Slave Trader Edward Colston's statue torn down in Bristol

castletownman

In fifty hundred years time, someone will get this treatment because once, when they were young, they went "blackface" at a party.

I bet if they forensically studied every figure from the Victorian era and earlier, they'd find some pretty unsavoury stuff relative to today. But that's the key point: your comparing mindsets and ideals from generations ago to the more molly-coddled style of today.

I mean we all have an old uncle or grandfather who still use un-PC words and names to describe different races. Should we tear down their gravestones as a result?

Might as well burn all history books while we are at it.

Nermal

Bannasidhe wrote: »

It is also hammered home that the role of the historian is not to judge, the role of the historian is to lay out the facts as supported by the primary sources. It doesn't matter if they were heroes or villains.

I agree absolutely.

What better example could we find of this worthless and facile 'judgement' than the people behind https://www.toppletheracists.org/?

As they blithely say: 'History is complicated so we have made some judgment calls.'

Edgware

marieholmfan wrote: »

There would be no Jewish people or non white people in Ireland.
That would now be history - the crime of 70 years ago.

The role of the Gaelic Irish (putatively) is less clear - either full citizens of the the 3rd Reich (if there even would have been any citizens as we understand the term) or else enserfed helots. However the language would have been revived.

Language revived my arse.
What's the Irish for crematorium?

FrancieBrady

castletownman wrote: »

In fifty hundred years time, someone will get this treatment because once, when they were young, they went "blackface" at a party.

I bet if they forensically studied every figure from the Victorian era and earlier, they'd find some pretty unsavoury stuff relative to today. But that's the key point: your comparing mindsets and ideals from generations ago to the more molly-coddled style of today.

I mean we all have an old uncle or grandfather who still use un-PC words and names to describe different races. Should we tear down their gravestones as a result?

Might as well burn all history books while we are at it.

If the gravestone is a homage to his un-PCness then yes, it should be taken down.

That is the problem here. If your fortune and largess was based on the proceeds of slavery, it is no longer appropriate that that should be celebrated.

Bannasidhe

Nermal wrote: »

I agree absolutely.

What better example could we find of this worthless and facile 'judgement' than the people behind https://www.toppletheracists.org/?

As they blithely say: 'History is complicated so we have made some judgment calls.'

The are just the other side of the 'Statues are history' crowd in my opinion.

Both sides are making judgements.

While historians across the world are joking about the difficulty in getting the statue into their car/lecture theatre/office so they can do their job.

In the future it's those who are judging on either side who will be written about - the statues will just about merit being a slide on a Powerpoint by way of illustration during a lecture or a small photograph in an article because the simple fact is they, themselves, don't matter - it's what they stand for/reaction they cause that will be looked at. Both sides treated equally.

Christy42

castletownman wrote: »

In fifty hundred years time, someone will get this treatment because once, when they were young, they went "blackface" at a party.

I bet if they forensically studied every figure from the Victorian era and earlier, they'd find some pretty unsavoury stuff relative to today. But that's the key point: your comparing mindsets and ideals from generations ago to the more molly-coddled style of today.

I mean we all have an old uncle or grandfather who still use un-PC words and names to describe different races. Should we tear down their gravestones as a result?

Might as well burn all history books while we are at it.

Everyone keeps saying this slippery slope stuff but I ain't seeing it.

The man has his gravestone where ever it was before, presuming the elements/new buildings didn't get to it already. Your racist uncle or grandad probably doesn't have a statue dedicated to them in a public park.

Neither is blackface the same as being a slave trader. Certainly many didn't think slavery wrong at the time. I can accept that. That does not mean he deserves a point of pride in the city either.

ohnonotgmail

marieholmfan wrote: »

There would be no Jewish people or non white people in Ireland.
That would now be history - the crime of 70 years ago.

The role of the Gaelic Irish (putatively) is less clear - either full citizens of the the 3rd Reich (if there even would have been any citizens as we understand the term) or else enserfed helots. However the language would have been revived.

well thats ok then

Nermal

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It is no longer appropriate that that should be celebrated.

Celebration?

You might have had a point if Colston's statue showed him dancing a merry jig, making the 'pay-me' sign with some poor manacled figure in tow.

If a statue is by definition a celebration of all the acts of that figure, then we will have no more statues.

Fleetwoodmac

While I agree absolutely with the symbolism of removing these statues, imposition of thought police in some cases is unfair. An example being Justin Beibers annihilation of Cork girl, Allie Sherlock. He publicly condemned her on her insta page for not using her platform to support BLM, which was untrue. The result being she is bombarded with thousands of messages from his fans. She is 15 years old, he clearly never considered the effect this could have on a young girls career, never mind her emotional health.
Educating people, particulalry someone so young,if that was the intent, should not be done so publically and to the detriment of someones mental health.

https://www.msn.com/en-ie/entertainment/celebrity/justin-bieber-has-a-go-at-cork-starlet-allie-sherlock-on-instagram/ar-BB15gY5d?ocid=sp

FrancieBrady

Nermal wrote: »

Celebration?

