Current affairs - BLM, slavery and racism.
In the past few weeks we have seen, due to the murder of George Floyd by US police officers, the creation of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement. This has resulted in demonstrations in many countries around the world and the destruction of statues celebrating many historical figures who gained their wealth in the slave trade. I have no problem with this protest movement as I fully support it’s general aims - although I do feel that the destruction of statues is not beneficial or helpful in achieving those aims..
There are those, however, who do object to the BLM protests and they have come up with their own slogan - All Lives Matter. I can’t object to this slogan, either but those making it are either deliberately missing the point or doing so without realising that they are doing so.
As some in the BLM movement have pointed out, “Yes, all lives matter but that cannot come about until black lives matter”. People of colour (and all non-whites) must be a subset of ‘all’ and if black lives are not given the same protections as white people then the ‘all’ cannot be achieved. This, of course, is ignored by extreme racists who still, to this day, refuse to accept that black people are humans in the same way that they are. One has to hope that such extreme views are very much in the minority. It is clear from many cases that in the USA, in particular but not solely, that black lives do not matter to far too many police persons and general citizens. Perhaps it would have been clearer if the BLM slogan had been Black Lives Matter Too - but that would have been less snappy and focused. At the same time it would have avoided allowing those on the other side being able to argue that the BLM movement was, in effect, saying that ‘only’ black lives matter (as this side of the argument seem to be doing).
Having said that, I fear that many supporting the ‘all lives matter’ brigade are fully aware of the logic behind the BLM movement and are opposing it because they don’t want to see that movement succeed. They are quite happy for blacks (and non-white ethnic minorities) to remain oppressed. Why, you might ask? I suspect that is to ensure the black, and other ethnic peoples remain socially less important and valued than themselves. This provides those people with a sense of superiority which they are afraid to lose as without this they could well sink to a similar level to those they seek to trap in this condition. These people are, in fact, racists and they are trying to hide this behind their false objection to the BLM slogan.
At the same time all such slogans and actions lose impetus after a time. While maintaining the struggle in some way I suspect that footballers, for example, ‘taking the knee’ before every match will lose this impetus - it will become such a common occurrence that the reason behind doing so will lose impact and it will, perhaps, be forgotten why this is being done. Having said that, I’m not sure what other actions could be taken in order that the reason behind doing so remains to the forefront. Perhaps the BLM movement needs to think about this and find other ways to keep the public fully aware of the issue?
I also have to say that I’m against the defacing and destruction of the statues of those who made their fortunes from the slave trade. Doing so will not help people understand the history of the USA and the UK (and other slave trading nations). There will be nothing for people to learn about the evil that was done in creating these fortunes or how some of those profits were used to enrich both the USA and the other nations involved in the slave trade. I think it would be better for those statues to remain in place but with updated description plaques fully explaining the history of the individuals that the statues celebrate. They could be taken down and placed in a museum with such updated plaques displayed there - but that will only be seen by those who visit the museums, while keeping the statues where they are will allow many more people to read and more fully understand the history - both good and bad (the good being limited to whatever small percentage of their wealth those individuals invested in their local communities).
Also, we must be careful not to fully equate slavery with racism - although that might be how it’s currently seen. There is, clearly, a link between slavery and racism, in the USA in particular - but slavery exists without racism and racism exists without slavery and I have concerns that dealing with both together gets in the way of combating racism, given that slavery now only exists illegally. I am not suggesting that we should now totally forget about historical slavery - just that we should be more concentrating on combating racism and that defacing or destroying statues of long dead slave traders only gets the BLM movement a negative response from those less involved or committed to eradicating racism. I recently read an article (on my phone) by a black, west African woman who admitted that her great grandfather (or, maybe, great great grand father) had been a black slave trader. She claimed that he should not be vilified for this as he came from a different time and culture when slavery was the norm - but if those defending the white slave trader’s statues do the same they are shouted down as racists supporting slavery. I would argue that what is good for this black woman must also be good for the white slavers as they also came from a time when slavery was the norm. Throughout history humanity has often used slaves. The ancient Greeks used slaves, white and, no doubt, those of other races they came into contact with. Should we cut the ancient Greeks out of history because of this? The Romans used slaves, often their own people and also from the white European tribes they had conquered. Should we cut the Romans out of history because of this? The powerful black peoples of west Africa raided weaker tribes and made slaves, also black people, of those they captured. Should we cut them out of history because of this? My point here is that slavery is not race dependent - white will enslave white and black will enslave black and we need to keep that in mind. My point here is that the white slave traders did not take slaves to America because they were black (and therefore sub-human) - they did so because they had an easy source of free (apart from buying and transporting them) labour which allowed them to increase their wealth. The slave trade was, in other words, born out of capitalism and the desire to make ever increasing profits. If the people of West Africa had been white, but still easily captured, then I suspect this trade would still have existed. The fact that those slaves had a different skin colour, and recognisably different facial features, helped to distinguish slave from non-slave which, in turn, has helped to create the anti-black racism we suffer from today. If, however, those slaves had been white then the racism we see today in the USA might not be so extensive and deep rooted. Different racial feature has helped to create today’s anti-black racism and the slave trade is what caused the USA to have so many black people living there today - but, I would argue, the slave trade is not the cause of racism by itself. Racism of one sort or another was rife around the world and linking the slave trade to this takes away, to some extent, the focus on trying to combat all examples of racism everywhere. Having said that, it is most likely that the white slavers were also racist as the common view of black people was that they were savages and sub-human - but I repeat the main reason for this trade was profit. If the white tobacco and cotton farmers of the USA had not wanted cheap labour then the slave trade would not have occurred - but the racist view of black people would still have existed until more enlightened voices became loud enough.
