virtue is not embodied through persistent and difficult private acts. Rather, it is demonstrated through momentary public performance and posted on Instagram. Far from fighting the power, the mob was acting in accordance with guidance it has received from schools, universities and mainstream media. Bristol council and the mayor did not decry destruction of public property, but applauded it... The middle-class managerial elite, which has control of institutions and politics, wants revenge on history; the mob was happy to comply... Middle-class, liberally inclined people around the country might have some sympathy with the Bristol mob because they assume action will be limited and controllable. They assume the mob will work for them rather than against them. Yet the cycle of destruction will eventually include monuments and art loved by many. There will be collateral damage, both cultural and human... A moral crusade to cleanse history is gaining ground in institutions that are charged with preservation. Preserving material (be it inspiring or appalling) allows us better to understand our history and society today; it helps us make judicious decisions about what is right for our future. However, many entrusted with protecting the full range of our heritage see themselves as moral agents who should retrospectively punish the past. Those in charge of museums and institutions have had the story of British collective guilt inculcated in them by politically driven education and reinforced by recent activity of the Arts Council of England and the Museums Association. If they could, many curators and directors would take artefacts in their care, pile them on the street and burn them. They want to demonstrate their moral fury as much as the mob, and all the training and education they have had up to now encourages that view... While Britain did engage in slavery for two centuries, for two centuries since no country has done more to oppose and end slavery than Britain. We are taught the first part of the slave trade, but not the second."
BBC Radio 4 - Best of Today, Gareth Southgate on the Euro, fans and waistcoats - "‘What would you say to those people who aren't particularly political, they're, yeah, they're not racist, but they just want to see their team beat United at home, or whoever it might be. And they worry a bit the sport is becoming an arena where you have to display your politics? I mean, do you have any sympathy with those people who say that sport and politics don't really mix?’
‘Well, I think there's a difference between politics and and acceptable human behavior. And why should our players have to withstand the abuse? Why should young people growing up, have to live with discrimination in clear, clearly unacceptable circumstances? It's just, the days are gone, where, you know, we sort of kept quiet about those things, we've got to make steps forward for generations to come. And we know that we're not going to change people's views overnight. But people when they're born, young people when they're born into this world, they don't have a discriminatory bone in their body. So it's the influence of us as parents, us as elders, us as leaders in society, that that are the ones that give signals and can make the changes.’"
If you don't support the leftist agenda, that's unacceptable human behavior. If you don't support BLM buying mansions with donated money, it means you think black people are inferior
Black Boy Lane to Diversity Drive? Sadiq Khan plans £25,000 grants to change ‘offensive’ street names - "Sadiq Khan has unveiled £25,000 grants to help people change street names as part of a diversity campaign launched following Black Lives Matter protests. The Mayor of London has announced a £1 million fund that will be shared out among community groups, including those wishing to campaign to alter potentially offensive road names... Binki Taylor, of the Commission for Diversity in the Public Realm, said: “The commission holds a strong desire for the outcome of its work to be a public realm that genuinely reflects the cultures, histories and narratives of all Londoners.” She added that it was an “act of empowerment for local people”."
