GROWING up in Newcastle in a time of mass unemployment, I disliked statues. For me they represented the upper classes – representations of the wealthy, the rich and powerful who had benefited from the labour of ordinary people.
The more I read, the less I liked them. Many of the individuals looking down on us were old imperialists, often racist, often, as I saw it, responsible for wars and acts of barbarism at home and abroad.
The difference between now and then is that not too long ago these feelings of injustice were channelled through campaigns to challenge the ideas and institutions of society with politics, arguments and ideas, in an attempt to change the nature of society. There were few if any attempts to pull down statues.
Today, helped by the modern elite, concerns about injustice and inequality are channelled through the psychological language of “offence”, a sentiment or attitude that is more inclined to limit debates, indeed to close them down.
What is at times called the politics of recognition engages with our emotions, encouraging a sense of hurt and a demand for censorship and the annihilation of anything that offends us.
In this respect the reaction following the brutal killing of George Floyd should come as no surprise.
Following decades of laws, police practices, institutional codes of conduct, sackings and the imprisonment of “offenders”, those who literally no-platformed the Colston statue were simply carrying out the emotionalised politics of recognition in a dramatic form.
See how many of the elite stood back, applauded the action or set about creating commissions to tear down more monuments. Even the police bent the knee to the sense of hurt being expressed. And now the dustbin of history is filling up with TV programmes and films deemed inappropriate for our more “caring” times.
Modern tolerance sounds radical but is profoundly reactionary. The issues addressed are often ones we rightly feel strongly about – racism, sexism, homophobia are things most people oppose. The method of opposition is however deeply intolerant, censorious and infantilising.
Of course you cannot create a tolerant society through the police, you cannot create a more just society by destroying anyone and anything you dislike. We cannot grow, develop and advance society by creating safe spaces everywhere and for everyone.
We don’t need more safe spaces, we need public spaces where people can discuss not destroy the past. Only then do we have a chance of making a better future.
Our columns are a platform for writers to express their opinions. They do not necessarily represent the views of The Herald
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here