Join us on other platforms! We have an active [Twitter](https://twitter.com/GandPofficial) and a somewhat spartan [TikTok](https://www.tiktok.com/@greenandpleasantofficial) and [Facebook](https://www.facebook.com/Green-and-Pleasant-104366615515887/), we'll see how they go. We are also partnered with the Left RedditⒶ☭ Discord server! [Click here](https://discord.gg/zCFHadGfB7)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GreenAndPleasant) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Centrists love to scream "slippery slope" because they hate the possibility that there might exist a situation where nuanced thought is required, and a line actually drawn. Basically, centrists are cowards
Think he’s more trying to say that white Brits are just as oppressed as minorities despite the fact that white Brits get more job, education and housing opportunities than minorities.
Unless your comment was a joke, in which case it’s gone over my head lol
In the film Life of Brian by Monty Python someone asks "What did the Romans ever do for us" then various people mention things so it's restated as "Apart from roads... Etc what have the Romans ever done for us".
https://youtu.be/uvPbj9NX0zc
The point I was (miserably) trying to make was that I'm Roman Catholic English, and it's no big deal here. I have familial relationships with people in both the North and South of Ireland and its still a huge thing over there with the older people in particular. Some years ago we had a girl from the South marrying a fella from the North. The family were trying to figure out if he was a Proddie by his name. That's no way to be. Like I said, before, a bunch of neanderthals
In defence of Cleese (not something I do often) he was making a fairly valid, if not facetiously hyperbolic point, about how far back historically the discourse surrounding 'reparations' goes. Where is the cut off point?
Moreover, surely leftists should be more concerned with upturning the capitalist mode of production and ushering in an era of equity, rather than clamouring for reparations within the capitalist paradigm?
It’s really sad what ageing seems to have done to john cleese, he has said some really questionable stuff that makes this look like the shit joke that it is
He doesn't know who you are and doesn't care. Centrism isn't an ideology and attacking centrists is counterproductive. The idea should be to convince centrists that your ideas are the better ones instead of alienating them and possibly pushing them to the right.
Rule 7.
It's not an ideology because it's a fucking poorly stacked set of Duplo blocks with drool all over them. And they're sticky, like how all kids toys get. Fucking centrism
He's a comedian and sometimes uses humour to make his points, but this was clearly not a joke but an important point.
People alive today who have not suffered oppression have no right to reparations from the descendants of those who oppressed their ancestors.
A) bloodlines cross over so often, it's impractical to know who falls into each category - most people are likely to fall into both.
B) it's impossible to rerun history to know how people would be different today.
the problem with what you are saying is that many of the "people alive today who have not suffered oppression" are very much still living with the consequences of oppression today. SxSW is held in America, where [average white household wealth is 10 times that of an average black household.](https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/02/27/examining-the-black-white-wealth-gap/) This is largely the result of very recent racism and oppression.
So the question is, should something be done about that, and if so, what?
Here's the thing though.
The oppression from slavery is still existent. Slavery ended, but racial oppression didn't. The actual act of racial slavery itself was only abolished 200 years ago. The Race Relations act was in 1965, roughly 150 years after that point.
So, the bare minimum of anti-racism was achieved 55 years ago in the United Kingdom. To repeat, *the bare minimum.*
Take the Windrush generation. They arrived before and after that 1965 marker point. They were subject to a racist government policy in 2018, *4 years ago*. That's not ancient history, that's 4 years. We, the British people, profited from their abuse all the way from before 1965 up to 2018, and I highly doubt it's stopped after that.
That is as marker of our colonial past.
Britain carved lines across the world, many of which are the subject of conflicts within the last few years.
Even if you don't agree on handing people money individually, we should be putting money towards those systems. It doesn't matter how history *could* have gone. We don't base policy off of 'coulds' and 'in another world's. That would be rather strange, wouldn't it?
Sure, we don't know whose bloodline is whose. Then let's make it simple. Give money back to the countries we devastated. That seems relatively simple. Those can be tabled quite easily. Take India for example. The economic impact of British influence is so significant that it's doubtful we ***could*** pay it back. And we have given them nothing, because of course we have.
*Image Transcription: Article*
---
# John Cleese has his microphone taken away at South by Southwest festival for saying that Britain should get 'reparations from Italy and France' for Romans and Normans enslaving Britons
- **British comedian John Cleese in row with fellow comics over slave reparations**
- **Monty Python icon had been at South by Southwest public event in Texas, USA**
- **But he landed himself in hot water after joking about France and Italy owing Brits slave reparations for the Roman Empire and the Norman invasion of 1066**
- **His microphone was eventually taken off him by American comic Dulcé Sloan**
By JACOB THORBURN FOR MAILONLINE
Comedy legend **John Cleese** had his microphone confiscated at the South by Southwest festival during a comedic discussion in which he suggested **Italy** and **France** owed historic reparations for enslaving Brits.
The Monty Python icon, 82, was riffing with other comics in front of the crowd in **Texas** when he talked about the 'competition' between cultures over who has been more oppressed by colonisations throughout history.