Public money is free
Starmer must rein in Sadiq Khan before it's too late - "The blinkered excitement that surrounded last year’s Black Lives Matter marches at last appears to be fading. At the recent England versus Scotland rugby international many players, including Billy Vunipola, refused to ‘take the knee’. The Crystal Palace striker Wilfried Zaha has also dismissed this gesture as “degrading”. And now, at last, the Home Secretary Priti Patel has said she would never take the knee either. It has taken much longer than it should have done, but the truth is beginning to circulate widely: BLM isn’t just a loose group of well meaning social activists who enjoy a protest - it’s a political organisation which would like to see Western capitalism brought down. Those of us who have tried to explain this since last summer can begin to breathe a sigh of relief. But there is one man who should now be worried: the Labour Party leader, Sir Keir Starmer. Last June, Sir Keir ‘took the knee’ in his parliamentary office and then posted a picture of himself in the pose on his Twitter account. Jumping on this bandwagon was a huge error. Internal Labour Party research, backed up by Lord Ashcroft, shows that voters in so-called ‘Red Wall’ seats believe that the London-led Labour Party is completely out of touch with them. It doesn’t take a genius to work out why. Most people’s priorities relate to a good education for their children plus home and job security for themselves, so they don’t take particularly well to an MP genuflecting in support of a hardline left-wing group. The Labour Party will only regain many of these Red Wall seats – and will only have a chance of winning the next general election – if it dumps the metropolitan woke act and reconnects with the vast majority of voters in this country. I think Sir Keir understands this, which is why, after years of deriding national flags (who can forget Emily Thornberry's 2014 tweet from Rochester of a white van driver’s house draped in the cross of St George) Labour has suddenly decided that the flag is acceptable... The BLM protests were chaotic, to put it mildly. The Cenotaph was desecrated and Churchill's statue in Parliament Square was daubed with graffiti, among other outrageous acts. In the confusion, the law-abiding majority was silenced, while those who peddled lies shouted loudest, informing us that our past was to be cleansed. Into this nightmarish scene stepped Khan to announce he was setting up a Commission for Diversity in the Public Realm. This month, he unveiled the members of this sinister-sounding enterprise. Its aim is clear: to remove statues, change street names and alter the imagery of London so that it can reflect the ‘diverse’ city as it is now. Khan believes that it is for him, as a here-today-gone-tomorrow local politician, to eradicate London’s Victorian history if it comes to it. The problem for Sir Keir – a London MP – is that some members of this commission will, I predict, cause him and the Labour Party huge embarrassment. The group appears to be made up of hard left anti-British activists who are not representative of proud Londoners. Take Toyin Agbetu. He is described as a social rights activist, but many would consider him a hard left extremist: in 2007 he heckled the Queen during a service at Westminster Abbey to commemorate the 200th anniversary of the abolition of the slave trade, and then threatened to punch a security guard when restrained. Does he know anything about the role played by the Royal Navy over decades in stamping out slavery? I am not convinced he does. Another commission member, Aindrea Emelife, is an art historian. She does not appear to be any more objective than Agbetu. Indeed, she expressed delight at the removal of the Colston statue last year, saying this unlawful act gave her "a rush of adrenaline". Will any statue in London be deemed acceptable by Ms Emelife? The only thing she has guaranteed to protect and defend is the importance to London of the LGBTQIA+ community. Perhaps the worst of all, though, is Lynette Nabbosa, who describes herself as a “Business Lecturer with a background in financial inclusion”. She has said that white supremacy is a British phenomenon, writing “No matter where you find examples of white supremacy, all roads lead back to my country of birth [Britain].” I won't even attempt to refute these ludicrous and dangerous statements. That Khan has put her in a position where she will have a say in determining what streets and statues in London are allowed to remain untouched is unspeakable. London may be a different place to the rest of the country, but it is not that different. Put to one side questions of how Khan’s group was assembled or who determined that any of the commissioners was worthy of sitting on this panel, and just remember this: hundreds of thousands of pounds of taxpayers’ money will be spent trying to dismantle London’s history – against the wishes of the silent majority – by this cabal of unelected “social activists” appointed by a Labour mayor. Surely that won’t be popular."
