|
kustomkarkommando posted:No, challenging the presence of a statue honouring a man who's achievements where the subjugation of African peoples for direct personal profit whose white supremacist ideas where considered controversial even at the time of his death is confronting the issue What is the issue?
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 19:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 12:45 |
|
|
Should the Russians have kept all the Stalin statues? E: ^^^^ Blowfish being contrary for the sake of being Blowfish is the issue I think.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 19:39
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:What is the issue? Well I would say the deep antipathy among sections of British society to confront the realities of colonialism beyond the tired 'the empire did a lot of good you know' maxim
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 19:41
|
|
|
Lead out in cuffs posted:Should the Russians have kept all the Stalin statues? At least an appreciable number of them, yes. Possibly with dicks drawn on Stalin's face, but still around.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 19:48
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
The idea that you can fix a statue by adding an explanatory plaque is an obvious sign of artistic illiteracy and should deserve no respect whatsoever.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 19:55
|
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:Fascinating stuff in here. An end to global neoliberal economics would be a good start. When developed nations get to spend 20-30% of their GDP on social welfare, but countries like South Africa get called profligate and punished by the global economy for spending 8%, that's a fundamental injustice.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
kustomkarkommando posted:Well I would say the deep antipathy among sections of British society to confront the realities of colonialism beyond the tired 'the empire did a lot of good you know' maxim *did a lot of good with Maxims if we're gonna be honest here
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:The idea that you can fix a statue by adding an explanatory plaque is an obvious sign of artistic illiteracy and should deserve no respect whatsoever. This, on the other hand ...  https://www.enca.com/south-africa/search-rhodes-nose-continues I guess it raises the question of what to do with the Rhodes Memorial. It's a fairly plush little piece of neoclassical architecture with an amazing view, out back of UCT. Obviously destroying the whole thing would be overboard, but you could definitely remove most traces of Rhodes from it (including the name). But gently caress the statues. If you must keep them, then do something like this: 
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
blowfish posted:No, it's blindly smashing things that upset you, and it's the very definition of refusing to confront them no matter whether you're powerful enough to succeed or not. How is having a debate about a) why it was put up b) what it meant at the time c) what it means now d) whether we should take it down not confronting the issue?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:How is having a debate about a) why it was put up b) what it meant at the time c) what it means now d) whether we should take it down not confronting the issue? I'm sorry but there wasn't much debate the issue, merely loud shouting about how I AM FEELING OPPRESSED by a statue without further detail (people couldn't be bothered to write, quote or even read actual arguments for the thing they were protesting to do).
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
Lead out in cuffs posted:This, on the other hand ... A Native American group cut off the foot of a statue of a conquistador who ordered all the men in New Mexico have one of their feet cut off in retribution for an uprising. Good on them and the guys who cut off Cecil's nose. blowfish posted:I'm sorry but there wasn't much debate the issue, merely loud shouting about how I AM FEELING OPPRESSED by a statue without further detail (people couldn't be bothered to quote or even read actual arguments for the thing they were protesting to do). Somehow I doubt that you're actually apologizing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:A Native American group cut off the foot of a statue of a conquistador who ordered all the men in New Mexico have one of their feet cut off in retribution for an uprising. Good on them and the guys who cut off Cecil's nose. That's at least a higher level of intellectual engagement than going "waah make the bad thing disappear from my view".
