|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jan 7, 2022 14:47:08 GMT
I think this boils down to whether it is better to be not offended, or to be educated. Since the world is fundamentally a bad place (in terms of human activity) one cannot expect to go through life without seeing stuff that is unpleasant or offensive by current standards. To pretend it didn’t happen by hiding the evidence means new generations won’t learn about the mistakes of their forefathers and are thus doomed to repeat the offending behaviour.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2022 14:48:51 GMT
I think it's actually slightly dangerous to attempt to "disappear" things which are part of history.
I doubt many people went up to the statue and worshipped the man as some sort of wonderful character.
Dark stains on history (which some people think the slavery bollocks is an example of) should not be erased. This leads to very bad things happening. You need to keep history alive however unpalatable it may be for the minority of idiots who seem to inhabit the place.
It's completely counterproductive. It's just a sculpture, probably made of metal. An inanimate object with historical references.
I don't see why anyone would give a shit about it just get on with life and stop being so fucking pathetic.
|
|
|
|
Post by ianali on Jan 7, 2022 14:55:59 GMT
I thought like this until I heard a black woman say that every time she walked past this statue, she felt as though it made what he did seem acceptable. She also asked if it would be equally ok to have statues of Hitler in town centres for instance. It made me think. How do you feel about people having to "Show their papers" these days, to prove they've been 'vaccinated' and are 'healthy'? That's right back at good old-fashioned German Nazi values. Medical apartheid and treating the 'unvaccinated' as the 'Untermensch'. Anyone OK with this discrimination/segregation is probably also perfectly happy to have a statue of Hitler or Thatcher in their garden. I am very much against any form of vaccine passport type things. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2022 15:07:47 GMT
Probably bomads.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2022 15:36:35 GMT
Incorrect, should have been removed and moved to a museum somewhere, one that shown him in a true light with the story that goes with it. I disagree. Moving it to a museum somewhere means that most people will never see it. Most people never or very rarely go to any museum, never mind the specific museum holding the statue. You might as well just hide it away in the bottom of Bristol docks. I DISAGREE IN CAPITALS THOUGH. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2022 15:57:25 GMT
Rolf Harris, Jimmy Saville, Gary Glitter to name but a few ... erased from public life for their conduct within their lifetimes. I see no difference in deciding to cease lauding historic figures if that is the decision of locals. The history remains ... the praise and idolatry ends. But action must follow discussion not as a result of vandalism surely ? Rog I wish folk in Rotherham would tidy up the mess there before attempting to interfere with matters of much less importance elsewhere. Nothing to contribute but personal attacks as usual. That's fine. Rog |
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Jan 7, 2022 16:12:42 GMT
Rolf Harris, Jimmy Saville, Gary Glitter to name but a few ... erased from public life for their conduct within their lifetimes. I see no difference in deciding to cease lauding historic figures if that is the decision of locals.
The history remains ... the praise and idolatry ends.But action must follow discussion not as a result of vandalism surely ? Rog erm .... Roger I hardly think a hundred year old statue of some obscure benefactor of the town, walked past by thousands daily
(99.9% probably without the faintest idea who he was or what he did), is really lauding a historic figure.
|
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jan 7, 2022 16:17:06 GMT
I disagree. Moving it to a museum somewhere means that most people will never see it. Most people never or very rarely go to any museum, never mind the specific museum holding the statue. You might as well just hide it away in the bottom of Bristol docks. I DISAGREE IN CAPITALS THOUGH. Yea but I Disagree in a BIGGER FONT. So there. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2022 16:21:05 GMT
Rolf Harris, Jimmy Saville, Gary Glitter to name but a few ... erased from public life for their conduct within their lifetimes. I see no difference in deciding to cease lauding historic figures if that is the decision of locals.
The history remains ... the praise and idolatry ends.But action must follow discussion not as a result of vandalism surely ? Rog erm .... Roger I hardly think a hundred year old statue of some obscure benefactor of the town, walked past by thousands daily
(99.9% probably without the faintest idea who he was or what he did), is really lauding a historic figure.
What would you call it then ? And as I said, basically I agree ... remove it and tell the history in the town's museums. But that's just an opinion, as valid as anyone else's. Rog |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2022 16:27:10 GMT
I wish folk in Rotherham would tidy up the mess there before attempting to interfere with matters of much less importance elsewhere. Nothing to contribute but personal attacks as usual. That's fine. Rog I’m stating my opinion, ffs, you keep banging on about our right to express them. |
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jan 7, 2022 16:42:48 GMT
erm .... Roger I hardly think a hundred year old statue of some obscure benefactor of the town, walked past by thousands daily
(99.9% probably without the faintest idea who he was or what he did), is really lauding a historic figure.
What would you call it then ? And as I said, basically I agree ... remove it and tell the history in the town's museums. But that's just an opinion, as valid as anyone else's. Rog It’s just part of the fabric and history of the nation. What about all the building he paid for with slave labour, would you have them bulldozed? And what about the other victorian building who were built by people in poverty, not getting paid the minimum wage, dying in avoidable construction site accidents? Would you bulldoze them too as they are offensive? There’s not going to be much left other than 1960s urban carbuncles. |
|
|
|
Post by JohnV on Jan 7, 2022 16:43:33 GMT
erm .... Roger I hardly think a hundred year old statue of some obscure benefactor of the town, walked past by thousands daily
(99.9% probably without the faintest idea who he was or what he did), is really lauding a historic figure.
What would you call it then ? Rog A public artwork, like it or loathe it, it belongs to everyone and no individual or group of individuals have the right to remove, many see it as that and care little for or against but some wish it to remain.
Their wish is just as valid, in fact more so because the status quo should always require a large majority to overthrow.
but then that's my opinion and is just as valid if not more so than those who get offended for things that happened in history
(How the hell can you be "offended" for something that happened generations ago)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2022 16:55:11 GMT
As I said, if the majority of locals wish it removed I have no issue with it.
The positive thing to come out of the whole episode is that it has promoted discussions around the country and people can decide on what public monuments and statues they wish to retain or remove.
Rog
|
|
|
|
Post by patty on Jan 7, 2022 16:55:30 GMT
I must admit I've always had a rather wicked desire to own a boat called "Black Joke" Just to wind up the woke that have never heard of the "HMS Black Joke" Nice one JohnV To save others the trouble: The third HMS Black Joke was probably built in Baltimore in 1824, becoming the Brazilian slave ship Henriquetta.[2] The Royal Navy captured her in September 1827 and purchased her into the service. The Navy re-named her Black Joke, after an English song of the same name, and assigned her to the West Africa Squadron (or Preventive Squadron). Her role was to chase down slave ships, and over her five-year career she freed many hundreds of slaves. The Navy deliberately burnt her in May 1832 because her timbers had rotted to the point that she was no longer fit for active service. Thanks Jim, saved me a Google |
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on Jan 7, 2022 16:59:57 GMT
As I said, if the majority of locals wish it removed I have no issue with it. The positive thing to come out of the whole episode is that it has promoted discussions around the country and people can decide on what public monuments and statues they wish to retain or remove. Rog The problem with that is most people are thick, ignorant and have no idea. If you had a referendum on museums, most people would say “don’t spend public money on that boring crap, give it back to the people so they can spend it on booze, fags and drugs.” If you had a referendum on statues, most people wouldn’t be interested unless it was one of the latest ones of a Love Island Celebrity. If you had a referendum on naming a scientific research vessel, they would come up with a stupid name like “Boatie mcBoatFace”. Oh yea, they did that one already. The country cannot be run by the will of the masses, it would be horrendous. |
|
