MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
He gets rather high pitched when he’s angry doesn’t he 😂 what a tool
He gets rather high pitched when he’s angry
Yeah, cocaine will do that.
Well done Bristolians, good riddance.
Get in the sea.
chewkw
Member
It goes back to civilisation. From the day the pyramids, Great Wall of China, the Inca pyramids were built. Put it this way Great Wall of China was not built by patriotic volunteered labour.Yeah, I know. I’ve been to Kelvingrove Museum numerous times, it’s not hidden. But the appropriation of wealth to the detriment of others isn’t really something that’s ever ended, it’s not just history.
The monuments inc. wonders of the world can be viewed as commemoration of the oppressed; statues such as Colston are nothing more than celebration of the oppressor.
Public freak out on reddit is full of horrific videos of police taking the piss....
Surprised no cops have been shot at given their acts and the prevalence of guns in the US.
I don't like seeing symbols of history destroyed because then the next generation don't see that tangible reminder.
Take the statue of the Duke of Cumberland the Butcher. Infamous in Scotland for the genocide that followed the failed 1746 rebellion. Should that get toppled? Or should the real story be attached to him?
Or almost local to me, "The Mannie" overlooking Golspie. The man responsible for turning the Highland Glens into a desert of sheep. I'd settle for just removing the head and placing it as the target in a public urinal - that would be a brilliant tourist attraction for Golspie. Folk would come from the USA specially to pee on that. 🙂
I'd prefer to see them preserved but with a plaque commemorating their evils as well as what they did to deserve being immortalised in a statue. Take them down to ground level though. If they have to be moved, then maybe we should have a special park in each city to remember our more unpleasant heroes. Nasty Bastard and Right C**** Park has a ring to it. 🙂
I don’t like seeing symbols of history destroyed because then the next generation don’t see that tangible reminder.
Just replace the statue with that of those that suffered from their actions.
Statues aren't history, they're just commemoration (which is a sort of hero worship after all) . If the thing/person you're worshipping on reflection doesn't deserve it, or times have changed, and that doesn't reflect what you want, then rip it down.
TBH, no one gives a crap when great swathes of Canary Wharf were bulldozed to make way for Banker flats, or housing or villages get torn down when they get in the way of a road, and those are often folk's homes. If a lump of iron gets pulled down peacefully? Crack on...
nickc
Subscriber
Statues aren’t history,
100%.
I really don't understand the connection people have to monuments of the landed gentry, they aren't the guardians of history, tbh you could probably argue the point of them was to distort history. A plaque most people won't read isn't going to change that.
History is better when comes from books, not statues to obscene wealth telling an airbrushed view of history..
The Duke of Sutherland statue was the fisrt thing I thought of. I've driven hundreds of tourists past it. They almost always ask what and who it is. I then tell them about the Clearances and his part in them* Without that stark reminder on the hill, the story of the people of Sutherland might go untold. Locally, opinion seems to have swung behind keeping it in place. Removing it would be no more than a gesture. I'd rather see the current estates split up and managed by the folk who live and work there. That would have a much greater affect on the future.
There is a more modest statue of the Cleared at Helmsdale. I point that out too.
* I also tell them about the Duchess of Sutherland, Carbisdale Castle and the clock tower but I'll save that for another time.
The video above is about why there are so many statues in the South of the USA commemorating the civil war generals, politicians, and so on. The same is largely true of large amounts of public statuary in the UK as well. When you start to look at when the vast majority of public commemoration (of especially Imperialists) started to be erected, it was at the decline of Empire. Loads of these were put up buy folk (or their supporters) who were keen of celebrating a a way of life that for millions was oppressive, but for a select few was very very comfy, thanks v much. We do need to have a reckoning about why some of them aren't being removed.
For the record, despite his many flaws, I think the one of Churchill should remain.
scotroutes
Subscriber
Why do those people need about a million monuments up and down the country though? There's wider histories that we can tell.
Plus if you put something in place of the duke of sutherland monument, people will still point and ask, what's that.
I'm not trying to make some wider point. I'm commenting on one statue.
I think there's a middle ground, as others have said there's nothing wrong with acknowledging the wealth that created our country whilst also recognising where that wealth came from. Local history is something we're not particularly good at, perhaps making it a requirement of the curriculum to learn history at a local level would go some way to bridge the gap. We have a dark past, there's nothing wrong with acknowledging that and using it to place modern events within a historical context.