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
blowfish posted:That's at least a higher level of intellectual engagement than going "waah make the bad thing disappear from my view". Yes, blowfish, I would estimate that 99.9% of the world's population has a higher level of intellectual engagement than you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Yes, blowfish, I would estimate that 99.9% of the world's population has a higher level of intellectual engagement than you. Awesome username/post combo.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 20:31
|
|
|
kustomkarkommando posted:Well I would say the deep antipathy among sections of British society to confront the realities of colonialism beyond the tired 'the empire did a lot of good you know' maxim See, that's interesting, because the original purpose of the movement was apparently about institutional racism, racial inequality and campus housing. The statue was symbolic. In this thread, the original line of discussion of the movement was about how symbolic, destructive actions took over the movement and removed its ability to produce meaningful policy change. And now the issue and goals being litigated in the thread have similarly shifted. I'd be curious to hear from Lead out in cuffs regarding the relative foci of fees must fall versus rhodes must fall, and why the internal dynamics of those movements worked out the way they did. It sounds like there was a discipline problem in RMF that cost them the media battle. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 20:39 on Sep 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 20:31
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:See, that's interesting, because the original purpose of the movement was apparently about institutional racism, racial inequality and campus housing. The statue was symbolic. In this thread, the original line of discussion of the movement was about how symbolic, destructive actions took over the movement and removed its ability to produce meaningful policy change. And now the issue and goals being litigated in the thread have similarly shifted. Oh no, not 'destruction'. If only we could avoid destroying things like racist institutions and racial inequality.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 20:33
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Oh no, not 'destruction'. If only we could avoid destroying things like racist institutions and racial inequality. Statues aren't institutions. They're statues. The discussion was about how the movement focused on destroying symbols of colonialism in a way that hampered their ability to produce change in the institution-the stuff that was actually producing inequality and injustice. The protest became about names, statues and paintings instead of, e.g., the number of black professors, or cost of student housing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:See, that's interesting, because the original purpose of the movement was apparently about institutional racism, racial inequality and campus housing. The statue was symbolic. In this thread, the original line of discussion of the movement was about how symbolic, destructive actions took over the movement and removed its ability to produce meaningful policy change. And now the issue and goals being litigated in the thread have similarly shifted. Specifically in the UK context, which is what I am talking about, the local version of Rhodes Must Fall sprang up to counter deep-rooted racism prevalent in sections of Oxford and a culture of imperial glorification that alienated the small Black student population. Forcing a confrontation on persistent colonial nostalgia by challenging the presence a statue embodying that makes sense to me. To quote: Under Rhodes posted:RMF Oxford says its ultimate goal is to ‘decolonise’ the university, a broad campaign – of which changing public symbols is only one part – to address what it sees as Oxford’s deep racism. Its first action was to protest against the Oxford Union’s ‘Colonial Comeback’-themed cocktail, served on the night of a debate about reparations and advertised with a poster of shackled black hands. This wasn’t an isolated incident. Two years ago a group of students at St Hugh’s put on blackface to illustrate Jay-Z and Kanye West’s ‘Niggas in Paris’ as part of a ‘song titles’-themed bop. Only 3.9 per cent of Oxford’s professors have a Black and Minority Ethnic background; even at Cambridge the figure is 6.4 per cent. Undergraduates can still complete a history degree without studying the non-European world. In a recent survey, 59.3 per cent of BME students reported feeling unwelcome at Oxford because of their race.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Statues aren't institutions. They're statues. The discussion was about how the movement focused on destroying symbols of colonialism in a way that hampered their ability to produce change in the institution-the stuff that was actually producing inequality and injustice. The protest became about names, statues and paintings instead of, e.g., the number of black professors, or cost of student housing. The "discussion" being about how whatever they did hampered their ability to change things was one person calling them an "anti-white movement."
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
Badger of Basra posted:The "discussion" being about how whatever they did hampered their ability to change things was one person calling them an "anti-white movement." No, they didn't. They argued that an anti-white movement "came to the forefront". I too am suspicious of anti-white movement fearmongering in the context of SA, but if the movement has parts of it that you wind up having to disavow because they're burning poo poo, then yes, there's a problem with how you're controlling and directing people. kustomkarkommando posted:Specifically in the UK context, which is what I am talking about, the local version of Rhodes Must Fall sprang up to counter deep-rooted racism prevalent in sections of Oxford and a culture of imperial glorification that alienated the small Black student population. Forcing a confrontation on persistent colonial nostalgia by challenging the presence a statue embodying that makes sense to me. To quote: From the same article: quote:But complaints of structural racism and calls for curriculum reform don’t draw public attention like the toppling of a statue, and the RMF leaders know this. Peter Scott in the Guardian called the removal of the statue the ‘easy option’ and a ‘displacement activity’ that distracts from the real issues. But it’s hard to imagine that anyone would be talking about Oxford’s colonial past, or racist present, if the statue’s future weren’t hanging in the balance. Focusing on the statue was a mistake. The products of the movement have become, again as per the same cited article, about removing statues and portraits instead of the things the organizers were actually trying to accomplish. This is how institutions divert protest movements-and how movements divert themselves. It's why Penn State removed the Paterno statue, and stayed quiet about what they're going to do with it. The statue became the subject of discussion, and the problems of culture and funding of sports at the institution remained. Now they're hosting a celebration of his life- and in the meantime, another statue of him was erected in downtown.