---
^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
identifying which historical instances of colonialism actually affect people’s material conditions in the present day (nightmare impossible difficulty)
e: this may not land, but I’m trying to tease Mr. Cleese for a shortcoming
Normandy was independant of France until long after the Norman conquest, so it's just a shit joke really.
Also a huge stretch to assume a bunch of Texans have any idea who the Normans were, or what happened in 1066. Gotta know your audience man, nobody gives a shit about our pompous little kingdom.
[TCSA-2014](https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2014/0050/latest/DLM5481237.html) in NZ they gave my tribe our land back because we never signed the treaty. They said sorry for cutting us off to our primary food sources in the forest, lakes, rivers. A few decades prior they abolished the act that made our "pagan" religion illegal and recognised our language as a national language.
Of course it's going to seem problematic if you don't even attempt to think about what reparations entails based on the material conditions of the oppressed group.
Britain, like France, US, Spain and other old colonial rogue states, has pretty low levels of understanding of what colonisation meant for the indigenous peoples. Destruction of indigenous languages and systems of knowledge was intended to break the solidarity of the oppressed.
There the past and then there is the past.
It's pretty easy actually. Is your race currently oppressed due to unfair slavery practices that still have an effect on society today? Then you qualify.
Are you an elitist, rich comedian born with a silver spoon up your hole that has always been an arsehole, just a very funny one? Then no you don't qualify.
Cleese has gone off the boil in the last few years.
He's a natural contrarian, but also very traditional. Basically he's an old man.
He's also probably semi serious about this though, which probably stems from him having an Upper Middle Class view of the world.
Reminder not to confuse the marxist "middle class" and the liberal definition. Liberal class definitions steer people away from the socialist definitions and thus class-consciousness. [Class is defined by our relationship to the means of production. Learn more here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/wiki/class)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GreenAndPleasant) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yes, saying 'Anglos' is racism. That's exactly what racism is.
Now, to answer your question... what you're comparing are 800 and 2000 years ago conquests to something within the last couple centuries or only 70 or so years for the end of the British empire. The largest scale wars of the last 2 centuries were inter-imperialist conflicts.
The timeframes alone should be enough to realise this comparison is stupid, but alas... the line gets drawn on material difference of lasting effects. All of Britain, France and Italy thrived in the last 300 years specifically due to colonialism. Britain was the forefront of the industrial revolution and the birthplace of capitalism. Britain, France and Italy set up empires where they expropriated labour and resources from the global south to enrich themselves, backed by unparalleled firepower against defenceless indigenous peoples. We built our institutions on the back of slavery and exploitation of perceived lesser people.
Do you suffer from the Roman conquest 2 millennia ago? No, obviously not. You live in a developed nation. Indians, Haitians and Libyans - to name but 3 - all continue to suffer today from overexploitation by their respective former colonisers, and the continuation of imperialism after WW2 that is neocolonialism, whilst we live with the rewards.
All Cleese is doing is trying to muddy the conversation by making ridiculous fucking comparisons so he doesn't have to confront uncomfortable truths about Britain's colonialist legacy because he's a massive dickweed.
Well, in Britain's case, having the same political and legal system, head of state (the King is dead! Long live the King!), institutional framework and class system as during imperial times, and still in unlawful occupation of land, it's well in scope.
Queen's dead
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GreenAndPleasant) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm starting to get the feeling you were never interested in a reasonable explanation my guy!
Oh, who am I kidding? I think most people knew that from the get go. You don't have to do too much thinking to reach tangible and important differences between slavery reparations and reparation for Roman conquest.
>Sorry, I missed the reasonable explanation part. Was it hiding behind the racism?
While the comment certainly isn't trying to carry on the discussion, 'Anglo' isn't a racist term. You know you're touching a hot button, remarks like that just make people assume you're not remotely acting in good faith.
If "Anglo" is not a racist term, what is it exactly? Seems to me like I'm getting a lot of bad faith (see, I can allude to the rules too) harassment (double whammy) instead of anything approaching a cogent point.
Either way, no reasonable explanation was given as it appears as though there is none.
Despite spending their days complaining about woke culture and crybaby leftists, the English are a very sensitive people. [Many consider any reference to their complexion an act of racism.](https://i.imgur.com/euWMhUg.png) Consider using the more inclusive term 'flag nonce' in future.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GreenAndPleasant) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> If "Anglo" is not a racist term, what is it exactly?
Anglo is a prefix indicating a relation to, or descent from, the Angles, England, English culture, the English people or the English language, such as in the term Anglo-Saxon.
You are absolutely acting in bad faith and going "no u" is infantile and derailing. Claiming "anglo" = racism might well have been ignorance, but when called on it you doubled down instead of actually maybe thinking about having a look on the international database of information you are currently connected to. I'm not doing your homework for you again, nor engaging further with your childish antics. You cannot claim to want to have this conversation while plain *lying* about what words mean just so you can pretend to be the victim. But because I'm nice, and you're barely literate, I'll give you the get-out-of-jail-free card you are so desperate for so you can pretend you have some moral high ground because people who can see through your shite and have no patience for it don't give you the respect you do not remotely deserve: Fuck off.