Sadly, he still won that year's election. But maybe that will ensure Labour continues to lose
Statues of ‘old white men’ may need to be destroyed, Welsh government advises - "Statues of “old white men” such as the Duke of Wellington and Admiral Lord Nelson could be hidden or destroyed to create the “right historical narrative”, according to Welsh government guidance. Historical statues that often glorify “powerful, older, able-bodied white men” may be “offensive” to a more diverse modern public, according to guidance which is expected to be finalised this month. The government's "best-practice" advice states that councils and other public bodies should “take action” to set the “right historical narrative”. It says authorities could “conceal commemorations” and “discretely box monuments or enclose them creatively in new artworks”. Street and buildings could also be changed, the guidance states, to “remove offensive or unwanted names”. Alternatively, “offensive or unwanted items” could be relocated or destroyed, the advisory documents state, while noting drawbacks including expense and the need for extensive public consultation. Public commemorations including paintings, plaques and statues, the advice states, should “not insult or hurt fellow citizens”. It claims that existing monuments “can be offensive to people today who see them in a different light”, including as “aggressors who conquered peoples to expand the British Empire”. Diversity is “hardly visible at all in public commemorations”, it says, with existing memorials giving the “perception that the achievements that society considers noteworthy are those of powerful, older, able-bodied white men”... officials note that the “relative preponderance of white historians over other identities can skew understanding”. In 2020 a statue of Sir Thomas Picton was boarded up at Cardiff City Hall after the city's mayor called for its removal. Sir Thomas was hailed as a hero following his death at the Battle of Waterloo in 1815, but his legacy as governor of Trinidad has been questioned and he was also involved in the slave trade. The advice follows a 2021 government-backed “audit of commemoration” in the wake of Black Lives Matter protests, which covered hundreds of statues, plaques, buildings and street names linked to “the slave trade and British Empire”... The audit’s subsequent “Anti-Racist Wales Action Plan” outlined public bodies’ responsibility for “setting the right historical narrative” and aimed to recognise “historical injustices” while also pointing out the “positive impact” of minority communities... Andrew RT Davies, the leader of the Welsh Conservatives, has raised concerns that the guidance represents an “Orwellian” attempt to have public bodies rewrite history. He told the Telegraph: “Whether it is their erroneous misguidance for public bodies or their so-called ‘Anti-Racist Wales Action Plan’, Labour are intent on rewriting our history here in Wales. “Labour have been captured by a hard-Left, anti-British mob who want nothing more than to topple our statues, tear up the works of classic authors and cancel our great orators, all in the name of virtue signalling."
Is it cos I is racist? - "The Black Lives Matter protests last summer have set a miniature cultural revolution in motion. Protesters have called for the toppling of statues, the decolonisation of university courses and the introduction of unconscious-bias training in the workplace. One of the most unlikely targets of this ‘anti-racist’ cultural cleansing has been British 2000s-era comedies. TV channels and on-demand services – without any prompting from actual anti-racist activists, it seems – have been merrily slapping ‘content warnings’ on comedy classics. Viewers of The League of Gentleman, Little Britain and The Mighty Boosh are all now warned that what they are about to watch contains ‘outdated’ and ‘racist’ humour. The latest TV comedy to be given an offensive-content warning is Da Ali G Show, which originally aired on Channel 4 but can now be streamed on Britbox. Would-be viewers are warned that the show contains ‘crude humour, including racist terms which may offend, sexual references and strong language’. What’s odd about this racism warning, in particular, is that Da Ali G Show is a satire about race. Sacha Baron Cohen’s character is a white ‘wigga’ who appropriates black-sounding slang, dress and music. He would interview real-world figures in character and make them uncomfortable by toying with race, by pretending to be black while obviously being white. ‘Is it cos I is black?’ was Ali G’s most infamous catchphrase."
Oxford University suggests imperial measurements could be researched in project to diversify Stem course - "Oxford University has suggested imperial measurements could be researched by students hired to try and 'diversify' and 'decolonise' its STEM curriculum. The university has been recruiting students on living wage to conduct extensive research this summer, alongside scholars, into how Oxford’s science curricula can be made less “Eurocentric”... It acts on a pledge by Oxford’s vice-chancellor to embed teaching on colonialism into courses following last summer’s Black Lives Matter protests, and is among a raft of decolonising overhauls currently underway on campuses across Britain. It comes despite Michelle Donelan, the universities minister, in February warning the “so-called decolonisation of the curriculum” mirrored the Soviet Union and was “censoring history”."
