George Floyd/Black Lives Matter Protests

[101]

4 minutes ago, Mr Waldo said:

Children I know are taught about the slave trade but they are not really taught about  the Arab slave trade, or the African slave trade, or the South American slave trade.   Or the fact that,according to some reliable sources, their are more slaves today than in the 19th centuary?

Forgive my ignorance but I guess the reason we are taught about the Atlantic Slave Trade is because that's what we (the Scots/ Brits) were closest aligned to and made a hell of a lot of cash from.

The other slave trades to mention as far as I know didn't have the same level of UK interference. There is a lot of evil shit in the world but I don't thin it's realistic to teach everyone everything at school, for example the street names in Glasgow in particular if you didn't know that why not? Take some interest in where you live and the people that lived there only by doing that will we avoid the atrocities the generations made before.

As for modern slavery I did learn about that at school but not in any great detail however I doubt folk care now if they can't see people in chains they will brush it off. A number of companies that trade in the UK use prison labour in the US which is basically slavery. I don't think people will stop using Asda or McDonald's - price is the big driver in the UK and US not ethics

[craigkillie]

6 hours ago, ThatBoyRonaldo said:

Something that slightly grates with me is people moaning about 'they should teach kids about this in schools' and its close cousin 'they don't teach any Scottish history in schools, it's 1066 then straight to the war'. I left school over a decade ago and pretty sure this was covered, along with loads of other Scottish, UK and world history. For a subject that is only compulsory for 2 years they do alright. You can cover racism in other areas as well - reading Othello in English was a formative experience for me for example. 

Schools/putting something in the curriculum are a small part of the issue imo - the main problem is that Britain at large hasn't really ever accepted that the empire was a bad thing. It doesn't really matter that much what you study in your hour of history a week between 13 and 15 if that doesn't change imo. 

They perhaps teach it in some schools, but it's certainly not everywhere. I finished school in 2007 and have no recollection of ever learning about the slave trade or any other aspect of British colonialism at any point. We studied US civil rights in modern studies, but it was very much from a modern perspective and didn't really go into a great deal of depth about the historical reasons why these racial differences were entrenched.

I feel as though it should be central to the curriculum, not some optional topic which schools can choose to cover. If the Scottish government can (quite rightly) embed LGBTI issues into the curriculum then I think it is reasonable to ask them to do the same for topics surrounding racism.

My hypothesis here is that people who grew up in more working class and/or less ethnically diverse areas are much less likely to have this as part of their education. I haven't necessarily got any evidence for this, but I think it stands to reason.

[Mr Waldo]

2 minutes ago, 101 said:

Forgive my ignorance but I guess the reason we are taught about the Atlantic Slave Trade is because that's what we (the Scots/ Brits) were closest aligned to and made a hell of a lot of cash from.

The other slave trades to mention as far as I know didn't have the same level of UK interference. There is a lot of evil shit in the world but I don't thin it's realistic to teach everyone everything at school, for example the street names in Glasgow in particular if you didn't know that why not? Take some interest in where you live and the people that lived there only by doing that will we avoid the atrocities the generations made before.

As for modern slavery I did learn about that at school but not in any great detail however I doubt folk care now if they can't see people in chains they will brush it off. A number of companies that trade in the UK use prison labour in the US which is basically slavery. I don't think people will stop using Asda or McDonald's - price is the big driver in the UK and US not ethics

I agree with you 100%  But I get annoyed that it sounds like certain people invented slavery. (I am trying to be polite).  We must teach people about our history. Should we rename Buchanan Street in Glasgow?

I think a biger issue is, will people stop using the likes of iPhones because some of their components are made by current day slaves. 

 

[ICTChris]

We studied slavery in Standard grade history. We had a mock debate about the abolition of slavery and I was chosen to speak for the pro slavery side. I can’t recall exactly what arguments I used, I think most of the arguments we covered were religious in nature.

I had forgotten about that until right now, what a really odd situation to put children in. I was about 13 or 14 at the time and was asked to argue for slavery in front of the class. How strange.

[101]

7 minutes ago, Mr Waldo said:

I agree with you 100%  But I get annoyed that it sounds like certain people invented slavery. (I am trying to be polite).  We must teach people about our history. Should we rename Buchanan Street in Glasgow?

