PART 1: WHY WE MUST RETHINK MONUMENTS AS WE KNOW THEM.
What is a monument? To discuss why British monuments require a great deal of critical reconstruction, we must first define what the monument is. Cambridge dictionary defines a monument as being ‘A structure or building that is built to honour a special person or event’1. Monuments as we know them are typically comprised of a stone/marble/metal hyper-realistic sculpture in the public domain. Their purpose being to commemorate the person depicted, or to remember- with affection- a particular event. To honour a person, it must first be understood what they have achieved, and then we must unpick and ask why their action is coveted, and why it is considered to be worthy of a statue. To do this we have to look at their action in relation to societal values held at the site of construction- both geographically and in time. One of the values Britain holds dear is the idea of a fair society, one held up by the backbone of law- and individuals can be understood in terms of their ability to act in accordance of these boundaries. Another characteristic that becomes very apparent while investigating British monuments is a sense of nationhood. Paul Gilroy speaks on the power that law and order has had in shaping contemporary British society- defining what is good, what the public should aspire to be, and therefore what is criminal, and tarred as un-British. It is important to note that the British ideology of legality is not innate, it has been manufactured, and over time, politics has combined with the idea of ‘law and order’ to express an image of national identity 2. We must therefore unpick the ‘special’ reason a person is immortalised in statue for. Can it be understood by most in current times as a superior moral action? Is it still considered to be worthy of space in the public realm? Or is it held in high regard only when viewed in relation to a certain time, place and specific set of societal values. Thomas J Price, Artist, speaks on this matter, noting that ‘Public sculptures and statues have been used to signpost, to exemplify what power looks like and to maintain the systems of power’ 3. This suggestion opens up a discussion of the real purpose of the monument. If the purpose was to cherish those doing moral good, is it appropriate for Parliament Square to be adorned with Winston Churchill? I would argue that an individual quoted to say ‘I am strongly in favour of using poison gas against uncivilised tribes. It would spread a lively terror’, and ‘I hate Indians. They are beastly people with a 1 2 3
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/monument Paul Gilroy, There ain’t no black in the Union Jack, (Routledge: London, 2002)p84-94. https://time.com/5854797/taking-down-statues/?fbclid=IwAR1UQpG_XgRXPM30ArBKSx4YIwG-
beastly religion’, is perhaps not the best selection for a statue head. This then begs the question- why do we have statues of individuals such as Churchill, who have committed, sanctioned or profiteered from large scale atrocities? If viewed through the lens of British values- in this case, the affection for a strong and aggressive figurehead- it makes sense that Churchill not only receives eternity in bronze but also to be placed in such a prestigious spot. Churchill effectively lead a stint of Britain’s imperial reign, and despite being a believer of eugenics, advocating the use of poison gas, and sanctioning the starving of millions of Indians 4, Britain 5 seems to ignore this in favour of the net ‘good’ he achieved for us 6. It can therefore be understood that the monument of Churchill is not a celebration of good deeds, but an iteration of power and national sentiment 7. I argue that the monument as we know it is a very physical and painful echo of nationalism that pervades the UK 8. To place a figure on a pedestal and celebrate what we perceive them to have done for ‘us’ is to first of all recognise the body of the UK as one homogenous population with common goals 9- i.e. colonialism. Then ‘we’ collectively celebrate the historical goals of the British Empire, which required a great deal of suffering, conquest and accumulation to be met.
4 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-29701767 5 I would like to stress that British citizens are not one homogenous group, and many have spoken out against such monuments, but ‘Britain’ in this sentence refers to those in power, speaking on behalf of the collective country. 6 I would dispute that the continuity of empire as a net good. 7 Which I consider to be deeply flawed, for many reasons- the primary of which being that Britain’s population is not a monolith, so national aspiration is simply a desire of those in positions of power. 8 Covering why nationalism is extremely problematic is beyond the scope of this short paper, but has been covered by many academics. 9 Paul Gilroy, There ain’t no black in the Union Jack, (Routledge: London, 2002).