Kew Gardens boss changes 'decolonisation' language after backlash - "The Royal Botanical Gardens promised to "decolonise our collections" in the manifesto published last year. The organisation is instead promising to "re-examine" the collections. But Kew's director, Richard Deverell claimed that a large part of the backlash had been misplaced... Kew previously faced allegations that it may be breaching the National Heritage Act 1983 when it pledged to reword display boards... the Royal Botanical Gardens' director also said that he wouldn't "apologise" for slavery, as it is "simply not Kew's territory"."
Kew Gardens director hits back at claims it is 'growing woke' - "In its 10-year manifesto, Kew Gardens outlined five key priorities, including having honest conversations about its links to imperialism and colonialism... the manifesto – which contained a pledge to “decolonise” the garden’s collections by acknowledging and addressing “exploitative and racist legacies” – drew criticism for being woke... the director, Richard Deverell, said the manifesto signalled one of the most fundamental periods of change in the history of the world-famous botanic garden in London and to stay silent on issues of race could be seen as being complicit. Describing it as a “fork in the road moment”, Deverell said the outpouring of grief around the world after the killing of George Floyd brought into focus deep-rooted and longstanding injustices faced by black people. Deverell said Kew, as an institution, could not stand aside. “Like so many other organisations, parts of Kew’s history shamefully draw from a legacy that has deep roots in colonialism and racism”... “There is no acceptable neutral position on this subject; to stay silent is to be complicit. Each of us needs to step up to tackle injustices in our society and our organisations."... “We will move quickly to ‘decolonise’ our collections, re-examining them to acknowledge and address any exploitative or racist legacies, and develop new narratives around them.” As well as broadening the narrative around plants, Deverell said there would be a move to increase diversity among senior staff. The institution does not have a record of the number of people from ethnic minority groups that it employs. “We need to make sure that people do not feel intimidated by the Victorian wrought iron gates of Kew. At the moment we have too few role models from minority backgrounds and that is something we will definitely work towards addressing in the next 10 years”"
We are not trashing history, says Kew Gardens chief - "Mr Deverell initially pursued a punchy and defiant response to critics of the language in the manifesto, but has now, to an extent, walked back from it. Much of the reaction, he claimed, had been “asserting that we are doing things that we are simply not doing. “At first I found it amusing, And subsequently, it was actually quite annoying, because it was causing a lot of distraction. It’s why we dropped that word from our manifesto. It was causing heat, but not light.” While other public institutions are toppling statues or looking to send items back to their countries of origin, Kew is not removing any of its collection, Mr Deverell insisted. And although displays will be updated, there will not be a “didactic or hectoring tone”. “You’re not going to read anything, I think, that is critical of Kew’s, or indeed British history. What you will see, I hope, is a broader and actually, I think, more interesting and engaging set of stories that links our historical roots to contemporary issues,” he said. The whole programme, he said, made Kew “an exemplar of retain and explain”, the Government’s stance on contested history, “we are not removing anything; we are seeking to broaden the stories we tell”. On a walk through the Chinese Grove, below Kew’s historic giant pagoda, Mr Deverell pointed to newer interpretation signs that included mentions of how Britain’s victory in the Opium Wars opened China up to Western botanists, explained how locals used plants well before Europeans “discovered” them and detailed the help Chinese individuals had given to these foreign scientists."
Public pressure works
Woke London council spends £180,000 renaming local road...only for it to be vandalised by protester hours later - "The Tottenham road was formerly known as Black Boy Lane but was renamed La Rose Lane on Monday, honouring the late black publisher, poet John La Rose... residents on the road have protested against the name change, with some putting up copies of the original sign outside their homes. One resident said: “I will keep it up, I don’t think the council can force me to take it down. “Why they waste so much money (changing the signs) when that money could be spent in a better way? “The council just decided to change the name because of Black Lives Matter.” A campaigner handed out the signs for free to encourage residents on the street to share their disapproval at the council’s decision... It said the name “continues to have a negative impact on black residents and visitors to our borough due to its racial connotations”. The name change is said to have cost the taxpayer £180,000 according to Save Our Statues, according to heritage campaigners... “While I do not condone vandalism, there is certainly a feeling that this change was imposed upon the local residents and that so-called consultations carried no value. The words Black Boy were clearly understood locally to have no link to ethnicity or skin tone.”"
