Slave Trader Edward Colston's statue torn down in Bristol

Sheep_shear

I saw there's been defacements of monuments in Galway yesterday, then reading this - https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/council-asked-to-take-down-statue-of-ira-chief-over-links-to-nazis-39277402.html

Who else is on the chopping block in Ireland? Outside of a confederate plaque, I'm actually not aware of anything too dodgy around

Christy42

thequarefellow wrote: »

In the 1800s you were very unlikely to be informed that the availability of sugar or cotton in Europe was the result of slavery. Today we are reliably informed that textiles, coffee, chocolate, fishing etc are industries that are riddled with cases of horrible exploitation and slavery in many cases. But we turn a blind eye. Shouldn't we deal with that as a priority? Because there are people, children, right now, enslaved so that we can buy a pair of jeans in Penneys for a fiver.

Primark and exploitation

textile industry

Global slavery index

'Mars, Nestlé, and Hershey Won't Promise Chocolate is Free from Child Labor'

slavery in fishing industry

coffee

I have legitimately no idea what this has to do with the statue of a slave trader?

I mean yes but would you be bringing it up if a statue hadn't gone for a swim? If so why bring it up here? The fixes for these are pretty complex and they have a lot of money invested in preventing them. If not shame on you for using their suffering to make a point about a f'in statue.

joe40

thequarefellow wrote: »

In the 1800s you were very unlikely to be informed that the availability of sugar or cotton in Europe was the result of slavery. Today we are reliably informed that textiles, coffee, chocolate, fishing etc are industries that are riddled with cases of horrible exploitation and slavery in many cases. But we turn a blind eye. Shouldn't we deal with that as a priority? Because there are people, children, right now, enslaved so that we can buy a pair of jeans in Penneys for a fiver.

Primark and exploitation

textile industry

Global slavery index

'Mars, Nestlé, and Hershey Won't Promise Chocolate is Free from Child Labor'

slavery in fishing industry

coffee

I agree with all that. And if there was a protest or something I could do I would. I hate that some clothes are so cheap they're nearly disposable.

Is it not possible to deal with those issues as well. One doesn't rule out the other.

joe40

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Might as well just get rid of all statues since no one is perfect.

It's like having an argument with my wife..

thequarefellow

Christy42 wrote: »

I have legitimately no idea what this has to do with the statue of a slave trader?

I mean yes but would you be bringing it up if a statue hadn't gone for a swim? If so why bring it up here? The fixes for these are pretty complex and they have a lot of money invested in preventing them. If not shame on you for using their suffering to make a point about a f'in statue.

If someone is so horrified by the statue of a slave trader that they want to see it torn down shouldn't they be concerned about their indirect involvement in slavery?

titan18

Deleted User wrote: »

The General Lee and many confederate statues were generally put up in early 20th century as Jim Crow laws were being enacted. They were a jab at black people. There was another spike of such statues being erected during the Civil Rights movement.

That's fair enough. Some are up for historical purposes though. Like there's a General Lee monument at Gettysburg. Much like there's a lot of other Confederate and Union monuments there. Removing them is erasing history imo if it happened. AMerican Civil War happened and that was a pretty pivotal point. It's right that there are monuments there to commemorate it. There's a memorial at Arlington which should stay.

There's a fine line between erasing history and removing racist affronts and people will easily cross it. Like in Berlin, you have museums dedicated to Nazism as an educational tool. Bits of the wall are still there as a reminder etc.

thequarefellow

joe40 wrote: »

I agree with all that. And if there was a protest or something I could do I would. I hate that some clothes are so cheap they're nearly disposable.

Is it not possible to deal with those issues as well. One doesn't rule out the other.

I'm not suggesting it does. But removing these statues without attending to the issue of modern day slavery and exploitation is worrying.

biko

robinph wrote: »

Erm, yes.

If the powers that be said that they understood the issues and would be urgently looking at if the statues should remain then that would diffuse the situation, or as is happening with statues in the UK various ones are being moved fairly quickly.

There have been controversy around this before
2014 https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jun/09/edward-colston-bristol-statue-slavery
2018 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-bristol-45825768
The response was an educational plaque https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-bristol-44951380

titan18

joe40 wrote: »

No one is talking about the rank and file soldiers, they don't have statues.
The leaders definitely knew what they were fighting for.

The Germany analogy is actually good. I can believe that not all the soldiers were hardcore Nazis, but all the leadership was.

Someone like Lee is like Rommel imo. Rommel was not a Nazi, but a highly decorated military officer who served in the German army before Nazi party took over. He fought and led the military of his country as it was his duty and his career, and still has memorials due to his service and military brilliance.

Christy42

thequarefellow wrote: »

If someone is so horrified by the statue of a slave trader that they want to see it torn down shouldn't they be concerned about their indirect involvement in slavery?

