Best to focus on what people do actually do and say rather than coulda shoulda, it's so easy to misrepresent people isn't it?

"Why should we not form a secret society with but one object," he once said, "the furtherance of the British Empire and the bringing of the whole world under British rule, for the recovery of the United States, for making the Anglo-Saxon race but one Empire?"

Gotta love the Aryan dream.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-32131829

Oh Kizzy... you could talk a pie off a shelf.

Nope, never heard that before.

Is that you saying you agree? :)

Next they will want to take down our town centre Jimmy Saville statue

its pc gone mad

How can a man who founded free Scholarships for underprivileged students from the Colonies, Germany and the USA to the tune of one billion dollars of his own money be classed as anything other than a 'benevolent benefactor' (whatever this means means:laugh:) - in this one charitable act alone.

Yes - pull down his statue, rewrite history, and STOP thousands of the poor and unfortunate in life from availing themselves of a free education. :facepalm:

Pardon the pun, but this issue is not so black and white. Apartheid was undeniably a heinous regime, but once the detestable whites abdicated power, was South Africa TRULY a better place or worse?

Or did it largely remain unchanged, with blacks ill treating other blacks or blacks murdering other blacks, where once such appalling injustices were once the exclusive preserve of the ruling whites?

There are very few truly wealthy men in history who amassed such fortunes morally and/or legitimately - including many non-whites. How many of these found free education for ALL colours with a billion of their own money?

'benevolent benefactor' (whatever this means means :laugh:)'

'The actions of Rhodes and his BSAC forever changed the face of Southern Africa and the lives of its inhabitants. He built a large empire in Southern Africa, but in doing so he disregarded the rights of the people—the “natives,” as he referred to them—already living on the lands that he claimed. Rhodes’s treaties with the various African chiefs tended to be of dubious legality, and he routinely pushed against or ignored established boundaries with other European colonial powers, which sometimes put him at odds with Britain’s Foreign Office. Some of the legislation passed while he was prime minister of the Cape laid the groundwork for the discriminatory apartheid policies of South Africa in the 20th century.

A legacy of a different nature was revealed when Rhodes’s will was read in April 1902, detailing an imaginative scheme of awarding scholarships at Oxford to young men from the colonies and from the United States and Germany. That appealed to the public instinct for a more-disinterested kind of imperialism. Most of his fortune was devoted to the scholarships. As the will forbade disqualification on grounds of race, many nonwhite students have benefited from the scholarships, though it is doubtful that such was Rhodes’s intention. He once defined his policy as “equal rights for every white man south of the Zambezi” and later, under liberal pressure, amended “white” to “civilized.” But he probably regarded the possibility of native Africans becoming “civilized” as so remote that the two expressions, in his mind, came to the same thing.'

http://www.britannica.com/biography/Cecil-Rhodes

So let me get this article straight. Shall we start with FACTS?:

1) Rhodes left a will.
2) His will detailed an imaginative scheme of awarding scholarships at Oxford to young men from the colonies and from the United States and Germany.
3) Most of his fortune was devoted to the Scholarships.

So the above is merely exactly have I have said twice already then.

Now we'll come to the article's 'muddled bit' - the bit of deceitful 'double speak':

"As the will forbade disqualification on grounds of race, many nonwhite students have benefited from the scholarships, though[B] it is doubtful that such was Rhodes’s intention."

??????????

Q. Whose will was this?
A. Rhode's will.

Q. So who was the architect of the will and the author of the clause which 'forbade disqualification' to these free scholarships of Rhodes on the grounds of race'?
A. That's right - Rhodes himself.

It was Rhodes will. It was Rhodes money, and it was Rhodes himself who stipulated that NO ONE would be barred from his scholarships because of race.

This **** piece of propaganda makes it appear as if 'The Will' itself was a living, breathing entity and that it was 'The Will' NOT Rhodes himself which forbade disqualification to these scholarships because of race, so that non-white students only benefited by default.

How bent and devious can a writer get?

Rhodes STIPULATED the 'No bar because of colour clause' in his own will his so that coloured students could qualify for his free scholarships , but this article deceitfully tries to persuade the reader that: " it is doubtful that such was Rhodes’s intention."

And by doing so, the bent author moves seamlessly from FACT to dishonest FICTION.

:facepalm:

'As for women and minorities, the former were not permitted to apply according to the strict wording of Rhodes’ will; the latter, while theoretically accepted under article 24, which reads, “No student shall be qualified or disqualified for election to a Scholarship on account of his race or religious opinions,”(Schaeper and Schaeper 1998, 18) were limited by the racial realities of the countries and institutions from whence they came. For instance, although the first black Scholar from the U.S., Alain LeRoy Locke, was selected in 1907, the Scholarship was not awarded to another black American until 1962. This racial disparity was due, in part, to the fact that the majority of the awards were handed out to traditionally white institutions. Traditionally black institutions, meanwhile, often did not have campus representatives whose role it was to inform their students of the opportunities afforded by the Rhodes Scholarship. As American colleges began to desegregate and admit more minority students, an increasing number of minorities applied to and won the Rhodes Scholarship.'

