Black Lives Matter Mr Colston
In an earlier post I reproduced something I wrote in 2019 when my daughter asked me a school homework question “should the U.K. government apologise for its part in the slave trade?” In which I talk about Bristol's role in the slave trade.
Then in 2020, during the Covid19 lockdown, Bristol made headlines around the world when a statue of Edward Colston, a man who gave vast sums of money to the city of Bristol, and who made that money from the slave trade, was pulled down during a Black Lives Matter march prompted by the killing of George Floyd in the US. The statue was dragged through the streets of Bristol, and dumped in the harbour.
White People Talking About Racism
Before I turn to Mr Colston I will say that I am white middle class man, not degree level educated, but certainly not excluded from the privilege inherent in the UK for people of the same skin colour. Some people may say that because of this I have no place commenting on issues about race. I respect those views, but I disagree.
Within the issue of race I am someone who is wrapped up in a system that has inherent racism within in, and as I am not a person of colour, it means that I benefit from the system and do not suffer the negatives of it. And it is because of this fact that I think I should give my view on how I feel being part of this system and whether I am for it, or against it.
As I am not victimised by the system I think it means that my thinking on this is more simplistic, for example a jailor probably views the prison system in much more simplistic terms that the innocent man wrongly convicted and jailed.
My simple view is this. I ask myself versions of this question:
Do I want to live in a world where there is systemic and institutionalised racism within our societal structures which lead to black men being killed by a police officer (as one example) or at the other end of the scale, an ongoing daily, low level narrative in our press that is corrosive and degrading towards people of colour?
If I answer this question “no”; I have 2 options.
1) Do nothing.
2) Do something.
It's that simple to me. I answer it no, and I choose to do something and that is why I give my views.
And I also think that it is the obligation of everyone who benefits from a racist system to also speak out or push back against that benefit and to rebalance the system so that it is fairer for all and not based on skin colour.
This is still me being self interested! How, when I am talking about removing a benefit? It is my belief that white people have absolutely nothing to gain from continuing on this road and a hell of a lot to gain from eradicating racism from society. I believe that my self interest will result in a fairer, better and more just society.
In my view, if you enjoy the benefits of white privilege in silence then you are a passive racist and there is no good form of racism.
Or perhaps Dr King made the point better:
That said, I also need to listen as the only way you, the jailor, can understand the complexities of the life of the innocent prisoner, given that you are never going to live it or experience it, is to shut up and listen and then your simplistic view can develop into a greater understanding of what he might need from you to help change the system.
Because my question is phrased in a very simple way it makes racism look simple, of course we don’t want the police killing anyone that's pretty obvious, but systemic racism is far more pervasive than obvious acts of violence, or using racist language:
It's about living in a world where newspapers make subtle and not so subtle negative comments about anyone of colour from asylum seekers to Princesses on a daily basis.
It's where people use social media and accept that ongoing relentless racism is just one of those things, the white owners of social media companies increase their wealth from these racist comments whilst claiming they cannot use any of this wealth to stop it, just like slaver traders explaining why they cannot stop using slaves.
It's where most of the large companies you may work for are run by grey haired white men, just like slave trading companies were.
It's where the police can kill a black person, but the media point out that he was involved in petty crime, or drug taking, implying that his death deserves less sympathy, whereas an angelic white person, who's recreational drug taking and paying their gardener cash in hand (petty crime) doesn't count as the same thing and we're all outraged at their death.
It's where a comment by a politician that is slightly negative towards Israel leads to an ongoing, well funded campaign or possibly even his assassination, but where local mayors receive 6,000 emails a week just giving skin colour based hate and that's just how it is, nothing is said or done, just as it was with the slave trade.
Its about not letting black girls with afro hair go to school because the school uniform policy has been designed around hair which is more European.
It's where facial recognition software is written by well off university educated white American men that has within its coding a bias towards looking for faces of colour when trying to identify people more likely to be terrorists or criminals but it can’t really spot the, typically white, perpetrator of the majority of shootings or crime.
This list could go on and on.
There is a great Youtube video about class and social inequality highlights how systemic racism gives you an advantage. In my head its like arranging a swimming race, then just before the start pushing the black swimmers head underwater and letting the other swimmers go. The black swimmer isn't asking for any advantage, or to wear flippers to make him go faster, he just wants you to take your damn foot off his head so he can swim with the rest.