I think a biger issue is, will people stop using the likes of iPhones because some of their components are made by current day slaves. 

 

I personally don't think we should rename anything that has a troubled past, if people don't educate themselves then I don't know what we can do. The caveat I would add is that I'm a white guy the street is named after a nasty white guy but if it made people of other ethnicities uncomfortable then I would say take it down but it should absolutely make white Scots feel uncomfortable that our countrymen profited from the sale of humans.

There is a reason the fairfone isn't a market leader...

In Britian I worry that this is just one big social media stunt I hope things change but I very much doubt it. If the amount of people I saw do blackout Tuesday actually made one change in their lives the world would be a better place already.

[Theroadlesstravelled]

26 minutes ago, 101 said:

I personally don't think we should rename anything that has a troubled past, if people don't educate themselves then I don't know what we can do. The caveat I would add is that I'm a white guy the street is named after a nasty white guy but if it made people of other ethnicities uncomfortable then I would say take it down but it should absolutely make white Scots feel uncomfortable that our countrymen profited from the sale of humans.

There is a reason the fairfone isn't a market leader...

In Britian I worry that this is just one big social media stunt I hope things change but I very much doubt it. If the amount of people I saw do blackout Tuesday actually made one change in their lives the world would be a better place already.

I agree. No way should Rangers International have been allowed back into the league.

[D.A.F.C]

Just now, Theroadlesstravelled said:

I agree. No way should Rangers International have been allowed back into the league.

It’s ok rangers were abolished years ago.

[Steve_Wilkos]

Just to set something straight.

I was born in Middlesbrough and now live in Stockton-on-Tees. So, I am qualified to say that Teesside is packed with beautiful architecture and even more beautiful people.

[effeffsee_the2nd]

1 hour ago, Mr Waldo said:

Children I know are taught about the slave trade but they are not really taught about  the Arab slave trade, or the African slave trade, or the South American slave trade.   Or the fact that,according to some reliable sources, their are more slaves today than in the 19th centuary?

you're right in that you say slavery has existed since the dawn of time and still exists in some forms today although by now it is illegal no matter where it is.  the big BIG  difference is only western European empires did so on an industrial scale and for several hundred years to a specific group of people & these countries would not be as wealthy and secure as they are today had it not been for their slave related activities in the past.

[coprolite]

2 hours ago, 101 said:

Forgive my ignorance but I guess the reason we are taught about the Atlantic Slave Trade is because that's what we (the Scots/ Brits) were closest aligned to and made a hell of a lot of cash from.

The other slave trades to mention as far as I know didn't have the same level of UK interference. There is a lot of evil shit in the world but I don't thin it's realistic to teach everyone everything at school, for example the street names in Glasgow in particular if you didn't know that why not? Take some interest in where you live and the people that lived there only by doing that will we avoid the atrocities the generations made before.

As for modern slavery I did learn about that at school but not in any great detail however I doubt folk care now if they can't see people in chains they will brush it off. A number of companies that trade in the UK use prison labour in the US which is basically slavery. I don't think people will stop using Asda or McDonald's - price is the big driver in the UK and US not ethics

The world has been interconnected for longer than many people think. 

Part of the reason that the Atlantic slave trade existed was a ready supply of African slaves from African slave traders, which happened to be in a very convenient place tradewinds wise.  

That doesn't excuse the barbarity that took place at all.  If the point of history (as a subject of study) is to stop us making mistakes twice then i think we should try to understand the conditions that can lead to things going wrong. That doesn't need to be limited to things that have involved us. 

[Theroadlesstravelled]

 

[Granny Danger]

I posted a couple of days back about the role of the police unions.  It looks like they will be one of the tougher nuts to crack.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/08/politics/police-union-reform-protests/index.html

“They've become far too powerful. They form political action committees. They donate to district attorneys' race or state attorneys' race, state senators and representatives and so forth," Charles Ramsey, a former DC police chief and former Philadelphia police commissioner, said Sunday on CNN. "And then we wonder why you can't get anything done."

 

 

Decades of collective bargaining has resulted in police forces where department chiefs have little control, and the unions have set the terms for internal investigations. Even if an officer is formally punished, nuances in the contract often help officers prevail on appeal, Serpas said.