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Statues aren't institutions. They're statues. The discussion was about how the movement focused on destroying symbols of colonialism in a way that hampered their ability to produce change in the institution-the stuff that was actually producing inequality and injustice. The protest became about names, statues and paintings instead of, e.g., the number of black professors, or cost of student housing. Really? Because the discussion seemed more to be about how you're a weiner. Especially given that "hampered their ability to produce change in the institution" has not really been justified or any attempts made at justifying it, beyond asserting it. So, as kustomkarkommando posted as I was writing this post, the maintenance and reenactment of racist, colonialist, imperialist, etc. symbols is something that both reinforces and demonstrates the values of the system that performs this maintenance and reenactment, as shown by the constant defense of these symbols whenever they are attacked. To put it simply, the Chicago Police Department's reaction to vandalism of the statue of a police officer in Haymarket Square commemorating police violence against protests is by no means unrelated to the CPD shooting to kill in 1968 or disproportionately targeting, arresting, and killing people of color. Attacking these symbols is a way to break this cycle.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
kustomkarkommando posted:Specifically in the UK context, which is what I am talking about, the local version of Rhodes Must Fall sprang up to counter deep-rooted racism prevalent in sections of Oxford and a culture of imperial glorification that alienated the small Black student population. Forcing a confrontation on persistent colonial nostalgia by challenging the presence a statue embodying that makes sense to me. To quote: Apart from the proportion of black profs and the Union thing (which while affiliated with the uni is student run) everything there basically boils down "insensitive and/or racist students exist at Oxford". The history degree thing is typical of the (perhaps overly) modular nature of Oxbridge degrees that lets students skip everything they don't care about; in my course you have equivalent stuff like biologists who don't know caterpillars turn into butterflies and moths after studying biological natural sciences for three years. suck my woke dick fucked around with this message at 20:50 on Sep 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Really? Because the discussion seemed more to be about how you're a weiner. Especially given that "hampered their ability to produce change in the institution" has not really been justified or any attempts made at justifying it, beyond asserting it. The article kustomkarkommando cites acknowledges it. The goals of the movement were not centered around the statue. The article also concludes by stating that all of the university's changes involved moving symbols, rather than making policy changes, and that ultimately most of the symbolic changes also didn't happen. Again: I get the maintenance and reenactment arguments involving symbols. I understand that they have those effects. And I get that they are an appealing way to draw attention to a movement. They are a better way for the institution to ensure that nothing happens.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Apart from the proportion of black profs and the Union thing (which while affiliated with the uni is student run) everything there basically boils down "insensitive and/or racist students exist at Oxford". The history degree thing is typical of the (perhaps overly) modular nature of Oxbridge degrees that lets students skip everything they don't care about; in my course you have equivalent stuff like biologists who don't know caterpillars turn into butterflies and moths after studying biological natural sciences for three years. The specific position of Oxford in British society as a hothouse for the upper echelons of society makes a battle over the toleration of colonial-era nostalgia among the student body all the more important and mobilizing against continuing symbols of colonial glorification important - Oxford is a culture as much as it is an institution I mean if you read combating deep seated racism at Oxford being purely about the functioning of the Universities internal systems rather than a broader attempt at reforming the culture of the great white city of the British upper class I think you are missing the point to a degree kustomkarkommando fucked around with this message at 21:00 on Sep 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
kustomkarkommando posted:The specific position of Oxford in British society as a hothouse for the upper echelons of society makes a battle over the toleration of colonial-era nostalgia among the student body all the more important and mobilizing against continuing symbols of colonial glorification important - Oxford is a culture as much as it is an institution Yes, but you had a silly movement which was all about removing one specific statue in ~Oriel College, Oxford~, rather than about entrenched power structures/racism/excessive RULE BRITANNIA in English upperclassmen. Essentially, brats from the middle and lower class complained about being personally inconvenienced during their first taste of real privilege. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 22:27
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Yes, but you had a silly movement which was all about removing one specific statue in ~Oriel College, Oxford~, rather than about entrenched power structures/racism/excessive RULE BRITANNIA in English upperclassmen. They had other protests as well about related issues regarding colonial legacy in oxford and yes that what it was about I dont actually think you know very much about the specifics of the Oxford protests
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Essentially, brats from the middle and lower class complained about being personally inconvenienced during their first taste of real privilege. Jesus Christ, dude.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
kustomkarkommando posted:They had other protests as well about related issues regarding colonial legacy in oxford and yes that what it was about Hmmm yes, I think this movement which quickly vanished when the specific statue it was about didn't end up getting taken down in time for the next summer vacation was a serious political movement about taking on a wide range of issues regarding colonial legacy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 22:34
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Hmmm yes, I think this movement which quickly vanished when the specific statue it was about didn't end up getting taken down in time for the next summer vacation was a serious political movement about taking on a wide range of issues regarding colonial legacy. Yes I will take your facebook analysis over the stated aims and goals of the movements organizers
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
kustomkarkommando posted:Yes I will take your facebook analysis over the stated aims and goals of the movements organizers Hmmm, perhaps the original organisers who at least put in a token amount of thought stopped being relevant once the movement got overrun by drooling retards (i.e. basically throughout most of the movement).
