Arts, Britain, Education, History, India, Literature, Poetry

Snowflake students censor ‘racist’ Kipling

RUDYARD KIPLING

Intro: Students at Manchester University have painted over classic verses of Kipling’s IF poem that was put on the wall of the university to inspire hard work.

STUDENTS have been branded “snowflakes” after removing a poem by the Victorian writer Rudyard Kipling from a university wall over claims that he was “racist”.

Undergraduates at the University of Manchester painted over a mural featuring the celebrated poem “IF” in their students’ union. Students feared it would upset ethnic minorities.

The 1895 work contains no reference to race, but the students said it was still offensive because some of Kipling’s other works are about colonialism.

His 1899 poem The White Man’s Burden has been criticised in modern times for advocating colonialism and portraying other races as inferior.

It is the latest in a string of similar incidents involving students trying to remove references to controversial historical figures at universities.

Kipling’s IF gives advice about how to be a strong and resilient man and has often been used to inspire young people, because it advocates self-discipline and hard work.

Staff at the students’ union commissioned a local artist to paint it to motivate undergraduates in their studies.

But the union’s student representatives complained that they had not been consulted and decided to have it removed.

They replaced it with the 1978 poem “Still I Rise” by American civil rights activist Maya Angelou, which was read by Nelson Mandela at his presidential inauguration in 1994.

A Welfare officer from the university told The Tab website: “We noticed an artist had painted a Rudyard Kipling poem in the students’ union. This was done without our consultation or approval.

“This was especially problematic given the poet’s imperialistic and racist work such as The White Man’s Burden, where Kipling explains how it is the responsibility of white men to ‘civilise’ black and Asian people through colonialism.

“We decided to paint over that poem and replace it with Still I Rise by Maya Angelou, a poem about resilience and overcoming our history by a brilliant black woman.”

A spokesperson for the union said: “We understand that we made a mistake in our approach to a recent piece of artwork by failing to garner student opinion at the start of a new project. We accept that the result was inappropriate and for that we apologise.”

It was added that the union would make changes to “guarantee that student voices are heard and considered properly” so that “every outcome is representative of our membership”.

“We’re working closely with the union’s elected officers to learn all we can from this situation and are looking forward to introducing powerful, relevant and meaningful art installations across the student’s union building over the coming months.”

Chris McGovern, of the Campaign for Real Education, criticised the Manchester students, saying: “This is outrageous cultural vandalism. Kipling is a much beloved poet.

“These students are closing off access to one of our most popular poems and it is Liberal Fascism.

“They are snowflakes who should not be indulged. Forcing your views on other people should have no place in British society.”

The University of Manchester said it would not be appropriate to comment because the students’ union is an independent body.

It comes after Oxford University students led an unsuccessful campaign to tear down a statue of the 19th century imperialist Cecil Rhodes. They also forced the university authorities to move a portrait of Theresa May by putting up signs saying she was “hostile” to immigrants.

At Bristol, students tried to force the authorities to change the name of a building named after benefactor Henry Overton Wills III, a cigarette maker whose family company was said to have benefitted from slavery.

Critics have said it is wrong for students to try to censor the past and that they should instead view writers and figures in their historical context.

 

ONCE revered as the Bard of Empire, Rudyard Kipling has often been viewed as something of an embarrassment in the post-colonial world.

Critics often point to his poem Gunga Din (1890), which is written from the point of view of an English soldier in India about an Indian water-bearer, and lines from his novel Kim (1901) such as “My experience is that one can never fathom the Oriental mind” as examples of how he was a racist. But academics also say that he had a deep infinity with India and was often affectionate towards the Indian subjects of his work.

Rana Mitter, professor of the history and politics of modern China at Oxford University, who has a Bengali family background, describes Kipling as “very respectful of India as a culture and society”.

Professor Mitter said: “Kipling understood India better than his British contemporaries. If you read a poem like Gunga Din you’ll see that it isn’t contemptuous of India at all, but is respectful.

“However, Kipling was a product of late-Victorian Britain and had prejudices that were commonplace at that time.”

The Oxford University professor has also said that Kipling’s “The Ballad Of East And West”, which contains the famous line “East is East and West is West and never the twain shall meet”, is more problematic.

Born in Bombay in 1865, Kipling was sent away to school in England when he was five.

In 1882 he returned to India, where he worked for newspapers. Aside from his poetry, among his best-known work is The Jungle Book from 1894, which became a children’s classic and inspired a film produced by Walt Disney in 1967. He died in 1936.

. Appendage

IF

Standard
Britain, Government, Russia, Society

The UK is being dragged into new Cold War with Russia by the truth

BRITISH-RUSSIAN RELATIONS

THE Kremlin continues to dismiss accusations that its agents were behind the Salisbury chemical weapons attack with a mixture of threats, bad satire and misinformation, including the idea it is all an anti-Russian conspiracy.

Meanwhile, the police in Britain have been doing their job, trying to find out who attempted to murder former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia, and who was responsible for the death of Dawn Sturgess and the poisoning of her partner Charlie Rowley with the same Novichok nerve agent, in nearby Amesbury.

