National Trust Vs Right Wing Restore Trust

voted yesterday. each candidate standing for election has space for a small bio so that you can read who they are, and what they've done in the past and so forth. Not one of the candidates of Restore Trust use the space to announce their involvement in that organisation.

Which says something to me, at least.

Haven't voted yet, but intend to this week.

Not one of the candidates of Restore Trust use the space to announce their involvement in that organisation.

You're right, says everything.

Being 'woke' at the national trust amounts to just recognising the true history of some of these properties, not 'cancelling Britishness'.
These people are clearly too spineless to actually reveal that their motive is to keep history nice and white washed.

Did you see that some supporters of the Restore Trust are using the hashtag #empirestrikesback on twitter 🤦‍♂️

So, what, they're Palpatine and the forces of Darth Vader?

Sounds about right

Haven't read it ,who is the most bike friendly?

Not one of the candidates of Restore Trust use the space to announce their involvement in that organisation.

Yes, it seems odd that Stephen Green doesn't mention it in his diatribe/supporting statement. His spiel is an absolute gem, if any of the other 45 candidates hold similar views they're being a lot more circumspect about it.

Stephen Green is the leader of Christian Voice he's been accused  by his former wife of (amongst other things)  domestic abuse. Seems an ideal candidate, and a lovely bloke...

Restore Trust list which candidates they back as below...so makes it very easy to know exactly who to avoid.

Michael Goodhart

Stephen Green

Min Grimshaw

David Pearson

Andrew Powles

Guy Trehane

45 candidates hold similar views they’re being a lot more circumspect about it.

The countryside alliance tried pulled a similar trick years ago trying to reverse the ban on hunting on NT land. Their candidates on the whole didn’t announce their real agenda either.

The NT are starting to integrate the interests of multiple user groups into the management of their land but it's a slow process.

Stephen Green also lobbied against the marital rape legislation - so comes as no surprise he doesn't want the trust to focus on the history of female oppression and the suffragettes.

Wow he's a real piece of work eh https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Voice_(UK)

From Wiki:

After the appearance of Green on Question Time in September 2005

Wow. Not exactly due diligence on the part of the producers there.

Basically the UK equivalent of the Westboro Baptist Church given a national audience.

Being ‘woke’ at the national trust amounts to just recognising the true history of some of these properties, not ‘cancelling Britishness’.

Not everyone agrees with the constant focus on the ills of the Atlantic slave trade and colonialism. The politicisation of the NT if you like.

Wow. Not exactly due diligence on the part of the producers there.

Well...

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/ourbeeb/is-question-time-s-audience-producer-really-fascist/

The politicisation of the NT if you like.

Funny world we are in where telling the truth in a balanced way is seen as politicisation.

Not everyone agrees with the constant focus on the ills of the Atlantic slave trade and colonialism. The politicisation of the NT if you like.

It's not political to be asking that the history we are presented with is fair and balanced. It's not political to point out that people who were honoured and enriched were also responsible for the slaughter and enslavement of hundreds of thousands of human beings. It's not political to want to be able to point out to visitors that the beautiful houses and gardens they enjoy were paid for by theft and plunder and with the lives of innocent victims.

Not everyone agrees with the constant focus on the ills of the Atlantic slave trade and colonialism

Aside from that isnt really the case is it? They havent painted over the properties with "brought with proceeds from slave trade" but are simply acknowledging how those properties were funded.

The politicisation of the NT if you like.

By accurately reporting what happened? The ones politicising it are those demanding that only their whitewashed version of history is acceptable.

Not everyone agrees with the constant focus on the ills of the Atlantic slave trade and colonialism.

Sure but when a good percentage of the buildings in your care were built using the proceeds of businesses that used slavery, were compensated hugely when slavery was abolished allowing them to buy more land (and enclose it) and otherwise generally wouldn't exist...You owe it to people to help them understand that don't you?

The history of most of Britain's stately home stock is indelibly and inextricably linked with slavery, it's amiss not to tell the story of that.

but are simply acknowledging how those properties were funded.

And what possible difference does that make to anyone?

The 'woke-turn' of the NT also goes further than highlighting colonial links; staff who didn't want to wear rainbow badges being taken off visitor-facing duties and staff are being forced to undergo 'unconscious bias' training.

Utter bollocks, any evidence of that?

You have to remember for a lot of these people, these land owners (Churchill is a prime example) are their hero's, they adore them and what they stand for. So when someone comes round and say that not only are they not a heroic as you'd like, we're also going to tell people about it, it get their goat somewhat.

