|
Post by martin44 on Jun 13, 2020 21:09:00 GMT
Winston churchill statue should be protected no matter what.... or shouldn't it?
|
|
benaj
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,830
Likes: 1,586
|
Post by benaj on Jun 13, 2020 22:04:01 GMT
May be it’s time to relocate it, and replace with a more meaningful statue of a non historical figure with a cause like winning the Covid 19 battle. youtu.be/vro-pS4cQ2g
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,788
Likes: 2,735
|
Post by michaelc on Jun 13, 2020 22:20:50 GMT
Winston churchill statue should be protected no matter what.... or shouldn't it? It's a good question. Ultimately, if the majority of the population don't want a statue to exist anymore or want it moved to a museum that should happen and can happen under our existing system of democracy. If the majority do want it to remain then it should be protected. _If_ and assuming that is the case, how much effort should be spent protecting them? Protecting one statue is probably reasonably easy but how would potentially hundreds or thousands be secured? While we're at it, what would happen if different protest groups suddenly turned their attentions towards other state owned infrastructure. Lamp-posts, electricity sub-stations, telegraph poles... Quite a long list of vulnerable assets. A tough approach is probably needed.
|
|
jj
Member of DD Central
Jolly Jammy
Posts: 320
Likes: 357
|
Post by jj on Jun 13, 2020 22:21:33 GMT
I think people should be protesting against the slave trade that is happening NOW, in this day and age.
It is shocking that in this country (and others) it still goes on.
Why does selling people in to prostitution & hard labour does not merit the same response?
|
|
|
Post by default on Jun 14, 2020 7:50:07 GMT
The police were wrong not to intervene in the pulling down of the statue of Edward Colston. And Kier Starmer was wrong to try to defend this act of vandalism by saying that it should have been taken down long ago. Whilst those that are supposed to uphold law and order look the other way when it suits them, they are effectively inciting anarchy. But equally, Boris Johnson has lost so much credibility now that, even though I think he has been right on this issue, I doubt that anyone cares what he says anymore. Candidly, I have no wish to venerate people like Edward Colston. But I do think that trying to airbrush the past is not the answer. And I'm not quite up for a revolution yet, as they tend to be messy and seldom improve anything.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,661
Likes: 2,984
|
Post by IFISAcava on Jun 14, 2020 8:40:50 GMT
The police were wrong not to intervene in the pulling down of the statue of Edward Colston. And Kier Starmer was wrong to try to defend this act of vandalism by saying that it should have been taken down long ago. Whilst those that are supposed to uphold law and order look the other way when it suits them, they are effectively inciting anarchy. But equally, Boris Johnson has lost so much credibility now that, even though I think he has been right on this issue, I doubt that anyone cares what he says anymore. Candidly, I have no wish to venerate people like Edward Colston. But I do think that trying to airbrush the past is not the answer. And I'm not quite up for a revolution yet, as they tend to be messy and seldom improve anything. That's a complete misrepresentation what Starmer said - he explicitly said it was wrong of the protesters to pull the statue down. He did not "try to defend this act of vandalism". And it is a perfectly valid view for people to wish for public spaces not to be decorated by those associated with things in the past of which we are not proud. You can have that view, and say that if enough people hold that view then the statue should be relocated from the public space in a democratic manner, without condoning vandalism.
|
|
|
Post by default on Jun 14, 2020 9:30:50 GMT
The police were wrong not to intervene in the pulling down of the statue of Edward Colston. And Kier Starmer was wrong to try to defend this act of vandalism by saying that it should have been taken down long ago. Whilst those that are supposed to uphold law and order look the other way when it suits them, they are effectively inciting anarchy. But equally, Boris Johnson has lost so much credibility now that, even though I think he has been right on this issue, I doubt that anyone cares what he says anymore. Candidly, I have no wish to venerate people like Edward Colston. But I do think that trying to airbrush the past is not the answer. And I'm not quite up for a revolution yet, as they tend to be messy and seldom improve anything. That's a complete misrepresentation what Starmer said - he explicitly said it was wrong of the protesters to pull the statue down. He did not "try to defend this act of vandalism". And it is a perfectly valid view for people to wish for public spaces not to be decorated by those associated with things in the past of which we are not proud. You can have that view, and say that if enough people hold that view then the statue should be relocated from the public space in a democratic manner, without condoning vandalism. You're entitled to your opinion, however, Kier Starmer, in trying to excuse this was defending it. No doubt about that in my mind.
