My mate called me a stump the other day, I found that quite amusing
Stump is good. The missus was saying she likes English because literally any word can become an insult.
Stump is good. The missus was saying she likes English because literally any word can become an insult.
We used to say stoat quite a lot but it's not said much now. Used wasp for years even prior to the arrival of the actual Wasps
Unfortunately we appear to be breeding a country of bigots which is totally unhealthy. Have debate, have disagreements but listen to people’s views (with some exceptions ie when deeply intentionally offensive etc) and form your own judgement and respect that others will form theirs.
David Starkey next on the block, though harder to argue against.
David Starkey dropped by publisher and university positions after racist remarks
David Starkey dropped by publisher and university positions after racist remarks
who'd have thought that David Starkey being interviewed by Darren Grimes would take such a turn?
I would say I'm not entirely sure why you'd review his backlist in the light of those comments. They're either with academic merit... or not!
Was the main issue with his use of the term genocide?
Clearly the slave trade was hideous and wrong on SO many levels (and i do not support what he said or seemingly stands for), but i think he has a point - while there were many deaths, i'm not sure commoditisation and "ownership" of a human race is the same as genocide.
I do agree that it is semantics, but possibly correct by the exact accepted definition (see our earlier debate on Anti-semitism vs criticism of the actions of the Israeli state)
Article Two of the UN Convention on Genocide (1951) defines it as
"any of the following acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such":
Clearly the slave trade was hideous and wrong on SO many levels (and i do not support what he said or seemingly stands for), but i think he has a point - while there were many deaths, i'm not sure commoditisation and "ownership" of a human race is the same as genocide.
I do agree that it is semantics, but possibly correct by the exact accepted definition (see our earlier debate on Anti-semitism vs criticism of the actions of the Israeli state)
Article Two of the UN Convention on Genocide (1951) defines it as
"any of the following acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such":
- Killing members of the group
- Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group
- Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part
- Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group
- Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group
Poor old Hutch......and I bet Huggy Bear is fuming
The wife teaches History and said he’s always been known in the history community to be like this.
Yeah can’t argue with that one. Starkey knows what he’s doing and has made a career out of being “controversial”, that’s clear racism. Don’t think his work should be removed or anything though, let it stand on its academic merit (I have no idea of its academic merit)
He’s known to be one of the best scholars in his field. Outside of that he’s known for having quite controversial views.
If anyone is a bit of history buff, his book ‘Monarchy’ is interesting.
Shoulda read his fucking quote, shouldn't i?
But would he have been right if he hadn't spoilt it with the last bit?? Slavery is not necessarily genocide?
But would he have been right if he hadn't spoilt it with the last bit?? Slavery is not necessarily genocide?
His initial point was probably technically correct and he wouldn't have been involved in the shit storm he is now if he hadn't added the 'damn blacks' comment at the end that's for sure.
Was a disgusting thing to say and his contempt for black people was evident.
Always thought of him as a pompous bellend (and VERY gammony!!) - no loss to academia or broadcasting.
I’ve listened and seen some of his stuff on Tudors for example and it’s been really good. I had no idea about the other bits until I heard the quote.
He’s said equally offensive things on QT in the past I think
He seems to be a good historian. Unfortunately it appears that may be because he lives in the past.
Yeah it's the tone of it and way it was said. Clearly derogatory, bloke seems like an old nonce.
Eh, got to be more than that surely. Found the tweet and it can’t be just for this
Last edited:
Here we go again - but is that actually insulting? A trifle predatory, maybe, but asking someone if they'd like to join you for your favourite meal??
I think there was a Twitter pile on on Patel calling her a coconut and Khan joined in with his tweet about curry.
Its not that it’s the fact he’s implying with his picture that she wouldn’t like a curry, implying she’s a coconut. Weird thing is I’m not sure how it’s different to the woke position of “whiteness”, which wouldn’t get you cancelled but I find just as racist (or not).