Britain’s selective memory and nationalist tendencies To produce a monument is to cherry-pick a moment of history and glorify it, usually simultaneously erasing a host of crime and wrongdoing in the process. A notable feature of Britain’s operations has been its ability to remain optimistic, viewing the past through an idealistic and often restricted optic. Akala speaks more on this, in particular the narrow account that education systems provide detailing the ending of slavery. He unpicks the reductive and false claims that Britain was the first country to abolish slavery, led by William Wilberforce, and infuses this with the truth that Haiti was in fact the first country to abolish slavery 10. Akala also writes about ‘Operation Legacy’, an initiative under which paperwork detailing atrocities committed under imperial rule were destroyed, with state intelligence agencies conspiring to ‘burn, bury at sea or hide 11’ potentially sensitive documents. These acts of historic perception management can be seen as Britain’s attempt to protect national identity- to retain the fair and just image mentioned earlier. George Orwell notes how the ‘disease loosely called nationalism is now almost universal’ 12, and discusses how with a nationalist, ‘material facts are supressed, dates altered, quotations removed from their context and doctored so as to change their meaning’ 13. Thus, if we inspect Britain’s monuments in terms of nationalist sentiment, it is understandable to assume the ‘History’ we are told they represent is more than likely not a factual account, and we must be critical and aware of a constructed narrative surrounding the monument. Paul Gilroy also discusses nationalism and its link to ‘race’ and class discourse in Britain. He notes how the politics of ‘race’ stems from a conception of national belonging 14. Covering why nationalism is at its root extremely problematic is beyond the scope of this short paper, but has been covered by many academics.
10 Akala, Natives, (Two Roads: London, 2019) p123-133. 11 Akala, Natives, (Two Roads: London, 2019) p144. 12 GEORGE ORWELL, NOTES ON NATIONALISM, (PENGUIN Books: [Place of publication not identified], 2018). 13 GEORGE ORWELL, NOTES ON NATIONALISM, (PENGUIN Books: [Place of publication not identified], 2018). 14 Paul Gilroy, There ain’t no black in the Union Jack, (Routledge: London, 2002).
Edward Colston and removing history Britain is flooded with monuments, and a quick google search will reveal polarising examples such as Nelson’s Column15, Lord Baden-Powell16, and more recently Edward Colston17. Britain’s monuments speak of an outdated national pride, they cement a period of imperial aggression and exploitation for personal gain, and celebrate it as an achievement. As national opinion evolves and moves further away from imperial interest, is it appropriate to retain statues intending to honour individuals aligned to the nations previous endeavours? As people begin to unpick and question why we are celebrating certain individuals, it is therefore acceptable that some monuments deemed to be inappropriate be removed? Edward Colston’s statue was built in 1895, erected to recognise his philanthropic achievements. The UKs demographic has changed substantially since the statue was erected18, and along with ever changing societal conventions, a portion of the British public has spoken against the statue- with a petition collecting thousands of signatures19. It is important to note that Edward Colston was a member of the Royal African Company (RAC), which had a monopoly on the west African slave trade, where he made the bulk of his fortune. Those signing the petition did so upon the basis of the statue being a constant iteration of the slave trade and those who profiteered from it. This in turn sparked a backlash, with other members of the British public defending the statue- arguing that to remove the statue equates to an attempt to remove history. With previous outline on the role of the monument, it is argued that the role of the monument is not to depict an accurate history- more so to restate to the public the current systems of power. The arguments in favour of the Colston statue echoed that of Enoch Powell and The Sun’s attack on the queen’s 1983 Christmas speech. Powell had challenged the ‘madness’ of the liberal integrationists on behalf of the new right, arguing that the Queen was ‘more concerned for the susceptibilities and prejudices of a vociferous minority of newcomers than for the great mass of her subjects’. The Sun similarly claimed that ‘The queen has allowed herself to be used as a mouthpiece for racial minorities, and ought to spend more time speaking out for the white majority.’20 15 Who has been accused of having ‘vigorously defended’ the slave trade. BBC.co.uk/programmes/articles/1R7wld63Tz3r5rh7NJfJC6jseven-of-the-wold-s-most-controversial-statues 16 Baden-Powell was voted the 13th most influential person in the UK in the 20th century in a poll in 2007. How-
ever, critics say he held racist views and MI5 files reveal he was invited to meet Adolf Hitler. https://www.independent. co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-statues-removed-down-colston-rhodes-baden-powell-racism-a9560736.html
17 Edward Colston was a member of the Royal African Company (RAC), which had a monopoly on the west African slave trade, where he made the bulk of his fortune. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jun/08/who-was-edward-colston-and-why-was-his-bristol-statue-toppledslave-trader-black-lives-matter-protests 18 https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/uk-population-by-ethnicity/national-and-regional-populations/regional-ethnic-diversity/latest 19 https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jun/08/who-was-edward-colston-and-why-washis-bristol-statue-toppled-slave-trader-black-lives-matter-protests 20 Paul Gilroy, There ain’t no black in the Union Jack, (Routledge: London, 2002) Page 49.
