Forum menu
I find it odd that someone speaks at length in academic terms, when their entry point into a thread contained unqualified rumours, straight from the tabloids.
Guess it's all about finding any way to justify your own beliefs.
BBC PM just now… their Restore Trust guest had a real world example… some beanbags… six years ago to make it easier for people to focus on an intricate ceiling… that was the real world example that they reached for. That warranted a campaign group.
🤷🏻♂️
This thread would've fallen away in obsolescence if it wasn't for the cake-eating Gammon/Troll. As it happens there's probably a few more votes being cast at the AGM against the racist shills.
LOLZ.
The idea that Britain was at the forefront of getting rid of slavery is a strange one.
The idea that slavery has be gotten rid of is a strange on. Theres estimated to be 40 million people world-wide currently enslaved, including around 10,000 in the uk.
We use the term 'abolished' in relation to slavery as it its ended, it hasn't. Its not legal any more but it hasn't been stopped. There are more slaves alive now, almost three times more, than the total that were traded across the four centuries of the slave trade.
You might have participated in the slave trade today. I you like a lot of chocolate on your biscuits you may well be in that club.
The beanbag scandal has reverberated for years you know. Im sure heads lolled....
There are more slaves alive now, almost three times more, than the total that were traded across the four centuries of the slave trade.
That's an interesting point although I don't know exactly how modern slavery is defined.
It’s an interesting point, but unless the NT are involved, I’m not sure why that makes a case for them removing > insert example here, we still haven’t seen one < from > insert property name here, we haven’t been given one <.
The beanbag scandal has reverberated for years you know. Im sure heads lolled….
Bravo.
As it happens there’s probably a few more votes being cast at the AGM against the racist shills.
Well, quite. I've never voted in a NT election before, but I'll definitely vote in this one.
They have altered a lot of their publicity material to appear more bourgeois recently.
link
See, that's better.
If you provide sources to seemingly wild claims, we can verify them. And possibly go "gosh, you're right, I had no idea!" Otherwise, you're just typing words, you might as well claim that the head of the NT is a chameleonic alien from the planet Spork.
Let's take a look then, shall we? You said:
> Why do you think they keep talking about dismantling and disrupting things like the nuclear family?
It was mentioned on their website. It's no longer mentioned on their website. That's not "keeping talking about it," that's mentioning it once and revising your stance when you realise you made a mistake.
> Why do they believe that a cultural hegemony exists
They don't.
> called white supremacy?
Now, we actually have some substance here.
The US, or parts of the US certainly, has a huge problem with white supremacy. We don't really had a direct frame of reference here - our Neon Nazis and EDL quarterwits are left-wing extremists compared to some corners of the States.
Can't imagine why anyone might want to eradicate those sorts of groups, can you?
If you provide sources to seemingly wild claims, we can verify them.
... plus of course, it gives you an opportunity to do your own fact-checking of what you think / believe before posting.
This thread would’ve fallen away in obsolescence if it wasn’t for the cake-eating Gammon/Troll.
My money's on it being ernielynch or one of the starmer harriers in which case good work given, the result is likely to be a few more votes against this right wing actual conspiracy (of low importance in the scheme of things, this whole culture wars nonsense being stoked up to distract).
OK cakey – one little bit of evidence that BLM has anything to do with communism. One tiny bit of evidence? Just a tiny bit.
not just a load of meaningless words chucked together - just a tiny bit of evidence
Or as it appears do you not actually know what either BLM or communism is?
Setting up a second account doesn't really strike me as ernie's style.
Ernie also would find it hard to dumb down his debating style to this level
He is both knowledgeable and a expert at debating
I find a lot of this puzzling as to some of the language used. If I was a NT member, (I have to be careful how I type that) I wouldn’t vote for anyone who ignored history, surely, that’s what the “stately homes” exist for? To remind us of the depths that humanity can descend into in the pursuit of money? The bonus is we can buy overpriced food, tea towels, mugs and bird food to make us feel better!
