Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Our prime minister obviously has a lot on his plate at present but I couldn’t help feeling he had overlooked recent evidence with his claims that “we cannot now try to edit or censor our past” and “we cannot pretend to have a different history.” Anyone who has read two history books on the same topic knows there are two sides to every story, which is precisely that point being made in the fight for racial equality.
One only has to consider the differing accounts of events surrounding a certain trip to Durham and the belated editing of blog posts to see that having different histories and editing the past are practices that both remain alive and well in the present day.
Sarah Wood
Scotland
A Cummings conspiracy?
One wonders at just how many ways a government can muck up on just about every front. Delaying lockdown, inadequate supplies of PPE and ventilators, decisions to release hospital patients carrying Covid-19 into care homes, incompetence over testing, incompetence over track and trace – all while boasting that all those cock-ups are “world beating”. That set me thinking about the structure, personalities and glaring inadequacies of those decision makers. At the centre of all this mayhem is, of course, Dominic Cummings, and being of a fanciful turn of mind I wondered, “What if ...? What if all of this chaos was a cunning plan?”
Dominic Cummings spent three years in Russia from 1994 to 1997. What if, then, Cummings is the ultimate Manchurian candidate? What if Russia’s plan was to weaken the west through destroying the economy of one of its main critics and leader of western opinion, Britain, and hopefully, weaken Europe in doing so? What better way than Brexit?
It has long been believed that Russian interference helped in swinging the referendum and, if my fanciful tale holds together, their man is at the centre. The right-wing Tories, so grateful to him, take him to their bosoms and thus he sits at the centre of all the ensuing chaos. He manipulates Boris Johnson not only into the prime ministerial role but as a consequence, has a grateful and unwitting ally, clearly so dependent upon Cummings that he cannot allow him to be sacked, whatever the embarrassment.
Perhaps John le Carre could do my tale proper justice, in time.
Kate Hall
Leeds
Losing his grip
I read John Rentoul’s column about the unfathomable effect of Dominic Cummings on Boris Johnson and his divisive tactics of “divide and rule” in this rigidly controlled government, where raising doubts or criticism must be akin to political exile. This has led to the parting of the ways with Tim Montgomerie, who paints a graphic picture of Cummings as a despotic individual who will not brook opposition or even presumably reasoned debate.
This is concerning because no adviser should have that much influence over the prime minister, especially in these dire and tragic times. If Cummings has been advising Johnson about how to handle this public health crisis, he hasn’t made much of a fist of it thus far, so perhaps his iron hold is losing traction.
Judith A Daniels
Great Yarmouth, Norfolk
Not censorship to remove statues of racists
It is not “editing our past”, as Boris Johnson puts it, to rid ourselves of statues of racists. A statue is merely a celebratory symbol; it doesn’t somehow represent history – not even remotely!
History contains many wicked people who are well known across the world. Those wicked people don’t need statues to alert the public to their existence; they’re known and understood regardless. It is education that enlightens people to history. The idea that losing statues is akin to misplacing our very history is frankly laughable. It is, not, however, in the least bit surprising to hear such nonsense being spouted, as our prime minister is hardly a facts man but, rather, a populist egotist with no regard whatsoever for the truth.
Sebastian Monblat
Sutton, London
Where does it end?
Where does the removal of statues end? A large number of our historic buildings were built on money from slavery. Do they get removed too? Or get demolished?
We could argue that if Winston Churchill had not been prime minister during the Second World War, the UK might have become a Nazi state. It is disgraceful that his statue has been covered to prevent damage.
Juliet Davis
Address supplied
Johnson is being ridiculous
The position of Boris Johnson is plainly ridiculous. Is it to lie about their history that the Germans don’t have statues of Hitler on their streets? It is about time we had an honest think about who adorns our towns and it shouldn’t be simply because at one point they were powerful. No one is lying; we’re just not wishing to celebrate certain aspects of our history. Sounds sensible to me.
Howard Pilott
Address supplied
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments