THE removal, officially or otherwise, of statues of men who accrued great wealth from the exploitation of slaves in their overseas plantations has been put on the unofficial agenda of the average fair-minded Scot.
Get rid of them, pull them down, resounds the cry, and until now no-one was more enthusiastic then I in this matter. However, what has made me stop and reconsider my stance is quite simple. You cannot change the facts of history, but can however correct its many errors.
If we pull down that statue, we help to hide that man and his crimes to humanity from the history books. People will walk by the empty plinth, and join the great ranks of the many who, when asked “what was there?”, will reply “I don’t know”. Sadly, as time passes they will add “I don’t care”.
READ MORE: Joanna Cherry: Scotland should consider black heritage centre
We should therefore keep the statues, but change or add an appropriate updated, historically correct inscription. Each case must be researched in detail and history societies submit their findings to an appointed jury who would word the findings on the inscriptions.
We should also make the same committee responsible for returning place names to their proper place. For example, the town of Fort William must be returned to its proper Gaelic name of Inverlochy. Those corrections will, or should, follow after independence.
Some say what’s in a name? Back in the seventies I took my family on a safari to see that great world wonder and largest waterfall in the world, Mosi-oa-Tunya (The Smoke that Thunders). You and David Livingston might call them The Victoria Falls.
More of our history and geography must be scrutinised and put right. That’s a must, but let’s get independence first, all else will follow.
Iain Ramsay
Greenock
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here