Given the local opposition to changing the name, if the perpetrator is caught, he must be found not guilty, given the Coulston statue verdict
Cecil Rhodes being written out of prehistory for colonial associations - "Our distant ancestor Homo rhodesiensis, or Rhodesian Man, is to be reclassified as Homo bodoensis in an attempt to shed colonial associations, and simplify a confusing period of human evolution... “We think that the aim of decolonizing palaeoanthropology is an important and socially responsible task, and indeed Cecil Rhodes represents a problematic namesake... Prof Chris Stringer, a research leader in human evolution at the Natural History Museum, said the name change may just add to the confusion."
Rhodes Must Fall: turning history into a safe space - "I spent some time looking at the material protesters had brought with them. One banner read, ‘Stop hurting black students’. A similar request is made by many of those calling for statues of racist men to be hauled down. According to this argument, the presence of these statues, representative of a troubled past, causes distress to people from ethnic-minority backgrounds. It strikes me as quite patronising for mostly white ‘radicals’ to complain that inanimate, static objects can cause so much damage to black people. It seems especially odd when you realise that the Rhodes statue is at a raised level, part of an upper floor of the building, where it is only noticeable if you are looking straight at it. But this is what happens when we indulge in a politics of offence: people start projecting their own feelings on to others. Another placard said, ‘Listen to black voices, Rhodes Must Fall’. This points to an additional, similar problem. It implies all black voices support the movement, and therefore, on this issue at least, they are all in agreement. Furthermore, it unfairly suggests those who oppose the removal of the statue are ignoring black people. Indeed, this has become a regular feature of modern identitarian movements: the desire to simplify complex, nuanced debates into easily identifiable battlelines, often based on racial or gender distinctions. ‘Believe women’ was another such cry, made by supporters of the #MeToo movement. It presumed all women were supportive, even though many had their doubts, and cast anyone who raised questions as misogynistic or stuck in the past. But perhaps the most striking part of this movement and of many like it is the way they engage with what has gone before us. ‘Your “heritage” is theft’, asserted one placard. Condemning the entire past of a nation and its people in one fell swoop is extraordinarily arrogant. It is this kind of attitude that has resulted in the depressing sight of a defaced Cenotaph in London. History is offending people, and activists are trying to attack it. In imposing a particular understanding of history on us, today’s anti-racist activists are doing precisely what they accuse their opponents of. No doubt, they will assert that theirs is the objective approach. But what they fail to acknowledge is that few actually defend the more horrific elements of our history. Hardly anybody denies Rhodes was a wicked man or that imperialism was nasty. That is not where the real battle lies, and to suggest otherwise is to misrepresent people’s views. The real battle lies in what we make history mean for today. And on that front, caution is a virtue. In caving to the demand to make towns, cities and entire countries into safe spaces where nobody can be offended, we take a dangerous path. History is full of unpleasant facts, but it does no good to remove them from the record."
