Current Affairs The Landmarks of Slavery;

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

No, none whatsoever. Both have the same aim.

What pearl clutching nonsense that is.

Statues are erected to honour the lives of people, depictions of slave traders have no place on our streets in 2020. Removing the statues from the streets doesn’t expunge history ffs.

 

[Tubey]

Only the vast majority of people in this country now know more about the Bristol slave trade and the part in that Colston played, than they ever did before his statue got lobbed in the drink. But yeah it’s akin to book burning or something, most of the certain sorts who are bleating about it didn’t even know a thing about him until this week, yet are trying to claim that history is somehow being rewritten and it’s ‘cultural vandalism’.

If you’re pretending to not understand why people in that City were offended by seeing the statue of that fella, and had been raising it as an issue locally for 30 years, then that’s your choice. But maybe just ask yourself why the council were blocked from adding a second plaque to that statue, as recent as 2018, explaining his background in the slave trade, which they proposed as a compromise between those demanding its removal and those who argued the converse.

Because the statue existed in the first instance.

 

[Tubey]

What pearl clutching nonsense that is.

Statues are erected to honour the lives of people, depictions of slavery traders have no place on our streets in 2020. Removing the statues from the streets doesn’t expunge history ffs.

To honour the lives of people in their own era in the context of their own era.

They don't honour them by the standards of 2020. It's called context - why seemingly nobody seems to have the ability to apply it nowadays is bloody baffling.

 

[Harryflashman]

Any statues that the person it commemorates gas Irish blood on their hands. Victoria included, Cromwell, Drake and many others.

you get that Ireland removed get removed the Victoria statue ? I’m my opinion a completely understandable move and any statues of Cromwell in the country wouldn't last long . the black community in this country are British citizens complaining about their oppression in this country . There is absolutely an argument though to have Cromwell statues removed here , given my heritage and identify I would certainly vote to have it gone . .

 

[Papa Shango]

The ones that hold cultural significance only by YOUR parameters. Just like how certain books were OK but others were burned.

I'm not taking the statues down!

For me it's no different from ex soviet states taking Lenin statues down or renaming places. People still know who he was, certain culturally significant things related to him are still in situ.

Would be nice if that Thatcher statue went...

 

[Spadge Vernacular]

If this is the path that we are taking then the Colosseum should 100% be bulldozed along with huge swathes of historical UK/Europe and beyond.

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

Because the statue existed in the first instance.

No. It’d had been in place for 125 years, and virtually no one outside of Bristol knew about the man, now they do, solely because protestors pulled it down. To say it had to exist for that to happen and that’s somehow a justification for its place on the Bristol streets is contrived garbage

 

[Tubey]

So, burning a book in the 1940's is the same as taking down a statue in 2020?

Yes.

Here are the shared aims.

1. The desire to obliterate an object that highlights a certain subject matter.
2. The people doing so are driven by a modern day ideology.
3. They are done with the firm belief that they are right in doing so.

There's no difference. Quite literally none. Good and evil isn't a consideration when it comes to history.

 

[Papa Shango]

It's not just removing a couple of statues is it? It's already moved on to removing satire (little Britain) from streaming sites, gone with the wind has been removed from HBO.

A quick internet search tells me that both things things are still incredibly easy to watch online or to buy.

 

[Papa Shango]

Yes.

Here are the shared aims.

1. The desire to obliterate an object that highlights a certain subject matter.
2. The people doing so are driven by a modern day ideology.
3. They are done with the firm belief that they are right in doing so.

There's no difference. Quite literally none. Good and evil isn't a consideration when it comes to history.

History is not being eradicated though, that's where your argument falls down. All it is is a visual representation of a person.

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

To honour the lives of people in their own era in the context of their own era.

They don't honour them by the standards of 2020. It's called context - why seemingly nobody seems to have the ability to apply it nowadays is bloody baffling.

That statue wasn’t erected until 175 years after the man’s death, and 60 years after slave trading had been ended. So there’s your context.

 

[tsubaki]

What we're witnessing right now is cultural vandalism. The modern day equivalent of book burning.

It's sickening. A blatant attempt to rewrite history by those too weak to acknowledge and learn from it. Perpetually offended idiots.

It’s not.

 

[tsubaki]

That statue wasn’t erected until 175 years after the man’s death, and 60 years after slave trading had been ended. So there’s your context.

It (and most of the others) are evidence of Victorian sensibilities, not history.

 

[Tubey]

No. It’d had been in place for 125 years, and virtually no one outside of Bristol knew about the man, now they do, solely because protestors pulled it down. To say it had to exist for that to happen and that’s somehow a justification for its place on the Bristol streets is contrived garbage

Right so if the statue didn't exist, the protesters couldn't have pulled it down and nobody would have learned about it. The fact the protesters wanted it pulled down shows they learned from it.

That's the inconvenient truth you can't dodge on this I'm afraid.

 

[coollino]

Yes.

Here are the shared aims.

1. The desire to obliterate an object that highlights a certain subject matter.
2. The people doing so are driven by a modern day ideology.
3. They are done with the firm belief that they are right in doing so.

There's no difference. Quite literally none. Good and evil isn't a consideration when it comes to history.

But how is history being obliterated in 2020?

I get it in 1940 with the books, but you are literally doing all three of above in your flawed argument.

If you simply said you don't agree with it, I get it, but you are pretty much making things up and sounding a bit insane.