For instance, some police union agreements have outlined how long police leadership must wait to investigate an incident, how they can ask the police officers questions and what they can ask, and how quickly the department must complete an investigation. Taken together, it puts the disciplinary power in the hands of the unions, which are set up to protect police officers' jobs.

Sometimes, police officers of color face discrimination within their own departments, and police unions have been complicit in allowing these inequalities to fester and survive, experts tell CNN.

 

[Sergeant Wilson]

6 hours ago, ICTChris said:

We studied slavery in Standard grade history. We had a mock debate about the abolition of slavery and I was chosen to speak for the pro slavery side. I can’t recall exactly what arguments I used, I think most of the arguments we covered were religious in nature.

I had forgotten about that until right now, what a really odd situation to put children in. I was about 13 or 14 at the time and was asked to argue for slavery in front of the class. How strange.

Did you win?

[Jacksgranda]

7 hours ago, Mr Waldo said:

Without going into the rights and wrongs, simply because it did some right and it did some wrong, but ask the people of Hong Kong, or Singapore, or a few other places with shee-ite neighbours if the Empire was evil.

Democracy, a bad thing?

And yes, I am aware of the bad things the British Empire did but I think it is more complex than evil...or good.

Personally, in the life of this planet, I believe the British Empire was a force for good....if you compare to what if it never existed.  

Surprised you haven't been hounded off the board for going against the received wisdom re the empire.

My take: our empire was the best of a mixed bag/least worst.

After suffering Japanes occupation, Lee Kuan Yew, was quite happy to have the British back. Although he was even happier when we went away again.

[Jacksgranda]

7 hours ago, ICTChris said:

We studied slavery in Standard grade history. We had a mock debate about the abolition of slavery and I was chosen to speak for the pro slavery side. I can’t recall exactly what arguments I used, I think most of the arguments we covered were religious in nature.

I had forgotten about that until right now, what a really odd situation to put children in. I was about 13 or 14 at the time and was asked to argue for slavery in front of the class. How strange.

Did you win?*
ETA: Too slow, Sarge first with the big questions as usual

Edited June 9, 2020 by Jacksgranda

[Detournement]

7 hours ago, Mr Waldo said:

 

Personally, in the life of this planet, I believe the British Empire was a force for good....if you compare to what if it never existed.  

This is moronic but I'll reply anyway. 

Historians have shown that GDP per capita was actually lower in India in 1947 than when the British arrived in the 18th century. Any development that actually occured was solely to aid Britain in plundering the sub continent's natural resources and labour. 

The same thing was true all over the Empire. It was a horrific experience for the colonised people. 

[Benjamin_Nevis]

8 hours ago, The_Kincardine said:

While England paddled up to its ankles in Empire we Scots were up to our knees in conquest and slavery and, since 1707, built our country around it.  The blood on the butchers' apron was, pound for pound, more likely to be let by Scots.

[coprolite]

11 minutes ago, Detournement said:

This is moronic but I'll reply anyway. 

Historians have shown that GDP per capita was actually lower in India in 1947 than when the British arrived in the 18th century. Any development that actually occured was solely to aid Britain in plundering the sub continent's natural resources and labour. 

The same thing was true all over the Empire. It was a horrific experience for the colonised people. 

Colonialism was shite.

The choice available to the British government of the day wasn't colonial India vs independent India. 

The alternative to Britain colonising India was to let France do it.  There is a school of thought that the French and Belgian colonies were even worse than Britain's. 

I agree that "a force for good" is hard to justify. You could plausibly argue that it was "a force for not as bad as it might have been" 

[Detournement]

All the European empires were a joint enterprise that worked together. 

Trying to say which ones were better or worse is like ranking serial killers by compassion for their victims. 

[Jacksgranda]

2 minutes ago, coprolite said:

Colonialism was shite.

The choice available to the British government of the day wasn't colonial India vs independent India. 

The alternative to Britain colonising India was to let France do it.  There is a school of thought that the French and Belgian colonies were even worse than Britain's. 

I agree that "a force for good" is hard to justify. You could plausibly argue that it was "a force for not as bad as it might have been" 

I don't think the Dutch and Germans covered themselves in glory, either.