In the meantime, keeping the statues but in a less reverential setting would strike a balance. Or don't. As Scotroutes says sometimes a very visual reminder works just as well.
My only concern is if we start replacing them with other whitewashed areas of history like the ridiculous statue they erected in Glasgow commemorating all the Irish immigrants "welcomed" into the city.
I think debate about statues is good and a new consensus can be reached on which stay and which go. I am appalled that a bunch of rioters can just rip one down because it suits their view point.
I am appalled that a bunch of rioters can just rip one down because it suits their view point.
I suppose you have to decide which is the greater crime: pulling it down, or erecting it in the first place.
I’d prefer to see them preserved but with a plaque commemorating their evils as well as what they did to deserve being immortalised in a statue. Take them down to ground level though. If they have to be moved, then maybe we should have a special park in each city to remember our more unpleasant heroes.
Controversial statues could be removed from public places and put into museums where they can be displayed with information that puts them in context and tells the full story of the subject of the sculpture. You could do the same thing with The Mannie. Just replace him with an alternative public monument that is a more inclusive representation of the people of Sutherland, which tourists can still ask questions about. I don't think putting a plaque on a public statute really addresses the issue properly, because a lot of people will never read the "small print".
The lack of widespread outrage at the Bristol toppling suggests that a lot of people agree it is something that should have been done long ago. I think a lot of people view it differently from the "random vandalism" of smashing in a shop window.
The question isn't should any given statue be pulled down but will it be. The will of the people through their actions will decide what stays or what goes, it's not something that's going to be resolved by a committee.
Anyway, what I say is irrelevant, as is we all say on here. We're old farts for the most part and the next direction for the country is going to be decided by the youth. If they want it coming down it's coming down, if you don't like it then go and put it back up yourself if you can muster the energy, because be sure that this coming generation has the energy to pull it right back down again.
The youth is angry, the youth is bored, schools out, gap years out, holidays are out, pubs and clubs are shut, the next year of university is on a stay at home tip. What could possibly go wrong?
The monuments inc. wonders of the world can be viewed as commemoration of the oppressed; statues such as Colston are nothing more than celebration of the oppressor.
To the mind of the oppressed or people who ended up in the losing end everything that reminds them of their past is offensive. No ifs and buts. Want to pull down all these buildings to start new?
Isn't it wonderful if we could wipe away our unwanted past to start new and proudly say we have not "sinned".
Slavery and the Building of Britain
Majority of civilisation is built from the proceed of on slavery as it is the norm of those days. From Genghis Khan to Alexander the Great both of which were despicable characters but they change the world. At some point our ancestors (you and me) might even be slaves in those days. If you are not a citizen of Rome in the past then you are a slave or lowly rated beings. In China the emperors and the generals usually enjoy the spoilt of their conflict as they wished. In Japan everyone is practically slaves apart from the Shogun and Samurai classes or the ruling classes. Same in other continents ...
Therefore, which city should we rebuilt first?
But Bristol city doesn't have a statue to Genghis ****ing khan does it.
Is this a race issue now? A class issue or is it about slavery? I've seen some outstanding comments on social media that just don't make sense!
I'm lost with all this...it looks like it's become a rent a mob movement now!
I suppose you have to decide which is the greater crime: pulling it down, or erecting it in the first place.
<span style="font-size: 0.8rem;">Not really.It was erected legally. It was pulled down illegally. If people want to debate and come to a consensus on what stays and goes then fine. Or are you suggesting we all go around pulling down memorials, statues or monuments we don’t like. If we can let’s start with all religious buildings as most of them have highly unsavoury histories. The crusades were hardly worth celebrating so let get rid of anything to do with them</span>
Is this a race issue now? A class issue or is it about slavery?
It can be all three. They are heavily intertwined
Therefore, which city should we rebuilt first?
We don't need to rebuild cities, we need to acknowledge our history properly without the hyperbole, and propaganda. we need to reassess what/who we look up to, and why we do it.
