If you would like to join our DDU Arts, Academic or Education Groups please get in touch!
Some good news this week as we hear that the Law Commission has decided to NOT extend the reach of Hate Crime legislation into the privacy of our homes. We can rest at ease (for now) that dinner party arguments won’t end in criminal charges. Maybe the Law Commission has taken note of public submissions to their consultation? DDU’s submission can be read here.
The debate about statues rumbles on. Robert Jenrick’s plans to make full planning permission a requirement for the removal of public statues has met with disagreement from representatives from the City of London Corporation. Kate Maltby offers some reflections on both sides of the debate and concludes that while the past cannot be erased via removing statues, nor can we say that public statues are devoid of any political spin. Meanwhile, a researcher at UCL‘s project on the legacies of slave-ownership argues Jenrick’s proposals are anti-democratic. Many deny that there is a culture war, or that anything is at risk of being removed. Maybe they should have a look at Policy Exchange’s History Matters Project. Or read how some allegedly ‘public’ inquiries, such as the held by Oxford with regards to the Rhodes statue, are anything but, as one DDU supporter found out.
It is shocking that celebrating the philanthropic efforts of Captain Sir Tom Moore should have been met by some with cynicism and boorish, offensive comments. In Scotland a man faces criminal charges for his comment that the only good British soldier is ‘a deed one’. And in London, a clergyman, Jarel Robinson-Brown faced calls for his removal from post because of his reference to ‘White Nationalism’. Both are cruel and offensive comments, but Nick Buckly, MBE, speaking from personal experience, argues that neither should be criminalised. Nor should offence be grounds for calling for people to lose their jobs. As he writes, in the words of Ghandi, ‘An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind’.