Visit Southwell Workhouse for a proper taste of NT..
To remind us of the depths that humanity can descend into in the pursuit of money?
Does everything have to be didactic, to carry some moral lesson?
Most people just want a nice day out, not a social justice sermon.
Then don’t read the information boards and just buy the cakes on offer?
Does everything have to be didactic
You're now arguing against education.
Does everything have to be didactic? No, of course it doesn't. But, and I'm amazed I haven't already mentioned this, it isn't.
Most people just want a nice day out
So what's stopping them?
TripAdvisor: "Our otherwise pleasurable family outing to Strawman Hall was ruined when we were shocked to discover that there were all these 'words' everywhere. Our little Hemione was traumatised for life, even though she can't read yet. One star."
not a social justice sermon.
Because there are (allegedly) words on a card that we've already established they aren't reading anyway?
Have you got your browser set to write-only? We've already explained this.
So can I confirm when visiting a nation trust property (other property owners are available) that following a quick look around to oh and ah at the grandeur and landscape we're to proceed to straight to the cafe to eat our body weight in cake. At no point are we to read any interpretive panels, speak to the guides or go into the old kitchens in case something offends us.
I wonder how the I_Scoff_Cakes would view Dunrobin Castle, the Manie and the Highland clearances?
Are the clearances part of the story or a bit that can be ignored while we're having a sneak peek at how the other 0.1% live?
The only person I've ever heard use the term 'cultural Marxism' IRL was a huge Tommy Robinson fanboy. Makes you think...
I had to look that word up, nice one. Everything doesn’t have to be a moral lesson, just both sides, or in some cases, all sides of the story. If you look into Hardwick Hall for example you find that it was home to one of the richest families in Britain, the devonshires, who abandoned it to the National Trust in lieu of death duties. They could then carry on with massive profit making at Chatsworth and their other estates whilst basking in the glory of the house on the hill. If you visit Hardwick you’ll hear a lot about royal connections but not a lot about how the money was made, and continues to be made. Huge land owners with vast estates and tenants. Plans to opencast vast areas of lovely land a few years ago… the repression goes on you see just in a different way.
*didactic I was referring to, a slow writer I'm afraid!
Yaxley Lennon, to use his proper name?
Actually, let's explore this one a little more.
Most people just want a nice day out
First: "most" people? You've just made that up, you cannot possibly know what "most" people want. Some do, sure. But if I were to guess, and my guesswork is equally as valid as yours, I would expect that the majority of people who "just want a nice day out" and aren't interested in the history of the place wouldn't choose to walk around a stately home in the first place.
Second: Some (from my own anecdotal observations, actually most) people want to learn about the place they're visiting. So we can either provide information, which caters for both groups (because reading isn't mandatory), or we can remove information which changes absolutely nothing for the Nice Dayers but robs everyone else the ability to understand what they're looking at.
"You're giving us too much information!" is a frankly weird complaint.
Oh, I don't know why I'm bothering. Discussions with right-wingers only ever go one of three ways. 1) they get angry, 2) they go silent, or 3) they don't respond and change the subject. And you my friend fall very firmly into number three.
Hey Cakey, here's a question(s) that I don't think has been asked yet.
Do you visit these properties on a regular basis? What was the last one you visited? Are you an NT member?
Indeed, have you ever visited one?
I went to have a look at what restore trust are actually asking for and they've gone in to detail and it seems pretty reasonable to me and nothing to do with any of the topics discussed in this thread.
1) Disclosure of remuneration of senior NT staff. - I can see there's a case against, but it doesn't seem an unreasonable request, even if the members decide they don't want to do it.
2) Increase in the number of curators which has been reduced in recent years to the detriment of many sites. (Some job titles have changed to make it appear there are more curators now - in fact there are far less.) If they can't afford this fair enough, but I think most people in this thread agree that detailed descriptions are lacking so I think everyone would agree this is highly desirable even if it not affordable. The supporting statement suggests the direction is dumbing down not adding more detail.