Humans have been on the planet for hundreds of thousands of years, and for a good percentage of that slavery was a thing, there's not a country of city or civilisation that hasn't touched in some form or another. (or continues to do so) the legacy of it is painfully closer to all of us than we'd likely be comfortable with. But it has to be said, that some things are so far distant from us that we cannot change or are not worth changing. There's good evidence (for example) that the Pyramids weren't entirely built using slaves...so do you pull down some of it? all of it? The Colosseum, the Parthenon? Stone Henge? do these stay up do they come down?
Will the 'mob' be going after the modern day Romanian & Albanian slavery rings?
I'm sure we all agree that slavery was never a good thing and i doubt anybody is hoping to resurrect it and having people apologise for it is absurd. Just make sure it doesn't happen again..ie stopping the aforementioned.
Just a thought.
If we're making a list, can I suggest every Butchers Apron in Scotland? Add Balmoral and the rest. Even then, it'll only be symbolic unless we do away with the whole monarchy and the institutions surrounding it.
But Bristol city doesn’t have a statue to Genghis **** khan does it.
Yes, you don't have G. Khan but Bristol is practically built from the proceed of slavery so pull it down?
If we’re making a list, can I suggest every Butchers Apron in Scotland? Add Balmoral and the rest.
I certainly can.
Statues are only ever symbolic, in my opinion (obviously exceptions for true works of art, ie by Michelangelo etc). Tearing the Colston statue down hurts no-one and means everything.
And if I'm honest I'm a lot happier with the principle of a statue being at the bottom of the dock than, say, Colston Hall being set alight.
I’m lost with all this…it looks like it’s become a rent a mob movement now!
Will the ‘mob’ be going after the modern day Romanian & Albanian slavery rings?
Care to explain what rentamob is? What form of protest would you prefer? A letter writing campaign and internet petition presumably?
I see you're also falling into the category of people who reject anyone standing up and fighting for their interests because you're too lazy and apathetic to do it yourself. I've seen a lot of this on social media in the last couple of days. How dare oppressed black people cause so much trouble when there are also lots of white people suffering quietly without making a fuss about it.
Yeah the difference being a building serves a practical, useful purpose regardless of who paid for it, whereas a statue serves no purpose but to celebrate the person it depicts. If that person is a slave trader, it's pretty inappropriate to be celebrating them. Not sure where the confusion stems from on this subject.
Furthermore a secondary plaque explaining his wrongdoing was suggested years ago and they didn't bother making it, so the statue clearly wasn't there for educational purposes.
EDIT: was supposed to be a reply to cheekw's most recent but somehow not managed to reply properly
scotroutes
If we’re making a list, can I suggest every Butchers Apron in Scotland?...
Need any help? 🙂
Imagine going to work every day, and cycling past a statue commemorating the work of the person who dragged your ancestors kicking and screaming across the Atlantic to go be enslaved in cotton plantations.
Imagine being asked to come here as part of the windrush generation, and one of the first things you see is that statue, and then a sign on a pub saying "no dogs, no blacks, no Irish"
Imagine white middle aged men defending it.
Statues are only ever symbolic, in my opinion (obviously exceptions for true works of art, ie by Michelangelo etc). Tearing the Colston statue down hurts no-one and means everything.
And if I’m honest I’m a lot happier with the principle of a statue being at the bottom of the dock than, say, Colston Hall being set alight.
What the protestors do not realise is that by destroying all the statues etc they have practicality let the past go easily. All the past slave traders would be laughing in their graves for being let off easily.
Yes, destroy all the history and the protesters will have no more leverage to their past as arguments which means they did not exist.
They'd campaigned for 40yrs to have the statue of Edward Colston either removed or to have the plaque reworded. This is the excuse as to why they haven't. In his time working at The Royal African Company they enslaved around 100,000 people.
Bristol Museums has sought to explain the reason for Colston’s statue remaining the city and says on its website that “Colston never, as far as we know, traded in enslaved Africans on his own account”.
But it added: “What we do know is that he was an active member of the governing body of the RAC, which traded in enslaved Africans, for 11 years.”
Yes, destroy all the history and the protesters will have no more leverage to their past as arguments which means they did not exist.
I've read this a couple of times now, and it still makes zero sense to me.
I’ve read this a couple of times now, and it still makes zero sense to me.