But what does systemic racism in the 20's have to do with Mr Colston and the slave trade, given that he died ages ago!?
Edward Colston 1636 - 1721
Why does this guy trigger so many Bristolians, black and white, into views of either 'leave it alone' or 'he needs to go'?
He did good things!
Colston made his wealth from the slave trade. The positive side to him was that he gave a lot of that money away which resulted in nice things for the city of Bristol. But that does not take away from the fact that he only had money to give away because he was a slaver, which meant that he earnt his money on the back of horror, death and suffering.
Hitler may have built nice hospitals because he had the gold teeth that his followers ripped from the mouths of Jewish people before killing them, but we don’t erect statues to him to thank him for the hospital!
Its all in the past
Also, its easy to think of slavery as a historical thing. I look at Colston's date of death and its 300 years ago, it doesn’t feel connected to me at all. And if slavery and the racism which stemmed from it were a thing of the past, then perhaps I would feel less negatively about Colston and his statue, but its not.
Kenneth C. Fraizer is the CEO of one of the worlds largest drug companies, Merck. So one of the most powerful businessmen globally. His grandfather was a slave. This is not history, this is now, this is within touching distance of us, we live with this today, this is a modern event, not medieval history, we walk around the planet with people who were brought up by people who were actual slaves, the property of a white person, people within the Transatlantic Slave Trade.
And of course, racism isn’t a thing of the past, its very much a 20's issue when it shouldn't be. THAT is a direct legacy of the slave trade playing out today.
Its an American Thing
British people also have a habit of thinking that racism and racist police officers is an American problem, but then perhaps remind yourself about this incident in 2020 when 6 police officers pin down a young black mother and rip her baby from her arms, on a bus, in Bristol.
The police say that 'there is more too this incident' but lets just remember it's a mum with a young baby in her arms, that's all she is, how much 'more' can she bring to this incident?
We were told there was 'more' to the Madeline McCann incident but the McCann's never had their children publicly torn from their arms, instead they have had years of UK police looking for their daughter, taxpayer money and public funds to help, whereas, this black woman was pinned to the floor.
Perhaps it was because she was being a noisy nuisance on the bus and it had nothing to do with her skin colour or systemic racist attitudes in the police, or perhaps her skin colour and stereotypes about loud black women went against her?
It Doesn't Affect Me
The other thing when it comes to police prejudice and violence is to always remember that, its not you today its people of colour, but don’t think that it will never be you. What if tomorrow that police brutality is aimed at you?
I could never imagine a world where a white woman is raped and killed by a police officer, or where women, want to lay some flowers in her memory also get aggressively arrested by the police.
Are you totally sure this will never happen and that it will never be you?
It reminds me of this:
Priti Crazy
The UK Home Secretary, the politician responsible for law and order, Priti Patel, called the pulling down of the Colston statue “sheer vandalism”.
Perhaps I shouldn't criticise her too much because that would mean I expect our politicians to be well informed and aware, and still mindful of the fact that it is we, the people, who vote them in who they are paid to represent! And that expectation is way too high to have in 2020 Britain, so I will cut her some slack and try and tell her the limited information that I am aware of.
What Priti failed to inform herself of before opening her mouth is that the people of Bristol have been pushing the democratically elected leaders of the country and city for nearly 4 decades, 40 YEARS, to deal with this issue and do something about the statue.
So for Priti to say that we should use democratic means to effect change she overlooks the fact that she and other politicians are failing us decade in and decade out, and their inactions leave us with no choice but to revoke the mandate to take action on our behalf.
I am more than happy to elect a politician who may do some things I like, and may do other things I disagree with, depending upon local views, but 40+ years and nothing! After this long you lose your right to decide as a politician, its back with the people to resolve.
Ultimately, we vote politicians in to do something, but the right is always reserved by the people to take matters into their own hands when politicians have been given sufficient opportunity to deal with something and have failed. Politicians only have the right to make decisions on our behalf when they actually do their job. They should not be surprised that if after decades of inaction we withdraw that privilege.
