Slave Trader Edward Colston's statue torn down in Bristol

mick087

Bowie wrote: »

Or this?



Do you imagine the ordinary members of the public were asked did they want it up in the first place? Were they f***.
I'm cool with a slave traders statue coming down. Next Thatcher's and Cromwell's.

This country is in a mess, i really dont think this would be a good example. This man was also given the death penalty.

The west has much to answer for when it come to this man.

Bannasidhe

suicide_circus wrote: »

slavery and child murder are both wrong in today's context, yes?

TBH - not much left of the Inca Empire and doubtful there are any alive today who are descended from their victims. The Inca no longer exist. They were wiped out. Slaughtered. Removed from the face of the Earth. They are as relevant to the discussion as the Carthegenians or the Spartans.

The Conquistadors on the other hand - after they destroyed the Inca they just went to town with the slavery, genocide, child murder etc etc. Now they had a lasting impact. Far better example for discussing South American monuments no?

Which Machu Picchu isn't by the way, a monument that is, it's an abandoned habitation. No one has lived there since 1572.
Which makes is not at all the same as Bristol.
Really terrible choice to frame your point around.

Nermal

Nermal wrote: »

Kheops-Pyramid
Nina at the Norwegian bokmål language Wikipedia / CC BY-SA (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/)

Here's an 'actual historical site' that is pretty much the definition of bragging by a rich businessman.

When are we tearing this one down?

You keep referring to things that are of immense historical and archaeological value. This statue came long after the man had died, misrepresented his history. Didn't really have anything of merit to it.

I have no problem with it being thrown in a museum as long as they describe the man he really was rather than the whitewashed history on the plaque.

robinph

Hunky Monster wrote: »

By some people’s logic here maybe we should get a few bulldozers in to sort out Auschwitz.

Yeah fück history.

Nobody has been suggesting that, well except for the people who wanted the slave traders statue to remain up and thinking that was the next "logical" step.

Auschwitz is not a statue commemorating the Nazis. It is an historical site to remember the victims of the Nazis.

Truthvader

Did someone forget to lock the gates/ All kinds of loonies out and about here.

1. There is no "systemic" racism. Are illiterate people simply using the word because they heard it somewhere else? The state/ the system is very specifically non racist and imposes penalties for it.
2. There some evil racist people out there. There are also a lot more eejits who say stupid racist things to impress their friends.
2. Destroying property that does not belong to you makes you a dick. Don't be a Dick
4. You can also be a Dick by being racist. Don't be a Dick

Bannasidhe

Hunky Monster wrote: »

By some people’s logic here maybe we should get a few bulldozers in to sort out Auschwitz.

Yeah fück history.

Because Auschwitz is a celebration of Hitler and Himmler?

Oh...wait...

Not only have you Godwinned -you have also demonstrated your utter lack of understanding the difference between remembering the victims and honouring those who victimised them.

elefant

Hunky Monster wrote: »

By some people’s logic here maybe we should get a few bulldozers in to sort out Auschwitz.

Yeah fück history.

Is this honestly what you currently think about the topic? Is this a comparison you are honestly making in good faith?

Christy42

is_that_so wrote: »

I didn't say it had been, I said it could be. It really is not the same thing. History is not clean and it's always been a challenge to show it, warts and all.

History is not clean indeed! However that statue didn't show the warts. Taking it down has shown off the warts brilliantly which as you say can be challenging it. I say a job well done in terms of teaching people history. Better than a statue where they couldn't even get a note on his role in the slave trade.

How could it be rewritten? What would they rewrite, white washing the slave trade would hardly benefit the SJWs now would it. It is a statue of him. The statue itself isn't particularly historical. It isn't the pyramids, it isn't that old. His life story is still available as it ever was, more so really. If anything the statue was an attempt at rewriting history given it misrepresented the man.

If people are particularly worried about it I say we can commission a statue dedicated to the slaves sent over to the US. It can note that it was off their backs that a lot of the funding for good works city of bristol was secured.

El_Duderino 09

suicide_circus wrote: »

They used to kill children in Machu Picchu by way of human sacrifice, not something the average modern Peruvian approves of i'm sure. Won't be long til the reduce the site to rubble i'd imagine.