You might have had a point if Colston's statue showed him dancing a merry jig, making the 'pay-me' sign with some poor manacled figure in tow.

If a statue is by definition a celebration of all the acts of that figure, then we will have no more statues.

Of course it is a 'celebration' of the person depicted.

We wouldn't know of Colston had he not enriched himself in the slave trade. His largesse was possible because of the money he made off that trade.

Bullocks

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Of course it is a 'celebration' of the person depicted.

We wouldn't know of Colston had he not enriched himself in the slave trade. His largesse was possible because of the money he made off that trade.

We could well have know him. He enriched himself in a lot more ways than trading in slaves.

ohnonotgmail

Bullocks wrote: »

We could well have know him. He enriched himself in a lot more ways than trading in slaves.

i hadn't heard of him before this. Now i know more about the atlantic slave trade than i probably want to know. tearing down the statue has been very educational.

completedit

Fleetwoodmac wrote: »

While I agree absolutely with the symbolism of removing these statues, imposition of thought police in some cases is unfair. An example being Justin Beibers annihilation of Cork girl, Allie Sherlock. He publicly condemned her on her insta page for not using her platform to support BLM, which was untrue. The result being she is bombarded with thousands of messages from his fans. She is 15 years old, he clearly never considered the effect this could have on a young girls career, never mind her emotional health.
Educating people, particulalry someone so young,if that was the intent, should not be done so publically and to the detriment of someones mental health.

https://www.msn.com/en-ie/entertainment/celebrity/justin-bieber-has-a-go-at-cork-starlet-allie-sherlock-on-instagram/ar-BB15gY5d?ocid=sp

What an absolute loser. And I say that as someone who has bought his albums

FrancieBrady

Bullocks wrote: »

We could well have know him. He enriched himself in a lot more ways than trading in slaves.

Extremely unlikely.

While he was involved with the company - 84,000 slaves it is estimated were transported.

Bannasidhe

marieholmfan wrote: »

There would be no Jewish people or non white people in Ireland.
That would now be history - the crime of 70 years ago.

The role of the Gaelic Irish (putatively) is less clear - either full citizens of the the 3rd Reich (if there even would have been any citizens as we understand the term) or else enserfed helots. However the language would have been revived.

Why wouldn't there be Jewish people in Ireland?

There have been Jewish people here for centuries - there was a pamphlet published in 1714 by an Irish philosopher advocating they be allowed to become naturalised citizens, in 1746 an bill was published in the Irish parliament to allow them to naturalise, Daniel O'Connell was a staunch advocate of Jewish Emancipation (they were also victims of the Penal Laws), and during the Famine Jewish families contributed a huge amount to relief efforts.

There have also been 'non-white' people in Ireland for centuries - not in great numbers but still here. For example Rachel Baptiste was a singer born in Ireland in c1750 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachael_Baptist - she was not white, she was also one of the estimated 1000 -3000 black people here at the time.

The only reason there would be no Jews would be that they went sent off to the Death camps - along with Quakers, Christian Scientists, Gypsies, Homosexuals and anyone else deemed sub-human.

There is no evidence to support the supposition that a Nazi regime would allow the revival of the Irish language, nor that Irish people (who are non -Ayran) would become citizens of the Third Reich. If you think otherwise perhaps you should have a look at where 19th C Race Theory so beloved by the Nazi's places the Irish.

I don't know if Russell was a Nazi sympathiser - it has not been proven he did anything more than seek to ally himself with the enemies of his enemies. Perhaps he was, or perhaps he was naive in the extreme and blinded by his hatred of the British authorities.

However, it is beyond a shadow of a doubt that Eoin O'Duffy (first leader of FG and 2nd Comissioner of An Garda Síochána) was a fascist - he even fought along side the Nazis in the Spanish Civil War.

Bullocks

Bullocks wrote: »

We could well have know him. He enriched himself in a lot more ways than trading in slaves.

Why? He made his wealth from the slave trade. That was the primary reason he ended up being a notable figure.

Madeleine Birchfield

The only reason Edward Colston was praised instead of reviled for 300 years in the UK is because he was a supporter of King James II who defected to William of Orange in 1689 when he invaded England to depose King James II.

ohnonotgmail

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Extremely unlikely.

While he was involved with the company - 84,000 slaves it is estimated were transported.

19000 of them died on the way over

lawrencesummers

So here is a good question for some of you.

If someone kidnapped your child and sold them, where would you like the statue of that person erected?

completedit

lawrencesummers wrote: »

So here is a good question for some of you.

If someone kidnapped your child and sold them, where would you like the statue of that person erected?

I think people read 1984 and are a bit too quick to apply it to everything

Madeleine Birchfield

Are there statues of Oliver Cromwell and William of Orange in Ireland?