I would argue these individuals are motivated by nationalist sentiment, and hold the Powellian idea that despite legal British status, blacks are not ‘real’ citizens in the UK21. Williams, 1983 and Mulhern, 1984 bring up almost identically what Powell and Worsthorne mention about distinction between authentic and inauthentic types of national belonging. Williams combines discussion of ‘race’ with patriotism and nationalism. But for him, as with the right, ‘race’ problems begin with immigration. The resentment of settlers leads to ideological specifications of ‘race’ and ‘superiority’. He dismisses ‘standard liberal’ anti-racist comments (e.g. ‘they’re as British as you are’) by stressing that social identity is a product of ‘long experience’. Which prompts the question- how long is long enough to become a genuine Brit?22 Once it is broken down, the statue protectors’ argument seems to revolve solely around nationalism, ‘race’, and the warped idea that race signifies national belonging. The resistance to ‘pander’ towards a minority- by removing a statue found to be offensive- stems from the fear that their white supremacy may evaporate if we act to reform Britain’s landscape23 so that is respectful towards the black bodies24 that are in integral part of current social identity and culture. Thomas J Price speaks on the claim that removing statues is removing history‘Pulling down Colston’s statue is not removing history — it is creating a historical moment, and at the very least it’s acknowledging the existence of a new contemporary thinking. You can’t hide behind words like “tradition” and “history” if they’re used to neutralize any kind of discussion about change.’
21
Enoch Powell suggests parliament can change the law but national sentiment transcends this. Paul Gilroy, There ain’t no black in the Union Jack, (Routledge: London, 2002) Page 47.
22 23
Paul Gilroy, There ain’t no black in the Union Jack, (Routledge: London, 2002) Page 50,51.
‘We looked at 968 public statues or sculptures in the database, of which 610 were identifiable as named people. Of these, just three are of black individuals - two of Nelson Mandela and one of Desmond Tutu (although the latter is placed inside Lewisham Town Hall)’ https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/53014592
24 I use the term ‘Bodies’ like Deanne Crooks in her publication ‘The Black Experience’- to refer to the physical presence as opposed to the derogatory usage it has under certain contexts.