Why Rhodes must stay - "the Rhodes Must Fall movement is underpinned by a supine culture of victimhood that depicts people, and especially black people, as weak, fragile and in need of constant validation from the powers-that-be. Rhodes Must Fall is a regressive moment. It talks about ethnic-minority people in an incredibly patronising and even dehumanising way. Its core belief is that statues of people who committed wrongs in the past are not only an affront to people of colour but actually cause them existential fear and pain. Rhodes Must Fall organisers have described the statue at Oriel as a form of ‘violence’. They write about the ‘violence of… infrastructure’. They claim that the ‘festering, rotting wound’ of white supremacy and colonialism continues to hurt ‘our black and brown bodies’... Should I feel ‘real harm’ when I walk by the Cromwell monument in Westminster, given that his forces did unspeakable things to my ancestors in Ireland? What about monuments to Queen Victoria, or the ‘Famine Queen’, as she was known in Ireland for years, who ruled Ireland when the Potato Famine killed hundreds of thousands of people? Should these monuments do ‘real harm’ to my ‘Irish body’? Should I be suffering from a ‘colonial wound’? If not, why not? Am I somehow more capable than others of negotiating the public square without feeling offended, upset or wounded by images of historic figures? This is where the identitarian lobby’s diminishing of our ethnic-minority citizens as being particularly vulnerable to existential offence gets perilously close to being something like racism. Rhodes Must Fall and others are promoting a view of black people as mere bodies who lack full control over their critical faculties, to such an extent that they can apparently be overcome by pain upon seeing a statue. The biological language (‘bodies’), and the paternalistic claims that ethnic-minority people must be protected and saved from certain depictions of history, runs the very serious risk of rehabilitating foul old ideas about the moral weakness of non-white people. This identitarian infantilisation can also be seen in Oxford’s decision to grant special dispensation to students who feel traumatised by the killing of George Floyd and who feel they haven’t been able to perform to their best in exams or assessments. This is completely bizarre. Why would a horrible killing 4,000 miles away traumatise UK-based students to such an extent that they cannot do their work properly? This is the logic of the victim cult, which treats people as morally fragile, easily offended and susceptible to ‘trauma’ simply through watching something or hearing something. This is a completely regressive idea in itself; the fact that it is an idea that is more likely to be applied to black people than white people makes it positively chilling. This racial paternalism benefits nobody. Rhodes should stay. Not because he was some kind of heroic figure, but firstly because it is important that we do not erase history, even difficult history, and secondly, and more importantly, because we must not capitulate to the deeply damaging cult of victimhood. There is nothing positive whatsoever in the rage against the Rhodes statue. It is fuelled by today’s illiberal, censorious culture of offence-taking and by a cult of fragility that calls into question people’s mental and moral autonomy and reduces them to the level of children who can be hurt by difficult ideas. It would be a grave error for Oxford, of all places, to embolden this backward worldview."
Exclusive: 150 Oxford dons refuse to teach in Rhodes statue row - "More than 150 Oxford dons are boycotting Oriel College and refusing to teach its students in protest at its decision to keep the Cecil Rhodes statue"
Liberals say that if you refuse to do your job you should be fired (when it's conservatives protesting). But good luck if yo ucall for these dons to be fired
Oxford dons boycotting Oriel are themselves funded by imperialists - "some have benefitted from financial legacies built on forced labour. Four of the academics who signed up to the boycott have received funding from the Leverhulme Trust, which was created with funding from Lord Leverhulme, a soap magnate who set up plantations in the Belgian Congo in the 1910s using forced labour. One historian has claimed that Leverhulme's "private kingdom" in the country (then under Belgian colonial rule) was "reliant on the horrific Belgian system of forced labour, a programme that reduced the population of Congo by half and accounted for more deaths than the Nazi Holocaust"... The Oriel boycott's signatories include Dr Dan Hodgkinson and Dr Zoe Cormack, both of whom are Leverhulme Early Career Fellows, a three-year post which is fully funded in the first year and part-funded in the second and third years by the Leverhulme Trust. Dr Julia Viebach, a lecturer in African Studies, also recently completed a Leverhulme Early Career Fellowship based at the Law Faculty. Meanwhile, Dr Agnieszka Kościańska is a Leverhulme visiting professor at Oxford, meaning she is eligible for up to £150,000 of funding from the trust. Dr Kathrin Bachleitner’s research in international relations is fully funded by the IKEA Foundation. In 2012, the Swedish company admitted that it had used East German political prisoners as forced labourers to manufacture its goods for more than a decade during the Cold War and said this was a "deep regret". Prof Wale Adebanwi, another signatory, is the Rhodes Professor of Race Relations. The professorship was created in the early 1950s, following a donation from the then Rhodesian Selection Trust, who requested it be named in memory of Cecil Rhodes. “These boycotters occupy positions or hold grants made in the name of Rhodes or other imperialists which they are happy to accept whilst berating the people who actually provided the funds,” said Nigel Biggar, regius professor of moral and pastoral theology at Oxford. “There is a certain moral inconsistency in doing that: you are biting the hand that feeds you, in effect.” Prof Biggar, who is currently researching the impact of Britain's imperial past, said the broader point this shows was that trying to unpick history was “both impossible and fruitless”... Some of the Oriel boycott’s leading figures also have professorships named after imperialists. Prof Kate Tunstall, an interim provost at Worcester college is the Clarendon Professor of French which is named after Edward Hyde, the 1st Earl of Clarendon... Prof Danny Dorling's professorship is named after Halford Mackinder who dedicated his life’s work to the renewal of the British Empire, which he saw as viable in the aftermath of the Second World War."