Donald Trump may claim that the police in the US have killed more white people than black people. That, it seems, may be true - but there are far, far more white people in the US than there are black people. The percentage of black people killed by the US police force, by population size, is much greater than the percentage of white people so killed. This is just another example of Trump twisting the truth to suit his views - and his views are clearly racist!
Using the same, flawed thinking (as Trump) there are those who will argue that the police forces (of all Western countries) only target the black communities (and other ethnic minorities) because they are more likely to commit crime. It is as if those racists believe that there is some genetic predisposition in black people to commit crime - which is not the case. It could well be the case that a higher percentage, per head of population, of black people do turn to crime but that is because of the deprivation in the areas they live in and are brought up in, not genetics. If your society does not provide a level playing field and your community is poor with few jobs and low pay for what jobs there are, then that community will quickly become a deprived area. If the opportunities for black people in education and reasonably well paid jobs do not exist then some in that community will decide that crime, of one sort or another, is the only way to escape from that situation. There are deprived white areas in most Western societies and I suspect that the levels of crime from those areas are also greater than the average. If, in other words, society does not provide for you then why obey the rules of that society? The answer to this problem is not to stop, search and murder black people - the answer is to remove the racism and persecution and ensure that all citizens have the same opportunities. If that was achieved then I’m pretty certain that the higher level of crime, per head of population, in those black communities, would disappear as the conditions in those communities improved. It is, in other words, the initial prejudices of white people which have created the current situation and claiming that black people are, in some way, genetically more inclined to crime is simply wrong and only adds to the persecution which, in turn, only adds to the chances that more from those deprived communities will turn to crime. In other words, the claim that black people are more inclined to crime adds to the already existing prejudice and this only helps to ensure that a higher percentage of black people do resort to crime. It is a self-perpetuating falsehood which needs to be eradicated.
There are those, however, who do object to the BLM protests and they have come up with their own slogan - All Lives Matter. I can’t object to this slogan, either but those making it are either deliberately missing the point or doing so without realising that they are doing so.
As some in the BLM movement have pointed out, “Yes, all lives matter but that cannot come about until black lives matter”. People of colour (and all non-whites) must be a subset of ‘all’ and if black lives are not given the same protections as white people then the ‘all’ cannot be achieved. This, of course, is ignored by extreme racists who still, to this day, refuse to accept that black people are humans in the same way that they are. One has to hope that such extreme views are very much in the minority. It is clear from many cases that in the USA, in particular but not solely, that black lives do not matter to far too many police persons and general citizens. Perhaps it would have been clearer if the BLM slogan had been Black Lives Matter Too - but that would have been less snappy and focused. At the same time it would have avoided allowing those on the other side being able to argue that the BLM movement was, in effect, saying that ‘only’ black lives matter (as this side of the argument seem to be doing).
Having said that, I fear that many supporting the ‘all lives matter’ brigade are fully aware of the logic behind the BLM movement and are opposing it because they don’t want to see that movement succeed. They are quite happy for blacks (and non-white ethnic minorities) to remain oppressed. Why, you might ask? I suspect that is to ensure the black, and other ethnic peoples remain socially less important and valued than themselves. This provides those people with a sense of superiority which they are afraid to lose as without this they could well sink to a similar level to those they seek to trap in this condition. These people are, in fact, racists and they are trying to hide this behind their false objection to the BLM slogan.
At the same time all such slogans and actions lose impetus after a time. While maintaining the struggle in some way I suspect that footballers, for example, ‘taking the knee’ before every match will lose this impetus - it will become such a common occurrence that the reason behind doing so will lose impact and it will, perhaps, be forgotten why this is being done. Having said that, I’m not sure what other actions could be taken in order that the reason behind doing so remains to the forefront. Perhaps the BLM movement needs to think about this and find other ways to keep the public fully aware of the issue?