3) Deploring treatment of NT staff and calling on the trust to treat volunteers with thought and respect. The supporting paragraph does have a paragraph about Volunteers not being made to wear political or social symbols but from insiders above that's not the case anyway - it's voluntary so as far as I can see no change.
I wouldn’t vote for anyone who ignored history
I think RestoreTrust might be totally in line with your thinking here. Far from dumbing down they want to cover things in more detail:
I was on the learning experience team at Montacute house for 15 years, delivering guided tours to school children aged between four and 16 years old. The content concentrated on the lives of rich and poor Tudors, discussions on the symbolism and meaning of portraits of Henry VIII and Elizabeth I, and we looked at the architecture and function of the rooms in the house. Relevant activities were also delivered, such as quilling, heraldry designs, dressing up in Tudor costumes (made by volunteers) and making pot-pourri and bouquet garni bags. The tours took place on most weekdays during the term and were popular with schools, many doing repeat visits. The feedback from the teachers was very good.
Overnight and with little and unsatisfactory explanation, our team was disbanded.
They might have needed to sack curators due to budget but those guys are volunteers.
https://www.restoretrust.org.uk/restore-trust-issues/
https://www.restoretrust.org.uk/
I understand budgets are tight and some of the issues are just matters of taste but almost everything RestoreTrust are advocating seems reasonable to me, some of it seems highly desirable and bang in line with the kind of stuff people are talking about in this thread. The NT shouldn't be running nice gardens and cake shops, they should be imparting some history too and they're moving fast away from that.
Do you visit these properties on a regular basis? What was the last one you visited? Are you an NT member?
Indeed, have you ever visited one?
Good question but this is descending into McCarthyism ‘Have you now or have you ever been a member of the NT’
Having a good time means lots of things to lots of different people. I spent a brilliant day walking round an NT property with an academic who did a complete Marxist economic analysis of the landscape and showed how hard nosed the pursuit of beauty was (its all about how you artfully arrange the cash crops and keep the outers far enough away so that they look picturesque but you don’t have to hear or smell them). They then went on to prove what they were saying with the old account ledgers. I can’t imagine it would have been everyones cup of tea but a good walk and coming away with a new way at looking at the world is a day I won’t forget.
Most of the NT properties we go to I just go round with the kids and distract them enough to allow Mrs B to read the hand held information boards. My only argument with the current focus on slavery is that it allows people to maintain a Downtonesque fairy tale of how wonderful and fair life in Britain was in the past. The people who built these houses were equal opportunities exploiters. They didn’t really care what colour your skin was everyone ‘below' them was fair game (more a historically accurate rather than a political statement).
You’ve just made that up, you cannot possibly know what “most” people want. Some do, sure. But if I were to guess, and my guesswork is equally as valid as yours, I would expect that the majority of people who “just want a nice day out” and aren’t interested in the history of the place wouldn’t choose to walk around a stately home in the first place.
It seems to me the people who are interested in the history of these places are *exactly* the people Restore trust are trying to represent here. In contrast the NT seem to be pitching squarely at the cake eaters.
I went to have a look at what restore trust are actually asking for and they’ve gone in to detail and it seems pretty reasonable to me and nothing to do with any of the topics discussed in this thread.
Not all if any of those are down to RestoreTrust. The volunteers thing is a result of the NT not paying the best wages in the game which means that you usually end up with someone fairly green in their late twenties as the volunteers officer trying to manage retirees who on the whole have had professional jobs. Its a clash of idealism, without too much practicality, meeting people who enjoy the company rather than the money and really don’t want to change. The false stories have stirred this up but there is a general issue with taking volunteers for granted and assuming they will jump at the idea of change
As you will have seen from other posts Covid lead to a complete cull of staff who will be needed in the future. It was a short term knee jerk reaction but pretty much in line with the NTs reputation for HR. That resolution to me says treat people better rather than anything too political
FFS, from the NT website how the hell can they recommend voting against "curatorial expertise".