Same here. The Bristol mayor has already said all the placards are being moved to the museum and thought likely the statue will join them. Will make an excellent thought-provoking display, rather than a plaque that just says Colston was 'one of the most virtuous and wise sons'.
Colston Tower is a 70s tower-block. No history there, so change the name.
What the protestors do not realise is that by destroying all the statues etc they have practicality let the past go easily.
It's weird how we don't have any statues of Hitler yet haven't forgotten about the atrocities he committed.
It’s weird how we don’t have any statues of Hitler yet haven’t forgotten about the atrocities he committed.
Bingo. Statues are symbols, people shouldn't really be surprised if they attract symbolic acts, it's pretty much what they're all about.
Uselesshippy,
Exactly this. My mates mum who is in her 80's and came to Bristol as part of the Windrush generation is ecstatic at the turn of events.
How about the proceed from slavery is that okay to keep?
How about all the unknown artefacts of cultural significant from other nations why not return them? Many of those artefacts are clearly not western culture put it this way.
Why do you (and everyone else on the far-right) seem to have this impression that history is one solid block, and if we change something now we have to reflect that change back through all eternity?
The semi-hysterical "Well if you do this, you have to do this" argument is simply a means to detract from the fact that we got to this point largely because the abuses and unfairness of the past has been tolerated and brought forward.
I, for one, do not consider the mass enslavement of upwards of ten million people to be in the same moral pigeon hole as refusing to give back the Elgin Marbles.
Not really.It was erected legally. It was pulled down illegally.
Good grief, is that all you have? The statue is of a man who acted completely legally when he enslaved 100,000 people.
@DazH you know nothing about me and what i stand for - you know what assumptions do?!
I am aghast as to how protesters expect to be taken seriously with the destruction they have done. All this will achieve is to tghten the grip.I'm not getting in to what my presciption would be (it certainly wouldn't be hitting Police horses and smashing things up).
Things need addressing and ths problem is multi-teired so its its solution. The behaviour is doing nothing but set the protestors causes back. Where does it display intelligence? Where does it display what their outcome is? Where does it display how they are going to do it?
I'm genuinely interested.
...and back to my point about slavery, will the BLM movement with all their funding they have been given by the likes of Cisco et al now try and tackle modern day slavery or will they just tweet about on their phones made by an 8 year old in China?? Surely, this sort of positive action and behaviour is more likely to promote greater levels of empathy with people who aren't convinced by their current efforts? Be the change and all that. Or will they just still smash up cties....where next the Liver Buildings in Liverpoool?
Yesterday made me a very proud Bristolian.
Why not melt down the Colston statue and use the bronze to make one in memory of those enslaved. Note on plinth can explain history of the piece.
Like the mayor, I don't condone it but am not exactly sad either. I suspect that is a significant proportion of the population. Personally, I think they should replace it with one of Bristol's greatest double acts... There is already precedent
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gromit_Unleashed
dogbone
Why not melt down the Colston statue and use the bronze to make one in memory of those enslaved. Note on plinth can explain history of the piece.
Melt it down and make medals out of it like they did with the Crimean cannons for the VC.
I suggest we call this one the VSC (Virtue Signalling Cross) to be awarded for exceptional efforts to oppose past crimes but not protesting with the same vigour while our govt's incompetence is killing tens of thousands of fellow citizens. (Ye gods, I hope it's incompetence)
The energy going into these protests is worthy, but wouldn't it be good if it was directed at making our govt have some genuine concern for our citizens and stop killing brown folk in foreign lands.
You can only regret the past, you can't fix it, but the future is worth the effort.
Maybe it is time for a revolution, and maybe this is how it starts.
Lamp, have you been kicked in the head by a horse or something?
chrismac
Subscriber
I think debate about statues is good and a new consensus can be reached on which stay and which go. I am appalled that a bunch of rioters can just rip one down because it suits their view point.
surely not celbrating slavery is everyones viewpoint?
the local Mp tried to get this pulled down several times, 1000s signed petition to get it pulled down, Tory councilor repeatedly blocked it
@inkster - Nope. just more than curious where we go from here in a positive constructive way...you know where the cause is presented credibly.
The behaviour is doing nothing but set the protestors causes back
1. It's often not the protesters that are causing violence, or if it is, it's often a v small section of it, and that nuance is often lost is piss poor coverage on the media.