So no is the answer. Don't use the suffering of others to make a cheap point. Shockingly people can care about multiple things at the same time? One was pretty easy to fix as it turns out. Fixing the others are far more complicated. If there are multiple issues in the world fixing one is better than none. What do you think? If we can't fix every issue in the world we should give up. Ridiculous distraction.

But what about, but what about...

titan18

titan18 wrote: »

That's fair enough. Some are up for historical purposes though. Like there's a General Lee monument at Gettysburg. Much like there's a lot of other Confederate and Union monuments there. Removing them is erasing history imo if it happened. AMerican Civil War happened and that was a pretty pivotal point. It's right that there are monuments there to commemorate it. There's a memorial at Arlington which should stay.

There's a fine line between erasing history and removing racist affronts and people will easily cross it. Like in Berlin, you have museums dedicated to Nazism as an educational tool. Bits of the wall are still there as a reminder etc.

If anything is removed, the reality is that they will go into museums. There's also no real demand to remove such statues from historical sites. Robert E Lee ironically opposed putting up statues in relation to the civil war, he thought it kept wounds open.

marieholmfan

titan18 wrote: »

Someone like Lee is like Rommel imo. Rommel was not a Nazi, but a highly decorated military officer who served in the German army before Nazi party took over. He fought and led the military of his country as it was his duty and his career, and still has memorials due to his service and military brilliance.

No way! Rommel was a July plotter. Lee was a particularly cruel slaveowner.

Where are all the Rommel statues by the way.

is_that_so

biko wrote: »

There have been controversy around this before
2014 https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jun/09/edward-colston-bristol-statue-slavery
2018 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-bristol-45825768
The response was an educational plaque https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-bristol-44951380

A quote from that 2014 article is interesting.

Maybe the answer is to make peace with the fact that sins of the past helped forge the present. Easier said than done. But a few more civic reminders of minorities who made this country great might help.

BloodyBill

joe40 wrote: »

No one is talking about the rank and file soldiers, they don't have statues.
The leaders definitely knew what they were fighting for.

The Germany analogy is actually good. I can believe that not all the soldiers were hardcore Nazis, but all the leadership was.

Actually that's incorrect. Most generals in the Werhmacht weren't Nazis or anything close to them . The SS was a different kettle of Fish.

nullzero

robinph wrote: »

Well I ignored the accusation of prattling on, and think I covered the bit about listening to people tending to actually be useful for defusing situations.

You are attempting to legitimatize the process of pulling down statues by people who clearly do not possess the necessary skills to do so safely.

What happens when right wing mobs start demanding things you don't agree with?
You're happy to facilitate mobs you agree with but in doing so you are setting a precedent for all mobs going forward, so yes I do believe you have been prattling on.

joe40

titan18 wrote: »

That's fair enough. Some are up for historical purposes though. Like there's a General Lee monument at Gettysburg. Much like there's a lot of other Confederate and Union monuments there. Removing them is erasing history imo if it happened. AMerican Civil War happened and that was a pretty pivotal point. It's right that there are monuments there to commemorate it. There's a memorial at Arlington which should stay.

There's a fine line between erasing history and removing racist affronts and people will easily cross it. Like in Berlin, you have museums dedicated to Nazism as an educational tool. Bits of the wall are still there as a reminder etc.

Removing statues is not erasing history. That is obvious. Statues and monuments celebrate historical figures.

No one would have an objection to a civil war museum which chronicles the important history of the time.

The commemoration/statue at the site of a battle, I don't have a problem with, that has historical significance.

Christy42

titan18 wrote: »

Someone like Lee is like Rommel imo. Rommel was not a Nazi, but a highly decorated military officer who served in the German army before Nazi party took over. He fought and led the military of his country as it was his duty and his career, and still has memorials due to his service and military brilliance.

Rommel largely got away with his reputation due to the (false) accusation that he was part of the plot to kill Hitler. It was why he was killed and endeared him to the allies.


Also even with a piece of propoganda in his favour he still doesn't have a statue of him up that I am aware of. I know there is a bust in a museum somewhere.

robinph

biko wrote: »

There have been controversy around this before
2014 https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jun/09/edward-colston-bristol-statue-slavery
2018 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-bristol-45825768
The response was an educational plaque https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-bristol-44951380

I know.

I also know that the plaque described in that last link was drastically re-worded to then barely mentioned anything about slavery, fairly uncharitable charities and slaves dying on the voyage by being thrown overboard and was rejected quite rightly by the mayor as not being a suitable update to the statue.

I've been aware of the issue with the name Colston in Bristol since the late '90's when Massive Attack refused to play in the Colston Hall.

nullzero

joe40 wrote: »

It's like having an argument with my wife..

Because you're wrong?

joe40

BloodyBill wrote: »

Actually that's incorrect. Most generals in the Werhmacht weren't Nazis or anything close to them . The SS was a different kettle of Fish.

The Germans still don't have any statues up commemorating or celebrating them. They absolutely remember their history, that is a totally different thing.

joe40

nullzero wrote: »

Because you're wrong?