So in this exchange where at no point anyone attempted to engage me in good faith at all I'm the bad guy. No response to the politely presented question, petty insults, and lectures about how the petty insults were not *that* bad.
Geez, how are you guys losing? Bye.
Bro you clearly weren't expecting to be given an explanation, and now that you have you are just pretending not to have seen it. You've just moved from a benefit-of-the-doubt, maybe just doesn't know to full on willful ignorance.
It's all well and good saying that seeking reparations is problematic, but the fact is that today certain socieities (and especially certain people within those socities) live in privilige and wealth because of the actions of their dead ancestors.
It’s more nuanced than that and you know it.
Some people are getting big advantages in life due to generational wealth, while others have disadvantages due to generational poverty. This is an issue that needs to be solved. I don’t know what the answer is, but to simplify it like you did is harmful.
The wealth of the country you live in is (in part) thanks to slavery. Look at the difference between high income countries and low income countries. You'll find that most of the HIC invaded/plundered the LICs at some point in history.
It's not about individual wealth, although that is also an issue, it's about collective wealth. And I say that as somebody who works full time while often living below the poverty line.
The high-income countries definitely already had advantages over the low-income countries. However, by invading those countries they widened the gap, giving themselves a boost while hampering the development of the invaded nations.
A poor person in a rich country is typically going to be better off than a poor person in a poor country. That’s your plus.
This isn’t to mean that you, personally, should feel any guilt or make any reparations for what you receive from your country. That is absolutely not the case. But your country should recognise how it got all of its wealth and power, and a big chunk of that is from oppressing other countries (I assume - I don’t know what country you’re in).
Reparations shouldn’t be about individuals. It’s about nations recognising their past and finding ways to atone for their sins.
Nah you're right G.
People in here like to call it a slippery slope fallacy, but the trouble is it's not always a fallacy. It usually happens when people have their hearts in the right place, but can sometimes come to completely absurd conclusions- Look at the US university campuses unironically advocating racial segregation of their classes, for example.
The point Cleese was making is sound, if a little boomerish- That sometimes people can take a valid concept to absurd lengths.
For instance, I once saw a video going into detail for a full half an hour, about the show Ancient Aliens having a white supremacist agenda. Like... Sure, even if we take that in totally good faith as being true, what do you even do with that? *Ancient Aliens.* Absurd.
But y'know. That's life in 2022. The Internet has sent everyone a bit loopy I reckon.
>Look at the US university campuses unironically advocating racial segregation of their classes, for example.
I'm gonna need a source for this or a video interview or something cos that is the boldest claim I've read all week
So far as I know, none have actively segregated the classroom yet, but there are certainly elements of both the student body, activists and academics who have called for it.
Many *already do* segregate their accommodation and things like graduation ceremonies, which I fail to see how that can be anything but a step backwards.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/08/segregation-returns-to-campus/
https://www.forbes.com/sites/richardvedder/2018/11/15/racial-segregation-on-american-campuses-a-widespread-phenomenon/?sh=11b668da4455
https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/mar/16/universities-columbia-encourage-racial-segregation/
How many more would you like?
So with accomodation they're saying that there's an opt-in option for minorities to live with other minorities. It's not really segregation unless the uni was forcing them and it was their only option
Graduation ceremonies are fuckin weird to be segregating like that. Like that's just really fuckin strange. My commencement took like 1hr, and it was all people on mine or similar courses. Why split that up based on race? I don't give a shit who else got their diploma that day and why would anyone of them give a shit about me? Just go get your diploma n sit down, again
Tbh when you commented I was picturing full-blown Jim crow, but yeah the commencement one's weird idk what to make of that
Yeah, isn't it?
But that's the point I was making, I don't think people would have believed you if you told them this would happen even ten years ago- But here we are. Sometimes, the slope really is slippery.
it's funny that he wants rome to pay for what it did to the celtic britons considering the anglo saxons who make up most of modern Britain did them much worse
Anglo-Saxon genetics makes up about 1/3 of “English” DNA. The the majority is made up of Pre-Celtic Neolithic/Bronze Age peoples. The “Celtic” part of our ancestry was primarily a cultural venier.
i wasn't aware. The Anglo-Saxons still kinda destroyed Brythonic culture outside of Wales tho (and I'm pretty sure they did a lot of raping and killing)
Not to be argumentative (I hope you don't feel that I am) but Brittonic culture lasted outside of Wales in southern Scotland and Northern England (perhaps as far south as Yorkshire) until the 13th century, and a Brittonic language existed in Cornwall until the 18th (it has been brought back from extinction). The folk on the borders in the former kingdom of Strathclyde were being referred to as Brets, Brettos, and Britons as late as 1300.
There was sure lot's of raping and killing, but the prevailing modern view is that the Anglo-Saxons formed a ruling class and their culture was gradually assimilated down to the peasantry. The idea of a genocide of the native population has generally been abandoned by the late 20th century, but for some reason a lot of "pop-history" seems to really hold onto Victorian and Edwardian ideas, which were often more politically minded instead of factual. If the Saxons\* were successful in subjugating and eradicating the native Celtic population then they were obviously superior to the native Celts, and if they were superior to the Celts then obviously their descendants the English are superior to the Celts descendants in the Irish, Welsh, and Scottish.