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Hmmm, perhaps the original organisers who at least put in a token amount of thought stopped being relevant once the movement got overrun by drooling retards (i.e. basically throughout most of the movement). They where relevant when one of them made a white girl cry though funny that
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 22:46
|
|
|
kustomkarkommando posted:They where relevant when one of them made a white girl cry though Well that was already towards the end of their relevance, but now that you've brought it up, "  I should make a random person who has nothing to do with this poo poo cry" is surely the finest moment of a political movement.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 22:48
|
|
|
Basically everyone involved in Rhodes Must Fall UK: Self-Absorbed Boogaloo was stupid or bad. Rhodes was an rear end in a top hat back in the day; the College are spineless assholes for waffling until letting themselves get blackmailed into a decision by donors; the idiot tweens marching for the general cause of, uh, something, I'm sure someone smarter than me has thought of it but I'm kinda angry remain idiots.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
Yeah I remember when they called for the creation of an Afro-Carribean scholarship. What self absorbed pricks
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 23:00
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Basically everyone involved in Rhodes Must Fall UK: Self-Absorbed Boogaloo was stupid or bad. That seems to be the case with a lot of left wing groups these days.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:The article kustomkarkommando cites acknowledges it. The goals of the movement were not centered around the statue. The article also concludes by stating that all of the university's changes involved moving symbols, rather than making policy changes, and that ultimately most of the symbolic changes also didn't happen. No you don't, because you are insisting that changing these symbols is "nothing happening". Lying in such a clumsy way is not really helpful either in deceit or honesty. Your broader argument seems to be that the university would have done more things if not for the fools who protested, and that their reluctance and stonewalling would fade away if things were done in a properly technocratic fashion.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
kustomkarkommando posted:Yeah I remember when they called for the creation of an Afro-Carribean scholarship. What self absorbed pricks Well, it's very easy to carry around a banner with something written on it, but again: how much pressure to enact any substantial changes continued after the College decided not to take down the statue? essentially nothing was done and the movement died down a few weeks after
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:No you don't, because you are insisting that changing these symbols is "nothing happening". Lying in such a clumsy way is not really helpful either in deceit or honesty. Technically it's just almost nothing and not literally nothing, but it's purely optics that (as mentioned in the post you're quoting) were changed instead of things materially affecting people. If the protest movement had any teeth and wasn't the closest approximation of slacktivism possible irl, then you'd have an appreciable number of people continuing to keep up pressure to force meaningful change, instead of going "yay we tore down a statue, time to go home" or "well it's still there, eh, might as well go home".
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Technically it's just almost nothing and not literally nothing, but it's purely optics that (as mentioned in the post you're quoting) were changed instead of things materially affecting people. If the protest movement had any teeth and wasn't the closest approximation of slacktivism possible irl, then you'd have an appreciable number of people continuing to keep up pressure to force meaningful change, instead of going "yay we tore down a statue, time to go home" or "well it's still there, eh, might as well go home". Why exactly do you think that screeching like a demented macaw about how you hate the protestors and they're all mentally disabled constitutes an argument worthy of reply, or of posting?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 12:45 |
|
|
so do we have to wait until the post-racial Communist utopia is here to take down the giant memorial to the genocidal white supremacist? or is that not allowed even then?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 23:25
|
|