In reality, I feel that Ms Patel should also be grateful that it's a statue being pulled down, because it serves as a warning on how people deal with things if politicians continue to fail us and gives her and her colleagues ample notice to up their game.
Were Bristolians Against the Statue?
Many representations to do something about the state have been made to local and national politicians. In addition to this, the statue itself has been used to show that action is needed.
In the 5 years that I have walked passed the statue these are my recordings of various attempts to confront this issues and effect change.
In 2017, his face went white....
In March 2018, he was put up for sale.....
There was also a bronze plaque added, unofficially, but which appeared to me to be factually accurate, and one which the Council could have easily left in place.
One Saturday in May 2018 a really ordinary looking family were sitting on the benches nearby and very quietly put together some knitwork they had done, before putting it on the statue. This stayed in place for quite some time.
The occupations around the outside highlighting where exploitation is still occurring. The layout reminiscent of the 'cargo' chained to the floor of a slave ship sailing from Africa to America before returning to the UK.
Black Lives Matter, Bristol - June 2020
Covid19 lockdowns started in March 2020 and in May 2020 George Floyd was killed in the US sparking the Black Lives Matter (BLM) marches in the US and the UK and elsewhere. Highlighting yet again, how black people particularly are subject to 'negative outcomes' when dealing with the police.
In Bristol, the BLM march was scheduled for 7 June. A warm Saturday in the middle of lockdown when all gatherings and protests were illegal. The police said that anyone protesting was irresponsible and clearly had no respect from the NHS. I guess I understand why they are saying this. They have been given a law by the politicians to enforce, that's their job.
Perhaps with hindsight, none of us, politicians included, should have ever thought that taking away the right to protest was a good thing. In my view, pandemic or not, some things are important and history shows us that sometimes good people die trying to help good causes.
The protest, was very large for Bristol, especially an illegal one, estimated to be around 10,000 people. Despite this people did maintain space, were safe and respectful. More importantly, the police presence was light, friendly, and on the whole supportive, by being in the background and focused on crowd safety rather than crowd disbursement and enforcing Covid rules. There was no spike in Covid infections following the protest, confirming the scientific research we already had available to us that transmission outdoors is very unlikely (and therefore, these protesters were not reckless idiots as the police were making out).
When the crowds took to their knee, copying the manner in which George Floyd was murdered, it was a moving moment. I posed my simple question in my thoughts "do I want to live in a world where police officers view the colour of a persons skin negatively so that they use unreasonable force in their arrest, and where they kneel on the neck of a black man and stop him breathing?" I answer no. And that is why I was at the protest. That behaviour is the legacy of the Edward Colston and the slave trade being played out today.
Without me prompting her, my 14 year old daughter made a sign to carry during the march:
And she did:
And as the march surrounded Mr Colston, in that moment he was brought down, dragged through the streets in a very similar way to how slaves were treated or how people of colour have been lynched throughout the years, and he was thrown in Bristol docks by the mob with the backdrop of Pero's bridge, named after Pero Jones, one of the few slaves who came to Bristol and who lived and died as a slave in the city.
The final watery end would have been how much of his 'cargo' (including women, children, babies) would have died. As a Bristolian, there is a poetic justice in seeing Mr Colston's statue being removed in this manner.
The Aftermath
No one was hurt, no police officers assaulted when this statue was dealt with. Avon & Somerset police did a good job in gauging how to deal with this situation.
In the lead up to the BLM marches, much was made of the lockdown rules and how reckless protesters were. Being a Black Lives Matter march, there was also an undertone in aspects of media of this being reckless black people, ignoring the fact that the Bristol march reflected the ethnic makeup of Bristol and was a majority of white people. There was also very little media noise about the massive turn out with no real violence or arrests, positive reporting does not suit the negative narrative some parts of the media has for black issues.
After the excitement of the statue coming down the crowd laid their banners around the plinth which became a memorial for the BLM cause.
England for the English
Inexplicably, individuals turned up later in the evening who some people might describe as 'far right'. I don't know their politics, to me they looked thuggish, like men from a football gang that actively seeks out a fight.
So if I was stereotyping them, I would say they are people who feel proud about being British and about the UK, and its military history, but based on an uninformed or sanitised and simple view about all these matters, and where they would say that British people are historically white, so England should be for the white English people.