Your second sentence is irrelevant to this being an act of vandalism, because it didn't happen that way, as well you know. It wasn't taken down long ago, precisely because the so called democratic process had prevented that outcome. So, saying it should have been is just creating an excuse. Keir Starmer is undoubtedly clever enough to know what he was doing. And I am not going to excuse him for it.
It isn't even that I dislike Keir Starmer, however, I am starting to wonder if he might just be trying to put popularity before absolute honesty. The whole 'taking the knee' bit was truly cringeworthy.
We either have a society that has laws that apply equally to everyone or we don't. And the latter is a very dangerous path to tread, just to pander to a protest movement.
But if you prefer anarchy, that's your choice.
Again, I have no wish to venerate Edward Colston, however, this act was vandalism born of anarchy. Period.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,661
Likes: 2,984
|
Post by IFISAcava on Jun 14, 2020 9:46:27 GMT
That's a complete misrepresentation what Starmer said - he explicitly said it was wrong of the protesters to pull the statue down. He did not "try to defend this act of vandalism". And it is a perfectly valid view for people to wish for public spaces not to be decorated by those associated with things in the past of which we are not proud. You can have that view, and say that if enough people hold that view then the statue should be relocated from the public space in a democratic manner, without condoning vandalism. You're entitled to your opinion, however, Kier Starmer, in trying to excuse this was defending it. No doubt about that in my mind.
Your second sentence is irrelevant to this being an act of vandalism, because it didn't happen that way, as well you know. It wasn't taken down long ago, precisely because the so called democratic process had prevented that outcome. So, saying it should have been is just creating an excuse. Keir Starmer is undoubtedly clever enough to know what he was doing. And I am not going to excuse him for it.
It isn't even that I dislike Keir Starmer, however, I am starting to wonder if he might just be trying to put popularity before absolute honesty. The whole 'taking the knee' bit was truly cringeworthy.
We either have a society that has laws that apply equally to everyone or we don't. And the latter is a very dangerous path to tread, just to pander to a protest movement.
But if you prefer anarchy, that's your choice.
Again, I have no wish to venerate Edward Colston, however, this act was vandalism born of anarchy. Period.
Wow. My statement opposing vandalism and supporting democracy is now equated with preferring anarchy? Starmer's word were that it was "completely wrong" to topple the statue. Couldn't be clearer, so I do think you have already made your mind up about Starmer regardless of what he says.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,550
Likes: 4,167
|
Post by agent69 on Jun 14, 2020 9:53:40 GMT
The police were wrong not to intervene in the pulling down of the statue of Edward Colston. And Kier Starmer was wrong to try to defend this act of vandalism by saying that it should have been taken down long ago. Whilst those that are supposed to uphold law and order look the other way when it suits them, they are effectively inciting anarchy. But equally, Boris Johnson has lost so much credibility now that, even though I think he has been right on this issue, I doubt that anyone cares what he says anymore. Candidly, I have no wish to venerate people like Edward Colston. But I do think that trying to airbrush the past is not the answer. And I'm not quite up for a revolution yet, as they tend to be messy and seldom improve anything. The problem I have with people that want to protest or complain is that they normally take a blinkered approach to whatever issue they want to protest about, and are happy to ignore facts that don't support their argument or inconsistencies that undermine what they say. For example most middle eastern countries have draconian penalties for drug possession / use, but are happy to ignore the fact that one of their number is producing 80% of the world's heroin.
