Slave Trader Edward Colston's statue torn down in Bristol

buried

So when they going to take that statue of Saint Patrick off the Hill of Tara and put it in some Roman church where it should be?

FrancieBrady

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Another monument venerating a person who profited from inter-generational torture removed.

https://twitter.com/SadiqKhan/status/1270425865273389056

Maybe they could designate a bit of the English Channel for these statues in memorial of those slaves who were thrown in, threw themselves in, or tossed their children in to save them from a miserable life.

The salty tears of the broflakes would be delicious.

Cecil Rhodes for the high jump too. Cathartic days for Britain...characther forming one might say.

nickkinneg

By that same logic - the pyramids of Egypt should be torn down as well - they were built by slaves. Who is being held to account there?

ancapailldorcha

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

No moaning here lad, sure I suppose you agree with it being taken off.

Did I say that?

Alrigghtythen

Let's just trash everything, that'll help

nickkinneg

I repeat - By that same logic - the pyramids of Egypt should be torn down as well - they were built by slaves. Who is being held to account there?

Huntergonzo

Alrigghtythen wrote: »

Let's just trash everything, that'll help

Yep, especially if it 'offends' you, that's the golden ticket these days.

Gradius

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Cecil Rhodes for the high jump too. Cathartic days for Britain...characther forming one might say.

For sure, it will inspire the same resilient constitution of soft ice cream

buried

nickkinneg wrote: »

I repeat - By that same logic - the pyramids of Egypt should be torn down as well - they were built by slaves. Who is being held to account there?

Nobody knows who built the Pyramids, not the ones in Giza anyways. The lack of hieroglyphs in the Great Pyramid of Giza, plus the fact the rest of the Pyramids the actual Egyptian Pharaohs tried to build all fell in on themselves denotes that those lads had nothing to do with the ones in Giza. When the great Pyramid was first broken into there wasn't even a body inside it. There was nothing in it.

nickkinneg

nickkinneg wrote: »

I repeat - By that same logic - the pyramids of Egypt should be torn down as well - they were built by slaves. Who is being held to account there?

Immense historical value versus statues of zero historical worth that misrepresent history.

Odhinn

nickkinneg wrote: »

I repeat - By that same logic - the pyramids of Egypt should be torn down as well - they were built by slaves. Who is being held to account there?

Theres no evidence of that at all.

ancapailldorcha

Odhinn wrote: »

Theres no evidence of that at all.

In fairness he did say logic but I didn't pick up any of that either.

Gradius

nickkinneg wrote: »

I repeat - By that same logic - the pyramids of Egypt should be torn down as well - they were built by slaves. Who is being held to account there?

Sure never mind that, the han chinese are engaged in literally breeding out the Muslims over there. Having the women sleep with han chinese. Not to mention the more direct approach of concentration camps and rife slavery and live organ transplantation. Just one of a thousand examples that are actually worthy of genuine outrage.

In this world, however, the tearing down of centuries old statues is where the social media points are to be won. Photo opportunities galore.

It's all very specific when it comes to "the bad guy". There are lessons left right and center in how to manipulate people wholesale. Very effective.

FrancieBrady

Gradius wrote: »

For sure, it will inspire the same resilient constitution of soft ice cream

No, I think the likelihood is that the descendants of the empire builders will know the full truth of what was done to enrich their society.

Huntergonzo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No, I think the likelihood is that the descendants of the empire builders will know the full truth of what was done to enrich their society.

The descendants will give the same amount of fúcks as their ancestors did, but if tearing down statues gets people off then have at it.

ancapailldorcha

Gradius wrote: »

Sure never mind that, the han chinese are engaged in literally breeding out the Muslims over there. Having the women sleep with han chinese. Not to mention the more direct approach of concentration camps and rife slavery and live organ transplantation. Just one of a thousand examples that are actually worthy of genuine outrage.

In this world, however, the tearing down of centuries old statues is where the social media points are to be won. Photo opportunities galore.

It's all very specific when it comes to "the bad guy". There are lessons left right and center in how to manipulate people wholesale. Very effective.

Whereas a lot of the conservatives here seem to idolise a US president who adopts a sickeningly simpering attitude to the tyrannical leaders of such countries so you'll have to pardon my cynicism.

Bannasidhe

Gradius wrote: »

What separates a person from new Jersey away from Georgia?