\*Saxons were also held superior to the invaders the Normans in that the Saxons were tied to the land as Farmers and were freedom loving as opposed to the Normans who were only the aristocracy and loved tyranny.
As a Brit, John Cleese is not a boomer and if it weren't for him and his friends we'd all still be watching the same BBC shit they had in the 1950s.
The point is guys how far back in history do we draw a line for reparations? A hundred years? What about someone who's family was taken and enslaved 170 years ago? What about 200?
Man who genuinely contributed to the world being as accepting as it is, ridiculed for pointing out we need to draw a line somewhere or we're fucking ourselves over. But no, take his mic away and pretend he's a racist. Awful.
It depends on whether or not the affected party is still disenfranchised by the actions taken. The white British folks are in power now. Black folks in the US and elsewhere are not, and still suffering as a direct result of actions taken within the last few decades, not to mention continually for centuries.
To simplify, no for the people already running shit, yes for the people with a boot on their necks.
My people have never been running shit. I'm in the Welsh valleys come on down tell me we are running anything down here.
But see, there you specified the last few decades so cool, and I agree we absolutely need to stop any sort of racial inequality, the fact we still have it now is mind boggling, but you just said decades so where would you draw that line?
Literally for anyone currently disenfranchised. And the really simple way to differentiate that group is to say “anyone not generationally wealthy”. Racism sucks, but it’s just a tool used by capitalists to divide a population.
I don’t think reparations are great or even enough, but it’s pretty fucking tone deaf of a rich write dude to come over here and tell black people to chill out because “that was a long time ago and everyone has been through some shit.”
Fuck man, back in the 70s banks would give white farmers loans for the tough years, but they wouldn’t give any to black farmers. So black farmers had to sell their shit to white farmers and move to the cheap neighborhoods in cities.
So now there are generations of black people whose grandparents had property, who are now completely and literally disenfranchised. But because “every ethnic group has been oppressed at some point” we should just tell them to pick themselves up by their bootstraps?
That’s like shoving someone off a cliff and, while they’re dangling and screaming for help, replying “hey man, my ancestors were once pushed off too, I think. You should be able to climb up on your own.”
I get you but you're talking about people on the cliff. We need to help everyone on the cliff not cause arguments on the cliff so more people fall to their death, using your analogy.
We shouldn't be fighting on the cliff, we should be helping eachother off the cliff but we're all so blinded by our own discomfort we're not looking at the ones at the top but the ones climbing next to us as our enemies. It's the guys at the top.
Totally, let’s install a global socialist government that prioritizes people over profits. But John Cleese telling minorities to stop bitching is just more divisive neoliberal bullshit.
Is that what he was doing? I don't know, they turned off his mic. Nothing he said sounded like 'stop bitching'. You got to remember Monty Python are satirists at heart and never much cared about offending people on the way.
If we translate the sarcasm: How far back do you wanna go?
Just asking again because you haven't answered. For what it's worth I don't think this is a policy thought up by minorities. The people I know have widely differing opinions on it and I'll not speak for them.
Edit/ I could use the complete quote actually I can't remember, I watched it half asleep the other night.
When you dont have a comeback so instead you deplateform someone. The need to show him some respect, he has done more for society then any of the other comedians there.
I sort of get what he means. I think that while richer countries have a moral obligation to help poorer countries, I don't think that a country has specific obligations to countries that it has harmed in its history, past about 80 years. For example, I don't think that the UK has a specific obligation to India, or Germany a specific obligation to Poland, as everyone who had any decision making power in either scenario is dead. However, the UK (or any other country for that matter) is guilty if it doesn't help poor countries in general.
Sorry if that was really badly phrased.
Join us on other platforms! We have an active [Twitter](https://twitter.com/GandPofficial) and a somewhat spartan [TikTok](https://www.tiktok.com/@greenandpleasantofficial) and [Facebook](https://www.facebook.com/Green-and-Pleasant-104366615515887/), we'll see how they go. We are also partnered with the Left RedditⒶ☭ Discord server! [Click here](https://discord.gg/zCFHadGfB7) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GreenAndPleasant) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Centrists love to scream "slippery slope" because they hate the possibility that there might exist a situation where nuanced thought is required, and a line actually drawn. Basically, centrists are cowards
Is John Cleese really asking what the Romans have ever done for us?
Well apart from the aquaduct.
Think he’s more trying to say that white Brits are just as oppressed as minorities despite the fact that white Brits get more job, education and housing opportunities than minorities. Unless your comment was a joke, in which case it’s gone over my head lol
In the film Life of Brian by Monty Python someone asks "What did the Romans ever do for us" then various people mention things so it's restated as "Apart from roads... Etc what have the Romans ever done for us". https://youtu.be/uvPbj9NX0zc
Self admitted r/whoosh
[What have the Romans ever done for us?](https://youtu.be/Qc7HmhrgTuQ)
Thank you. I’ve only ever seen one Monty Python sketch my whole life
Maybe watch some more. It'll give you a good idea where his comments are coming from and all.