PART 2: BRINGING ABOUT CHANGE
Marc Quinn’s move for power. As mentioned, public opinion of the Colston statue was dwindling, and thousands had signed a petition to get it removed. And on the 7th June 2020, as tensions ran high following a viral video of American police officers murdering an unarmed, compliant black man- George Floyd, the Colston statue was toppled and thrown into a river during global Black Lives Matters protests. The mayor of Bristol, Marvin Rees commented on the toppling: “I know the removal of the Colston Statue will divide opinion, as the statue itself has done for many years. However, it’s important to listen to those who found the statue to represent an affront to humanity.” 1 A month later, on the 15th July 2020, a sculpture of protester Jen Reid was placed on the plinth by artist Marc Quinn. Quinn, who has called his work A Surge of Power (Jen Reid) 2020, continues: “When I saw the picture of Jen on Instagram, I immediately thought it would be great to immortalise that moment. The image is a silhouette: she looked like a sculpture already. I’ve been making portraits of refugees using 3D scanning over the last year and applied the same technology to this.”2 The sculpture was an embodiment of an Instagram photo- in which Jen Reid climbed onto the plinth and stood with her fist in the air. Initially, the country erupted in mass support, pleased to have Black representation atop a plinth, spreading a message of change, one that aligned with Black Lives Matter protests, one that opposed to the colonial messages that Colston perpetuated. After the initial support has cleared, voices began to speak up about the discomfort they felt at the statue- around the fact that Colston’s replacement had been created by a white man. The statue was removed after 24hours, as Quinn did not have relevant permissions to place his sculpture there.
1 https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jun/07/blm-protesters-topple-statue-of-bristolslave-trader-edward-colston 2 https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2020/jul/15/marc-quinn-statue-colston-jen-reidblack-lives-matter-bristol
The void created by statue removal: a question of who. For many, the first question when thinking about replacing Colston’s statue was‘Who should be immortalised on the plinth now?’ And with suggestions of worthy black figures flying around, I argue that we should first ask who should get the opportunity to produce the art in the first place. The many black artists speaking out against Quinn’s statue advocate for a change that runs deeper than representation, one that centres social reform, a re-allocation of opportunity and resources, and a move towards equity. On the surface, representation of a black woman replacing Colston is a powerful gesture, one moving towards the kind of society BLM protesters are fighting for. But if we unpick the events leading up to its placement, we can see no viable change has occurred. Marc Quinn had the money and resources to mobilise his statue quickly and easily. His privileged circumstances meant that Quinn was able to produce his idea and act solely on behalf of himself, an individual- specifically a middle aged, successful white man- and attempt to speak on behalf of a whole complex movement. A movement he cannot personally identify the struggles of. Because he was able to act quickly, little discussion took place with members of the black community, nor the Bristol community, to see if his idea was an accepted gesture. This secretive working suggests that Quinn’s interests were not to work with and aid the black community- but to produce a grand gesture from himself- otherwise known as virtue signalling. In the placement of the statue, no systemic change was brought about After the dazzling representation dust has settled, it becomes clear that during his endeavour to move in on the now-free public space- a space occupied previously by a white man, commissioned by a white man- Quinn does nothing more than perpetuate the historic cycles of white supremacy. Thomas J Price describes this ‘this moment of joy and catharsis was taken away with the realisation that it was yet another example of white privilege in action.’3 Yes, the representation is of a black woman, a step in the right direction. Yet in the words of artist Larry Achiampong- ‘Who is being given the opportunity? Who is being given the chance?’4 If those in power speak the words of a movement and signal their virtue, but do not follow up with tangible actions to improve the lives of the 3
https://www.theartnewspaper.com/comment/a-votive-statue-to-appropriation-the-problem-with-marc-quinn-s-b lack-lives-matter-sculpture?fbclid=IwAR1h5LXxRrEkbR6fLHKuQWse8qgtM1fns7VVc6nTxLrdeLktOUsgEk7hzA4 4 https://www.instagram.com/p/CCssoTWlXd9/?igshid=8nh3xuq7hwvq&fbclid=IwAR3X58rhZE921rqRbHnmFn3c94_nen5dBwW2d2qIBJTHrEGPsi2S9KF1m5A
black community, nothing has changed but the face of things. In the cycle of events- a statue is pulled down as it represents whiteness in the form of exploitation, accumulation, capitalist gain at the ill of others’ lives. A space in the public realm then opens up, a fantastic opportunity to disrupt the cycle of white commissioning, with white artists filling all available space. A white artist then moves in on the space without permission- a move he is able to make due to a specific set of privileges he retains: materials, camera equipment, time, money, workers. Representation is nothing more than a good will gesture if it isn’t underpinned by systemic change, a re-distribution of resources, of opportunity. Quinn’s action of representation achieved nothing to improve the lives of black British citizens. He offered no space for them to speak, when he produced his idea without consultation. He offered no physical space, when he took the plinth- a space that could have been offered to a black artist. He could have used his resources to mobilise a black artist to the plinth, but he instead used it to continue his personal production. Price expands on this- ‘There’s almost a sense of entitlement from white creators, to think that they have the solution. White artists are putting themselves forward to create replacement sculptures of slave owners with no sense of irony. That’s a saviour complex, and that exemplifies what is wrong’ 5
