Oxford gets it!

May 6, 2016 9:29 PM

Piemom

Views

1610

Likes

230

Dislikes

33

The Brits know how to handle the activists.

"Autres temps, autres moeurs"
other times, other customs
Stop judging past events by current mores

This ludicrous notion you have that a bronze statue of Cecil Rhodes should be removed from Oriel College, because it’s symbolic of “institutional racism” and “white slavery”. Well even if it is – which we dispute – so bloody what? Any undergraduate so feeble-minded that they can’t pass a bronze statue without having their “safe space” violated really does not deserve to be here.

Actually, we’ll go further than that. Your Rhodes Must Fall campaign is not merely fatuous but ugly, vandalistic and dangerous. We agree with Oxford historian RW Johnson that what you are trying to do here is no different from what ISIS and the Al-Qaeda have been doing to artefacts in places like Mali and Syria. You are murdering history.

http://www.snopes.com/oxford-letter-to-students/
http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/dec/18/oxford-university-students-cecli-rhodes
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/oxford-rhodes-statue-rewriting-history_us_56967676e4b0b4eb759caef7

+

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Shut the fuck up and go to class, PC warriors.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 6

Isn't this similar to taking down Confederate flags?

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Someone please tell this to the people in New Orleans

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

This campaign is headed by the guy getting money from the Rhodes stipendia. He is okay with that....

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Pity the south african universities didn't get it. They've vandalised tons of statues. Even some that had nothing to do with imperialism.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Some of the students who protested this in South Africa are actually on a Rhodes scholarship.....

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Stephen Fry talks about this in an interview: https://youtu.be/eJQHakkViPo?t=6m10s (Starts 6m10s; Ends 8m22s).

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Infantilism

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

They have a right to protest and the uni can tell them no. As long as they're not vandalising anything I don't see the harm in this

10 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 2

If you disrupt other student and classes with your protests it does

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 6

Oh come on! When is it "okay" to protest, then? Between 7 and 8 pm, when everyone is safe at home?

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

People are paying to be there to learn. You're not getting payed, you're not discriminated against from the staff or students 1/

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

by a bloody statue than you don't have the mental capacity nor the maturity to be attending higher education 3/

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

than why are you disrupting a service they are paying for? Not everyone has their parents pay for their education. If you get offended 2/

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Well safe space is silly, but on the other hand Cecil kind of was an extreme supremacist.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 4

None of them are calling it "safe space", it's the new buzzword to talk shit on any college student they disagree with.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 4

When the term safe space is used it means they think the person is being overly sensitive.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

It's still a buzzword, as "overly sensitive" is subjective. You could say some people are too sensitive about keeping it.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Overly sensitive in the sense that they lack the ability to tolerate something the presence or usage of something they dislike.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

No one's saying to erase him from history; they don't want him to still be venerated in such way and have the right to express their opinion

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Why would you want a statue of a slave owner? That's not exactly something you proudly display to everyone.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Because good accomplishments should always be heralded and not made any lesser by other acts by the same individual.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Why not herald the accomplishment, but recognise his obvious mistakes?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yeah you can recognise his mistakes, but Like Admiral Nelson, he wasn't a nice man but he still deserves his column.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's like the American or British flag, how many people died for the countries to be successful? The flag doesn't represent those deaths.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The flag also isn't a single person.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Just as a single person isn't represented by one action, the statue represents what he did for the uni, not all his actions he's ever done.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

It's not about "safe spaces", it's about acknowledging that Mr. Rhodes was a key part of something that was incredibly harmful to many (1)

10 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 8

people. If we found out tomorrow that Martin Luther King Jr. was a serial baby murderer, you can bet your ass we'd be taking down statues(2)

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 7

False analogue: We always knew what Rhodes did an believed in but if MLK was a known serial killer he would never have gained any prestige.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

and renaming streets. Not because we are trying to protect ourselves from anything, but because we don't generally idolize people who (3)

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 7

who super shitty things. (4/4)

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 7

If somebody does something bad we shouldn't fully support them but you can't just dismiss anything positive they did either (1)

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 3

They took his statue down in Africa which is fair enough but it's still part of UK heritage so should stay up there. 2/2

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

To compare this to ISIS is ridiculous and insulting to people actually suffering under ISIS.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 5

They're not talking about people, they're talking about this.http://edition.cnn.com/2015/03/09/world/iraq-isis-heritage/index.html

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I know. It's ridiculous to compare changing values and voluntary change to destruction of one's cultural history.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

No no, they're comparing the destruction of monuments to, the destruction of monuments.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

To call the voluntary removal of statute in order to reflect changing values "destruction" is ridiculous.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

They've defaced and torched a dozen monuments, burned paintings and coated statues in human excrement.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

no it isnt. This is one of the sorts of thing ISIS are known for. Its a perfectly valid comparison. Dont need full overlap to do comparison.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Isis is known for unilateral destruction, not asking for change because of changing values.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

I think its a fair comparison. Destruction of monuments that have historical significance. Its barbarism and should be treated as such.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

Removing a statute of someone you don't like isn't "destruction."

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

oh fuck off you regressive crybaby. Go burn some more books.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 3

Generally think these campaigns are silly, but why would it be okay to remove a statue of Hitler from a German university but not this one?

10 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 2

You've just made a lot of reasonable people stop and think, and a lot of unreasonable people defend Hitler. +1

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 4

i doubt there are any statues of hitler on any german unis. If there are though, I would not be for removing them.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Because that's a major false equivalency.

10 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 5

Can you explain?

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

What Hitler did was not acceptable by his times standards whereas Rhodes was for his time holding acceptable views

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 7

Does not make him innocent, or anyone of the time innocent.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

It's not a matter of innocent or guilty. You can't put the past on trial. And comparing Rhodes to hitler is simply stupid.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

no but the counter argument to removing his statue is you cannot judge people by today's standards as views and values change

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The statue is for his accomplishments, not everything he ever did or stood for.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0