I don’t normally read long posts (though I’ve probably written some). I read Aziz’s. Twice.

Thanks Aziz

What I object to is this woke urge to centre the whole of British history around the Atlantic slave trade, to make everything about race, slavery and a national shame that can never be atoned for.

Hang on.

No, the slave trade is not the centre of the whole of British history

Yes, it is a national shame that can never be atone for.

Britain’s colonial project was barely off the ground when the Slavery Abolition Act 1833 was passed.

What tosh! The East India Company (private colony) started in 1612. Jamestown Virginia colonised from 1607, other American colonies shortly after. West Indies from 1648.

@Sandwich – the loss of the Thirteen Colonies in 1783 marks the end of the so-called first British Empire which is roughly when the Atlantic slave trade peaked. It’s true that the British had India by proxy (through company rule) but the (second) British Empire doesn’t get into high gear until the mid 19th century and peaks in 1919. The Atlantic slave trade is long gone by then.

The implication of conflating slavery and colonialism is that the British sought colonies to acquire slaves which is a total lie, certainly after 1800 or so. The British actually banned slavery in their colonies such as India, for example.

Whatevs.

Getting back to (literally) the case in point, it’s difficult to see what Braverman and co hope to achieve by escalating this?

Surely the Court of Appeal are just going to look at it and say ‘the jury delivered a verdict. You don’t like it. WTF do you expect us to do about it?’

Resulting in them looking even more stupid than they do now. If that’s possible?

Also quite amusing coming from a government that has broken the law on multiple occasions.
Most recently for not disclosing PPE contracts for their dodgy mates, but also for proroguing parliament.

Getting back to (literally) the case in point, it’s difficult to see what Braverman and co hope to achieve by escalating this?

Appease the Tory faithful – plays well to their core supports.

Then quietly forget about it and move on to drowning asylum seekers in the channel or whatever the next Tory bright idea is….

Beaten to it, but the Secret Barrister link above explains the actual legal angles of the case really well.

And in case anyone agrees with the view of some politicians that the law needs to be “fixed” to deal with this kind of issue, I suggest you read his book Fake Law, which points out how everyone’s right to access justice in this country has been eroded by governments, of both parties, who kneejerk to appease ill informed headlines.

It’s definitely possible binners, one might say it’s even probable!

As so often is the case with this lot: this seems a very bizarre hill to choose to die on

Defending slave traders?

See also: defending Owen Patterson for obvious corruption

Not very bright this lot, are they?

Defending slave traders?

Makes perfect sense, the Tories are the party of the landed gentry most of whom’s wealth is built upon the work of others, slaves, serfs, citizens etc.

Can’t be long before they suggest that one of the benefits of leaving the EU is we can bring back indebted servitude and slowly build back up to slavery….

@binners

Coulston wasn’t on trial. These 4 were for criminal damage.

Makes perfect sense, the Tories are the party of the landed gentry most of whom’s wealth is built upon the work of others, slaves, serfs, citizens etc.

Imagine if UK has no Tories then what do we have? One party system like CCP?

These 4 were for criminal damage.

I wonder what which statues they are going to topple next and where is the end.

Just to reiterate, colonialism and slavery are not the same thing.

Nobody said they were but they are both part of a system of exploitation based on perceived racial and cultural superiority.

90% of slaves were sold by other Africans

Yes slavery has always existed and no it wasn’t the preserve of white people but the transatlantic slave trade was particularly egregious because it was carried out relatively recently by an incredibly powerful empire, backed up by supposed scientific knowledge that white people were the superior race and it was their duty/privilege to own and ‘civilise’ the savages. The fact that some people still seek to downplay its importance or employ whataboutery is telling.

Coulston wasn’t on trial. These 4 were for criminal damage.

And what was the outcome of that?

Coulston wasn’t on trial. These 4 were for criminal damage.

And were found not guilty by a jury of their peers, as is the English way, for the reasons set out in the Secret Barrister article on the previous page.

Surprisingly all makes a lot more sense when you have facts and expert opinion rather than random press and politicians describing it.

@binners

Coulston wasn’t on trial. These 4 were for criminal damage

No shit, Sherlock!

And to repeat my question: what do Braverman (and by obvious extension: people like you) hope to achieve by taking a jury verdict to the court of appeal? Other than a stampy feet ‘it’s just, like, SOOOOOOOOO NOT FAIR!!!’

How on earth do they (you) think this advances the cause of anything, other than the obvious dog whistle to racists that they’re on their side and slave traders are indeed worthy of veneration, because presumably that’s what put the Great in Britain, or some other pseudo-colonial, nationalist bollocks (Empire 2.0)?