Its difficult to understand their motives other than wanting to confront and fight people who would go on a BLM march. They themselves were unable to articulate any reasonable motive for turning up and standing on the Cenotaph. They claimed it was to 'protect the Cenotaph from damage', but given that 10,000 people had earlier surrounded it and it was left undamaged, it is unclear who it needed protecting from.
In addition to that, the young dead (mainly) boys, of all nationalities, who are remembered by the war memorial, fought and died for our freedom against a Nazi regime that, in all likelihood, would have rid Europe of any person of colour.
So despite the dated attitudes towards race at the time, which would have been less tolerant than now, the end result of their actions were that they fought against racism and for freedom for people of all colours. So for racists to protect something which represents the exact opposite of racism and oppression, seems very confused to me, but thankfully, the police moved them on and no harm or trouble occurred.
Fortunately, they were not there in the days after when other memorials were put in place reminding us that St George was not English. Perhaps he did not actually slay a dragon either, perhaps that too is a myth?
And for gods sake don't mention that Jesus was a Jewish middle eastern man rather than the white Christian we have all been sold as part of the Roman Catholic and Church of England's white washing of history.
Its not just skin colour, even the Welsh and the Scottish are excluded from England's green and pleasant land!
What Happened Next
The media circus started in the week that followed as the toppling of the statue became international news:
And since that day a new debate has started. One which asks what should be done next with the statue and the plinth. Clearly there are some who want Colston returned to the plinth, calling on Marvin Reece the (black) Mayor of Bristol to replace it:
For me, I am torn. I did think that perhaps a statue of a slave with a plaque explaining the slave trade and its connection to Bristol and the events that took place when Colston was finally dealt with would be good.
I have heard others saying it should be left empty on the grounds that any statue commemorating a person of colour could just trigger people and cause more division as it would become a focal point for racist vandalism. I think that is probably true, it would.
If our aim is to unite in a common humanity, then perhaps leaving the plinth empty serves as the best memory of the events that took place that day and in the 300 years leading up to it.
And with the sites international fame the empty plinth has become a focal point for protests, jokes, or just remembering topical or worthy things. For example, when the Bristol born actor that played Darth Vader, Dave Prowse died, a meme quickly appeared with a suggestion:
When someone tried to recreate it for real, it wasn't quite as effective, but I guess, at least the character is black (although in reality, in the original trilogy it was 2 white actors with a black actors voice! Even the dark lord has race issues!)
Some points were aimed at the BBC and the Monarchy.
One artist made a statue of the Bristolian girl, Jen Reid, who climbed on the plinth following the statue being toppled and made the clenched fist, black power, salute. Her statue lasted less than 24 hours.
Others highlighted cases where systemic racism has killed people of colour in the name of profit, an exact replica of the slave trade.
Some made much less effort:
And others just remembered events:
Mr Churchill and the Union Jack
Pulling down the Colston statue triggered a chain reaction. One which led to graffiti being sprayed on the Churchill statue in Parliament Square, London, calling him a racist.
In my view, I think Colston was a specific issue to Bristol and it it not a call to remove every statue of everyone connected to Slavery, or anyone who ever uttered a racist remark in their lifetime, or people who helped build the British Empire.
I do not know the exact reason why people talk about Churchill being a racist, it might be his involvement in the Boer war, of which I know nothing, but have no doubt that British behaviour in colonial Africa was inhuman and cruel at times. Perhaps he was a white supremacist who believed that the British Empire was the morally correct reward for the superior white person. If this was his view, I would say that it's abhorrent.
However, I also believe that in standing up to the Nazi's he put himself on the right side of history and we should commemorate him for that. We should not judge every historical figure by their use of language or for conforming to the normal behaviour of their time when their impact on our current world is significantly positive. By helping defeat the Nazi's Churchill has potentially done a lot to save minorities within Europe and to help immigration, both things which the Nazi's would have probably wiped out.
Likewise, I think Gandhi's peaceful struggle against the British for Indian independence is inspiring. And I think the way he lived his life is also inspiring, despite the fact that he was a supporter of the South African apartheid regime, this does not negate his positive contribution to humanities story, although I can appreciate why he can be considered to be racist.
