'Topple the Racists' - a sustained attack on British History

OneTenner

LE
Book Reviewer
?
I never said laws were retrospective.
He mentioned "guilt in a criminal conspiracy" and I agreed.
No one can change facts. What you can do is change a narrative. I don't argue with slavers or racists being celebrated in their time, I argue with them being celebrated now.
Remembering people for historical deeds isn't 'celebrating' them at all - or are you suggesting we should brush all the people who have, by modern standards, populist consensus or just what 'Karen off of facebook thinks' acted badly at some point in their lives - under the rug of time and never mention them again?
Or maybe we should remember them for everything they did, so that we can have a clear measure of what good, bad and indifferent looks like in the historical record? Why stop at Statues - maybe move on to sanitising pictures & books as well, removing any inconveniences that do not conform to modern standards so people that come after us don't have to see how 'bad' we all were through history. Yer, that'd work.
 

Niamac

GCM
It's pretty difficult to think of any "civilization" in history which did not practise slavery. Some of it is still going on and might be a better target for outrage etc.
 
I once had a chief inspector tell me that we could not use the ic codes as descriptors on nominal records on the HOLMES2 computer system, Obviously I treated his order with the respect it deserved.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Customs and Excise used to have their own intel database, and certainly had IC code tick boxes on the inputting forms.
There was also a box marked Chinky for a "person of interest" of the Oriental persuasion, who may have alternative names.
It remained for years.
 
A bellendish thing to do in the current climate, but I would have thought Cambridge university would have supported him, they were all for free speech when Dr Priyamavada Gopal was chopsing off.
As I understand it he suggested that slavery wasn't genocide.. That happens to be true doesn't it?


Lets look at some proper genocides...
The Nazis failed attempt to eliminate 9.5 million Jews from Europe.. Failed because they lost a war about as badly as its possible to lose a war.
Jewish Population loss by country
Poland: 91 percent (approximately 3 million)
Greece: 87 percent (65,000)
Lithuania: 83 percent (140,000)
Slovakia: 80 percent (71,000)
Yugoslavia: 77 percent (60,000)
Latvia: 76 percent (70,000)
Yugoslavia: 77 percent (60,000)
Latvia: 76 percent (70,000)
Netherlands: 71 percent (100,000)
Hungary: 66 percent (550,000)
Bohemia/Moravia: 66 percent (78,000)
Norway: 45 percent (762)
Romania: 44 percent (270,000)
Estonia: 44 percent (2,000)
Belgium: 38 percent (25,000)
Luxembourg: 28 percent (1,000)
Soviet Union: 33 percent (1,000,000)
France: 30 percent (77,000)
Austria: 27 percent (50,000)
Germany: 25 percent (142,000)
Italy: 17 percent (7,500)
Finland: 0.35 percent (8)
Denmark: 0.75 percent (60)
Bulgaria: 0 percent (0)
Started in earnest in 1941 ended in late 1945 Clear intent had they continued to entirely eliminate the target population.

Rwandan Genocide Failed government attempt to eliminate the Tutsi population
Exact numbers uncertain But between 500,000 and 1 million people murdered in 3 months 8 days.. 70% of the target population. Attempt failed because an RPF offensive pushed the government across the border into Zaire before they finished the job...

The slave trade removed about 12.5 million Africans over 350 years when the continental population was estimated at 46 Million in 1500 and 97 Million in 1870, Nor does the growth rate in Africa differ significantly from the world as a whole. Disgusting and vile stain on the soul of humanity that it was the Atlantic slave trade was manifestly not a Genocide...
 
As I understand it he suggested that slavery wasn't genocide.. That happens to be true doesn't it?
It is and whilst that would have been enough for the far left to hang him - its not the actual problem bit of his speech

Even saying If it were genocide there would not be so many black people on Europe etc would not have been an issue to most - whether they agreed with his logic or not

But the statement so many damn blacks - smacks of racism
 

Awol

LE
As I understand it he suggested that slavery wasn't genocide.. That happens to be true doesn't it?


Lets look at some proper genocides...
The Nazis failed attempt to eliminate 9.5 million Jews from Europe.. Failed because they lost a war about as badly as its possible to lose a war.
Jewish Population loss by country
Poland: 91 percent (approximately 3 million)
Greece: 87 percent (65,000)
Lithuania: 83 percent (140,000)
Slovakia: 80 percent (71,000)
Yugoslavia: 77 percent (60,000)
Latvia: 76 percent (70,000)
Yugoslavia: 77 percent (60,000)
Latvia: 76 percent (70,000)
Netherlands: 71 percent (100,000)
Hungary: 66 percent (550,000)
Bohemia/Moravia: 66 percent (78,000)
Norway: 45 percent (762)
Romania: 44 percent (270,000)
Estonia: 44 percent (2,000)
Belgium: 38 percent (25,000)
Luxembourg: 28 percent (1,000)
Soviet Union: 33 percent (1,000,000)
France: 30 percent (77,000)
Austria: 27 percent (50,000)
Germany: 25 percent (142,000)
Italy: 17 percent (7,500)
Finland: 0.35 percent (8)
Denmark: 0.75 percent (60)
Bulgaria: 0 percent (0)
Started in earnest in 1941 ended in late 1945 Clear intent had they continued to entirely eliminate the target population.

