Rhodes must fall

I'm 100% certain that if Rhodes lived to this day, he wouldn't have expected the level of integration between races in society. Is it fair to say that the scholarship put in place to uphold and better a white Britain ?

I take it that the Egyptian pyramids should also be torn down?

So you want to cleanse the country of any historical references you happen to disagree with, but only ones that people who you perceive to be less intelligent would understand? How patronising.

To destroy a statue is an attempt at "erasing all traces of a frightful past'. Where do we draw the line at what is considered artistic homage and destruction?

That's down to the building owners and the planning authorities (DCLG) - stating that "it can't happen because listed" is overstating the restrictions on altering listed buildings.

The building itself was hated (even by the college that paid for it!) when it was first built: https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1046662
"Whatever the actual merits of the design, Champneys' intransigence ensured the building a frosty reception from his clients: already reviled on the drawing board, anticipated with foreboding whilst in progress, it was ridiculed on completion. The Oriel Record for March 1910, includes a frontispiece of the street façade and calls it a 'compromise', as did the college Treasurer, also in print; the Record of September 1911 comments that 'The New Buildings are now a fait accompli, and all that remains is to get accustomed to them'. Other critcisms followed, but Evelyn Waugh trumped them all in 1930, suggesting that 'a very small expenditure on dynamite should be enough to rid us forever of... the High Street front of Oriel..'"

The listing itself refers to Rhodes controversial status in history - I wouldn't be surprised if a thoughtful application for some amendments (including the removal of his statue to a museum) would be approved. Grade II* listed alterations far beyond that and for far sillier reasons have been approved in the past.

I'm sure an appeal could be made and that the situation would change greatly if more publicity were raised.

If there were more publicity over this matter you and your fellow-travellers would probably be lynched. The world doesn't share your desire to hide our history in a politically-correct cellar somewhere.

Rhodes was a monster. Many people think so.

You're being a bureaucratic busybody! It would be a disaster if people always confined themselves to the rules on things and stopped there - I'm sure an appeal could be made and that the situation would change greatly if more publicity were raised.

Well, the Middle East branch of the Remove the Statues Campaign has already made a start on such expressions of alien domination as churches, temples and government buildings in Palmyria, Mosul and elsewhere in Iraq and Syria (and also in Afghanistan). Once they extend their sway to Egypt I am quite sure that the pyramids will be re-purposed as hard core in new roads or the foundations of mosques, houses and offices.

Presumably, they are in daily contact with their brothers-in-arms in the NUS.

You're being a bureaucratic busybody!

You'd be hard pushed to find any support for this outside the pople that already care.

Most people support places like National Heritage so wouldn't be so willing to see parts of our history (especially one that is already protected) treated in such an awful manner as the way these people are suggesting

Many people think Churchill was a monster, yet he was voted the greatest-ever Briton. Campaigning to remove the Rhodes statue while benefiting from his endowment, as some students are, is particularly hypocritical and, frankly, nasty.

You iconoclasts should try and do something a bit more positive with your energies.

You'd be hard pushed to find any support for this outside the people that already care.

Most people support places like National Heritage so wouldn't be so willing to see parts of our history (especially one that is already protected) treated in such an awful manner as the way these people are suggesting

How is putting a statue into a museum treating historic artifacts in an awful way?

By pointing out that Grade II* listed status doesn't preclude alterations to a building and stating that it does is misrepresenting what listed building status involves?

Globally I'm sure there would be support and we are inhabitating a globalised world so it's not that out of the question. Only experimenting could really determine how it would go...

The rest of the world doesn't dictate what we do with our heritage.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Globally I'm sure there would be support and we are inhabitating a globalised world so it's not that out of the question. Only experimenting could really determine how it would go...

Do you also think the statues of Queen Victoria should be removed? and Churchill? and George Washington in the USA?

You won't find a single historical character that is completely clean. Many had their flaws, but their statues have been erected to celebrate their accomplishments. By bequeathing his wealth to Oxford in order to create the first international scholarship program, Rhodes undeniably made a good action - this is what his statue represents.

Moreover, at his time, South Africa was a very well advanced country in the world. It is only later that its leaders rejected progress and South Africa thus became an anachronistic regime, but Rhodes is not responsible for what South Africa became after he died.

Times have changed, this is precisely why we shouldn't judge historical characters by our modern standards. Otherwise, you can say that statues of Disraeli, Gladstone & co. must be removed because they were misogynist and against democracy, whereas their ideas were just mainstream at the time. And you can do that for pretty much any historical character.