5 https://time.com/5854797/taking-down-statues/?fbclid=IwAR1UQpG_XgRXPM30ArBKSx4YIwG5Dw117VU7YCqza9ke78WAnOyQv26N17Y
Postface: Appropriateness of the task set by SHU In the realm of criticality, I would like to discuss that it may on one level be ill-thought out to give a course with a largely white demographic the task of designing a monument. This further perpetuates the idea that it is ok for a supreme1 majority to retain their hold on the presentation of a selective history of their choosing. The subject of monument in 2020 is politically charged and highly polarising, and the discourses of nation and people are saturated with racial connotations.2 I think to design a monument and ignore the politics underlying the concrete would be to wilfully renounce the activism that brought Colston’s statue down. Public art and monument are not one in the same- their core purpose is different. A monument will not invite critical review like an artwork will, a monument assumes a moral and factual correctness, it presumes it has the right to be there- and unfortunately in many cases has proven to simply not be true. On another level, it could be argued that reconfiguring the monument is holding the context and issues saturating the topic relevant and in the consciousness of those assigned the task. Assigning this task could be viewed as a move toward keeping momentum high and inviting cross-examination towards current convention. The topic is a great way to mobilise students around complex current issues, yet I think a reframing may be required. I think to approach this task as a design brief rather than an exercise in critical reconstruction would be to partake an active role in maintaining systems and a move away from systemic change. I think reconfiguring the monument is much more of an essay topic rather than a 1-2-sided proposal. ‘Reconfigure the monument’ seems to invite discussion and deconstruction. Yet, asking for a monument proposal seems to open up a design-focussed space in which yet another statue of a historical figure may be an acceptable response. Students will make of this project what they wish, and as with all art, take as little or put in as much time as they deem it requires. I personally feel this project brief is very sensitive and therefore requires a lot more work than a small proposal. A reframing of the design proposal would allow the project to be approached more as a social commentary and critical analysis, which is what I think the realm of monuments requires as a minimum, and I think proposing a monument without a back log of work would be reductive to change.
1 I use the terms supreme and subordinate in their literal meaning of high and lower rankings of power. 2 Paul Gilroy, There ain’t no black in the Union Jack, (Routledge: London, 2002) Page 60.
Quotes RE: Monument Project Time.com Thomas J Price, Artist Taking down statues isn’t enough. We need to radically rethink how we celebrate power. https://time.com/5854797/taking-down-statues/?fbclid=IwAR1UQpG_XgRXPM30ArBKSx4YIwG5Dw117VU7YCqza9ke78WAnOyQv26N17Y • Public sculptures and statues have been used to signpost, to exemplify what power looks like and to maintain the systems of power • Pulling down Colston’s statue is not removing history — it is creating a historical moment, and at the very least it’s acknowledging the existence of a new contemporary thinking. You can’t hide behind words like “tradition” and “history” if they’re used to neutralize any kind of discussion about change. • There’s almost a sense of entitlement from white creators, to think that they have the solution. White artists are putting themselves forward to create replacement sculptures of slave owners with no sense of irony. That’s a savior complex, and that exemplifies what is wrong • Black artists should be looked at first to replace many of these sculptures that may be removed. If we cannot see the irony in taking down a statue of a slave owner, and replacing it with work by an artist whose ancestors have benefitted from slavery, that’s an indication of even wider issues. • My initial intention wasn’t to create works about race, but I realized that there was power in the figurative, and there was power in representing people who looked like me, because I could give a real insight to that experience • There needs to be an openness and more nuanced understanding of what it means to be Black, and that’s only going to happen when there are people in positions of power to commission who understand where our art comes from Instagram Larry Achiampong, Artist The White Pube, Critiques https://www.instagram.com/p/CCssoTWlXd9/?igshid=8nh3xuq7hwvq&fbclid=IwAR3X58rhZE921rqRbHnmFn3c94_nen5dBwW2d2qIBJTHrEGPsi2S9KF1m5A • ‘Yesterday, big name sculptor Marc Quinn put a statue of Black Lives Matter protestor Jen Reid up on the empty Colston plinth, where Bristolians had pulled down the previous occupant and thrown the slave trader into the water early in June. It was only a matter of time before a white man artist managed to make himself the centre of the conversation again, wasn’t it. We should have taken bets on who it might have been. They’re all so obsessed with fame and glory.
