No one reading she ships/badge article can seriously come away with the feeling it is anti-City. It talks about the ship being a symbol of Manchester before the canal was built and that the only logical conclusion is that it is celebrating Manchester’s international trade, which was cotton and slaves on 2 of 3 legs. As other have pointed out it is part of The Guardian’s navel gazing on the subject and they are doing nothing wrong highlighting that a lot of the historical wealth of the country was based on slavery and exploitation. Not exactly something that was focussed on in my history lessons. The fact that both City and United incorporated the ship in their badge is understandable, but it is a fair question to ask whether we would do so now.
Even if this article can be seen as the ‘wokerati’ at work, it does not mean that he isn‘t right. Comparisons with The Gunners aren’t entirely valid as guns can also be used to defend the country and a gun isn’t ‘arguably’ a symbol of a centuries long genocide - and even if a technical connection with bad things can also be made, it doesn’t make the ship any better.
At the end of the day it isn’t the biggest issue facing the clubs at present (especially United) but on reflection I would rather see the bee than the ship.
Even if this article can be seen as the ‘wokerati’ at work, it does not mean that he isn‘t right. Comparisons with The Gunners aren’t entirely valid as guns can also be used to defend the country and a gun isn’t ‘arguably’ a symbol of a centuries long genocide - and even if a technical connection with bad things can also be made, it doesn’t make the ship any better.
At the end of the day it isn’t the biggest issue facing the clubs at present (especially United) but on reflection I would rather see the bee than the ship.