Depends on whether they're still dealing with the remnants of the child killing in Machu Picchu. But it's nice to see that you don't have any good arguments against what happened yesterday.

Being reduced to this kind of argument about Machu Picchu or other posters talking about roman leaders statues or the colosseum, says a lot about your position. You oppose it even without good reasons. Speaks volumes.

mick087

elefant wrote: »

Are people genuine in here in trying to draw a comparison between buildings that were funded through slave trade, and a statue of an actual slave trader?

It's such a pathetic effort at gotcha whataboutery that it really doesn't feel genuine.

Check out the world cup statiums being built for 2022.
It might not be called slavery but i wouldnt want to of been working on them,

BlitzKrieg

Nermal wrote: »

Kheops-Pyramid
Nina at the Norwegian bokmål language Wikipedia / CC BY-SA (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/)

Here's an 'actual historical site' that is pretty much the definition of bragging by a rich businessman.

When are we tearing this one down?

thats a tomb

Lets be clear here

Actual historical sites

You know places where stuff actually happened or were actively used by the people or civilisations that they are being preserved for are rightfully preserved.

This goes from the Pyramids up to the palace of Versaille and the memorial at the world trade centre.

These are historical artifacts and memorials, most have been turned into museums to educate, those museums have been updated as a more nuenced understanding of history around these places become known.


Statues and other public displays primarily funded by private individuals or organisations commissioned over a 100 years after the person or event in question, placed in an area of social prominance but no actual direct link to the person or place in question that are primarily erected for personal motivations or agendas of the time are not given the same historical significance and can be removed.

Preferably they should be civilly removed but that can sometimes not be the case. You can wholly and justifiably have a discussion about property damage etc*, but the erasing history card people keep pulling is bullsh*t which has been the primary card pulled here in this thread.




*For example I do feel the Bristol police had the right position, if they had stormed in to recover the statue after it had been pulled down they did seriously run the risk of the protest becoming a genuine unfocused mob and leading to a lot more damage to actual businesses and services in the city cente. It has arguably made the entire Bristol protest go a lot smoother by allowing the focus to be on one mostly valueless statue that can be easily recovered and is arguably more valuable now in it's current state then it was prior.

robinph

Truthvader wrote: »

2. Destroying property that does not belong to you makes you a dick. Don't be a Dick

As a citizen of the city in question it belonged to me. It was installed by former wealthy old white men from Bristol. It's been brought down by the current citizens of Bristol.

I'm happy to see it end up in the harbour, and I'm also perfectly fine with my taxes being spent on lifting it back out of the harbour now to stick it in a museum which the kid will then no doubt visit on a school trip in a couple of years to learn about the history of the city.

Eric Cartman

Hunky Monster wrote: »

By some people’s logic here maybe we should get a few bulldozers in to sort out Auschwitz.

Yeah fück history.

Convert it into a golf course sure
Burn books while we’re at it.
Nothing could possibly go wrong if we pave over every bit of uncomfortable history

markodaly

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Protests have a long history and they can be very effective at causing change.

Yes, but what happned yesterday in Bristol was not just a protest it was an unruly mob taking an undemocratic decision to damage public property. This thread is not a comment on protests in general, its is a debate on the very actions that happened in Bristol. You may want to wash it away in the usual way you wash away facts that are a little uncomfortable.

It makes politicians stand up and take notice and change their focus. It will likely cause more councils to stop democratically ignoring calls to remove similar statues in other areas.

So you are legitimising violence?

Interesting, because when it suited you, you were very much against the idea of mobs, dishing out extrajudicial justice.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=110712229

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

These vigilantes are mad for blood. I don't trust them to have any kind of mob power.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=110314543

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Do you mean there are people who want a police free society or people who want vigilante mobs?

I can tell you I've seen plenty of posters advocate for mob justice. Not sure I've ever seen a poster happy clappy advocating for police free society.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=108289627

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Police can be corrupted and we find out due to the auditing processes. The term 'corrupt' or 'audit' don't even apply to the mob. The mob could never be found to be wrong because there is no system for asking whether the mob ever got it right.

What does these previous comments tell us about you. Nothing really, apart from you being a huge hypocrite as everyone can now see. Espousing the rule of law on one hand when it suits, and giving mob justice a pass when it suits.