Rwandan Genocide Failed government attempt to eliminate the Tutsi population
Exact numbers uncertain But between 500,000 and 1 million people murdered in 3 months 8 days.. 70% of the target population. Attempt failed because an RPF offensive pushed the government across the border into Zaire before they finished the job...

The slave trade removed about 12.5 million Africans over 350 years when the continental population was estimated at 46 Million in 1500 and 97 Million in 1870, Nor does the growth rate in Africa differ significantly from the world as a whole. Disgusting and vile stain on the soul of humanity that it was the Atlantic slave trade was manifestly not a Genocide...
We live in a time where in the word ‘damn’ in a sentence is perceived worse than the word ‘genocide’.

Although I think the left would have destroyed Starkey even without the ‘damn blacks’ comment. He offered up a comment about race that wasn’t 100% anodyne and therefore had to be quickly silenced.
 
Last edited:
We live in a time where in the word ‘damn’ in a sentence is perceived worse than the word ‘genocide’.

Although I think the left would have destroyed Starkey even without the ‘damn blacks’ comment. He offered up a comment about race that wasn’t 100% anodyne and therefore had to be quickly silenced.
He damned himself with that sentence, and justifiably so. He's heading down the road of being a David Icke Alike.
Think about how you speak in public arena's swearing utterly disappears, yet he throws it in, in a very racist way, which didn't in anyway help. It was either pre-meditated, for some unintelligible reason which he thought would do him some good (what, I have no idea, maybe he wanted to retire, maybe he's got a book out?). Or it's the way he really thinks.
In the first case its stupidity, in the second he's a grotty little racist.


On the plus side there's a few organisations with an opening for a historian, maybe I should apply to Cambridge, after all that's my home town! :safe:
 
I think that both Mr Starkey and the people who oppose him may have misinterpreted the word genocide.

At one time ( maybe it still happens) we used to use charge books for making life a little bit easier. You just found the relevant offence you needed to charge someone with and then typed it onto the charge sheet directly from the charge book. It saved time actually looking up the wording from the law books.

I remember that genocide involved the transfer of people of a certain ( must specify) race or ethnic grouping from one place to another and under duress for gain .

The common offence that people think of as genocide........killing lots of people, is just murder.

I would have thought that when lots of people are killed at once, the people who give the orders are tracked down to just a few MURDERS and given time on that basis.

I suspect both Mr Starkey and the people throthing at him are thinking that genocide is murder. Strictly speaking then, the transfer of people across the Atlantic against their wishes is actually genocide.

Just a thought.
 
I think that both Mr Starkey and the people who oppose him may have misinterpreted the word genocide.

At one time ( maybe it still happens) we used to use charge books for making life a little bit easier. You just found the relevant offence you needed to charge someone with and then typed it onto the charge sheet directly from the charge book. It saved time actually looking up the wording from the law books.

I remember that genocide involved the transfer of people of a certain ( must specify) race or ethnic grouping from one place to another and under duress for gain .

The common offence that people think of as genocide........killing lots of people, is just murder.

I would have thought that when lots of people are killed at once, the people who give the orders are tracked down to just a few MURDERS and given time on that basis.

I suspect both Mr Starkey and the people throthing at him are thinking that genocide is murder. Strictly speaking then, the transfer of people across the Atlantic against their wishes is actually genocide.

Just a thought.
Rubbish.
 

Chef

LE
Excuse me, "some" were sold by indigenous powers but THE VAST MAJORITY WERE CAPTURED AND KIDNAPPED by european "discoverers".
As someone once said:

'Do the maths'.

HMS Black Joke*, an ex Brazilian owned slaver had a pay load of 569 slaves and a crew of 38 when slave trading. So your view is that the crew land somewhere in Africa bimble off into the great unknown and come back with 15 men each?

Presumably able bodied, healthy lads who might not take kindly to being told to get on the boat. Oh and you 531 wait there while we shackle up the first 38 of you. You think that that is a valid business plan now or ever was?

I have a perpetual motion machine that might interest you.

*HMS Black Joke (1827) - Wikipedia
 

Awol

LE
I think that both Mr Starkey and the people who oppose him may have misinterpreted the word genocide.

At one time ( maybe it still happens) we used to use charge books for making life a little bit easier. You just found the relevant offence you needed to charge someone with and then typed it onto the charge sheet directly from the charge book. It saved time actually looking up the wording from the law books.

