3 ms·

Historians say removal not the only way to deal with racist relics

1 points by empressplay 9y ago

eesmith 9y ago
Sure. Then the question is, how much context is needed? A large statue of a racist traitor, on a pedestal in the middle of a traffic circle, isn't really contextualized with a small plaque that few read saying "Fought to preserve slavery." I'm hard pressed to think of what is the proper contexualization in that case. Rename the street "Traitor Way" and put a sign over its head saying "Slaveholder"? Except that wouldn't be enough. Most of the statues need something about "erected as a 'fuck you' to blacks during the Jim Crow era, and as a way to promote the false 'Lost Cause' narrative", because the statue isn't really about the person. Plus it would need description of what those terms mean, since it's about context. So now you've got, what, a few signs-worth of text, which few read? While there's a great honking statue that no one can ignore? Nor is this new. Consider "Rhodes Must Fall". What's the appropriate context to counter-balance a large statue of Rhodes, the Anglo-Saxon supremacist imperialist, visible to effectively all of the students in campus, including African students whose ancestors directly suffered the negative effects of Rhodes's actions? As RMFO wrote at https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1688976428039724&id=1599672910303410 https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1688976428... : "We have always rejected the idea that ‘contextualising’ the statue is the best solution to this debate. First, we do not think that context reveals that Rhodes was a man of his time; he was criticised extensively in his time for his retrograde views and damaging actions. Secondly, it is not possible to contextualise the statue meaningfully, given the gravity of Rhodes’ actions." "Cecil Rhodes, amongst other things, exploited natural resources belonging to Southern Africans, as the founder of what is now De Beers; coordinated military massacres, such as the Jameson Reid; was the head of state of the Cape Colony when legislation was passed that paved the way for apartheid; and made numerous outrightly racist statements. We do not accept that this can be captured in a contextual plaque. The better approach is to ensure students are educated about Rhodes through a curriculum that engages with imperialism, and to ensure that the statue of Rhodes is relocated to a museum, where real lesson-learning can occur." Lastly, adding "context" is also the least responsive thing that an organization can do. A city, or state, or university, can drag its heels, put up the smallest possible plaque, and call it done, which requires yet another protest to get better context to fix. Repeat a few times.

1 points by empressplay 9y ago

Sure. Then the question is, how much context is needed? A large statue of a racist traitor, on a pedestal in the middle of a traffic circle, isn't really contextualized with a small plaque that few read saying "Fought to preserve slavery." I'm hard pressed to think of what is the proper contexualization in that case. Rename the street "Traitor Way" and put a sign over its head saying "Slaveholder"? Except that wouldn't be enough. Most of the statues need something about "erected as a 'fuck you' to blacks during the Jim Crow era, and as a way to promote the false 'Lost Cause' narrative", because the statue isn't really about the person. Plus it would need description of what those terms mean, since it's about context. So now you've got, what, a few signs-worth of text, which few read? While there's a great honking statue that no one can ignore? Nor is this new. Consider "Rhodes Must Fall". What's the appropriate context to counter-balance a large statue of Rhodes, the Anglo-Saxon supremacist imperialist, visible to effectively all of the students in campus, including African students whose ancestors directly suffered the negative effects of Rhodes's actions? As RMFO wrote at https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1688976428039724&id=1599672910303410 https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1688976428... : "We have always rejected the idea that ‘contextualising’ the statue is the best solution to this debate. First, we do not think that context reveals that Rhodes was a man of his time; he was criticised extensively in his time for his retrograde views and damaging actions. Secondly, it is not possible to contextualise the statue meaningfully, given the gravity of Rhodes’ actions." "Cecil Rhodes, amongst other things, exploited natural resources belonging to Southern Africans, as the founder of what is now De Beers; coordinated military massacres, such as the Jameson Reid; was the head of state of the Cape Colony when legislation was passed that paved the way for apartheid; and made numerous outrightly racist statements. We do not accept that this can be captured in a contextual plaque. The better approach is to ensure students are educated about Rhodes through a curriculum that engages with imperialism, and to ensure that the statue of Rhodes is relocated to a museum, where real lesson-learning can occur." Lastly, adding "context" is also the least responsive thing that an organization can do. A city, or state, or university, can drag its heels, put up the smallest possible plaque, and call it done, which requires yet another protest to get better context to fix. Repeat a few times.