Anyway getting back on topic, as a westcountry lad I have a passing knowledge of Bristol. When I saw a group of black protestors pulling down the statue of Colston my immediate thought was 'I wonder how many of them have been to a pop concert at the Colston hall. I wonder how many of their parents went to see Bob Marley perform at the Colston hall'. I don't have an issue with people saying they want to expunge Colston from the history of Bristol, but to be consistent they would need to demolish the Colston hall (not just rename it), demolish all the schools that bear his name, and rip up all the infrastructure that he funded.
I wonder how many of those protestors would be in favour of pulling down all the status of Nelson Mandela in South Africa because he was a violent terrorist?
|
|
|
Post by default on Jun 14, 2020 10:13:19 GMT
You're entitled to your opinion, however, Kier Starmer, in trying to excuse this was defending it. No doubt about that in my mind.
Your second sentence is irrelevant to this being an act of vandalism, because it didn't happen that way, as well you know. It wasn't taken down long ago, precisely because the so called democratic process had prevented that outcome. So, saying it should have been is just creating an excuse. Keir Starmer is undoubtedly clever enough to know what he was doing. And I am not going to excuse him for it.
It isn't even that I dislike Keir Starmer, however, I am starting to wonder if he might just be trying to put popularity before absolute honesty. The whole 'taking the knee' bit was truly cringeworthy.
We either have a society that has laws that apply equally to everyone or we don't. And the latter is a very dangerous path to tread, just to pander to a protest movement.
But if you prefer anarchy, that's your choice.
Again, I have no wish to venerate Edward Colston, however, this act was vandalism born of anarchy. Period.
Wow. My statement opposing vandalism and supporting democracy is now equated with preferring anarchy? Starmer's word were that it was "completely wrong" to topple the statue. Couldn't be clearer, so I do think you have already made your mind up about Starmer regardless of what he says. You don't say a thing like "completely wrong" and follow it up with the excuse that it should have been taken down long ago without knowing that you're contradicting yourself and making an excuse to defend the very thing you said was "completely wrong". I think Kier Starmer needs to be far more careful about what he says if he isn't going to loose too much credibility. And, by the way, of those standing for the Labour leadership, he was by far my favourite. I just don't like what he's doing over this issue. He's clearly taken sides and by doing so he's just adding to the polarisation of our society. I'd like to see a fairer society. I'd like to have everyone feel valued. But I'm not going to dumb down issues like this just to sound popular. The whole of the British empire was built on exploitation. That's our history. We can't just stick it all in a museum and pretend it didn't happen. This kind of view is just a form of denial. We have to live with our past and use it as a reminder to steer us towards a better future.
|
|
starfished
Member of DD Central
Posts: 296
Likes: 216
|
Post by starfished on Jun 14, 2020 10:26:44 GMT
The problem I have with people that want to protest or complain is that they normally take a blinkered approach to whatever issue they want to protest about, and are happy to ignore facts that don't support their argument or inconsistencies that undermine what they say. For example most middle eastern countries have draconian penalties for drug possession / use, but are happy to ignore the fact that one of their number is producing 80% of the world's heroin.
Anyway getting back on topic, as a westcountry lad I have a passing knowledge of Bristol. When I saw a group of black protestors pulling down the statue of Colston my immediate thought was 'I wonder how many of them have been to a pop concert at the Colston hall. I wonder how many of their parents went to see Bob Marley perform at the Colston hall'. I don't have an issue with people saying they want to expunge Colston from the history of Bristol, but to be consistent they would need to demolish the Colston hall (not just rename it), demolish all the schools that bear his name, and rip up all the infrastructure that he funded.
I wonder how many of those protestors would be in favour of pulling down all the status of Nelson Mandela in South Africa because he was a violent terrorist? Link 1 Link 2Link 3Link 4
|
|
m2btj
Member of DD Central
Posts: 626
Likes: 749
|
Post by m2btj on Jun 14, 2020 10:59:41 GMT
In the early 1980's I parked my car at Winnie Mandela House, London Borough of Brent. At the time the Mandela's were revered as cult like icons. One day Winnie's name was quietly removed from the building without pomp or ceremony. It turned out that Winnie had blood on her hands. Her Nelson Mandela Football Team (bodyguards) had beaten a 14 year old boy to death on her instruction....she denied this but it never went away. She also advocated the horrific practice of burning people to death with her necklace i.e. placing rubber tyres over someone & setting them ablaze with petrol.