2. it is a fact that peaceful protests (no matter how large) DO NOT attract media coverage at all in this country,
3. Little if anything was ever changed by peaceful protest (See Iraq war)
4. Police tactics are designed to increase the chance of violence (kettling, herding, use of language etc), and I refuse to believe that some cops don't actually enjoy getting stuck into a protester or two.
5. Police tactics are often the cause of direct damage to property
6. Damage to property is often caused by peaceful protesters trying to get away from violent police tactics.
This is stuff I know from the (admittedly) few marches, rallies and protests that I've been in involved in over the years.
Under lockdown, you are 10 times more likely to have been fined if you are BAME. The generation graduating on the streets right now have grown up with 10 years of austerity, 4 years of Brexit based nationalism and they are the first generation to graduate having been educated under a Michael Gove / Dominic Cummings reformed curriculum, that put the King James Bible and celebrating the achievements of Empire at its core whilst removing texts and figures that relate to black history.
What we see is in part evidence of a failed education policy. The Tories set out to 'fix' something they saw as broken and we are now witnessing the results of their efforts. It's going to be a long hot summer, even if it rains.
epicyclo
Subscriber
dogbone
Why not melt down the Colston statue and use the bronze to make one in memory of those enslaved. Note on plinth can explain history of the piece.Melt it down and make medals out of it like they did with the Crimean cannons for the VC.
I suggest we call this one the VSC (Virtue Signalling Cross) to be awarded for exceptional efforts to oppose past crimes but not protesting with the same vigour while our govt’s incompetence is killing tens of thousands of fellow citizens. (Ye gods, I hope it’s incompetence)
The energy going into these protests is worthy, but wouldn’t it be good if it was directed at making our govt have some genuine concern for our citizens and stop killing brown folk in foreign lands.
You can only regret the past, you can’t fix it, but the future is worth the effort.
Maybe it is time for a revolution, and maybe this is how it starts.
It's not a single issue protest. It's a bit disingenuous that you are suggesting it is. But you crack on wagging your finger, missing the point and telling people what they should think or do..
The protests are very much routed in issues of the present.
Where does it display how they are going to do it?
It's not the protestors that can fix the problem.
you know nothing about me and what i stand for – you know what assumptions do?!
I can only go off what you write here, and that doesn't inspire a very positive image I'm afraid.
I am aghast as to how protesters expect to be taken seriously with the destruction they have done.
In a perfect world you'd be right. If something was wrong, people could contact their representatives in local and national government and action would be taken. In a more perfect world they wouldn't need to take action over such a provocatively absurd issue as having a statue to a slave trader in a modern multicultural society.
It's not a perfect world though. Time and again the political system proves that the only thing it listens to is action, and the more direct the better, whether 'violent' or not (I wouldn't describe this as violence BTW). To paraphrase something I saw on social media, why do we judge protestors by their most violent actions, but not the state and it's agents? Why wait months and expend a shit-ton of energy and work in campaigning for a statue to be taken down when you can just go and do it yourself in a few minutes?
The whole point of direct action is exactly that, to act. That's what the state is most scared of, and by opposing it as you do, you reinforce the very thing protestors were taking action against. If that's a position you're comfortable with, then you'll forgive me for making assumptions about what side of the argument you're on.
I am aghast
Now imagine how aghast you'd feel if you were Black today.
I am appalled that a bunch of rioters can just rip one down because it suits their view point.
Not just their viewpoint, the viewpoint of a great many people in Bristol, which you might realise if you were actually paying attention! 11,000 people signed a petition calling for its removal, I’ll bet you that if you did a poll in the city about that statute the majority of people would be quite happy about its removal. It should have been taken down and put into a museum in Bristol along with other exhibits about slavery and Bristol’s long associations with it. Bristol isn’t the only city in the U.K. with connections with slavery, and there needs to be a wider discussion about Britain’s involvement with the trade, but that discussion should also explore the part that African and Arab people had in the trade as well, happily taking money in return for their own people. It’s also often forgotten that some of those same slave traders from North Africa were taking white people from the south of England and Ireland and selling them into slavery - there’s a degree of guilt on both sides, but the obscene amount of money made by white traders, and the celebration of those people has to be addressed, but not swept away; those who choose to ignore the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them, and Bristol has a large Black population who really do need to be listened to and their concerns acted upon now.