Can I commend you on your prolonged vociferous defence of slave traders. Seems a subject close to your heart. Relatives?

Coulston wasn’t on trial. These 4 were for criminal damage

And the suffragettes broke the laws of the day. What makes you think the law here is correct?

Or maybe, for those who like getting out into the country, the Kinder trespass or how about joining a Union which was a crime for which people were deported.

@grum

relatively recently

The various slave trades in the Arab world and North Africa continued until much more recently. As did the Ottoman slave trade, and that’s only two examples of many.

The point is to contextualise the ‘sin’ of British (involvement in) slavery in historical times when everyone was doing slavery and many considered it fair game. History shouldn’t be a moral crusade where the past is everyday denounced through the righteous lens of the present.

Or not if you don’t want to take it down 🙂

I’d rather not rename stuff like the colston hall tbh it’s just the colston hall to most as it’s been called that all their lives and the new names pretty random but the statues fine in the museum as a piece of history.

I’d rather put a Wallace and Grommit statue on the plinth.

I was just referring to the statue as I don’t really know about the name on other locations like the hall tbh.

Nahhh … Wallace and Grommit will be criticised. Just built a giant robot!

… expression are vital in a civilised society

Is brute force civilised?

As a ‘Person of Colour’ …

I come from SE Asia (Borneo) and I ain’t European nor am I fair in skin colour so am I qualified to be considered as “person of colour”? Why see the colour? Whatever others see in me (colour) that’s their problem. I ain’t going to impose on them coz that’s who they are. Not all people behave like them and Not all condone their own history just as we do. I see my ancestral history as distinguishing and our forefathers/mothers had to escape the land they called home. It’s still happening by the way.

I see NO joy in the brute force applied in a civilised society unless it is war (even that can be civilised), because that’s why I am escaping from the place I called home as “2nd class” citizen. My previous generations had moved to a land to find peace only to receive “similar” treatment after two generations again so it is my turn to uproot to a land that is cold (I don’t like cold).

If you wish to talk about slavery we, non-Europeans or white, had built our “empire” with slaves in the past because that’s how the system worked in those days. Kingdoms after Kingdoms (from the Egyptian Kingdom, Chinese Kingdom to Majapahit Kingdom) relied on slaves to perform basic duties from Middle East, Africa, Asia to SE Asia perhaps even further. In China we loved slaves and were proud it. Those were the time. British colonialism is just but a change of “master” and Dutch colonialism in Indonesia was the most brutal. (many actually preferred British colonial administration apart from native political elites who considered themselves as the “rightful” owner of the land … yeah we get that and see that coming)

Moral of the story is that the use of brute force is no different to those where we escaped from … albeit lynch mob towards a statue.

I wonder what which statues they are going to topple next and where is the end.

I am going to say none, which makes it the end. But if someone does, for example, take down the statue of Eric Morecambe then they would be found guilty of criminal damage and quite rightly (I don’t think disliking someone’s comedy style would hold as a defence)

Moral of the story is that the use of brute force is no different to those where we escaped from

Apart from it being used against inanimate objects, not people?

I’d say that’s an absolutely ****ing enormous difference

Wouldn’t you?

Can I commend you on your prolonged vociferous defence of slave traders.

To be fair he’s really not doing that at all.

As pointed out to you; Europeans industrialised slavery. But your narrative is consistently justifying and downplaying it, while accusing others of overplaying it. Nothing you are posting is accurate. Your reasons for doing that are increasingly clear.

I wonder what which statues they are going to topple next and where is the end.

They best not bring down the one of Fred West that I’ve had commissioned.

Yes, he might have raped, beaten to death and buried many young women, but he also worked as a builder and many peoples homes benefit from extensions that he constructed, so overall I think we can take his contribution to society to be be, on balance, largely positive and worthy of commemorating

Apart from it being used against inanimate objects, not people?

I’d say that’s an absolutely ****ing enormous difference

Wouldn’t you?

Aren’t you a civilised society? A democracy?

Why brute force? Where do you stop?

Statue is the least important aspect of this entire sorry episode as it is just an object, but it is the action of brute force that is a concern.

In other part of the world the action will snowball into something else and seeing this happens is worrying especially in a so called civilised society.

As pointed out to you; Europeans industrialised slavery.

Pale by comparison to China. People were born into a slave class just like Japan in those feudal era. No industrialised needed as you are own from the day your were born to the feudal lords.