No I'm absolutely right, but the goal posts keep moving..
(By the way that was a joke)

titan18

Deleted User wrote: »

If anything is removed, the reality is that they will go into museums. There's also no real demand to remove such statues from historical sites. Robert E Lee ironically opposed putting up statues in relation to the civil war, he thought it kept wounds open.

Ya, I know that on Lee. Same with Davis, although I don't really agree with his statues, I can understand Lee's. There have been people in the past arguing for removal of Confederate statues at Gettsburg

marieholmfan wrote: »

No way! Rommel was a July plotter. Lee was a particularly cruel slaveowner.

Where are all the Rommel statues by the way.

There's no evidence that I've seen that paints Lee as a cruel slaveowner. He owned slaves, like pretty much everyone else, but he wasn't fond of it.

I don't think Rommel has statues. There's a few memorials though, some museums named after him, the largest German military base is named after him and has streets named after him.

titan18

titan18 wrote: »

Ya, I know that on Lee. Same with Davis, although I don't really agree with his statues, I can understand Lee's. There have been people in the past arguing for removal of Confederate statues at Gettsburg

And if they moved to a museum in the future, I can't really see the issue with it. That's not a rewrite of history. Plenty of statues end up being moved to museums.

robinph

nullzero wrote: »

You are attempting to legitimatize the process of pulling down statues by people who clearly do not possess the necessary skills to do so safely.

What happens when right wing mobs start demanding things you don't agree with?
You're happy to facilitate mobs you agree with but in doing so you are setting a precedent for all mobs going forward, so yes I do believe you have been prattling on.

If people are angry about something then you listen to what they are angry about, try to figure out why and try to figure out a peaceful resolution to the situation.

Doesn't matter if they are from the left or the right, experts at pulling down statues or not. You don't make the situation better by telling them they are wrong and using force against them whilst sticking your fingers in your ears.

lawrencesummers

Can we erect a statue of Daniel Kinehan once the Fury vs Joshua fight takes place?

titan18

joe40 wrote: »

Removing statues is not erasing history. That is obvious. Statues and monuments celebrate historical figures.

No one would have an objection to a civil war museum which chronicles the important history of the time.

The commemoration/statue at the site of a battle, I don't have a problem with, that has historical significance.

I've a hard time believing that once the statues are removed, they won't target removal of Confederate musuems. They already attacked the Virginia museum of history and culture for having confederate stuff in there. To me, that does seem like it's that they want to erase history.

Danzy

robinph wrote: »

If people are angry about something then you listen to what they are angry about, try to figure out why and try to figure out a peaceful resolution to the situation.

Doesn't matter if they are from the left or the right, experts at pulling down statues or not. You don't make the situation better by telling them they are wrong and using force against them whilst sticking your fingers in your ears.

You also see if their anger has merit, you don't automatically entertain it.

Lot of these activists have never heard no, over privileged.

thequarefellow

Christy42 wrote: »

So no is the answer. Don't use the suffering of others to make a cheap point. Shockingly people can care about multiple things at the same time? One was pretty easy to fix as it turns out. Fixing the others are far more complicated. If there are multiple issues in the world fixing one is better than none. What do you think? If we can't fix every issue in the world we should give up. Ridiculous distraction.

But what about, but what about...

So isn't now the optimum time to consider our involvement in slavery in the present? When there is a worldwide movement to address slavery in the past? The two are inextricably linked. I fail to see how it is a ridiculous distraction.

lawrencesummers

titan18 wrote: »

I've a hard time believing that once the statues are removed, they won't target removal of Confederate musuems. They already attacked the Virginia museum of history and culture for having confederate stuff in there. To me, that does seem like it's that they want to erase history.

Who is “they”?

CrankyHaus

Dear mob, meet counter-mob.

https://www.facebook.com/antievictionflyingcolumn/

From the good folks at Anti-Imperialist Action Ireland
Over the years Free State Anti Republican elements have attacked the Seán Russell 1940s IRA Monument in Fairview.
Far from attacking it because of any concocted links with Nazism, the first attack on the Russell monument was by Blueshirt Elements because in the original statue, Seán Russell was depicted giving the Communist raised fist salute.
The Nazi smear came later, by a Free State establishment fearful that they could loose their grip on Counter Revolutionary Power.
The reason Seán Russell is hated by the Free State is because he was IRA Chief of Staff in 1938, when the surviving loyal members of the All Ireland Second Dáil Éireann transferred the powers of Government of the Irish Republic to the IRA Army Council.
Seán Russell stood for the Republic that the Free State illegally and violently drove underground and his statue in Fairview park is a constant reminder that the Free State and Partition are both illegal and built on very shaken ground.
Hands off Seán Russell- Hands off the All Ireland Republic!

"The Nazi smear", Ho Ho Ho.
This could actually be a bit of craic after all.