I also have to say that I’m against the defacing and destruction of the statues of those who made their fortunes from the slave trade. Doing so will not help people understand the history of the USA and the UK (and other slave trading nations). There will be nothing for people to learn about the evil that was done in creating these fortunes or how some of those profits were used to enrich both the USA and the other nations involved in the slave trade. I think it would be better for those statues to remain in place but with updated description plaques fully explaining the history of the individuals that the statues celebrate. They could be taken down and placed in a museum with such updated plaques displayed there - but that will only be seen by those who visit the museums, while keeping the statues where they are will allow many more people to read and more fully understand the history - both good and bad (the good being limited to whatever small percentage of their wealth those individuals invested in their local communities).
Also, we must be careful not to fully equate slavery with racism - although that might be how it’s currently seen. There is, clearly, a link between slavery and racism, in the USA in particular - but slavery exists without racism and racism exists without slavery and I have concerns that dealing with both together gets in the way of combating racism, given that slavery now only exists illegally. I am not suggesting that we should now totally forget about historical slavery - just that we should be more concentrating on combating racism and that defacing or destroying statues of long dead slave traders only gets the BLM movement a negative response from those less involved or committed to eradicating racism. I recently read an article (on my phone) by a black, west African woman who admitted that her great grandfather (or, maybe, great great grand father) had been a black slave trader. She claimed that he should not be vilified for this as he came from a different time and culture when slavery was the norm - but if those defending the white slave trader’s statues do the same they are shouted down as racists supporting slavery. I would argue that what is good for this black woman must also be good for the white slavers as they also came from a time when slavery was the norm. Throughout history humanity has often used slaves. The ancient Greeks used slaves, white and, no doubt, those of other races they came into contact with. Should we cut the ancient Greeks out of history because of this? The Romans used slaves, often their own people and also from the white European tribes they had conquered. Should we cut the Romans out of history because of this? The powerful black peoples of west Africa raided weaker tribes and made slaves, also black people, of those they captured. Should we cut them out of history because of this? My point here is that slavery is not race dependent - white will enslave white and black will enslave black and we need to keep that in mind. My point here is that the white slave traders did not take slaves to America because they were black (and therefore sub-human) - they did so because they had an easy source of free (apart from buying and transporting them) labour which allowed them to increase their wealth. The slave trade was, in other words, born out of capitalism and the desire to make ever increasing profits. If the people of West Africa had been white, but still easily captured, then I suspect this trade would still have existed. The fact that those slaves had a different skin colour, and recognisably different facial features, helped to distinguish slave from non-slave which, in turn, has helped to create the anti-black racism we suffer from today. If, however, those slaves had been white then the racism we see today in the USA might not be so extensive and deep rooted. Different racial feature has helped to create today’s anti-black racism and the slave trade is what caused the USA to have so many black people living there today - but, I would argue, the slave trade is not the cause of racism by itself. Racism of one sort or another was rife around the world and linking the slave trade to this takes away, to some extent, the focus on trying to combat all examples of racism everywhere. Having said that, it is most likely that the white slavers were also racist as the common view of black people was that they were savages and sub-human - but I repeat the main reason for this trade was profit. If the white tobacco and cotton farmers of the USA had not wanted cheap labour then the slave trade would not have occurred - but the racist view of black people would still have existed until more enlightened voices became loud enough.
Donald Trump may claim that the police in the US have killed more white people than black people. That, it seems, may be true - but there are far, far more white people in the US than there are black people. The percentage of black people killed by the US police force, by population size, is much greater than the percentage of white people so killed. This is just another example of Trump twisting the truth to suit his views - and his views are clearly racist!
Using the same, flawed thinking (as Trump) there are those who will argue that the police forces (of all Western countries) only target the black communities (and other ethnic minorities) because they are more likely to commit crime. It is as if those racists believe that there is some genetic predisposition in black people to commit crime - which is not the case. It could well be the case that a higher percentage, per head of population, of black people do turn to crime but that is because of the deprivation in the areas they live in and are brought up in, not genetics. If your society does not provide a level playing field and your community is poor with few jobs and low pay for what jobs there are, then that community will quickly become a deprived area. If the opportunities for black people in education and reasonably well paid jobs do not exist then some in that community will decide that crime, of one sort or another, is the only way to escape from that situation. There are deprived white areas in most Western societies and I suspect that the levels of crime from those areas are also greater than the average. If, in other words, society does not provide for you then why obey the rules of that society? The answer to this problem is not to stop, search and murder black people - the answer is to remove the racism and persecution and ensure that all citizens have the same opportunities. If that was achieved then I’m pretty certain that the higher level of crime, per head of population, in those black communities, would disappear as the conditions in those communities improved. It is, in other words, the initial prejudices of white people which have created the current situation and claiming that black people are, in some way, genetically more inclined to crime is simply wrong and only adds to the persecution which, in turn, only adds to the chances that more from those deprived communities will turn to crime. In other words, the claim that black people are more inclined to crime adds to the already existing prejudice and this only helps to ensure that a higher percentage of black people do resort to crime. It is a self-perpetuating falsehood which needs to be eradicated.
.JPG)
Comments
Post a Comment