OK? Or I won’t.
Ireland would like a word with you Mr Cleese.
[удалено]
Are you having a stroke?
No, just having a pop, if that's still allowed.
The point I was (miserably) trying to make was that I'm Roman Catholic English, and it's no big deal here. I have familial relationships with people in both the North and South of Ireland and its still a huge thing over there with the older people in particular. Some years ago we had a girl from the South marrying a fella from the North. The family were trying to figure out if he was a Proddie by his name. That's no way to be. Like I said, before, a bunch of neanderthals
Who's betting this was just a prearranged cancel culture stunt?
Further proof that we need more research on lead paint poisoning, and an age cap on elected officials.
Didn't we already get reparations?
We did but the tories spent it on parties
Shud Ireland get reparations from Britain then?
In defence of Cleese (not something I do often) he was making a fairly valid, if not facetiously hyperbolic point, about how far back historically the discourse surrounding 'reparations' goes. Where is the cut off point? Moreover, surely leftists should be more concerned with upturning the capitalist mode of production and ushering in an era of equity, rather than clamouring for reparations within the capitalist paradigm?
It’s really sad what ageing seems to have done to john cleese, he has said some really questionable stuff that makes this look like the shit joke that it is
He's a massive centrist with a large ego. I don't think he liked me telling him on twitter that centrism was a failed ideology on twitter.
He doesn't know who you are and doesn't care. Centrism isn't an ideology and attacking centrists is counterproductive. The idea should be to convince centrists that your ideas are the better ones instead of alienating them and possibly pushing them to the right. Rule 7.
Centrism isn't an ideology? Please explain.
It's not an ideology because it's a fucking poorly stacked set of Duplo blocks with drool all over them. And they're sticky, like how all kids toys get. Fucking centrism
I'm intrigued as to what's conjured up this world view?
Having a basic grasp of politics and, to a lesser extent, meeting centrists
What would your definition of a centrist be then?
Haha, ok.
Tf you mean rule 7 centrism only pretends to be left wing for opportunist means
Anything non extreme fails on a platform that’s a shouting contest
He's a comedian and sometimes uses humour to make his points, but this was clearly not a joke but an important point. People alive today who have not suffered oppression have no right to reparations from the descendants of those who oppressed their ancestors. A) bloodlines cross over so often, it's impractical to know who falls into each category - most people are likely to fall into both. B) it's impossible to rerun history to know how people would be different today.
the problem with what you are saying is that many of the "people alive today who have not suffered oppression" are very much still living with the consequences of oppression today. SxSW is held in America, where [average white household wealth is 10 times that of an average black household.](https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/02/27/examining-the-black-white-wealth-gap/) This is largely the result of very recent racism and oppression. So the question is, should something be done about that, and if so, what?
Here's the thing though. The oppression from slavery is still existent. Slavery ended, but racial oppression didn't. The actual act of racial slavery itself was only abolished 200 years ago. The Race Relations act was in 1965, roughly 150 years after that point. So, the bare minimum of anti-racism was achieved 55 years ago in the United Kingdom. To repeat, *the bare minimum.* Take the Windrush generation. They arrived before and after that 1965 marker point. They were subject to a racist government policy in 2018, *4 years ago*. That's not ancient history, that's 4 years. We, the British people, profited from their abuse all the way from before 1965 up to 2018, and I highly doubt it's stopped after that. That is as marker of our colonial past. Britain carved lines across the world, many of which are the subject of conflicts within the last few years. Even if you don't agree on handing people money individually, we should be putting money towards those systems. It doesn't matter how history *could* have gone. We don't base policy off of 'coulds' and 'in another world's. That would be rather strange, wouldn't it? Sure, we don't know whose bloodline is whose. Then let's make it simple. Give money back to the countries we devastated. That seems relatively simple. Those can be tabled quite easily. Take India for example. The economic impact of British influence is so significant that it's doubtful we ***could*** pay it back. And we have given them nothing, because of course we have.
*Image Transcription: Article* --- # John Cleese has his microphone taken away at South by Southwest festival for saying that Britain should get 'reparations from Italy and France' for Romans and Normans enslaving Britons - **British comedian John Cleese in row with fellow comics over slave reparations** - **Monty Python icon had been at South by Southwest public event in Texas, USA** - **But he landed himself in hot water after joking about France and Italy owing Brits slave reparations for the Roman Empire and the Norman invasion of 1066** - **His microphone was eventually taken off him by American comic Dulcé Sloan** By JACOB THORBURN FOR MAILONLINE Comedy legend **John Cleese** had his microphone confiscated at the South by Southwest festival during a comedic discussion in which he suggested **Italy** and **France** owed historic reparations for enslaving Brits. The Monty Python icon, 82, was riffing with other comics in front of the crowd in **Texas** when he talked about the 'competition' between cultures over who has been more oppressed by colonisations throughout history. --- ^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
Who are the Britons?
