Slave Trader Edward Colston's statue torn down in Bristol

El_Duderino 09

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Brian Boru bought and sold slaves. He was a slave trader. His statue must come down.
John Newton who wrote “Amazing Grace” was a slave trader. The song must be banned.

If this thread didn't have any posts about people ironically suggesting things to ban and statues to pull down, it would be a lot shorter.

Bannasidhe

marieholmfan wrote: »

There's no evidence for this. As for his statue ; I think it would be appropriate for it to come down as the

[1] The Dal Cais had no claim at all to the high kingship of Ireland
[2] By accepting the Title of Inchiquin and a Barony his descendants have put themselves into another nationality and removed themselves from this one.

Plus the Earl of Thomond played a huge role in the Tudor annihilation of Gaelic Ireland but to be fair, we can't blame Brian for his descendents siding with the invaders and Treaty breakers.

El_Duderino 09

nickkinneg wrote: »

I read it about half way - and its one of the few books that actually chilled me

You actually cracked the book which I'd say that's far more than loads of the people who invoke him.

SafeSurfer

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

If this thread didn't have any posts about people ironically suggesting things to ban and statues to pull down, it would be a lot shorter.

Where’s the irony? If we are banning the commemoration of slave traders let’s not discriminate.

SafeSurfer

marieholmfan wrote: »

There's no evidence for this. As for his statue ; I think it would be appropriate for it to come down as the

[1] The Dal Cais had no claim at all to the high kingship of Ireland
[2] By accepting the Title of Inchiquin and a Barony his descendants have put themselves into another nationality and removed themselves from this one.

Sold men, women and children into slavery.
You probably think he was murdered in his tent by dastardly Danes while praying too.

nickkinneg

HBO Max has pulled Gone with the Wind now from its library of films. Just read this

El_Duderino 09

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Where’s the irony? If we are banning the commemoration of slave traders let’s not discriminate.

Either you don't know what irony means or you genuinely support taking down the Boru statue. Do you personally want to take down a Boru statue?

buried

FVP3 wrote: »

It never had a presence up there, and then it did.

What presence did the catholic church have up there? Fairytales about some welsh lad doing a day of magic is it? Wheres the physical evidence?

Er, you are the one who seems to want to write off 1000 years of history.

Er yourself, there are monuments up in the Hill of Tara that go back 5000 years, and in those 5000 years there was no roman Catholic church up there so what is one of their Statue Saints doing up there bar a symbolic "F**k you" to the indigenous culture that existed here long before any bearded foreigner came up in here telling the natives what to worship, think and say.

FFS man, what crazy form of history are you reading. There was no invasion of catholics into Ireland. The country was converted by choice. The old culture lasted beside catholicism.

Wheres your evidence for that? The first waves of christianity into all the nations they brought their middle eastern desert cult worship involved the absolute total destruction of pagan monuments and temples, violence against those who refused to convert. Where was the choice there? The same outfit racket that wants you to believe nations were "converted by choice" also want you to believe some skyman invented the world in 7 days and his son born of a virgin woman rose from the grave too so don't forget that crazy form of history too buck

ohnonotgmail

nickkinneg wrote: »

HBO Max has pulled Gone with the Wind now from its library of films. Just read this

welcome to 8 hours ago.

nickkinneg

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

welcome to 8 hours ago.

Sorry - not keeping up to date

nickkinneg

just read this one "Ant and Dec issue apology for 'impersonating people of colour' on Saturday Night Takeaway and promise to never do it again... as they remove all footage of sketches from ITV Hub "? is that 8 hours old to?

joe40

nickkinneg wrote: »

just read this one "Ant and Dec issue apology for 'impersonating people of colour' on Saturday Night Takeaway and promise to never do it again... as they remove all footage of sketches from ITV Hub "? is that 8 hours old to?