We got so many messages yesterday from people saying they had an issue with the fact it was Marc Quinn who’d done this rogue sculpture installation rather than a Black artist, and tbh a lot of the messages were from people saying ‘er is it okay that I feel weird about this?’ Your instincts are right. As @LarryAchiampong raises in these videos, if he’s got the means, couldn’t he have facilitated young Black artists to make something instead of centring himself? So SUSPISH that the first line of Quinn’s announcement is him stressing that the subject of the sculpture Jen Reid collaborated at every point in this process, as if that exonerates him. I respect her agency completely but isn’t this what the white art world always does? The institution keeps itself comfy and only hands out a few scraps to make itself look good as and when that’s self-benefitting (because looking good is more important than good things happening to people who need the leg up; because real structural change will threaten the comfort it has enjoyed for so long). @marcquinnart you are part of that institution 🤭’ • Who is being given the opportunity? Who is being given the chance? • Sometimes the best thing to do when you are part of the problem is just stop • Take your hands off of it.
The Art Newspaper Thomas J Price The problem with Marc Quinn’s Black Lives Matter Sculpture https://www.theartnewspaper.com/comment/a-votive-statue-to-appropriation-the-problem-with-marc-quinn-s-black-lives-matter-sculpture?fbclid=IwAR1h5LXxRrEkbR6fLHKuQWse8qgtM1fns7VVc6nTxLrdeLktOUsgEk7hzA4 • this moment of joy and catharsis was taken away with the realisation that it was yet another example of white privilege in action. • However, racism runs far deeper than representation. In actuality, the insidious nature of racism affects Black people’s access to opportunity and resources • This is why there are so few Black sculptors working in the public realm and less so one’s with the finances to immediately take advantage of the opportunities that arise. • It could well overshadow any permanent sculpture that eventually goes there, hindering real progress during a moment of activism that should have showcased a Black artist›s output, not that of a white cis man. BBC News Jen Reid: Statue of Black Lives Matter protester appears on Colston plinth
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-53414463 • Artist Marc Quinn said the black resin statue, called A Surge of Power, was meant to be a temporary installation to continue the conversation about racism. • “I was in his studio by the Friday after the protest with 201 cameras surrounding me, taking pictures of me from every conceivable angle. That went into a 3D print and a mould was made.” Daily Mail Bristol’s Mayor says sculpture of Black Lives Matter protester that replaced toppled statue of slave trader Edward Colston will be REMOVED after it was secretly erected by activists https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8524687/Edward-Colston-statue-replaced-unofficial-sculpture-Black-Lives-Matter-protester.html • A team of ten people led by Mr Quinn worked quickly and in secret to erect the statue. Workers arrived in two lorries and had the sculpture up within 15 minutes using a hydraulic crane truck parked next to the plinth. • A team of ten people led by artist Marc Quinn worked quickly and in secret with the local council said to be uninvolved in the stunt • Writing on his website marcquinn.com, the artist said: ‘This sculpture captures a moment. It happened in the middle of the news and the worldwide ripple effect from George Floyd’s killing – all of which I had been following. • ‘My friend who knew this showed me a picture on Instagram of Jen standing on the plinth in Bristol with her fist in a Black Power salute. • ‘My first, instant thought was how incredible it would be to make a sculpture of her, in that instant. It is such a powerful image, of a moment I felt had to be materialised, forever.’ • Mr Quinn writes that he then contacted Ms Reid over social media, and she said she wanted to ‘collaborate’. • He adds: ‘Keeping the issue of Black people’s lives and experiences in the public eye and doing whatever I can to help is so important. Those of us who have privilege have a duty to be part of change.