Oriel controversy: Meet ‘Red Kate’, leader of the ‘People’s Republic of Worcester College’ - " Prof Tunstall - or “Red Kate” as she is called by fellow dons - was appointed as interim provost in September 2019 after her predecessor Sir Jonathan Bate stepped down. Within weeks of taking up her post, she attempted to abolish the traditions of grace before meals and standing for dons, only to face a backlash from students who wanted to keep the customs intact. Her other changes included installing an equalities officer on the governing body, setting up a new “community, equality and decolonisation” fund, and installing a multi-faith prayer room as an alternative to chapel. Last month at the height of the Israel-Gaza conflict, she sent out a mass email to congratulate students and staff who took part in pro-Palestinian protests in the city centre. “It was heartening to see so many Worcester, staff and students, at the event in Oxford city centre on Sunday expressing solidarity with the Palestinians, condemning the violence and calling for peace”... Although Prof Tunstall made no secret of her Left-wing views, dons were nonetheless “shocked” to see she had signed up to boycott Oriel. "It is extraordinary - there is no precedent for it ,” one said. “There is a very strong code among heads of houses at both Oxford and Cambridge that you act collegiately. It is a very basic principle. “This means it is not the business of one college to tell another college how it should be conducting its affairs."... “This boycott displays the ugly intolerance of its supporters, who simply will not live with any view other than their own and are willing to punish students to impose their will,” said Nigel Biggar, regius professor of moral and pastoral theology at Oxford. “Having failed to persuade, they now employ force. Such authoritarianism has no place in a university that purports to be liberal”. Prof Biggar, who is head of Oxford’s McDonald Centre for Theology, Ethics, and Public Life, is currently leading a project on "Ethics and the Empire", which analyses the impact of Britain's imperial past. In 2017, academics launched a vociferous attack on Prof Biggar after he suggested that people should have “pride” about aspects of their imperialist past. “Someone who was properly liberal should accept a decision that they don’t agree with. Otherwise all we have is the expression of deep feelings and civil war”... For some, this episode has shone a light on what many within Oxford have known for some time: that the university is no longer the bastion of Establishment that it once was... “In terms of the policy and political outlook there is little if anything traditional in Oxford any more. With very few exceptions the tutors and fellows at Oxford are politically on the Left and in many cases very far to the Left.” He said that was part of a broader phenomenon, since academics tend to be Left leaning, but added it caused particular tension at a university like Oxford which is “liable to have links with historical figures who the extremely Left leaning academic staff hold in contempt”. He added: “That is the basic reason why Oxford in particular is the epicentre of this kind of crisis.” It is not just rank and file academics that display Left-wing tendencies. Some dons have noted how over the past decade or so, almost all head of house positions have been handed to “a Blairite, an ex-head of a quango, or someone from a Left-leaning media organisation" meaning the culture is also changing from the top... “Here we have 150 academics, some of them very senior - these people are clearly willing to go on the warpath when they disagree with something,” he said. “Imagine what the effect will be on their colleagues and students - will they feel able to disagree or will they censor themselves? That is the most sinister effect of this behaviour. “These people need to be able to restrain themselves to give other people the freedom to say what they really think without fear of being punished”."
