Barrie Davis wrote:up_the_line wrote:lunarjetman wrote: There are alternative points of view, and here's one of them...
https://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/news/p ... rk-4213108
Ok read it
What I got from that is:
1. Because slavers did some good stuff (with the money they made from slavery), they should be honoured
2. Because people wouldn't know who Hawkins was it didn't matter
3. It'll cause more division
(code for: it'll pee people off who think we should just keep these things in place forever)
4. It's 'whitewashing history
(so hang on, it's NOT whitewashing history to have these statues and road names in place with no mention of these people's misdeeds?!)
5. Finally, and the funniest part of the whole thing, Britain doesn't have a massive problem with racism:
Well, windrush seems to suggest otherwise and the very fact we have a head of state who writes that black people are Picanninies with watermelon smiles
Why do you think we should keep John Hawkins name in parts of the city?
It's a shame that, in the present day, we are seeking to assume offence on behalf of those who may not, or should not, be offended. In some parts of the world, pickaninny is widely used by black people to describe their children. In New Guinea, Creole countries, Melanesia and Vanuatu it is still part of the language. It was not ever an offensive term used by white people intended to insult until some 'right on' journalist decided it was. I find it offensive that I am constantly supposed to apologise for being white, male, protestant and straight. I think I must be amongst the oinly genuine minority group left.
Just to help you out. We are not in New Guinea or Vanuata. Context is all. Get it now? And you are NOT in a minority group.