Thats a great thing.

Mob rule is a 'great thing', so why are you against it 'some' of the time?
:pac::pac::pac::pac:

mick087

Christy42 wrote: »

History is not clean indeed! However that statue didn't show the warts. Taking it down has shown off the warts brilliantly which as you say can be challenging it. I say a job well done in terms of teaching people history. Better than a statue where they couldn't even get a note on his role in the slave trade.

How could it be rewritten? It is a statue of him. The statue itself isn't particularly historical. It isn't the pyramids, it isn't that old. His life story is still available as it ever was. If anything the statue was an attempt at rewriting history given it misrepresented the man.

This has not shown the warts off brittently what it has done is set peoples thinking back.
When a person says to you Black lifes matter, what he or she really thinks when it comes to it will be hidden in the vote they make in secret.

robinph

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

It has arguably made the entire Bristol protest go a lot smoother by allowing the focus to be on one mostly valueless statue that can be easily recovered and is arguably more valuable now in it's current state then it was prior.

+1

This makes it a much more powerful object when it is dried off and stuck in the museum.

Nermal

Deleted User wrote: »

You keep referring to things that are of immense historical and archaeological value.

A violent woke mob is no judge of historical, archaeological, or artistic value. Why should they have the power to cleanse the streets of history?

Bowie wrote: »

For all the comparisons to Iraq, Ireland, Soviet states: precisely what oppressive, undemocratic and colonial entity are the Bristol branch of BLM engaged in violent rebellion against?

Cal4567

If you start allowing the rule of the mob, then you get into very dangerous territory. This along with the defacing of Churchill's statue in Westminster has probably incensed the silent majority, a lot of whom may have had some sympathy with the Minneapolis situation. I doubt whether they are as sympathetic today as they were before the weekend.

Also, they are on fairly dodgy historical ground when it comes to slavery. It was as much a black on black crime within Africa before the white man realised its value.

Truthvader

robinph wrote: »

As a citizen of the city in question it belonged to me. It was installed by former wealthy old white men from Bristol. It's been brought down by the current citizens of Bristol.

I'm happy to see it end up in the harbour, and I'm also perfectly fine with my taxes being spent on lifting it back out of the harbour now to stick it in a museum which the kid will then no doubt visit on a school trip in a couple of years to learn about the history of the city.

As before. Don't be a Dick.

The problem is that once you let people like you decide what to destroy we are all licenced to destroy whatever we like. Know Bristol well, fantastic city. Not improved by Dicks.

Don be a Dick

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Convert it into a golf course sure
Burn books while we’re at it.
Nothing could possibly go wrong if we pave over every bit of uncomfortable history

Why don’t we consult the mob going burning, looting and destroying everything while we’re at it.

Cupatae

what are black people in the Uk rioting for ?

robinph

Truthvader wrote: »

As before. Don't be a Dick.

The problem is that once you let people like you decide what to destroy we are all licenced to destroy whatever we like. Know Bristol well, fantastic city. Not improved by Dicks.

Don be a Dick

How has the city been damaged by the removal of this statue?

Nothing has been destroyed, nothing has been lost. Just a statue which doesn't represent the feelings of the population towards the slave trade ended up in the harbour.

Christy42

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Convert it into a golf course sure
Burn books while we’re at it.
Nothing could possibly go wrong if we pave over every bit of uncomfortable history

Literally no part of history was paved over. If anything this highlighted the slave trade's connection with Bristol far more than the statue ever did. (I am presuming that is the uncomfortable bit of history you are referring to)?

suicide_circus

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Depends on whether they're still dealing with the remnants of the child killing in Machu Picchu. But it's nice to see that you don't have any good arguments against what happened yesterday.

Being reduced to this kind of argument about Machu Picchu or other posters talking about roman leaders statues or the colosseum, says a lot about your position. You oppose it even without good reasons. Speaks volumes.

i feel duty bound to offer a devil's advocate position on such things. The tearing down of monuments, the burning of books...these things are not trivial and deserve to be questioned. Actions taken by mobs in the throes of moral fervor need to be looked at.

mick087

Cal4567 wrote: »

If you start allowing the rule of the mob, then you get into very dangerous territory. This along with the defacing of Churchill's statue in Westminster has probably incensed the silent majority, a lot of whom may have had some sympathy with the Minneapolis situation. I doubt whether they are as sympathetic today as they were before the weekend.