Think of them as like Lance Armstrong fans prior to the Oprah interview...

And what possible difference does that make to anyone?

That they go away from their day out a wee bit more educated than when they went in? Scary thought I know...

That they go away from their day out a wee bit more educated than when they went in? Scary thought I know…

Perhaps the NT should give them maths lessons too?

staff are being forced to undergo ‘unconscious bias’ training.

Exactly how is this a bad thing?

Note that Min Grimshaw is one of the Restore Trust plants and also in the committee's recommendations, so don't just copy what they suggested.

So why do these links need highlighting to visitors who just want to enjoy a day out?

So just remove all references to the history all together or only the ones that make you uncomfortable?

Still waiting on the evidence …..

staff are being forced to undergo ‘unconscious bias’ training.

And what's wrong with that exactly?

Tempted to join the NT just to vote against RT - Stephen Green sounds thoroughly unpleasant to put it mildly..

So why do these links need highlighting to visitors who just want to enjoy a day out?

If they just want to enjoy a day out then they dont need to bother reading the informational boards and leaflets etc.
If they do want to do so though isnt it best that they get to find out the bad as well as the good about the buildings?

And what’s wrong with that exactly?

Firstly, I'm uncomfortable with the idea that my subconscious is the business of my employer. Secondly, the unconscious bias training itself is scientifically worthless.

Firstly, I’m uncomfortable with the idea that my subconscious is the business of my employer.

When you're expected to deal with members of the public of various races equitably as a core part of your job, why on earth not?

Secondly, the unconscious bias training itself is scientifically worthless.

According to who? You know about the specific details of this training? Or is it just a more general 'woke panic' because liberals made me feel bad?

If they just want to enjoy a day out then they dont need to bother reading the informational boards and leaflets etc.

This.

"I actively want to know about the history of this place... no not THAT history"

I tend to skip reading anything, and take pictures of the period wallpaper. Except in the kitchens... I get properly drawn into how they were run and how things were done there.

And what possible difference does that make to anyone?

Quite a bit, seeing as Restore Trust are in a lather over it. I'm sure there are reasons why they're so exercised by giving the public accurate information.

Conservative MPs are concerned that the Trust has been being too political.

Sir John Hayes, Conservative MP for South Holland and the Deepings, accused the Trust of not understanding its own purpose.

Hayes highlighted the Trust’s role in preserving beauty, and said: “Beauty, because it is the exemplification of truth, is the most important thing to which we should all aspire. In beauty, we begin to have sight of the Lord.

Um...... 🤦‍♂️

Except in the kitchens…

Weird isn't it, go into any stately home and you'll be shown where the staff worked and lived and you can see exactly the divide between rich and poor, the separate staircases, the teeny rooms, ...but goodness, happen to mention where  the people who own the house got the fabulous wealth from...nope, beyond the pale

Min Grimshaw

I voted a few days ago and admit to f**ing it up as I couldn't find a list of the "Restore Trust" idiots at the time. Mr Green was easy to spot, but other than that I and hoped by voting for a woman of non-English background I'd be avoiding any others.

I guess I totally "Priti Patel-ed" myself there.

I voted a few days ago and admit to f**ing it up as I couldn’t find a list of the “Restore Trust” idiots at the time. Mr Green was easy to spot, but other than that I and hoped by voting for a woman of non-English background I’d be avoiding any others.

If the RT thing is the most important issue to you then I understand you being miffed she didn't mention it, though maybe it's not a hugely important issue to her? Since the rest of her statement was compelling enough for you to pick her over 39 others she's maybe not the worst choice ever - I mean it's not like you voted for Stephen Green, is it?

All requires a bit of balance really, there will be many properties where the owners at some point had direct links with the slave trade, it is right that the properties history reflect that and be shared. However how prominent this is will depend on each property. If a large building program was funded directly from slave trading activities I'd expect slavery to a big part of the properties story, if at some point in it's history some of it's owners profited from the slave trade it should be mentioned but not be the main narrative (a modern day example would be the difference between someone having a pension that is invested in the arms industry and someone who works in the arms industry and built their house with the proceeds). Other properties it wouldn't have any relevance to.

The ‘woke-turn’ of the NT also goes further than highlighting colonial links; staff who didn’t want to wear rainbow badges being taken off visitor-facing duties and staff are being forced to undergo ‘unconscious bias’ training.