Churchills legacy is significantly positive to the world today and that is also to the benefit of people of colour.
Gandhi's legacy is significantly positive to the world today and that includes to black South Africans and other people of colour.
Colston's legacy today is significantly negative to Bristol today (and has been for at least the last 40 years.)
But not every slave trader statue, or slave owner, or statue of a person who ever uttered a negative racial term in the past, or a statue of anyone who supported the British Empire should be pulled down or removed. Each one needs to be taken on its own merits and some should remain so that we don't sanitise racism or the slave trade from our past. It's a fact. It's important to not forget that.
Our democratically elected leaders should take a view and make a decision in each case, publicise the decision and stand by it. Not everyone will be happy all of the time, but that's leadership. Doing nothing, as they did in Bristol, risks people taking matters into their own hands.
Our nationalism today, including our use of the Unions Jack, and how we view our armed forces, does not need to link back to slavery or the British Empire in my view. These are separate topics, which should be discussed, acknowledged, learnt from, understood and reconciled as part of our national fabric, but which in my view do not need to be carried as negative baggage stopping British people today from being proud about their country and its national emblems, its armed forces or even any positive aspects of it's past.
Police Crime and Sentencing Bill And less than a year after Colston falling, a Priti stupid Bill was put before Parliament which, if it became law, would criminalise the damaging of a statue and carry a 10 year prison sentence. You only get 7 years for raping someone! Carved stone and shaped metal is now more important to us than the safety of women.
The Bill also says that damaging the wreaths around a monument would carry the same penalty, echoing the views of the individuals who turned up to 'protect the Cenotaph' on the day Colston was pulled down. It seems that Priti Patel is copying the confused 'England for the English' mantra of the far right. Imagine being a politician so out of touch you side with Slaver Traders and English nationalists. No wonder people are disillusioned with democracy.
The Bill would have made any of the historical struggles for justice that have been undertaken by black people or other oppressed minorities in the past, including women, homosexuals, coal miners, anti-war, anti-nuclear, trade unionists, these historical protests for fairness and justice all of which have helped shaped a better society today, their protests would now be illegal under this Bill.
Jesus, Gandhi, Mandela, Biko, King, Parks and Pankhurst, all of these people would be criminalised and spend time in prison if they did what they did in the past but in the UK in 2021. Is that progress? Some of them were imprisoned and we look back today and see how wrong that is, why would we regress to this position?
And would they be in prison because a Judge and a Jury had decided that they were criminals? No. This law gives the police the power to say whether a protest and protester has been too noisy, or has broken a rule imposed on the protest of which they should have been aware, such as the road they should have walked on or the time it ended.
The protests against this Bill continue around the UK, largely ignored by main stream media. The Colston plinth was used as a focal point for this hoarding erected around it in April 2021.
And bringing this back to systemic racism, if I were a black person today and I saw the police being given more powers to criminalise me if I spoke out against racism in the UK I think I would be horrified, but unsurprised. It's just the latest step taken by a system that has always been working against me.
UK Not Systemically Racist
A race report commissioned by the current Government following the BLM marches was published in April 21, it declared that the UK was not systemically racist.
But we know that the Metropolitan Police, and by extension all forces have been declared by official reports to be institutionally racist. Has anything changed since the Macpherson report in 1999? Metropolitan Police Chief Constable Cresidda Dick says yes, so case closed Sherlock.
This Bill puts power into the hands of an organisation that has been shown to be institutionally racist. My blog about how Avon & Somerset have approached the policing of protests against this Bill makes me worry greatly about giving this organisation the ability to criminalise people based on their decisions.
And perhaps the fact that within 12 months of the Colston statue coming down, aggressive lockdown policing and the aggressive policing of the Kill the Bill protests, the Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset quits, suggests that even he knows that he is not a person who should be judging whether a protester is legal or illegal.
We know that health outcomes within the NHS are lower for minorities than they are for white people, because factors within society and the system of healthcare is systemically racist. No doubt we will have an enquiry into this until we have forgotten about it again.