Fair enough. It's a free world.

mick087

nickkinneg wrote: »

just read this one "Ant and Dec issue apology for 'impersonating people of colour' on Saturday Night Takeaway and promise to never do it again... as they remove all footage of sketches from ITV Hub "? is that 8 hours old to?

Your find many stars will come out and apologise now.



Do you think they will stop showing Fawlty Towers ie The Builders episode? Will john cleese apologise to us in Ireland? Oh and to the Germans, Spanish and americans and of course deaf people?

vetinari

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

If this thread didn't have any posts about people ironically suggesting things to ban and statues to pull down, it would be a lot shorter.

Exactly, it's baffling to see anyone defending the statue of a slave trader but here we are. Apparently if you take down one slave trader statue, you're obligated to take down any statue of anyone who did anything bad. That's such strange logic. Feels like a lot of people have lost the ability to analyze individual situations.

joe40

mick087 wrote: »

Your find many stars will come out and apologise now.



Do you think they will stop showing Fawlty Towers ie The Builders episode? Will john cleese apologise to us in Ireland? Oh and to the Germans and Spanish americans and of course deaf people?

No, Fawlty towers was parodying the idea of British exceptionalism. Basil was the butt of the joke.

Junkyard Tom

mick087 wrote: »

Do you think they will stop showing Fawlty Towers ie The Builders episode? Will john cleese apologise to us in Ireland? Oh and to the Germans and Spanish americans and of course deaf people?

The thing about Flowery Twats is that every character in it is an idiot*, caricature, or stereotype. It doesn't pick on any particular group. Basil Fawlty is the biggest moron of the lot.



*except Polly?

nickkinneg

apparently its reported that there's busloads of far right protestors preparing to come down to London for the weekend its reported - the danger will be if the police appear to be protecting the "smaller" of the two mobs which will most likely be the far right people.

mick087

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

The thing about Flowery Twats is that every character in it is an idiot*, caricature, or stereotype. It doesn't pick on any particular group. Basil Fawlty is the biggest moron of the lot.



*except Polly?

I dont know about that, apart from Mr o'reilly the other 2 was not Irish, putting on accents and one was called Spud..

SafeSurfer

vetinari wrote: »

Exactly, it's baffling to see anyone defending the statue of a slave trader but here we are. Apparently if you take down one slave trader statue, you're obligated to take down any statue of anyone who did anything bad. That's such strange logic. Feels like a lot of people have lost the ability to analyze individual situations.

Total strawman.

If statues are being removed because the people they commemorate profited from slavery why discriminate between different slave traders?
Is it not slavery itself that is objectionable or only the slavery of one race by another?

Cupatae

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

That's grand because those things aren't happening. Streets are renamed all the time so that's nothing to worry about and history is still being written and recorded. The issue is that MORE historical information is coming to light about a historical character.

Lads, Orwell would be spinning in his grave if he knew his work on actual totalitarianism was being thrown around willy-nilly.

Well actually factually speaking streets are not renamed all the time...

Also another fact.. that history had always been readily available.

robinph

nickkinneg wrote: »

apparently its reported that there's busloads of far right protestors preparing to come down to London for the weekend its reported - the danger will be if the police appear to be protecting the "smaller" of the two mobs which will most likely be the far right people.

If true then they will be readily identified on the way down and sent back before they get anywhere. Or they will just be ignored in the corner of some park and spend a few hours shouting racist slogans to themselves.

ohnonotgmail

robinph wrote: »

If true then they will be readily identified on the way down and sent back before they get anywhere. Or they will just be ignored in the corner of some park and spend a few hours shouting racist slogans to themselves.

while spending the day getting pissed up on cheap lager

Bannasidhe

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Total strawman.

If statues are being removed because the people they commemorate profited from slavery why discriminate between different slave traders?
Is it not slavery itself that is objectionable or only the slavery of one race by another?

The statue was removed because an awful lot of people in Bristol didn't want it there, had been asking for years for it to be moved, suggestions were made that it be put in a museum. And they were ignored.