A few years ago The Rhodes Statue was removed from University Of Cape Town following a campaign by South African student activists. They then turned their attention to the Rhodes statue at Oriel College, Oxford. A lot of time, money & energy was spent on a campaign that ultimately failed. I do hope that one day these very same students will address the problems that really plague SA i.e. abject poverty, violence & ANC political corruption on an industrial scale.
Poor old Nelson Mandela would turn in his grave!
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,661
Likes: 2,984
|
Post by IFISAcava on Jun 14, 2020 11:37:03 GMT
Wow. My statement opposing vandalism and supporting democracy is now equated with preferring anarchy? Starmer's word were that it was "completely wrong" to topple the statue. Couldn't be clearer, so I do think you have already made your mind up about Starmer regardless of what he says. You don't say a thing like "completely wrong" and follow it up with the excuse that it should have been taken down long ago without knowing that you're contradicting yourself and making an excuse to defend the very thing you said was "completely wrong". I think Kier Starmer needs to be far more careful about what he says if he isn't going to loose too much credibility. And, by the way, of those standing for the Labour leadership, he was by far my favourite. I just don't like what he's doing over this issue. He's clearly taken sides and by doing so he's just adding to the polarisation of our society. I'd like to see a fairer society. I'd like to have everyone feel valued. But I'm not going to dumb down issues like this just to sound popular. The whole of the British empire was built on exploitation. That's our history. We can't just stick it all in a museum and pretend it didn't happen. This kind of view is just a form of denial. We have to live with our past and use it as a reminder to steer us towards a better future. I simply don't follow your argument that it is contradictory to believe a statue ought to be removed with proper consent and procedures but wrong to vandalise it. I view that as absolutely consistent and indeed the correct way that any public campaign to change a public space should proceed. You can accept and acknowledge your history, and use it to steer a better future course, without putting statues in public spaces you know. Ask Germany. You could just as well argue that by continuing to venerate slave traders in public spaces, that is in itself a denial of the wrongs of the past. btw I am not arguing that it is right or wrong to take the statues down, merely that I disagree that the stances taken are contradictory, and that I disagree that taking statues down (if that is what the public wants in public spaces) would in and of itself be a form of denial.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,661
Likes: 2,984
|
Post by IFISAcava on Jun 14, 2020 11:48:50 GMT
It would be like arguing that it is inconsistent to believe that a poor person robbing a richer person is wrong whilst also believing in a progressive taxation system to redistribute wealth. The two are completely consistent.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,550
Likes: 4,167
|
Post by agent69 on Jun 14, 2020 12:10:40 GMT
The problem I have with people that want to protest or complain is that they normally take a blinkered approach to whatever issue they want to protest about, and are happy to ignore facts that don't support their argument or inconsistencies that undermine what they say. For example most middle eastern countries have draconian penalties for drug possession / use, but are happy to ignore the fact that one of their number is producing 80% of the world's heroin.
Anyway getting back on topic, as a westcountry lad I have a passing knowledge of Bristol. When I saw a group of black protestors pulling down the statue of Colston my immediate thought was 'I wonder how many of them have been to a pop concert at the Colston hall. I wonder how many of their parents went to see Bob Marley perform at the Colston hall'. I don't have an issue with people saying they want to expunge Colston from the history of Bristol, but to be consistent they would need to demolish the Colston hall (not just rename it), demolish all the schools that bear his name, and rip up all the infrastructure that he funded.
I wonder how many of those protestors would be in favour of pulling down all the status of Nelson Mandela in South Africa because he was a violent terrorist? Link 1 Link 2Link 3Link 4I'm sure you understand the gist of what I am saying and the hypocrisy that it exposes
|
|