We have a long way to go in this country to rid us of the noose of slavery and the idea of Black History month is nothing but a piecemeal offering
@lamp I'm not sure whose intelligence you are questioning and whether or not you're being sarcastic, I don't think you see the irony though. Did you miss my post at the top of the page that said that they've been campaigning for 40yrs to have Colston removed? You may not have seen it in the news as it's mainly been conducted civily through letters and meetings.
BLM is a movement, a collective of unorganised groups campaigning for a variety of different issues. They aren't an organisation and whilst a benefactor may support individual cases there's no mass funding for the movement. There's no legal aid for human rights or public law cases, and so many hoops you have to jump through before the you reach EHRC that time is up before you exhaust the process, so most cases go unheard.
As I said earlier in my reply to rydster who fears a Hobbesian state of nature where selfishness leads to lawlessness, I would suggest that for many we were already there years ago. It's not as balanced as you imagine and cracks have appeared in the facade
4. Police tactics are designed to increase the chance of violence (kettling, herding, use of language etc), and I refuse to believe that some cops don’t actually enjoy getting stuck into a protester or two.
5. Police tactics are often the cause of direct damage to property
6. Damage to property is often caused by peaceful protesters trying to get away from violent police tactics.
Having had direct experience of many protests and marches which turned violent, I can honestly say that almost all of them (with one or two execptions which I won't elaborate on) were caused by police violence. I was at the Criminal Justice Bill 'riot' in 1994, which was caused by the cops kettling protestors in a small area then baton charging them. I've been on many Reclaim the Streets protests where the same happened, and I've seen cops beating the shit out of young female activists in full view of their friends. Almost all of these examples would have remained peaceful and would have diffused without any trouble had the police not waded in. The police have the power to keep protests peaceful, and in Bristol that's what they did, because if they'd done what they often do, it would have resulted in a full-on riot, instead of containing it to a minor case of vandalism.
@DazH - 2 months down the line when the graffiti is gone, the windows have been replaced and something else in the news (which it will be!)...then what?? You see my point?
...so you'd be absolutely fine if someone smashed up your bike, your car, or graffitied the walls on your house then as long as it was for direct action, your'e cool with it?
As analogies go, that's about as good as feathers.
so you’d be absolutely fine if someone smashed up your bike, your car, or graffitied the walls on your house then as long as it was for direct action, your’e cool with it?
Don't be ridiculous. The scenarios are incomparable and you know it. Direct action is something that's used against established power by people who have exhausted other means or who have no recourse to challenging that power. Every now and again people need to signal to the politicians that they will not take no for an answer and that they won't be fobbed off. That's exactly what happened yesterday so I fail to see what the objection is, especially considering that it was still a peaceful expression of their complaints.
…so you’d be absolutely fine if someone smashed up your bike, your car, or graffitied the walls on your house
Violence to property in protests is always universally directed at symbols of power, that's why police stations, courts, statues get graffiti. Damage to property by individuals not part of protest, but going along for a chance for a bit of free stuff, go for shops. The chances of having your personal shit banged up is practically nil.
as long as it was for direct action, your’e cool with it?
It's mostly not peaceful protesters (even ones who believe in direct action) that are the ones damaging private property. The cops on the other hand, mostly couldn't give a toss (I've seen this; a car remain intact, only for it to be rammed by the cops as it was in their way)
Tactically it was a good move to let them do it. Protesting about racism is a bit abstract and this gave a concrete focus. It avoided a bundle with the police and may have saved the council the cost of SERCO pulling it down. Plus it encouraged Priti to make an utter fool of herself. Result.
I attended the Manchester protest on Saturday. I cycled in and as I locked my bike up on Market Street I though to myself 'what if things go tits up and my bike gets trashed?' I wouldn't be happy, I thought, though given the bigger picture I'd be fine with it. My conscience could live with the fact that doing the right thing ended up costing me a £400 bicycle.
Lamp,fear not!There's no need to throw out your bust of Bomber Harris just yet.
This is sort of horrifyingly funny, or funnily horrifying.
