Read on Twitter
The replies to this tweet/op-ed are full of people reminding David Lammy about the shocking abuse of the Bengalis by Churchill, and reminding us of some of his greatest, racist quotes. This prompts a quick thought... 1/n https://twitter.com/davidlammy/status/1336299592258887683
Perhaps we tolerate obvious rights-abusers like Churchill in our national story because, regardless of the bad things they did, they set us on a trajectory that we nevertheless approve of (at least in the context that Lammy is talking about in the article). 2/n
We celebrate Churchill’s promotion of human rights and overlook his violations because (done right) they lead inexorably towards a situation where Churchill’s own abuse of colonised people would be prevented or punished. 3/n
I think people like Thomas Jefferson might fall into the same category. How come a slave-owning rapist still gets venerated? I think possibly because a repudiation of those evils follows from Jefferson’s own philosophy. 4/n
By promoting a system of government based on the ‘self evident’ truth that ‘all men are created equal’ Jefferson sowed the seeds of the abandonment of the practices he indulged in. 5/n
I think this is a preferable way to discuss these men: They did awful things, but they somehow made *us* better. 6/n
The alternative is either to write off all their political work as tainted by their personal abuses; or to somehow write off those abuses with the “they were just a product of their time” cliche. 7/n
I should add for the avoidance of doubt that of course none of this seeks to excuse the outrages committed by Churchill or Jefferson. Rather, I’m trying to describe the discourse and defend continuing engagement with their ideas. 8/n
Because that’s the thing: their ideas are worth discussing, and promoting, and saving. Precisely because (I repeat) they’re the ideas that would stop slavery and the abuses inherent in colonialism. 9/n
I’m not a historian so it’s probably perilous for me to extemporise half formed thoughts on such subjects. But this is Twitter and someone might help me iterate towards a more refined version of this; or else, debunk it. 10/end.