Also, they are on fairly dodgy historical ground when it comes to slavery. It was as much a black on black crime within Africa before the white man realised its value.

The mob who did this, pulled it down jumped on it need to step forward and be counted. They need to explain who they are and there reason for doing this.



They used direct action which at times does need to be used. We need to hear from them why they used direct action.


IMO The statue should of been taken down by the council long but it was not and a group of young people pulled it down dragged it through the street and dropped it in the street.

markodaly

Cal4567 wrote: »

If you start allowing the rule of the mob, then you get into very dangerous territory. This along with the defacing of Churchill's statue in Westminster has probably incensed the silent majority, a lot of whom may have had some sympathy with the Minneapolis situation.

These people who vandalise statues are idiots really. They dont have a notion or a clue for the most part. Churchill was a fascist apprently, even though he stood up to and was part of the Allied nations that defeated the biggest Fascist regime known to man. Yawn!

It doest matter if it were Churchill, or Ghandi. These people live in an alternative bubble of their own making.

https://eurasiantimes.com/winston-churchill-statue-vandalised-in-london-during-black-lives-matter-protests/

Earlier, as EurAsian Times reported, US ambassador to India Kenneth Juster had apologised for the vandalism and desecration of Mahatma Gandhi’s statue situated outside Embassy of India’s office in Washington, DC, earlier in the day by unruly elements involved in the ongoing protests in the United States.

“So sorry to see the desecration of the Gandhi statue in Wash, DC. Please accept our sincere apologies. Appalled as well by the horrific death of George Floyd and the awful violence and vandalism. We stand against prejudice and discrimination of any type. We will recover and be better,” the ambassador said in a tweet.

But sure, its a great thing. Maybe the public and elected officals will stand up and take notice, now that someone vandalised a statue of Ghandi and we will all be better for it... right? :pac:

mick087

Cupatae wrote: »

what are black people in the Uk rioting for ?

They want the white race to belive that black lifes matter.

Nermal

Giambologna sabine

Look at these bastards in Florence, with a statue on display blatantly commemorating a notorious sexual assault.

Tear it down!

El_Duderino 09

markodaly wrote: »

Yes, but what happned yesterday in Bristol was not just a protest it was an unruly mob taking an undemocratic decision to damage public property. This thread is not a comment on protests in general, its is a debate on the very actions that happened in Bristol. You may want to wash it away in the usual way you wash away facts that are a little uncomfortable.




So you are legitimising violence?

Interesting, because when it suited you, you were very much against the idea of mobs, dishing out extrajudicial justice.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=110712229


https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=110314543


https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=108289627



What does these previous comments tell us about you. Nothing really, apart from you being a huge hypocrite as everyone can now see. Espousing the rule of law on one hand when it suits, and giving mob justice a pass when it suits.




Mob rule is a 'great thing', so why are you against it 'some' of the time?
:pac::pac::pac::pac:

I mean, that's impressive quote mining but unfortunately that thread was about mobs dishing out violent vigilante justice and hanging people they think are criminals. I oppose that.

What happened yesterday wasn't mobs dishing out violent vigilante justice and hanging people they think are criminals.

And to be clear, I said the protests and taking down the statue was a great thing. I did not say mob rule is a great thing. Nice try and i appreciate the work that went into it, but it was a very dishonest attempt to put words in my mouth. Overall about a 4/10.

The urge to ignore the great peaceful protest that happened yesterday and only see mob rule is fascinating. You tried to compare it to vigilante mobs dishing out violent vigilante justice and hanging people they think are criminals. That must have been a stretch for your credulity as you were doing it.

THE_SHEEP

Yes , the " mob " were correct to remove that statue . Sure wasn't the statue erected , all those years ago , to celebrate that this man was a slave trader / racist etc ( and for no other reason , hum ? )

Also , when are BLM and co going to demolish Mount Rushmore , seeing as the founding fathers were found of the odd slave or two ?

History should now be rewritten , in this " brave new world " .

Statues should now be erected of George Floyd
( And Piers Morgan ) .