Liberals don't accept that Westerners can be proud of their history - only ashamed of it
The pathetic revolt against Rhodes - "I grew up in Oxford. I walked past Oriel College countless times on the way home from school. Yet for most of my childhood, I didn’t even realise it had a statue of Cecil Rhodes above its main entrance. Nobody ever talked about it. Nobody ever really cared about it. What a difference a few years can make... The boycott also covers Oriel’s outreach work. In other words, these academics are refusing to help under-represented communities get places at the college – including ethnic minorities. Clearly, the revolt against Rhodes has little to do with tackling real-world inequalities. This is just one of many instances recently in which Oxford academics and officials have shown themselves to be as woke as any student. Last year, Oxford announced plans to ‘decolonise’ the university’s maths and science courses by ‘embedding teaching on colonialism and empire’ in the curriculum. In May, Oxford academics said that imperial measurements – like feet, yards and inches – were ‘tied deeply to the idea of the empire’ and should be ‘decolonised’. Unable to find real evidence of ‘systemic’ racism at universities, activist dons are trying to find it in their courses. The Oriel protest reminds us that the campus culture war is not a battle between woke students and bemused staff. Time and again, lecturers have joined in the witch-hunts and the cancellation campaigns against those who dissent from the identitarian ideology – even against their own colleagues. There are many reasons why the Rhodes statue should stay standing, but one of the strongest is also one of the simplest: it will act as a reminder to staff and students at Oxford that the world is a complicated place full of things they might not like – and that they’ll just have to grow up and learn to deal with it."
'Disrespectful': New Cecil Rhodes notice at Oriel College sparks debate - "Oriel College has erected the sign, describing the mining magnate as a "committed British colonialist" who exploited "peoples of southern Africa", as part of efforts to explain the controversial historical monument. But the plaque, unveiled during Black History Month, has been dismissed as "amateurish" and "disrespectful" by a city councillor."
The left don't want to contextualise or teach history. They want to destroy it
Oriel College angers academics with plaque depicting Cecil Rhodes as the ‘devil incarnate’ - "“I think the fundamental point is the lack of balance,” said David Abulafia, emeritus professor of Mediterranean history at Cambridge, who believes the current sign serves to “distort” history. “I am not trying to defend Rhodes’s career right across the board. This is a man who was a great benefactor of Oxford University and who – it may seem strange to us – actually thought he was bringing benefits to the people who fell under his control. “The notice is only concerned with linking him to racist and imperialist policies. This is clearly a reaction to the Rhodes Must Fall campaign and it's simply not how you do it.” Prof Abulafia said that the sign should be “balanced and measured”, adding: “It should look at the whole of Rhodes’s career, explaining properly who he was and what he was trying to do. One needs to explain where he stands in the context of the attitudes of his day. “He believed he was bringing benefits to Africa. We might now argue that he did more harm than good, but one has to understand what his intentions were. He is portrayed here as some sort of devil incarnate.”"
You're only allowed to hate "racists", not have a nuanced understanding of them
Why, as an African, I took a Rhodes scholarship | Nanjala Nyabola - "As a fellow Rhodes scholar and an African woman, I frequently get asked why, in the face of Rhodes's bloody and destructive quest to subjugate an entire generation of my people, I would accept money from a trust set up in his name. Why would I study at a university whose history is so intertwined with the legacy of colonial oppression, in a country that has never truly made peace with the atrocities perpetuated in the name of the empire? In my opinion, the legacy of the Rhodes scholarships speaks to the heart of the legacy of empire in general, and the short answer to all the questions raised above is: it's complicated... what's the alternative? When I graduated, I had planned to take 10 years off – and this was the optimistic estimate – to work and save up to do a master's degree. There is no other way on this earth that I would ever have been able to afford to come to Oxford without this scholarship... One of the best answers to the original question was given by one of the wonderful students that I met when I arrived. When asked why she accepted the scholarship, she said: "Cecil Rhodes had no intention for us as black women to ever see his money. I can't think of a better way of saying fuck you than taking it.""