Those feet washers seem to have a very acute awareness and willingness to recognise the difference. Ditto for those having their feet washed.

And it's very much black and white, African and European.

So while you say you recognise certain differences in people, you obviously have a blindspot that these people readily jump on.

Why are there no Asians involved, or Mexicans, or American Indians?

This gets to the heart of the hypocrisy, that many people, including European people, believe that Europeans have to "pay". It is singular in its specificity. You yourself blindly misread the word "european" as to mean "white", and "white" is the byword for "bad". You are so immersed in this paradigm that it has become an automatic translation in your brain.

To spell it out more succinctly, there are a lot of people that have that same peculiar "blindspot" as you, and it isn't an accident.

What separates a person from Kerry and a person from Louth?
A person from Bristol and a person from Durham?
A person from Portugal and a person from Sweden?

I don't know why anybody was involved in the footwashing. I don't know where they or their ancestors come from - and neither do you unless you have asked every single one of them.
Which you haven't, as you said it's not your business.
Yet, you are the only person I have seen to bring it up.

I could hazard a guess why Asians and Mexicans might feel they have no particular role to play in this, but it would be a guess. For all I know some of those 'Europeans' might have Asian or Mexican ancestry. Ya can't always tell just by looking at them on the internet - which is where you saw this isn't it?

Now you are telling me I think 'white' means 'bad'.

No - you think I think white means bad.

I think white is just another skin tone and in and of itself means nothing bar a person who has a white skin tone is descended from people who left Africa a very very very very long time ago.
At least on one side, people with one white parent and one black parent can look white, or black, or that shade Irish people go lie in the sun in Spain for hours to achieve.
Saw a thing about twin sisters - one has red hair, pale white skin, and freckles - the other has dark skin and soft afro hair. Are they 'European' or 'African' in your view?

Whether a person is good or bad has nothing to do with the colour of their skin, but if they think the colour of their skin makes them inherently superior to people with a different skin tone than yes, I, personally, think that person is a bad person.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Eric Cartman wrote: »

its literally fascism.

Were the IRA also fascist for blowing up Nelson's Pillar on O'Connell Street?

Gradius

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No, I think the likelihood is that the descendants of the empire builders will know the full truth of what was done to enrich their society.

If someone is ignorant enough to the ins and outs of the British empire, what value is there in convincing the ignorant? Convincing gullible people of anything is no achievement.

And what would that inspire, in your opinion?

Guilt, obviously.

But what practical effect do you see coming from it? What's the outcome in real terms?

Huntergonzo

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Were the IRA also fascist for blowing up Nelson's Pillar on O'Connell Street?

Nah I'd say that was an act of terrorism Princess.

biko

Many Africans slaves were caught by other Africans and sold on.
Doesn't that mean Africans should apologise to other Africans?
Do you have Nigerian friends? Ask them.

Long before Europeans arrived, Igbos enslaved other Igbos as punishment for crimes, for the payment of debts, and as prisoners of war. The practice differed from slavery in the Americas: slaves were permitted to move freely in their communities and to own property, but they were also sometimes sacrificed in religious ceremonies or buried alive with their masters to serve them in the next life.

When the transatlantic trade began, in the fifteenth century, the demand for slaves spiked. Igbo traders began kidnapping people from distant villages. Sometimes a family would sell off a disgraced relative, a practice that Ijoma Okoro, a professor of Igbo history at the University of Nigeria, Nsukka, likens to the shipping of British convicts to the penal colonies in Australia: “People would say, ‘Let them go. I don’t want to see them again.’ ” Between the fifteenth and nineteenth centuries, nearly one and a half million Igbo slaves were sent across the Middle Passage.

“Are you not ashamed of what he did?” I asked.

“I can never be ashamed of him,” he said, irritated.
“Why should I be? His business was legitimate at the time. He was respected by everyone around.”

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/personal-history/my-great-grandfather-the-nigerian-slave-trader

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Huntergonzo wrote: »

Nah I'd say that was an act of terrorism Princess.

I think your defintion of terrorism is even vaguer than Eric's definition of Fascism!

nickkinneg

Odhinn wrote: »

Theres no evidence of that at all.