'On this issue, South Africa posed a particular problem. Unlike any other jurisdiction to which Scholarships were allocated, South Africa had to select four out of its five Scholars from among the graduates of the four private boys’ secondary schools that had been named in Rhodes’ will. As these schools did not admit black students, the Scholars selected from their ranks were uniformly white, and the fact that South Africa was under apartheid left little doubt that the fifth Scholar selected would be white as well. Not until the 1960s was there any great global criticism of the South African selection process. When there finally was an outcry, the Trustees remonstrated that they lacked the authority to change the terms of Rhodes’ will; this could only be accomplished by amending the original piece of legislation under which his will was administered. Despite the Trustees’ argument that selecting Scholars from these schools defeated the real purpose of Rhodes’ will, the British courts maintained that it was the Trust’s duty to faithfully execute the will as written.

In the 1970s, in an effort to remedy the situation, the Trustees created four new “South-Africa-at-large” Scholarships, to which candidates from anywhere in the country could apply and be considered by a national committee made up of black, as well as white, selectors. Additionally, the Rhodes Trust allocated monies for the creation of the Rhodes Trust Scholarships to fund the university study of promising black candidates and hopefully nurture the development of black Rhodes Scholars. Not until the end of apartheid in 1991, however, was there a significant diversification in South African Scholars.'

http://rhodesproject.com/history-of-...ship-part-two/

[Political Correctness Gone Mad Mode]Of course they should remove the statue of this DWEM* along with all other statues of DWEM's

Only racist bigots will disagree

End OF[/[Political Correctness Gone Mad Mode]

Excuse me I seem to be foaming at the mouth.....:bored:

So goes the argument of some on that campus.


* DWEM (Dead White European Male) Google it...

I'd imagine just about everyone held views that aren't acceptable now back when he was alive, the world was a very different place. Perhaps instead they could stick an information board near the statue detailing his views to educate people on his history rather than tearing it down? There are a lot of bad people terrorising living people in the world today, surely it would be a better use of time to campaign against those rather than a man who has been dead for an awfully long time. :shrug:

..I don't know, this all seems like a misplaced focus to me..I know what he symbolises but I doubt he's the only one who has been a dubious patron of the university...ok, the only one with a statue erected for him but it's only a piece of stone and won't change anything whether it's there or not...how much money would it cost to take it down from a Grade II listed building, quite a bit I would imagine and who will fund it, the university...just seems silly in a world of limited money that some is used to destroy something, no matter what it is when it could be used to build instead...to build some lives..so many people who don't even have a roof to live under, let alone a university education so why not use that money, wherever it's coming from to do something that would change something, would make a difference, rather than to destroy..


..I mean I do understand the offence and why the students are offended but they have the privilege of what they have and of being there so what their offence compared to using some funds that would have been used on this, to make real differences to people who have nothing of what they have and a completely different future to them, in fact no future at all...I just can't see the sense in money being used to destroy when there is so much need in the world...

But that Young Black Student (a Trouble Maker)
on Ch4NewsHD
was being Political.
Even though a Black Lady next to him told him
he is wrong.

..so it's just one student then..and the title says 'students', this is an outrage Arista, I'm all raged out ....

He is their Leader
there is a group of Political Students doing this Protest
getting Worldwide News to visit them,

..it's a piece of stone and being there or not won't change the past or make any difference to the present or the future so maybe a focus on something that would or could for people whose only privilege in life at the moment is that they have breath...

..there is just not enough money in the world, there just isn't so why use some to tear down/destroy..use it to build lives...

Yes but this Young Black Student
at the Rhodes College
says its Insulting him
and MUST be taken down.



"This is what Isis do"
Jon Snow Told him.

Bored students always need something to 'campaign' against or protest about.If it was'nt this it would be something else.

Yes but he is on Loads on news Ch's
with his Mantra


So these days bringing in China TV
and Africa TV news
helps this trouble maker
get on our UK Ch4HD News

By acknowledging it as wrong might be a start I'd say.


Rhodes used legislation like the Glen Grey Act to have Blacks forcibly removed to reserves. He introduced policies to segregate non-whites in schools, hospitals, theatres, and public transport, imposed draconian labour laws, forced Blacks to carry passes, and removed thousands from the Cape Colony’s electoral rolls. He explained to the Cape Town Parliament in 1887 that “We must adopt a system of despotism, such as works so well in India, in our relations with the barbarians of South Africa.”

http://oxpaf.com/2015/06/18/why-must...all-in-oxford/

"Cape Town Parliament in 1887"


Its Fecking 2015 now Kizzy


Everyone has said keep our History
You are crazy to say take it down

Who's everyone...
If everyone was saying keep it there would be no issue would there?

I quoted his words, in this instance actions don't speak louder, they reveal the truth behind a legacy.

Everyone Knows he was Evil towards Blacks
BUT no one wants the statue down - but You



Thats what ISIS do remove all History

Shocking

That's not strictly true is it?

The Jon Snow soundbite isn't gospel Arista.
'Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.'

I doubt it is only black students demanding it be taken down.