The ‘We cannot afford’ line is the key part of this doublespeak

WITH Bristol City Council’s finances stretched to breaking point, even with the maximum allowed council tax rises each year (4.99% this year), what has the mayor / deputy mayor announced?

Yes, there will be cuts in services and hikes in charges but plans are also afoot for a custom-built bespoke ‘new museum or storyhouse’ and memorial that addresses the city’s slave trading history (Bristol Post, March 28).

The deputy mayor, leader of the ‘Legacy Steering Group’ set up in 2019 to look at this issue, announced this, saying “We cannot afford to do something so important on the cheap” and seemingly distanced the plan from the recent Abolition Shed Collective’s proposals to convert the semi-derelict Seamen’s Mission building into such a museum.

I would suggest that the ‘We cannot afford’ is the key part of this doublespeak, especially when this proposed expansion of the museum service comes just a year after the mayor was proposing a 10% cut in museum spending!

In a recent letter critiquing the Abolition Shed Collective’s proposals I said that the city should do more to publicly acknowledge its role in the Transatlantic Slave Trade and its abolition, but needs to do so in a practicable / sustainable way (I have previously made suggestions for this to the deputy mayor but had no reply) which is also truly educational – helping us to understand this history in the context of its times and the standards of those times.

I suggested that the Abolition Shed Collective’s plans would instead produce a ‘white elephant’ and ‘indoctrination centre.’

Having read the deputy mayor’s announcement, which made no mention of the important work of the Bristol abolitionists, I suggest the council’s effort will be even worse – a simplistic and highly selective ‘story’ will be told in the ‘story-house’ (I predict it will not be worthy of the words ‘history’ and ‘museum’) with an overarching victim and shaming narrative and call for ‘reparative justice.’

Their ‘story’ will use ‘Transatlantic Trafficking of Enslaved Afrikans (TTEA)’ rather than the widely recognised description ‘Transatlantic Slave Trade’ to avoid the concept of trade and thence the African / Arab involvement in the capturing and selling ‘supply’ part of this.

This modern terminology is also to make us think of this as if it was happening now rather than centuries ago when slavery was rife in many parts of the world, including within Africa, and living conditions and life expectancy were poor for many in society here too (think children up chimneys, down the mines, clearing debris from under working looms, and hanging as a punishment for minor as well as major crimes).

I could go on with describing how this will be indoctrination rather than true education but instead I recommend articles by Professor Robert Tombs (including Today’s History Wars: ideology, propaganda, careerism and The International Slavery Museum about the shortcomings of Liverpool’s ‘story-house’) on the excellent History Reclaimed website, which fights against the abuse and perversion of history for presentday political ends.

Julian Hill

Knowle