Yeah, none of that is true.
I worked for the NT for nearly 20 years until they made me redundant at the start of the year as part of 'cost cutting' measures (even though I worked in an area that made a profit) and have major issues with the way things are being run but I can't let utter nonsense pass unchallenged.

I'm still struggling to get my head around the mentality of people like i_scoff_cake and their ilk. The very idea that being pro-equality and thus being aware of inequality (i.e. woke) is something to be derided and railed against is just baffling.

I have undertaken unconscious bias training, its was fine and helped my understand my biases a bit more (mostly towards posh southerners ha ha). What on earth is there to be scared about??

staff who didn’t want to wear rainbow badges being taken off visitor-facing duties and staff are being forced to undergo ‘unconscious bias’ training.

Utter rubbish. No one was forced to do anything. They were offered it just as part of the rest of their training, that covers religions, disabilities etc etc. Just as you do with most roles that centre on public engagement in well organised companies.

As for;

So why do these links need highlighting to visitors who just want to enjoy a day out?

People can do whatever they want on their day out, they can look at the view or they can read the little information boards. This is just about making sure those information boards reflect the actual history, rather than conveniently ignoring it.
If knowing the truth about where you're visiting is going to spoil a day out then it also gives those people the option to go somewhere else that better suits their rose tinted imperialist standpoint.

Firstly, I’m uncomfortable with the idea that my subconscious is the business of my employer. Secondly, the unconscious bias training itself is scientifically worthless.

My employer will be very much involved if my unconscious bias leads to a complaint.

And while the Civil Service have pulled the plug on unconscious bias training, I'm not convinced the decision was science based, and there's plenty of other similar stuff we use.

Gonna get my vote on! Thanks OP.

Yeah, none of that is true.
I worked for the NT for nearly 20 years until they made me redundant at the start of the year as part of ‘cost cutting’ measures (even though I worked in an area that made a profit) and have major issues with the way things are being run but I can’t let utter nonsense pass unchallenged.

Yeah, I worked for the trust for 13 years until May, and can confirm that none of that was true.
I had issues with some of the Trusts practices but the recent move to actually attempt to welcome all sectors of society as visitors and volunteers (and not pay lip service), and to be honest and open about the history of the properties and landscapes I was in full agreement with.
As for being political - (being honest about the role of slavery I would argue isnt anyway), although the trust owes its origins to state legislation, it is an independent organisation, and has every right to have and promote opinions which relate to its remit and operation.

The ‘woke-turn’ of the NT

You do realise, don't you, that "woke" is simply being nice to others. That's what you're arguing against, being nice.

So why do these links need highlighting to visitors who just want to enjoy a day out?

They aren't. They don't have "have you heard the bad news about the slave trade" evangelists patrolling the place. People who don't want to bother about pesky things like "reading" or "learning things" are free to go and wander round and laugh at the statue of the boy with his willy out. In't choice brilliant!

Perhaps the NT should give them maths lessons too?

I know, right? It's astonishing that anyone would go to a historical building to learn about history, what a wild and crazy notion that is.

Firstly, I’m uncomfortable with the idea that my subconscious is the business of my employer.

You do understand, don't you, that the point is to highlight things that you might be unaware you're doing? It's not brainwashing, they don't strap you into the MindSuck 3000 and upload your thoughts to their central server.

Secondly, the unconscious bias training itself is scientifically worthless.

No it isn't.

All requires a bit of balance really, there will be many properties where the owners at some point had direct links with the slave trade, it is right that the properties history reflect that and be shared. However how prominent this is will depend on each property. If a large building program was funded directly from slave trading activities I’d expect slavery to a big part of the properties story, if at some point in it’s history some of it’s owners profited from the slave trade it should be mentioned but not be the main narrative (a modern day example would be the difference between someone having a pension that is invested in the arms industry and someone who works in the arms industry and built their house with the proceeds). Other properties it wouldn’t have any relevance to.

Absolute moral judgments about the values and practices of the past are called presentism. This is what the NT is essentially practising by vigorosly highlighting slavery links.

For what it's worth, these links were never hidden or secret, so it's then intensity by which they are promoted which is the problem; the mono-mania for slavery links.

You know, as an aside, this is one thing I've come to realise about the right wing over the last five years or so.

Many of the things they complain about, they have a very good point. You know, the "share if you think this is a disc race" posts on social meda, they often describe something which is actually disgraceful. For instance, as Cakeface's posts on here ably demonstrate, being forced into wearing badges which went against your personal beliefs, even if I thought those beliefs were abhorrent I'd be right there complaining with you about being forced to wear it.

