I think there is a bit of a danger in taking these things down. It's not because it would 'erase our history', (nobody learns history from statues), but because it risks us forgetting that bad people can also do good things. I'd quite like there to be conversations about Rhodes for many generations to come, and for people to know that people who can be the good guys in one place, can be the opposite in another.Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Wed Jun 17, 2020 8:13 pmIf you take off the Rhodes statue for "memorializing", should you take off that nice stone writing too? After all, it says "by the great generosity of Cecil Rhodes". That would be going too far for me. I appreciate that there's no easy answer, and lines will be drawn, but I'd like us to establish some solid principles on this stuff.
In a world where we seem increasingly obsessed with binary divisions and nuance being dismissed, I think it's more important than ever for people to remember what much of our Victorian prosperity was actually built on, and not slip into the complacent delusion that all bad people are entirely-bad pantomime villains. I think it risks letting the next Cecil Rhodes off the hook.