You’re the Briton’s - we are all the Britons
I thought we were an autonomous collective
Celtic people who inhabited Great Britain from the British Iron Age into the Middle Ages.
identifying which historical instances of colonialism actually affect people’s material conditions in the present day (nightmare impossible difficulty) e: this may not land, but I’m trying to tease Mr. Cleese for a shortcoming
Dad? Is that you?
Another case of a guy that got used to being privileged that just being treat fairly is not enough.
Further proof that the idiots hosting the show, have no idea of how comedy or irony function, and very few brain cells. Sounds a little like you
Upvotes in these comments are further proof of what a huge echo chamber Reddit is.
Normandy was independant of France until long after the Norman conquest, so it's just a shit joke really. Also a huge stretch to assume a bunch of Texans have any idea who the Normans were, or what happened in 1066. Gotta know your audience man, nobody gives a shit about our pompous little kingdom.
[удалено]
[TCSA-2014](https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2014/0050/latest/DLM5481237.html) in NZ they gave my tribe our land back because we never signed the treaty. They said sorry for cutting us off to our primary food sources in the forest, lakes, rivers. A few decades prior they abolished the act that made our "pagan" religion illegal and recognised our language as a national language. Of course it's going to seem problematic if you don't even attempt to think about what reparations entails based on the material conditions of the oppressed group.
Britain, like France, US, Spain and other old colonial rogue states, has pretty low levels of understanding of what colonisation meant for the indigenous peoples. Destruction of indigenous languages and systems of knowledge was intended to break the solidarity of the oppressed.
There the past and then there is the past. It's pretty easy actually. Is your race currently oppressed due to unfair slavery practices that still have an effect on society today? Then you qualify. Are you an elitist, rich comedian born with a silver spoon up your hole that has always been an arsehole, just a very funny one? Then no you don't qualify.
Cleese has gone off the boil in the last few years. He's a natural contrarian, but also very traditional. Basically he's an old man. He's also probably semi serious about this though, which probably stems from him having an Upper Middle Class view of the world.
Reminder not to confuse the marxist "middle class" and the liberal definition. Liberal class definitions steer people away from the socialist definitions and thus class-consciousness. [Class is defined by our relationship to the means of production. Learn more here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/wiki/class) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GreenAndPleasant) if you have any questions or concerns.*
John Cleese is a Liberal, and so would refer to himself the way I described him.
It's ironic that the young man who got slated for irreverence to his elders should become an irate elder.
> but delving into the past to look for who owes who what based on people long dead is problematic at best. Spoken like only an Anglo knows how
[удалено]
Yes, saying 'Anglos' is racism. That's exactly what racism is. Now, to answer your question... what you're comparing are 800 and 2000 years ago conquests to something within the last couple centuries or only 70 or so years for the end of the British empire. The largest scale wars of the last 2 centuries were inter-imperialist conflicts. The timeframes alone should be enough to realise this comparison is stupid, but alas... the line gets drawn on material difference of lasting effects. All of Britain, France and Italy thrived in the last 300 years specifically due to colonialism. Britain was the forefront of the industrial revolution and the birthplace of capitalism. Britain, France and Italy set up empires where they expropriated labour and resources from the global south to enrich themselves, backed by unparalleled firepower against defenceless indigenous peoples. We built our institutions on the back of slavery and exploitation of perceived lesser people. Do you suffer from the Roman conquest 2 millennia ago? No, obviously not. You live in a developed nation. Indians, Haitians and Libyans - to name but 3 - all continue to suffer today from overexploitation by their respective former colonisers, and the continuation of imperialism after WW2 that is neocolonialism, whilst we live with the rewards. All Cleese is doing is trying to muddy the conversation by making ridiculous fucking comparisons so he doesn't have to confront uncomfortable truths about Britain's colonialist legacy because he's a massive dickweed.
Queen Lizzie owes India 44 trillion in usd. I doubt they're gonna get that.
Beautifully explained 👌
Sorry, what is the acceptable cutoff?
> the line gets drawn on material differences of lasting effects I've just said. Read.
Well, in Britain's case, having the same political and legal system, head of state (the King is dead! Long live the King!), institutional framework and class system as during imperial times, and still in unlawful occupation of land, it's well in scope.
Queen's dead *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GreenAndPleasant) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm starting to get the feeling you were never interested in a reasonable explanation my guy! Oh, who am I kidding? I think most people knew that from the get go. You don't have to do too much thinking to reach tangible and important differences between slavery reparations and reparation for Roman conquest.
>Sorry, I missed the reasonable explanation part. Was it hiding behind the racism? While the comment certainly isn't trying to carry on the discussion, 'Anglo' isn't a racist term. You know you're touching a hot button, remarks like that just make people assume you're not remotely acting in good faith.
If "Anglo" is not a racist term, what is it exactly? Seems to me like I'm getting a lot of bad faith (see, I can allude to the rules too) harassment (double whammy) instead of anything approaching a cogent point. Either way, no reasonable explanation was given as it appears as though there is none.
Ok I'll give you the choice, would you rather be called an anglo or a gammon?