But again as demonstrated here, it simply isn't true. They're getting frotted up time and time and time again over things that may indeed disgraceful or unacceptable or shocking, if they weren't abject lies. They might as well be getting cross about Batman.

so it’s then intensity by which they are promoted which is the problem

Do you have to swear an oath acknowledging your white privilege and whip yourself with birch twigs to atone for colonialism when you enter a NT property now or something? Cos I don't remember that from the last time I went to Sizergh castle.

Can you explain what exactly you mean by the intensity with which they are promoted?

the mono-mania for slavery links

Slavery/colonialism links are absolutely everywhere if you go to most historical properties in the UK. I imagine the vast majority of visitors are almost totally unaware of this, and will continue to be so despite this made-up obsession you are claiming exists.

No it isn’t.

It's psuedo-science.

link

Ah, see, a source, well done. Are we learning yet?

I'll have a look in a bit, I've got a meeting in five minutes.

FWIW, I've no idea whether it is or it isn't. I simply put as much effort into debunking your claim as you did into proving it, which was "none whatsoever." If I'd spent time looking into it, you'd then have just changed the subject so it's a waste of my time.

But again as demonstrated here, it isn’t true. They’re getting frotted up time and time and time again over things that may indeed disgraceful or unacceptable or shocking, if they weren’t abject lies. They might as well be getting cross about Batman

And then when it's pointed out to them that it isn't true they just ignore it and start getting frothed up about something else. It's the proverbial pigeon on the chess board, they're not here to debate or engage, just to shit all over everything and declare everyone else to be a woketard.

This is what the NT is essentially practising by vigorosly highlighting slavery links.

Can you provide examples of this vigorous highlighting please so we can see what is triggering your outrage.
Since I think we must be experiencing very different things. Maybe I got lucky when I visited (since have been limited times this year) and the volunteers werent being ordered to dress in sackcloth those days and walk around shouting "repent, repent".

From your link:

A 2019 meta-analysis found no evidence of backfire, but also “trivial” impact on behavioural change and only a small effect on IAT scores. This systematic review did find some evidence of effect, but only looked at the impact on implicit bias scores, not real-world behaviour.

So let's improve the training/research - instead of getting hysterical about how awful it is. Companies still use Myers Briggs even though it's pseudoscience, are you similarly outraged about that?

Slavery/colonialism links are absolutely everywhere if you go to most historical properties in the UK.

Which I would argue is rather uninteresting. Certainly prior to industrialism almost all wealth was derived from various forms of unfree labour. Do we need a big disclaimer on the pyramids?

What is to gain from constantly picking at the scab here?

@grum

I'm not arguing that psychological testing is flawed per se just this particular instance of it.

Have you seen this training BTW? They mix accepted cognitive biases with made-up 'cultural' ones such as 'affinity bias'. It's a hustle.

It’s psuedo-science.

link

That's a piece about a Channel 4 programme about a classroom project, and a specific implicit attitudes test. I've had implicit bias training at my work and that link has precisely zero to do with what happens in most workplaces.

I don't particularly like HR led programmes as a rule and have learned not to expect a rigorous evidence base, shall we say. But so what frankly if it's just a couple of hours to think about your assumptions and how to treat people fairly, why not make the most of it?

What is to gain from constantly picking at the scab here?

Rather obviously, studying only half of history, the bit that doesn't make you feel uncomfortable, is likely to lead to a misunderstanding of how we got to where we are, which kind of makes it pointless to study history at all.

More interestingly, what is to gain by refusing to acknowledge the realities of history, and mocking any attempts by others to do so?

Have you seen this training BTW?

I've had unconscious bias training. It was very interesting, and while it may not have 'worked' in the sense that I still suffer from some unconscious biases, it certainly worked in that I know how and when to question my immediate responses to things and examine whether I may be being influenced by those biases. Two of the most valuable hours I ever spent at work, in my opinion. I'm curious as to why you are so anxious to prevent people having an experience like that?

Which I would argue is rather uninteresting.

Cool, ignore it then, just like most people always have and continue to do. Seems quite blinkered to me but you do you. Personally I find the days of the triangular trade, piracy, slave rebellions etc absolutely fascinating and there's some amazing stories to be told.

Dare I say if you find it boring/offensive perhaps that's more of a reflection on you than the content.

I wasn't expecting this on a rainy Wednesday afternoon. Keep up the good work cakey! I haven't laughed so much since the SKS thread 🙂

Cool, ignore it then

It's never been ignored, that's a myth. The difference is that now that the Woke want to frame it as the fulcrum or hub of western history. A kind of essential guilt.