Members’ resolution about curatorial expertise
Board of Trustees’ position: We recommend members vote against the resolution
https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/features/annual-general-meeting
I went to have a look at what restore trust are actually asking for and they’ve gone in to detail and it seems pretty reasonable to me and nothing to do with any of the topics discussed in this thread.
Are you one of those people who shares Britain First memes on FB about 'we should be nice to animals, share if you agree'?
Good question but this is descending into McCarthyism ‘Have you now or have you ever been a member of the NT’
I was just curious really as to whether our devourer of sweet baked goods actually had any direct interest or whether he'd just found something to randomly complain about.
Not all if any of those are down to RestoreTrust.
They all are. Linked to the website. There are other resolutions on the NT website from other people.
As you will have seen from other posts Covid lead to a complete cull of staff who will be needed in the future. It was a short term knee jerk reaction but pretty much in line with the NTs reputation for HR. That resolution to me says treat people better rather than anything too political
I'm sure they needed to save money, but surely curators should be last out the door. And surely the NT should be saying they will hire knowledgeable people back when the situation changes. In fact it's looking far more like they're deliberately trying to make the NT a theme park business and deliberately dumbing down accordingly.
FFS, from the NT website how the hell can they recommend voting against “curatorial expertise”.
I thought the same at first but it says to vote against "the resolution" and we don't know what that is. The resolution could be "let's get rid of cultural expertise" in which case it's worth voting against.
Or am I overthinking this?
Pages 16 & 17
I thought the same at first but it says to vote against “the resolution” and we don’t know what that is.
Yes we do, I quoted it and linked to it.
You have to remember the primary purpose of the NT is to help the owners of these houses get the public to pay for their upkeep and to avoid inheritance taxes.
The 'Common Sense Group' of Tory MPs - closely allied to Restore Trust, make their feelings about history very plain in this letter.
https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1325750156487237633
We are not to teach multiple perspectives about history, and no criticism of anything to do with Churchill will be tolerated. It actually uses the phrases 'woke agenda', 'cultural marxist' and 'snowflakes', in case you weren't clear where they stand in the culture war.
Yes we do, I quoted it and linked to it.
You quoted what the resolution was?
I'm missing something here, sorry. I don't really know how these things work, which doesn't help.
Yes we do, I quoted it and linked to it.
And which takes such little effort to find, effort that good faith actors would bother to expend before slagging people off - plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose
Check my post Cougar.
[ actually page 9 in the PDF, as the’ve published DPS as single pages ]
Basically a “they are ruining everything… bean bags… betraying the families who passed the houses on to them… etc” … so they’ve recommend it is rejected because otherwise it would damn those currently running the NT as vandals.
Most people just want a nice day out, not a social justice sermon.
That does sound a bit crap so I am sure you will be able to provide us with the examples of it. I am guessing there is some glitch which has been preventing you doing so so far.
In fact it’s looking far more like they’re deliberately trying to make the NT a theme park business and deliberately dumbing down accordingly.
So why is the cake scoffer upset since they seem to be wanting the NT to be mostly about people having a fun day out rather than that tedious history stuff.
Check my post Cougar.
Why is yours better than mine? The text of the resolutions and the supporting text is identical.
Is it because the NT's includes their claim to have doubled the number of curators when in fact they made curators redundant and then retitled people in other roles with no expertise whatsoever as curators?
...and if they *really* had doubled the number of curators, couldn't they still have supported the resolution and said yes, we already have and we will do more of the same in the future when we have budget so we totally support the resolution.
I suspect the RestoreTrust are bang on correct and this is all about the 10 year plan to dumb it down and turn the properties into theme parks for fewer people who are prepared to pay more. They're not alone in that view:
He rejected the idea that the trust was dumbing down, but said “there are many, many people who most of all just want to enjoy a place and I’m not embarrassed about that at all. I don’t think every visit is about deep learning. I think what we want to do is give people what they want and on the whole, we’re doing that”.