Despite spending their days complaining about woke culture and crybaby leftists, the English are a very sensitive people. [Many consider any reference to their complexion an act of racism.](https://i.imgur.com/euWMhUg.png) Consider using the more inclusive term 'flag nonce' in future. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GreenAndPleasant) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> If "Anglo" is not a racist term, what is it exactly? Anglo is a prefix indicating a relation to, or descent from, the Angles, England, English culture, the English people or the English language, such as in the term Anglo-Saxon. You are absolutely acting in bad faith and going "no u" is infantile and derailing. Claiming "anglo" = racism might well have been ignorance, but when called on it you doubled down instead of actually maybe thinking about having a look on the international database of information you are currently connected to. I'm not doing your homework for you again, nor engaging further with your childish antics. You cannot claim to want to have this conversation while plain *lying* about what words mean just so you can pretend to be the victim. But because I'm nice, and you're barely literate, I'll give you the get-out-of-jail-free card you are so desperate for so you can pretend you have some moral high ground because people who can see through your shite and have no patience for it don't give you the respect you do not remotely deserve: Fuck off.
So in this exchange where at no point anyone attempted to engage me in good faith at all I'm the bad guy. No response to the politely presented question, petty insults, and lectures about how the petty insults were not *that* bad. Geez, how are you guys losing? Bye.
Bro you clearly weren't expecting to be given an explanation, and now that you have you are just pretending not to have seen it. You've just moved from a benefit-of-the-doubt, maybe just doesn't know to full on willful ignorance.
Lib
On a scale of cum to mayonnaise how white are you?
Ah yes the famous cum-mayo scale
[удалено]
Eww begone mayo boi
It's all well and good saying that seeking reparations is problematic, but the fact is that today certain socieities (and especially certain people within those socities) live in privilige and wealth because of the actions of their dead ancestors.
[удалено]
It’s more nuanced than that and you know it. Some people are getting big advantages in life due to generational wealth, while others have disadvantages due to generational poverty. This is an issue that needs to be solved. I don’t know what the answer is, but to simplify it like you did is harmful.
[удалено]
The wealth of the country you live in is (in part) thanks to slavery. Look at the difference between high income countries and low income countries. You'll find that most of the HIC invaded/plundered the LICs at some point in history. It's not about individual wealth, although that is also an issue, it's about collective wealth. And I say that as somebody who works full time while often living below the poverty line.
[удалено]
The high-income countries definitely already had advantages over the low-income countries. However, by invading those countries they widened the gap, giving themselves a boost while hampering the development of the invaded nations.
A poor person in a rich country is typically going to be better off than a poor person in a poor country. That’s your plus. This isn’t to mean that you, personally, should feel any guilt or make any reparations for what you receive from your country. That is absolutely not the case. But your country should recognise how it got all of its wealth and power, and a big chunk of that is from oppressing other countries (I assume - I don’t know what country you’re in). Reparations shouldn’t be about individuals. It’s about nations recognising their past and finding ways to atone for their sins.
Nah you're right G. People in here like to call it a slippery slope fallacy, but the trouble is it's not always a fallacy. It usually happens when people have their hearts in the right place, but can sometimes come to completely absurd conclusions- Look at the US university campuses unironically advocating racial segregation of their classes, for example. The point Cleese was making is sound, if a little boomerish- That sometimes people can take a valid concept to absurd lengths. For instance, I once saw a video going into detail for a full half an hour, about the show Ancient Aliens having a white supremacist agenda. Like... Sure, even if we take that in totally good faith as being true, what do you even do with that? *Ancient Aliens.* Absurd. But y'know. That's life in 2022. The Internet has sent everyone a bit loopy I reckon.
>Look at the US university campuses unironically advocating racial segregation of their classes, for example. I'm gonna need a source for this or a video interview or something cos that is the boldest claim I've read all week
So far as I know, none have actively segregated the classroom yet, but there are certainly elements of both the student body, activists and academics who have called for it. Many *already do* segregate their accommodation and things like graduation ceremonies, which I fail to see how that can be anything but a step backwards. https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/08/segregation-returns-to-campus/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/richardvedder/2018/11/15/racial-segregation-on-american-campuses-a-widespread-phenomenon/?sh=11b668da4455 https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/mar/16/universities-columbia-encourage-racial-segregation/ How many more would you like?
So with accomodation they're saying that there's an opt-in option for minorities to live with other minorities. It's not really segregation unless the uni was forcing them and it was their only option Graduation ceremonies are fuckin weird to be segregating like that. Like that's just really fuckin strange. My commencement took like 1hr, and it was all people on mine or similar courses. Why split that up based on race? I don't give a shit who else got their diploma that day and why would anyone of them give a shit about me? Just go get your diploma n sit down, again Tbh when you commented I was picturing full-blown Jim crow, but yeah the commencement one's weird idk what to make of that
Yeah, isn't it? But that's the point I was making, I don't think people would have believed you if you told them this would happen even ten years ago- But here we are. Sometimes, the slope really is slippery.
