An Analysis Of The Statue Of Cecil Rhodes

Cecil Rhodes Essay Cecil Rhodes amassed immense wealth by establishing the diamond industry in southern Africa. Rhodes exploited the native population in order to mine the diamonds so that he could increase his wealth. Upon his death, his fortune was given mostly to Oxford University to fund Rhodes scholarships. At Oriel College, there is a statue of Cecil Rhodes that has caused extensive protest recently, as people are angered at the representation of someone responsible for the abuse and slaughter of the native South Africans for personal gain. Many students argue for the removal of the statue because it represents racism, but Oxford insists on keeping the statue due to donors who threaten to withdraw their gifts if it is taken down. The statue of Cecil Rhodes should be removed from Oriel College at Oxford University. Those who argue against tearing down the statue claim that “we are not proud of absolutely everything that happened in our past, but we cannot erase it all” ("Backlash over Plot to"). They claim that the statue does not represent racism or oppression and that if the Rhodes statue is removed, then commemoration of many
other historical figures, such as Churchill and Jefferson, should be stopped as well. The overseer of the Rhodes scholarships even argues that removing the statue would be agreeing to “airbrush or bulldoze history” and therefore would show that the college is not serving “the pursuit of knowledge” (Simpson 42). These men are correct in insisting that we must not soften history, but the removal of the statue would not be assuaging history. Cecil Rhodes slaughtered South Africans for personal gain and laid the groundwork for apartheid: he should not be honored with a statue at Oriel College.
As Simpson states, “he wasn’t a nice man, even by the standards of the time.” The men arguing against removing the statue cite other leaders who had opinions disagreeing with modern ideas, but they fail to acknowledge that Rhodes was not simply a product of his times, but he was instead worse than many. Rhodes donated a fortune to the university, so it is understandable that they would want to honor him. It was not wrong of Oriel College to erect the statue honoring Rhodes, but now that we are able to look back and see who he was and what he did, it is imperative that the statue is removed because it honors someone who, even by the standards of his time, was cruel due to
racism.
Those leading the protest of the statue at Oxford have protested in a sophisticated manner with facts to reinforce their case. Last year, only twenty four black British students were accepted as undergraduates at the university (Simpson 42). The statue is about more than Cecil Rhodes alone: it represents the inequality that remains at Oxford to this day. Along with the inequality in admissions, apparently, Oxford also has been criticized for having curriculum that focuses on the United States and Britain while ignoring the rest of the world. Whether the statue is removed or not, Oxford needs to examine, and likely alter, their curriculum and environment.
Many argue that “Rhodes Must Fall” and others say the statue should remain because it represents history. Removing a statue is not forgetting history. The men arguing for Rhodes compare him to people who were products of their times in their wrongdoings, but Rhodes was more than a product of his times in his racism. Oxford students voted about the statue’s position on the campus and 245 out of 457 students voted to remove the statue (Espinoza); however, the statue will likely remain erect due to threats from donors. Money should not silence the protest against racism at the university. The protesters are scrutinizing the entire culture of Oxford, and the Rhodes statue is only one part of a larger issue. The greater problems eventually need to be addressed more directly, but, at the moment, the simple step of removing the statue would be an indication that Oxford is going to work toward equality, even if money is lost in the process.