If we're just talking about 'facts', why are we not told that the vast majority of African slaves were actually enslaved by other Africans?

Still waiting on that evidence……… It’s almost as if you can’t provide any because it’s a load of bollocks and now you’ve been called out on it numerous times you’re going to just ignore it and hope it goes away

What is to gain from constantly picking at the scab here?

"Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it"?

Still waiting on that evidence

The burden of proof is on you regarding the efficacy of unconscious bias training.

If we’re just talking about ‘facts’, why are we not told that the vast majority of African slaves were actually enslaved by other Africans?

It’s never been ignored, that’s a myth.

He was talking about visitors choosing to ignore info plaques, I believe.

The difference is that now that the Woke want to frame it as the fulcrum or hub of western history.

No they don't.

Which I would argue is rather uninteresting.

Then don't read the information provided about it when you visit the properties. You don't have to. You just don't want others to be able to... who knows why... it's very odd.

“Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it”?

It's worse than that. It isn't that Cakeface doesn't want to learn from history, they want to actually suppress any history that conflicts with the myth of British exceptionalism. Real 1984 stuff.

<edited in a very woke fashion for gender neutrality>

The burden of proof is on you regarding the efficacy of unconscious bias training.

No, that’s not what I’ve asked for numerous times, I want evidence of your other pathetic claims. And when you admit you can’t provide any then I expect an apology and retraction

The difference is that now that the Woke want to frame it as the fulcrum or hub of western history. A kind of essential guilt.

Again, please provide some evidence supporting your claims. Just for starters show us some of the recent NT materials which you find so appalling. Since we currently we have a few ex members of staff on the thread seeming a bit bemused and a bunch of punters equally so.
It shouldnt be hard if its so pervasive.

why are we not told that the vast majority of African slaves were actually enslaved by other Africans?

Something I would think would be highly relevant in the museums built in the old slaving posts on the African coast but possibly not so much in an NT property. Although possibly a couple of NT sites could have sections about the barbary pirates and their raids on part of the UK.

If we’re just talking about ‘facts’, why are we not told that the vast majority of African slaves were actually enslaved by other Africans?

SQUIRREL!

I’ve had unconscious bias training.

I think one issue is, like most HR training, its highly variable. The one I did was sensible and, as far as I remember my psychology lectures, based around reasonably solid research. I have seen some cases, although it might be handy editing, which do look to be absolute guff. Probably because the classic team building expert stereotype personality decided that they could handle unconscious bias just as well as they could team building training and, sadly, were right but just not the way they thought.

Wonder how long it’ll be until scoff rolls out the “they ask you how you voted in 2016 in job interviews”

Another made up NT ‘fact’ 🙄

[img] [/img]

t’s never been ignored, that’s a myth. The difference is that now that the Woke want to frame it as the fulcrum or hub of western history

Its the only reason for the british empire to exist. without slavery or servitude of others we would have always been a little island on the edge of Europe. what made the british empire was the subjugation of peoples and the stealing of their wealth and land.

so yes - slavery and servitude is an essential and major part of UK history as it had a huge effect on the UK and its wealth

I suggest you read some history

I suggest you read some history

But it's simultaneously completely uninteresting and the most important thing ever to Scoff...I don't think he's going to read anything you know...

 The difference is that now that the Woke want to frame it as the fulcrum or hub of western history. A kind of essential guilt.

No one is asking for your guilt. Unless you're an actual human trafficker presumably you've nothing to feel guilty about. All the NT are doing is putting the wealth and history of the people who lived in these houses in context.

Interestingly enough when Defoe wrote Moll Flanders there's a passage in which he describes Moll getting her inheritance and how by financial shenanigan's that it's been turned into money with an "English Provenance" What he means by this is that it's been laundered of it's colonial (and thus gained from businesses involved in slavery) origins...Even in the 18thC they knew and understood that slavery made folks uncomfortable. You're not the first person to want to look away from your country's past. I doubt you'll be the last

I understand that it's uninteresting to some. The solution is "don't read it, then."

The solution Cakey seems to be pushing is "prevent everyone else from reading it too." And I don't really understand why.

Well, I think I do, it's a fear of Creeping Beingnicetopeopleism, but I don't understand why that would be something to rally against.

Well, I think I do, given that one of the early lies complaints was being forced to wear Pride badges.

You can dress it up as making academic points, but letting

the Woke

slip through, complete with capital W, says it all about what you really believe.