BBC News Jen Reid statue removal ‘to be paid for by artist’ https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-53486065 • “We intend to offer a maquette of the sculpture to the Bristol Museum,” he added. • The statue was taken down 24 hours after it was erected because the council said it did not have planning permission.
Open Democracy .Net The Battle of Britishness in the age of Brexit https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/battle-of-britishness-in-ageof-brexit-akala-talks-to-convention/ • I’ve written something that I’ve entitled “The battle of Britishness in the age of Brexit” and the title of the essay comes from a brilliant book by Tony Kushner that examines the waves of migration to Britain from the 17th century up until the 1950’s. I suggest everyone read it to see how much depressing continuity, and also lack of credibility, there is around contemporary debates about migration • In Britain, our project of national forgetting and selective remembrance, has been so successful that we often like to believe that race is what happens elsewhere, in the USA perhaps • Race rather was codified by some of the greatest thinkers, educated at the top universities of the modern age: Kant to Linnaeus, Blumenbach to Hume. And the idea of race was used by a pan-European ruling class to devastating effect • For example, Winston Churchill, often voted Britain’s favourite person, could be found describing the Palestinians as dogs, or claiming that the extermination of the red man of America or the black man of Australia was, as he put it, no great crime at all. He also blamed Indians for breeding like rabbits, when millions of them were starved to death through British rule • In the year since 1945, independence movements, the returning to pre-eminence of Asian economies, technological superiority of Japan and a whole host of other global trends have served to make the philosophy of innate Euro-
pean supremacy lose all serious intellectual credibility. • What does this mean? It means that even though far more migrants came from Europe in the post-war years than did people from say, the Caribbean, and even though they were not British citizens – nor English speakers – they faded into obscurity and became official citizens of the UK, whose status as recent immigrants is largely unknown. By contrast, those of us, whose grandparents were British citizens and English speakers are often seen and referred to as immigrants. • Clearly, the culture is not the issue here. The presence of mass European migration in the post-war years did not elicit a ‘Keep Britain Anglo-Saxon’ campaign. • The 1962 Immigration Commonwealth Act, repealed the free movement of subjects of the British empire, migrating to the mother country. British imperial subjects now had to prove that they had a grandparent with a British passport. The fully intended consequence of this was to halt the migration to Britain by people of African or Asian heritage, with those from the white-settler colonies, South Africa, Australia, etc, being the only colonial citizens who could satisfy the criteria. • we’ve seen charter planes full of Jamaican nationals, Kenyans, Nigerians, Ghanaians and others, from Commonwealth countries – many of whom had spent decades in Britain, indeed most of their lives, had British children and British partners, and even those without criminal records – being sent back to countries that some of them had not visited since childhood. There will be no planes full of Australians, Swedes or Germans, I can promise you that. • Many black Britains are well aware that European unity, if not of course the EU itself, was fostered in no small part by the pan-European project of racialised enslavement and the post-1884 Berlin conference that joined the scramble for Africa with the European powers • but would include admitting that people colonised by Britain seem to have a strangely different memory of what it was like than do the British ruling class. • It would mean that people in the UK are, like all humans, subject to irrational prejudices that have no basis in fact. Audre Lorde The Masters Tools Will Never Dismantle the Masters House • For the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house. They may allow us temporarily to beat him at his own game, but they will never enable us to bring about genuine change.