Carved In The Past

• The Campaign: It began at the University of Cape Town, demanding the removal of Rhodes’s statue.

• Reason: Rhodes held racist views, laid the foundations of apartheid in S. Africa, made his fortune in exploitative diamond mining.

• The Counter View: Rhodes’s views were the prevailing sentiment in England in his times and must be seen in context.

***

After more than 100 years of his death, Cecil John Rhodes, described by many as one of the “most committed imperialists of the 19th century”, continues to be a divisive force. Students on campuses from South Afr­ica to Oxford in the United Kingdom and elsewhere are agitated over his presence and want his statues, plaques and busts removed. The ‘Rhodes Must Fall’ campaign, which began in South Africa last spring on the demand that his statue on the steps of the University of Cape Town be removed, has now spread to other universities and colleges. Most famously, the campaign has gathered steam at Oriel College in Oxford, where Rhodes once studied.

Few would dispute that Rhodes was a white supremacist who managed to control large swathes of land and wealth—much of it through diamond mining—at the cost of native Africans. He believed the English to be the master race and once said, “I contend that we are the first race in the world and that the more of the world we inhabit, the better it is for the human race.” Two countries in Africa—Northern Rhodesia (now Zambia) and Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe)—were named after him. But many argue that he has to be judged in his context, and his remarks reflect the dominant sentiment of his time. Lord Chris Patten, chancellor of Oxford University, told BBC, “Any views Cecil Rhodes had about Empire were common to his time.”

Lord Patten and other senior members of Oxford University, including Prof Louise Richardson, the new vice-chancellor, are of the view that Rhodes’s statue at the university would remain despite the growing dem­and for its removal. “What do you do about our history? What Rhodes did at the end of his life was give money to help ens­ure others get this opportunity,” argued Lord Patten. What he refers to is the Rhodes scholarship—the money left beh­ind by him to allow promising stud­ents from several countries to come to Oxford to study. In the past, many famous personalities had enjoyed the Rhodes scholarship: the list of luminaries includes former US President Bill Clinton. There is a large number of former Rhodes scholars from India too. Though most of them are aware of the campaign seeking the removal of his statue from Oxford, few that Outlook spoke to seem inclined to support the move.

“Removing edifices which remind us about our histories, even though we ought to be critical in our judgement about historical figures, is as bad as the ‘edifice complex’ we have in India of people seeking immortality by naming places and institutions after themselves,” says R. Sudarshan, professor of government and public policy at the O.P. Jindal Global University. “The Greeks said that never judge a man until he is dead. By that premise, the imperialist Cecil Rhodes did redeem his aggrandising career in some measure, enabling scholars who benefited by his endowment to be critical of him and write new histories of his career and the deadly consequences of some of his actions in South Africa.”

Sports journalist and author Boria Majumdar agrees with this view and raises questions about the space for debate in the campaign. “The ‘Rhodes Must Fall’ campaign is a stated position. It does not ask if it should fall. Rather, it states the statue ‘must fall’. For a group advocating openness and debate, their position or actions conform to the very opposite of what they adv­ocate. Also, if we consider Indian institutions, several key ones were built by imperialists who have debatable pasts. Now, to suggest all of these need to fall or change is to deny the very way our societies have evolved.” He also says one must consider the Rhodes scholarship and especially the Mandela Rhodes Foundation, which has done good work in Africa: to take a one-sided view of things would be faulty and go against the very grain of openness.

Arghya Sengupta, of the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, Delhi, also says that, like many others, he was aware of Rhodes’s racist background when he took the Rhodes scholarship, but he was hoping to equip himself with the skills to make a meaningful impact on the legal system and the people of India—and, he adds, it doesn’t stop him from criticising Rhodes.

“Whether Rhodes should fall or not—I limit my discussion to his statue at Oriel College, Oxford—is a form versus substance question,” he says. “The real isssue is deeply ingrained racism on UK campuses. Having been a victim of racism on one occasion, I think it makes a whit of a difference if the statue stays or goes. Better policies, sensitised faculty, a more diverse student body—these are more structured solutions to a complex problem.”

Some others, while sympathetic to the campaign, raise serious questions on whether it will end racism that exists in the system and in people’s attitude in the West. “While I am in complete sympathy with the ‘Rhodes Must Fall’ campaign, I’m not sure if bringing down a statue will end the ent­renched racism and condescension for people of colour which I encountered at Oxford,” says former TV anchor and journalist Sagarika Ghose. “So bring down a statue, but bring down the racism and discrimination too. Yes, all of us were aware of the colonialist-imperialist vision of Rhodes and I always thought it a delicious irony of history that a scholarship meant for white men was also being subverted somewhat by being given to brown women.”

So what does all this add up to? Will the campaign on the various campuses bring about some fundamental change? In South Africa, where, interestingly, the agitation has become part of the larger political movement in the country on inequality, it has shown some gains. Rhodes’s statue has been removed from Cape Town University and there are all indications that this might also affect some changes in the existing curriculum. In Oxford, however, the statue of Rhodes stays—at least for now. But the campaign reflecting the disquiet among students—especially the non-white sections—has forced the university authorities to relook at some of the fundamental things. A plaque on the university grounds commemorating Rhodes has been removed and a sign has also gone up to suggest the authorities, though aware of Rhodes’s contributions, do not condone the policies he pursued.

But more importantly, the university has put in place a better engagement bet­ween the students and the teachers with a six-month “listening project”. Maybe some things, even in Oxford, will finally change for the better.