We know that the when ethnic minorities living in a tower block, it can be wrapped in flammable cladding and they get told to stay inside by the authorities as they burn to death. The companies involved increased profit for their shareholders, just as Colston did for the Royal African Company. The value of life continues to be lowered based on skin colour and no one has been held accountable for this, its just how the system works, always has been.
We know that the core institution within the UK, the monarchy, has people within it who have used racist language over the years, and where the daughter in law of the Queen said that one member of the institution questioned the skin colour of her baby. In response, that institution has done nothing to confirm that this is being addressed. There is unaddressed racism within the institution at the heart of Britain, confirming that nothing has changed from 1066 to 2021.
So while the report concluded that the UK is not systemically racist, it did conclude that racism still exists within its institutions. This alone seems to be enough reason to not give the Police additional powers to criminalise protesters, as we are likely to see disproportionally more black people criminalised as a result.
Slaves and the 99%
Slavery was part of a system. An unregulated free market capitalist system. A system that was cruel and inhumane and driven by profit and greed. We still have this system in place today. When capitalism is unchecked, it can become cruel and inhumane and disastrous for humanity. This is a lesson we should note.
The people who conceived of, created and controlled the slave trade were white, but they had other attributes too. It wasn’t the poor white people (poor as in living in abject poverty, which was the majority of the white population in the 18th Century Britain) who ran this business. It was the wealthy elites. The wealthy 1% of the population. And whilst they indulged in a cruel horrendous business that was racist, they also had no regard for the poor white population either. It wasn’t just skin colour that meant they didn’t care about you, it also included greed and wealth inequality and protecting their place in society from the 99%.
The average life expectancy of a poor (white) person in the 18th Century Britain was 18. Whilst they were never subject to the horror of removal from their homeland as "goods for sale at a profit" if they were sent to work in a workhouse, they were essentially owned by the workhouse owner, they were at risk of separation from family and children, beatings, torture, rape, just as slaves were in their short and dire existence. They may not have been considered “goods for sale at a profit” but they were expendable, and not worthy of anything. They were worthless to the 1% and as disposable and expendable as slaves.
This tells us that in addition to racism, it is wealth inequality and the greed and the pursuit of profit by the 1% of the population who have no regard for the other 99%, irrespective of colour, combined with unregulated capitalism that is the problem. Racism is just one added ingredient.
This disregard for the 99% continues today where the 1% make good money from destroying the planet, so they continue, putting all of us, and our children and grandchildren at great risk of a horrible future, a future which will contain its own set of pain, suffering and inhumanity. A future in which all our lives are threatened and in which we all have to fight for our survival.
While we argue about statues and white privilege today, in addition to our inability to solve racism, we fail to address the greed and wealth inequality and unregulated capitalism today, the very same factors that fuelled the slave trade and the inhumanity to black people plus the total disregard of all people not part of the wealthy elite. This is not new. A member of the Black Panthers highlighted this well in the 1960’s saying:
We're not a racist organization, because we understand that racism is an excuse used for capitalism, and we know that racism is just - it's a byproduct of capitalism.
Fred Hampton - August 30, 1948 – December 4, 1969 (shot in the head by a police officer). Black Panther Party member and founder of the Rainbow Coalition an organisation that unified movements such as the BPP with others fighting for wider cultural reforms in inequality, political corruption and change.
George Floyd - RIP
At the time of writing the policeman who knelt on George Floyds neck is on trial in the US. If convicted, he faces up to 40 years in prison. He has the privilege of facing justice in a system that is more favourable to him due to his skin colour. The man in charge of the police officer who knelt with his full body weight on George’s neck for 9 minutes and 29 seconds said:
"To continue to apply that level of force to a person proned out, handcuffed behind their back — that in no way, shape or form is anything that is by policy"
In Conclusion
I would say that the majority of people in the UK want to live in a world where the value of all lives are equal and where we have mutual respect of each other, where we embrace and celebrate our differences and mutually respect each other based on our actions and words and where the historic prejudices based on skin colour, greed and wealth inequality and unregulated capitalism becomes a part of our historical story, and that these things do not continue into our future, a future in which we can be proud of aspects of our past while acknowledging and understanding the wrongs.
Those of us in the 99% should remember:
There are people who benefit financially from us bickering and disliking each other, and while we do, we keep them in the 1%.
Comments