@duckman

‘Industrialised’? What do you mean by that? The industrial revolution (in the UK) didn’t really begin until the Atlantic slave trade was in decline. It’s estimated that the Arab slave trade probably enslaved more Africans than the Atlantic slave trade.

You say I want to downplay the trade. I’d ask you why you want to frame it as a unique evil?

…and no, I have never justified it.

Imagine if UK has no Tories then what do we have? One party system like CCP?

I reckon you’d have one less political party….

And were found not guilty by a jury of their peers, as is the English way, for the reasons set out in the Secret Barrister article on the previous page.

Surprisingly all makes a lot more sense when you have facts and expert opinion rather than random press and politicians describing it.

Yep,I do find his stuff great and that is well worth a read , as you say hearing his explanation.

Still Priti will soon sort that legal loophole of allowing the courts to return verdicts that the government doesn’t want.

I reckon you’d have one less political party….

Like CCP? You can have as many parties as you wish so long as they all swear allegiance to CCP just like the recent HK election. What a circus.

Who’d have thought a racially charged thread would diverge so much, still not had Godwin’s Law invoked yet though!

Moral of the story is that the use of brute force is no different to those where we escaped from

Apart from it being used against inanimate objects, not people?

To be fair, the law allows you to use force against people in certain permitted circumstances, as it is also allowed in this case with force used against a statue.

@chewkw – It’s been pointed out that in several ‘protest’ cases the jury hasn’t convicted despite the defendants having no defence in law. In this case, however, unlike the other cases, no tangible harm was being prevented by the defendant’s actions, unless you include the ‘harm’ of an ‘offensive’ object being present. Sadly, the jury fell for the defence team’s sophism.

It’s a green light for people quite certain of their own righteousness.

@chewkw – Many of these woke people think that all problems would be solved if we just gave the woke Philosopher-Kings enough power.

Aaaaaaawwwwww.

I love a good bromance 😃

And were found not guilty by a jury of their peers

And just the other day people were arguing about how to avoid jury duty, especially if the crimes were not to their liking and a bit traumatic and stressful.

I wonder how those 4 would have gotten on then with just a panel of judges adjudicating in their trial.

4 guilty verdicts I imagine.

To be fair, the law allows you to use force against people in certain permitted circumstances, as it is also allowed in this case with force used against a statue.

Yes, I know they won the case but it is worrying to see that happened. Democracy in that case also means brute force which is scary to say the least.

… however, unlike the other cases, no tangible harm was being prevented by the defendant’s actions, unless you include the ‘harm’ of an ‘offensive’ object being present. Sadly, the jury fell for the defence team’s sophism.

Yes, I know there is no harm but such action is worrying. Remember, I am a Buddhist and over the centuries in many countries/locations we see the destruction of Buddha statues (they love destroying Buddhas for whatever reasons, yes no harm to the people) and that is a concern.

Many of these woke people think that all problems would be solved if we just gave the woke Philosopher-Kings enough power.

If the situation is the other way round, I wonder how they would feel … funny world this is.

Aaaaaaawwwwww.

I love a good bromance 😃

LOL!

p/s: please don’t buy Buddha head for interior decoration. Why do people want someone’s head for decoration? Are you our native head hunters?

I wonder how those 4 would have gotten on then with just a panel of judges adjudicating in their trial.

4 guilty verdicts I imagine

Why just imagine?

Why don’t you just move to a country where they do that kind of thing – North Korea perhaps? Maybe China? – and you can give us all a live commentary

Oh… erm… maybe not, because they wouldn’t actually allow you to do that

Still… dictatorships… on balance… probably great if you’re a statue

I am going to say none, which makes it the end. But if someone does, for example, take down the statue of Eric Morecambe then they would be found guilty of criminal damage and quite rightly (I don’t think disliking someone’s comedy style would hold as a defence)

What if someone does not find them funny or feel offended?
I find them offensive for not being funny after spending time trying to understand their jokes, LOL! (crikey I had to ask my colleagues to explain their jokes! How offensive is that!)

P/s: Benny Hill is good … LOL!

Well they did the ‘old man river’ sketch. So people could then feel justified on going mob handed to Morecambe and tearing down the statue.

At least the sea is close by and they wouldn’t need to roll it that far.

Why don’t you just move to a country where they do that kind of thing – North Korea perhaps? Maybe China? – and you can give us all a live commentary

Naff off binners. Im not saying its right or just or anything like that. I’ve just pointed out if we followed the advice given in the AVOIDING JURY DUTY thread, they wouldn’t have gotten a not guilty verdict. If you disagree with that fine but dont go all weird and spouty on us thanks.