The total strawman is this comment:Is it not slavery itself that is objectionable or only the slavery of one race by another?

Slavery of anyone by anyone else is objectionable - but in Europe - where we are - it was very much a matter of one group enslaving another and the colour of their respective skins was the determining factor.

Let's clean up our own house before we start pointing the finger at others.

Cupatae

Bannasidhe wrote: »

The statue was removed because an awful lot of people in Bristol didn't want it there, had been asking for years for it to be moved, suggestions were made that it be put in a museum. And they were ignored.

The total strawman is this comment:Is it not slavery itself that is objectionable or only the slavery of one race by another?

Slavery of anyone by anyone else is objectionable - but in Europe - where we are - it was very much a matter of one group enslaving another and the colour of their respective skins was the determining factor.

Let's clean up our own house before we start pointing the finger at others.

Hmmm quite alot incorrect in this post...There is also a clear sympathy bias towards one skin color over the other, some plights are simply deemed not as important as the other.. by certain bands on people on here.

They are clearly very biased towards one cause, and hide it under the guise of "equality" ironically enough.

But one thing I will say, when groups such as BLM take no responsibility for themselves and attach all blame to another party it severely discredits there cause to people not blinded by mob mentality.

SafeSurfer

Bannasidhe wrote: »

The statue was removed because an awful lot of people in Bristol didn't want it there, had been asking for years for it to be moved, suggestions were made that it be put in a museum. And they were ignored.

The total strawman is this comment:Is it not slavery itself that is objectionable or only the slavery of one race by another?

Slavery of anyone by anyone else is objectionable - but in Europe - where we are - it was very much a matter of one group enslaving another and the colour of their respective skins was the determining factor.

Let's clean up our own house before we start pointing the finger at others.

If you think slavery in Europe “was very much a matter of one group enslaving another and the colour of their respective skins was the determining factor” then you are completely ignorant of the history of slavery in Europe.

irishguitarlad

What will happen to those statues? Will they be put in museums?

vetinari

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Total strawman.

If statues are being removed because the people they commemorate profited from slavery why discriminate between different slave traders?
Is it not slavery itself that is objectionable or only the slavery of one race by another?

Who says I have to worry about discriminating between slave traders?
Judge each situation on it's merits.
Your line of reasoning is just a way to defend the status quo.
Everything is "fine" if we leave all the slave trader statues up.
It's only if you take down one that there is an issue.

El_Duderino 09

vetinari wrote: »

Exactly, it's baffling to see anyone defending the statue of a slave trader but here we are. Apparently if you take down one slave trader statue, you're obligated to take down any statue of anyone who did anything bad. That's such strange logic. Feels like a lot of people have lost the ability to analyze individual situations.

I think a lot of people have lost perspective on all this. They pretend not to get the difference between current racism and historical. I know Irish people were discriminated against in the past, but we're not now so don't I take offense at old anti-Irish jokes. If Irish people were still descriminated against then you can bet the same posters would be much more likely to understand.

The real pity is the lack of ability to empathise. And the straining to pretend they're equal victims. Pretending Brian Boru slaving a thousand years ago is similar to the African slave trade.

In case anyone needs. the destination pointed out, the difference is that black people today still experience racism in places like the UK and US, stemming back to those days I'm undecided on whether these posters genuinely don't/can't get it or if they see just pretending they cant understand.

El_Duderino 09

SafeSurfer wrote: »

Total strawman.

If statues are being removed because the people they commemorate profited from slavery why discriminate between different slave traders?
Is it not slavery itself that is objectionable or only the slavery of one race by another?

Do you genuinely not know the answer to that question? Serious question I'll answer it for you if you don't know.

SafeSurfer

SafeSurfer wrote: »

If you think slavery in Europe “was very much a matter of one group enslaving another and the colour of their respective skins was the determining factor” then you are completely ignorant of the history of slavery in Europe.

*gets popcorn * Lecturing historians on history always goes well....