I remember that genocide involved the transfer of people of a certain ( must specify) race or ethnic grouping from one place to another and under duress for gain .

The common offence that people think of as genocide........killing lots of people, is just murder.

I would have thought that when lots of people are killed at once, the people who give the orders are tracked down to just a few MURDERS and given time on that basis.

I suspect both Mr Starkey and the people throthing at him are thinking that genocide is murder. Strictly speaking then, the transfer of people across the Atlantic against their wishes is actually genocide.

Just a thought.
Nope. The ‘cide’ suffix denotes killing.
 
I think that both Mr Starkey and the people who oppose him may have misinterpreted the word genocide.

At one time ( maybe it still happens) we used to use charge books for making life a little bit easier. You just found the relevant offence you needed to charge someone with and then typed it onto the charge sheet directly from the charge book. It saved time actually looking up the wording from the law books.

I remember that genocide involved the transfer of people of a certain ( must specify) race or ethnic grouping from one place to another and under duress for gain .

The common offence that people think of as genocide........killing lots of people, is just murder.

I would have thought that when lots of people are killed at once, the people who give the orders are tracked down to just a few MURDERS and given time on that basis.

I suspect both Mr Starkey and the people throthing at him are thinking that genocide is murder. Strictly speaking then, the transfer of people across the Atlantic against their wishes is actually genocide.

Just a thought.
Poppycock. Genocide is murder. Check out the UN homepage on Crimes Against Humanity.

Or a dictionary.
 
It is and whilst that would have been enough for the far left to hang him - its not the actual problem bit of his speech

Even saying If it were genocide there would not be so many black people on Europe etc would not have been an issue to most - whether they agreed with his logic or not

But the statement so many damn blacks - smacks of racism
I tried to watch the whole thing but I get a subconscious urge to smack my elbow into his face when I listen too him... It's like Dawkins he pisses me off even when I agree with him.

I'd give him the benefit of the doubt .. just .. I think he was blindsided by his performance schtick.. the slightly barmy patrician great uncle thing.. The one where he uses 5 dollar words to say how speechlessly angry he is... If we'd been discussing the idea that Trump was running a Fascist thuggocracy; he would no doubt have wondered that if the knout was falling on the backs of the peasants and the jackboot was on the neck of the intelligentsia; how come there are so many whiny damn socialists on American TV... I think he automatically uses it as a comedic emphatic and his brain didn't intercept his mouth in time...

Of course If there's a repetition or he has form that might revoke his pass... :p :)
 
My bold ... true, but as a pleasant, educated (at LSE) Nigerian once told me after a verbal dispute with an Afro Caribbean worker one evening, it was mainly tribal criminals & useless ne'er-do-wells that were sold to save the tribe the problems as well.
He explained that his great grandfather, a tribal chief, had told him this and it was this inherent "bad blood" which gave the West Indians this characteristic!!
Working in Brent in the Met, I found that their was no love lost between West Africans and West Indians. Mind you they all hated Somalians. Especially the Dutch Somalis that started to move to the UK when the cloggies started cracking down after Pim Fortuyn was murdered, and started insisting that they learn Dutch and intergrate. Some of the most arrogant people that I have come across.
 
I think that both Mr Starkey and the people who oppose him may have misinterpreted the word genocide.

At one time ( maybe it still happens) we used to use charge books for making life a little bit easier. You just found the relevant offence you needed to charge someone with and then typed it onto the charge sheet directly from the charge book. It saved time actually looking up the wording from the law books.

I remember that genocide involved the transfer of people of a certain ( must specify) race or ethnic grouping from one place to another and under duress for gain .

The common offence that people think of as genocide........killing lots of people, is just murder.

I would have thought that when lots of people are killed at once, the people who give the orders are tracked down to just a few MURDERS and given time on that basis.

I suspect both Mr Starkey and the people throthing at him are thinking that genocide is murder. Strictly speaking then, the transfer of people across the Atlantic against their wishes is actually genocide.

Just a thought.
Well then I wonder what other bollocks was in your chargebook..

The UK has been a signatory to the UN Convention on the prevention and punishment of Genocide since 1970. That document contains the following definition :

"In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(6) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. "


I always wondered what happened to this chap...



Seems he got a job composing chargebooks...
 

Joker62

ADC
Book Reviewer
Although you obviously haven't spared a thought as to how that culture developed, nor for all the ancient, and often very advanced, cultures that were "watered down/destroyed" or had "foreign" attitudes forced upon them by the arrival of the much-lauded British Empire.

MsG
And now we are supposed to allow "foreign" attitudes to "water down" our culture, by that I mean the cases of knifings that have increased, bombings and general fuckwittery?
What you are saying in that statement above is "we did it to them so they are allowed to do it to us", 2 wrongs don't make a right!
 

Latest Threads

Top