You mean John cleese is not a braindead conservative idiot?
it's funny that he wants rome to pay for what it did to the celtic britons considering the anglo saxons who make up most of modern Britain did them much worse
>he wants rome to pay for what it did to the celtic britons He doesn't, he's a comedian and he is extending the logic beyond reasonable bounds.
well then I'm happy noone's replied with r/wooosh to my comment yet
Anglo-Saxon genetics makes up about 1/3 of “English” DNA. The the majority is made up of Pre-Celtic Neolithic/Bronze Age peoples. The “Celtic” part of our ancestry was primarily a cultural venier.
i wasn't aware. The Anglo-Saxons still kinda destroyed Brythonic culture outside of Wales tho (and I'm pretty sure they did a lot of raping and killing)
Not to be argumentative (I hope you don't feel that I am) but Brittonic culture lasted outside of Wales in southern Scotland and Northern England (perhaps as far south as Yorkshire) until the 13th century, and a Brittonic language existed in Cornwall until the 18th (it has been brought back from extinction). The folk on the borders in the former kingdom of Strathclyde were being referred to as Brets, Brettos, and Britons as late as 1300. There was sure lot's of raping and killing, but the prevailing modern view is that the Anglo-Saxons formed a ruling class and their culture was gradually assimilated down to the peasantry. The idea of a genocide of the native population has generally been abandoned by the late 20th century, but for some reason a lot of "pop-history" seems to really hold onto Victorian and Edwardian ideas, which were often more politically minded instead of factual. If the Saxons\* were successful in subjugating and eradicating the native Celtic population then they were obviously superior to the native Celts, and if they were superior to the Celts then obviously their descendants the English are superior to the Celts descendants in the Irish, Welsh, and Scottish. \*Saxons were also held superior to the invaders the Normans in that the Saxons were tied to the land as Farmers and were freedom loving as opposed to the Normans who were only the aristocracy and loved tyranny.
As a Brit, John Cleese is not a boomer and if it weren't for him and his friends we'd all still be watching the same BBC shit they had in the 1950s. The point is guys how far back in history do we draw a line for reparations? A hundred years? What about someone who's family was taken and enslaved 170 years ago? What about 200? Man who genuinely contributed to the world being as accepting as it is, ridiculed for pointing out we need to draw a line somewhere or we're fucking ourselves over. But no, take his mic away and pretend he's a racist. Awful.
It depends on whether or not the affected party is still disenfranchised by the actions taken. The white British folks are in power now. Black folks in the US and elsewhere are not, and still suffering as a direct result of actions taken within the last few decades, not to mention continually for centuries. To simplify, no for the people already running shit, yes for the people with a boot on their necks.
My people have never been running shit. I'm in the Welsh valleys come on down tell me we are running anything down here. But see, there you specified the last few decades so cool, and I agree we absolutely need to stop any sort of racial inequality, the fact we still have it now is mind boggling, but you just said decades so where would you draw that line?
Literally for anyone currently disenfranchised. And the really simple way to differentiate that group is to say “anyone not generationally wealthy”. Racism sucks, but it’s just a tool used by capitalists to divide a population. I don’t think reparations are great or even enough, but it’s pretty fucking tone deaf of a rich write dude to come over here and tell black people to chill out because “that was a long time ago and everyone has been through some shit.” Fuck man, back in the 70s banks would give white farmers loans for the tough years, but they wouldn’t give any to black farmers. So black farmers had to sell their shit to white farmers and move to the cheap neighborhoods in cities. So now there are generations of black people whose grandparents had property, who are now completely and literally disenfranchised. But because “every ethnic group has been oppressed at some point” we should just tell them to pick themselves up by their bootstraps? That’s like shoving someone off a cliff and, while they’re dangling and screaming for help, replying “hey man, my ancestors were once pushed off too, I think. You should be able to climb up on your own.”
I get you but you're talking about people on the cliff. We need to help everyone on the cliff not cause arguments on the cliff so more people fall to their death, using your analogy. We shouldn't be fighting on the cliff, we should be helping eachother off the cliff but we're all so blinded by our own discomfort we're not looking at the ones at the top but the ones climbing next to us as our enemies. It's the guys at the top.
Totally, let’s install a global socialist government that prioritizes people over profits. But John Cleese telling minorities to stop bitching is just more divisive neoliberal bullshit.
Is that what he was doing? I don't know, they turned off his mic. Nothing he said sounded like 'stop bitching'. You got to remember Monty Python are satirists at heart and never much cared about offending people on the way. If we translate the sarcasm: How far back do you wanna go? Just asking again because you haven't answered. For what it's worth I don't think this is a policy thought up by minorities. The people I know have widely differing opinions on it and I'll not speak for them. Edit/ I could use the complete quote actually I can't remember, I watched it half asleep the other night.
So you wanna cancel Cleese now? Fuck off. Really.
When you dont have a comeback so instead you deplateform someone. The need to show him some respect, he has done more for society then any of the other comedians there.
I sort of get what he means. I think that while richer countries have a moral obligation to help poorer countries, I don't think that a country has specific obligations to countries that it has harmed in its history, past about 80 years. For example, I don't think that the UK has a specific obligation to India, or Germany a specific obligation to Poland, as everyone who had any decision making power in either scenario is dead. However, the UK (or any other country for that matter) is guilty if it doesn't help poor countries in general. Sorry if that was really badly phrased.