Bannasidhe

Nermal wrote: »

Celebration?

You might have had a point if Colston's statue showed him dancing a merry jig, making the 'pay-me' sign with some poor manacled figure in tow.

If a statue is by definition a celebration of all the acts of that figure, then we will have no more statues.

Just as an FYI - there is an accepted 'language' when it comes to public monuments. How the figure is seated, whether it's a full figure/bust etc.
If there is a horse involved it gets even more complicated.

We have pretty much as societies forgotten that language now - bar a few academics and those with an interest in such things - but up to and including when Colston's statue was commissioned that knowledge was widely known.



Essentially there was a formula that told the story to those who knew how to read such things and Colston's statue is very much a 'celebration' by which I mean it honours him.
'Doing a jig' was not included in the formula.

osarusan

lawrencesummers wrote: »

So here is a good question for some of you.

If someone kidnapped your child and sold them, where would you like the statue of that person erected?

Tbh I don't think that's a good question as it's too simplistic.

You could argue that almost any political or military figure significant enough to have a statue/monument to them will have some skeletons in their closet.

There is a discussion to be had about weighing up the good and bad and deciding whether overall, such a figure still merits commemoration or not, and how they should be commemorated (in terms of what any inscription says, for example).

But as I've said already, seeing as this guy was involved in the transportation of more than 80,000 slaves, it doesn't seem to be to be the best example to use at all.

lawrencesummers

Madeleine Birchfield wrote: »

Are there statues of Oliver Cromwell and William of Orange in Ireland?

No, but maybe we should put some up.

lawrencesummers

osarusan wrote: »

Tbh I don't think that's a good question as it's too simplistic.

You could argue that almost any political or military figure significant enough to have a statue/monument to them will have some skeletons in their closet.

There is a discussion to be had about weighing up the good and bad and deciding whether overall, such a figure still merits commemoration or not, and how they should be commemorated (in terms of what any inscription says, for example).

But as I've said already, seeing as this guy was involved in the transportation of more than 80,000 slaves, it doesn't seem to be to be the best example to use at all.

If you want to ask that question then fine, but make sure you ask yourself who was it that decided this person was fitting of a statue in the first place?

It sure wasn’t the people, that discussion didn’t happen in the first place, so a lot of statues are not representative of their audience in the first place.

There was a new bridge opened in Cork in the last while, the naming of it was done democratically.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/new-cork-bridge-to-be-named-after-irish-schindler-mary-elmes-907081.html

Randy Archer

hotmail.com wrote: »

Parnell and O'Connell aren't even taught in the Junior Cert.

What school did you attend ?

Primary school, especially a catholic school, most certainly taught people of O’Connell

As for junior cert, the Irish history side of that course ,starts with the land league and Home Rule . It’s absolutely IMPOSSIBLE not to know who Parnell was . Even the thickos would have a grasp of who he was if they did history

lawrencesummers

completedit wrote: »

I think people read 1984 and are a bit too quick to apply it to everything

That’s interesting considering I never read it.

mick087

This is a chance for the UK to be the first in europe to face up to its past, but its got to be done that dont alienate sections of the UK.

European history as well as the worlds history is full of stories of societies being built on slavery, cruelty cheap labour.
Correct me if im wrong but here in Ireland we was once the slave capital of the known world and praise the viking era.


The Colston statue should of been addressed a longtime ago, european colonial times should of been addressed a long time ago.
Europe is going to find this difficult to face up to beacuse the education system is divised to worship cruel greedy people and reward such people with names and statues.

I hope this is a step forward to some real change and some real equity for all.

osarusan

lawrencesummers wrote: »

If you want to ask that question then fine, but make sure you ask yourself who was it that decided this person was fitting of a statue in the first place?

It sure wasn’t the people, that discussion didn’t happen in the first place, so a lot of statues are not representative of their audience in the first place.

There was a new bridge opened in Cork in the last while, the naming of it was done democratically.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/new-cork-bridge-to-be-named-after-irish-schindler-mary-elmes-907081.html

I'm not talking about naming new monuments/bridges though, I'm talking about if and how to deal with existing ones.



And as you say, the Colston statue wasn't representative of the audience at the time (as pointed out in this thread, they tried and failed to raise the money for it from the public), which is another reason it's not a good example in my opinion to be using.

Gregor Samsa

Madeleine Birchfield wrote: »

Are there statues of Oliver Cromwell and William of Orange in Ireland?

Not on public display, but here's both:

A lost statue of Oliver Cromwell with a nose for trouble has been recovered by gardaí nearly eight years after it was stolen from a Co Cork castle, along with three other limestone creations.

Gardaí have revealed that the life-sized bust of Cromwell, along with one of William of Orange and two statues of eagles, were recently discovered by a member of the public who was out hunting on lands near Cratloe, Co Clare.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/cork-statue-of-oliver-cromwell-found-after-8-years-missing-903732.html