Slavery however did exist in Egypt - Im pretty sure - "Egyptian slaves, specifically during the New Kingdom era, originated from foreign lands. The slaves themselves were seen as an accomplishment to Egyptian kings’ reign, and a sign of power. Slaves or b3k were seen as property or a commodity to be bought and sold. Their human qualities were disregarded and were merely seen as a property to be used for a master’s labour" - so thats what i mean "by that logic" and "who is held to account"

Gradius

Bannasidhe wrote: »

What separates a person from Kerry and a person from Louth?
A person from Bristol and a person from Durham?
A person from Portugal and a person from Sweden?

I don't know why anybody was involved in the footwashing. I don't know where they or their ancestors come from - and neither do you unless you have asked every single one of them.
Which you haven't, as you said it's not your business.
Yet, you are the only person I have seen to bring it up.

I could hazard a guess why Asians and Mexicans might feel they have no particular role to play in this, but it would be a guess. For all I know some of those 'Europeans' might have Asian or Mexican ancestry. Ya can't always tell just by looking at them on the internet - which is where you saw this isn't it?

Now you are telling me I think 'white' means 'bad'.

No - you think I think white means bad.

I think white is just another skin tone and in and of itself means nothing bar a person who has a white skin tone is descended from people who left Africa a very very very very long time ago.
At least on one side, people with one white parent and one black parent can look white, or black, or that shade Irish people go lie in the sun in Spain for hours to achieve.
Saw a thing about twin sisters - one has red hair, pale white skin, and freckles - the other has dark skin and soft afro hair. Are they 'European' or 'African' in your view?

Whether a person is good or bad has nothing to do with the colour of their skin, but if they think the colour of their skin makes them inherently superior to people with a different skin tone than yes, I, personally, think that person is a bad person.

No, no, no

You are stating your ignorance on how these people are, without one single exception, self-dividing into black and white. In this micro example, the subservient gesture of "white" people to "black" people.

These excellent people can recognise what they're doing. But you can't. You can't grasp it. You can't understand it. You're ignorant to it. It's an unsolvable puzzle.

Then in the same instance, you'll segregate all sorts of other people. Of course you understand why there are no Mexicans. Of course you understand why there are no japanese. Of course you understand why there are no vikings.

You can see everything you want to see. And nothing you refuse to see.

No,, I don't think white = bad. Yet you are the one who translates words automatically to change meaning. You did that earlier.

Pointing out the obvious is rarely popular, especially with selectively critical people. But what you are saying is tried and true, it's practical cliché. But it works, and you'll have many friends because of it, though quality may be wanting.

iamstop

Jimbob1977 wrote: »

The Inbetweeners couldn't be made today.

And it started only ten years ago.

Briefcase wanker!

FrancieBrady

Gradius wrote: »

If someone is ignorant enough to the ins and outs of the British empire, what value is there in convincing the ignorant? Convincing gullible people of anything is no achievement.

And what would that inspire, in your opinion?

Guilt, obviously.

But what practical effect do you see coming from it? What's the outcome in real terms?

Education, is the outcome. Which is always a good thing. Britain is not full of 'ignorant people'. Those people are a product of an education system that doesn't tell them this stuff.
The statuery won't survive of the majority of people know the truth.

buried

nickkinneg wrote: »

Slavery however did exist in Egypt - Im pretty sure - "Egyptian slaves, specifically during the New Kingdom era, originated from foreign lands. The slaves themselves were seen as an accomplishment to Egyptian kings’ reign, and a sign of power. Slaves or b3k were seen as property or a commodity to be bought and sold. Their human qualities were disregarded and were merely seen as a property to be used for a master’s labour" - so thats what i mean "by that logic" and "who is held to account"

Slavery did exist in Pharaoh ruled Egypt. But there is no actual hard evidence that proves the Pharaohs built the Great Pyramid complex at Giza. Recent geological evidence has shown that the stones at the complex were weathered by water and rain which means the monuments in the area could be more than 10,000 years old

nickkinneg

and you can probably add in the Colosseum in Rome too - that would need to be checked - "by that logic"

Huntergonzo

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

I think your defintion of terrorism is even vaguer than Eric's definition of Fascism!

And you're free to think it.

Junkyard Tom

nickkinneg wrote: »

By that same logic - the pyramids of Egypt should be torn down as well - they were built by slaves. Who is being held to account there?

They're a monument to hard work of slaves and nobody is trying to venerate the people who benefitted from their graft.

Go teach yourself about false equivalence and whataboutery.