Now detectives have identified several suspects who they believe to be Russian, a move that seems certain to ramp up tensions with Moscow.

Anyone taken in by the bizarre notion that the UK was behind the sinister poisonings in an attempt to discredit Moscow only needs to take a vague look at the ongoing chaos at Westminster to realise the Government is in no fit shape to plot such a grandiose scheme, even if it wanted to be.

What is certain, however, is that Britain is being dragged, against its will, into a deepening diplomatic crisis with Russia by evidence and truth, while the Kremlin continues to respond with obfuscation.

Standard
Britain, Economic, European Union, Government, Politics, Society

Leavers say a Brexit no-deal would not be a disaster

BREXIT

LEADING Brexiteers have declared that there is nothing to fear if Britain leaves the EU without a deal.

After a tumultuous last few days in which Theresa May’s Chequers plan has been under fire from Remainers and Leavers alike, a poll shows growing public support for walking away from the negotiations.

It found twice as many voters now back leaving the EU without a deal.

Senior Eurosceptic MPs said it was proof that the PM should accelerate contingency planning for a no-deal scenario.

Remainers have long argued that the consequences of a no deal would be catastrophic for the economy. But leading Brexiteers have admitted that, although it could be bumpy in the short term, Britain could thrive in the long run. Former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith said: “If we don’t have a trade deal with the EU then we simply trade on World Trade Organisation terms, which is how most countries trade with each other.

“It wouldn’t be bedlam. All this talk about crashing out with no deal – we’re not crashing, we’re moving to WTO rules, which is how all EU-US trade is governed at the moment.”

Former Cabinet minister Priti Patel said: “We should be free to forge new trade deals around the world and leave the protectionism of the EU. This is a positive thing we should be celebrating.”

The ComRes poll found 39 per cent think the Prime Minister “should accept a no-deal and the UK simply leave the EU”. Just 20 per cent want her to push on with the White Paper, which critics say is a “half in, half out” Brexit.

More than half of Tory voters (51 per cent) back no deal, compared to one in four (26 percent) of Labour supporters.

A quarter of voters want the PM to ask for an extension to the March deadline for a deal.

John Longworth, of Leave Means Leave, and a former head of the British Chambers of Commerce, said: “There would be a little border disruption if we leave without a deal, but nothing like as bad as Remainers say it would be – and the upsides would be considerable.

“We could free our economy from EU regulations and do huge free-trade deals with the US, Australia, New Zealand and Canada.”

What would happen if we just walked away?

. The Divorce Bill

Leaving without a deal would mean an immediate Brexit on March 29 after tearing up a 21-month transition agreement. This included giving £39billion to the EU, which ministers would no longer have to pay, a House of Lords report claims.

. Customs & Trade

The Chequers agreement effectively proposed keeping Britain in the single market for goods and agriculture to preserve “frictionless” trade and to protect the economy.

Customs checks on cross-Channel freight would cause havoc at ports, hitting food supplies and other goods.

Britain could waive customs checks on EU produce to free up backlogs, but it is equitable to ask whether Brussels would do the same for us?

. Tariffs

All EU-UK trade in goods is free of tariffs in the single market.

Trade would revert to World Trade Organisation Rules. The EU would charge import tariffs averaging 2-3 per cent on goods, but up to 60 per cent for some agricultural produce, damaging UK exporters.

We have a trade deficit with the EU of some £71billion – they sell us more than we sell them – so the EU overall would lose out.

German cars and French agriculture would be worst hit, as would UK regions with large export industries. Tariffs could also mean price inflation. But UK trade with the EU is 13 per cent of GDP and falling compared to non-EU trade, which generates a surplus and is likely to grow. The outlook would be boosted by Britain’s ability to strike trade deals.

. Immigration

The UK would immediately have control over its borders and freedom to set migration policy on all EU migrants.

UK nationals would likely lose their right to live and work in the EU. There would be legal uncertainty for the 1.3million Britons living in the EU and the 3.7million EU nationals here.

. City of London

Many firms have already made contingency plans for a no deal, but there would probably be a significant degree of disruption and an economic hit.

Ministers would likely take an axe to tax and regulations to preserve the UK’s economic advantage.

. Aeroplanes

Fears of planes not being able to fly appear far-fetched – unless the EU is determined to destroy both business and tourism. Rules to keep planes in the air are likely to be agreed. The EU has many deals with non-EU countries as part of its Open Skies regime.

. European Courts

Britain would be free from the edicts of the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg and all EU laws. Parliament would be sovereign.

. Farming & Fishing

The UK would quit the Common Agricultural Policy, which gives farmers and landowners £3billion in subsidies. Ministers would come under pressure to continue a form of subsidy.

. Northern Ireland

Northern Ireland would be outside the EU, with no arrangements on how to manage 300 crossing points on the 310-mile border.

The EU would want Ireland to impose customs and other checks to protect the bloc’s borders – something it has said it will not do. No deal could blow a hole in the Good Friday Agreement, with pressure on all sides to find a compromise.

Standard