"https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/klamath-falls-oregon-victory-declared-over-antifa-which-never-showed-n1226681?utm_source=pocket-newtab"
Thanks for that link somafunk.
seosamh77
The protests are very much routed in issues of the present.
I most definitely am not wagging my finger.
I think it's great to see the population finally starting to react. I'd just like to see them aim their anger better than at ancient statues.
As I said, maybe this is just the start...
But maybe we'll now get to see how good a classicist Boris is. He should know what comes next when there isn't enough bread and circuses to keep an angry populace diverted.
Will this ever happen?
The Justice in Policing Act...
We can only hope...
Slam dunk, somafunk.
Congratulating 'ourselves' for abolishing slavery is meaningless when it was still legal to own a slave until 1835. But thats the narrative we're fed. You would think that a government bail out of slave owners that took 180 years to pay off would feature slightly more prominently in our history and education. The debt incurred to fight WW2 was paid off in a third of the time.
I most definitely am not wagging my finger.
I’d just like to see them aim their anger better than at ancient statues.
Not just their viewpoint, the viewpoint of a great many people in Bristol, which you might realise if you were actually paying attention! 11,000 people signed a petition calling for its removal, I’ll bet you that if you did a poll in the city about that statute the majority of people would be quite happy about its removal. It should have been taken down and put into a museum in Bristol along with other exhibits about slavery and Bristol’s long associations with it. Bristol isn’t the only city in the U.K. with connections with slavery, and there needs to be a wider discussion about Britain’s involvement with the trade, but that discussion should also explore the part that African and Arab people had in the trade as well, happily taking money in return for their own people. It’s also often forgotten that some of those same slave traders from North Africa were taking white people from the south of England and Ireland and selling them into slavery – there’s a degree of guilt on both sides, but the obscene amount of money made by white traders, and the celebration of those people has to be addressed, but not swept away; those who choose to ignore the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them, and Bristol has a large Black population who really do need to be listened to and their concerns acted upon now.
So its ok to break the law if 11,000 people out of a city population of 690,000 that less than 2% of the cities population. Not even a significant minority. If we can all break the law if less than 2% of the city agrees then we wont have many laws left. What makes this small minority think it has the right to tell the other 98% what its can and cant have. I dont care who the statue is. Its not important. Its the principle of a tiny minority vandalizing and destroying public property because they have decided to take offence at it
“ I dont care who the statue is”
You should, you really should care and understand the implications of it
So its ok to break the law if 11,000 people out of a city population of 690,000 that less than 2% of the cities population. Not even a significant minority. If we can all break the law if less than 2% of the city agrees then we wont have many laws left. What makes this small minority think it has the right to tell the other 98% what its can and cant have. I dont care who the statue is. Its not important. Its the principle of a tiny minority vandalizing and destroying public property because they have decided to take offence at it
Yeah, I get where you are coming from. It's disappointing that only 2% of the population could be arsed enough to sign a petition asking for it to be removed and, ideally, these things would be done by consensus. However, if something is so abhorrent and insulting to a even a small number of the population, does it really deserve to remain?
Colston Tower is a 70s tower-block. No history there, so change the name.
The Merchant Venturers will never allow it. They are the same people who have obstructed the Colston statue debate for 30 years. They also have fingers in may pies in the city and do not appear to be a current force for democratic good. More here
https://twitter.com/mat8iou/status/1269896135113674753?s=21
What makes this small minority think it has the right to tell the other 98% what its can and cant have.
I agree: it's outrageous that a small group of powerful white men told us we must have a statue of a mass murderer.
However, if something is so abhorrent and insulting to a even a small number of the population, does it really deserve to remain?
Would you still be saying that if that small number of people were all members of the EDL or ISIS. No I doubt it (or at least i hope not).
chrismac,
If you feel that strongly about it feel free to go and put it back up yourself. I'm sure you can round up a posse of like minded law abiding citizens to help you.
Fill your boots as they say, (though you might find a pair of waders more usefull.)
But seriously, perhaps they can make an annual event of dredging Eddie up from the depths and re erecting him briefly, only to topple him again and send him on his journey down the hill before the ritual submersion into the dock. More fun than chucking a cheese down a hill, (another West Country tradition.)
On a lighter note, how do all you 'white statues matter' crowd feel about the Confederate flag / memorials?