The Forum Site - Join the conversation
Forums:
News & Current Events

Removing Statues Doesn't Erase History

Reply to Topic
AuthorMessage
Pages: << · 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 · >>
Darkman666 On about 6 hours ago




Saint Louis, Missouri
#46New Post! Jun 25, 2020 @ 15:10:57
@gakINGKONG Said

At least 400 National Guardsmen have been deployed to DC to be on standby because all statues are at risk.

I mean don't get me wrong I'm secretly in love with slave owners just as much as the next guy but the fact of the matter remains at some point those lunatic college students and other crack-addicted 20-somethings might go after a statue that you like. And then what Mr Man?


next week, on 4 th of july, national guardsman has stand over national momentums anyway. if collage students were in 60's and 70's, they probably will blow up instead tearing them down. at least, 400 national guardsmen have a job for a couple of weeks.
gakINGKONG On October 18, 2022




, Florida
#47New Post! Jun 25, 2020 @ 20:07:28
This is like saying book-burning doesn't destroy ideas.
Darkman666 On about 6 hours ago




Saint Louis, Missouri
#48New Post! Jun 25, 2020 @ 21:07:45
removing statues because they were slave owners back then, not the heroes or famous historical leaders, or two different things.

these statues are people, could easily probably slavery, not have use an amendment. some ways, removing the statues is alienation the people, who protected america and the constitution. that's prejudice to the people, who at the time thought it was ok, do the wrong back then.

the people of america now, that want to remove these statues, what the last thing that you to do for america, if people become prejudice against you, and want tear down your statue now?
bob_the_fisherman On January 30, 2023
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#49New Post! Jun 25, 2020 @ 23:21:07
@gakINGKONG Said

This is like saying book-burning doesn't destroy ideas.


Indeed.

The problem with book burning is who decides which books get burned? Usually it is the mob.

I remember in that famous speech Trump gave that the media has been gaslighting over ever since, where he said there were "fine people" opposing the tearing down of statues because once you start, there is no telling where it will end. He expressly said he was not speaking of white nationalists and neo-Nazis who he said ought to be totally condemned, but just normal, average, everyday Americans.

The media frothed at the mouth in barely contained rage over this as they lied about what he said, and frothed even harder when Trump asked if George Washington and others would go, and now, somewhat ironically, they jubilantly froth at the mouth as people tear down and burn monuments to Washington and others.

In hindsight, maybe people in the media need a rabies shot and a day in a class called, "journalism one oh one" so they can finally understand something about the job they are supposed to do
chaski On about 22 hours ago
Stalker





Tree at Floydgirrl's Window,
#50New Post! Jun 26, 2020 @ 03:05:58
@gakINGKONG Said

This is like saying book-burning doesn't destroy ideas.





Yet another idiotic statement from the peanut gallery.

Books and statues are so very much alike.


But I'm with you bro... we need to bring back the monuments and statues of Nazi Germany, Stalin, Saddam Hussein... in fact, the American soldiers that helped pull down the statues of Saddam Hussein should be prosecuted for trying to destroy and re-write history.




Statues and books... some of the dumbest s*** every... if you could packed that nonsense you could make a fortune in the fertilizer business.

dihctatr On November 06, 2020




Upland, California
#51New Post! Jun 26, 2020 @ 03:12:21
pandering publicly to blacks didnot save rich whites from sodomy,rape,looting,burning by blm\
dihctatr On November 06, 2020




Upland, California
#52New Post! Jun 26, 2020 @ 03:30:42
hey BLM---
whites suddenly overemphazizing ''we luvv blacks''

you know they be pandering\

here the truth about forum whites who ''have black frends''\

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f__OHggeM-Y
dihctatr On November 06, 2020




Upland, California
#53New Post! Jun 26, 2020 @ 03:41:44
BLACKLIVSMATTER
YOU CHOSE TO BACK THEIR ACTIVITY BUT THEY NOW
BE OUT TO MURDER YOU LEADERS\
THEY DECLARED ALL YOU HAVE TO BE THEIRS-HOMS,AUTOS,CITYHALLS\
BLACK ON WHITE WAR BY LOOTING,ROBBERY,SODOMY,RAPE\
NO POLEES AVAILABLE FOR YOU EVERRR\
LEADERS AND NEWS CONSIDER POLEES ABOLISHED \
Jennifer1984 On July 20, 2022
Returner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#54New Post! Jun 26, 2020 @ 05:14:07
@gakINGKONG Said

This is like saying book-burning doesn't destroy ideas.



Nonsense. Books contain information. You read a book, evaluate its message and then decide whether or not you consider that information valid.

A statue has no such value. It's only purpose is to honour, praise and elevate the subject. There is no information in a statue. It is not history.

If you can't grasp that fact, you probably spend too much time looking at statues and not enough time reading books.
bob_the_fisherman On January 30, 2023
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#55New Post! Jun 26, 2020 @ 05:22:06
@Jennifer1984 Said

If you can't grasp that fact, you probably spend too much time looking at statues and not enough time reading books.



Jennifer1984 On July 20, 2022
Returner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#56New Post! Jun 26, 2020 @ 05:34:11
There has been much talk about what happened in Bristol as an "act of vandalism".... as "the wilful destruction of somebody elses property".... of "defilement".

I recently asked somebody on another forum what he thought of the tearing down of the Berlin Wall in 1989. He replied (I'm cutting and pasting his comments now) "That was justified because the berlin wall is a monument to communism and oppression."

In my next post I asked him if it was right to tear down another country's (East Germany) property. Reply: "it dont matter whoit belongs to. it had to go."

And there you have it. Double standards.

The real issues for some people are not alleged acts of vandalism or concern for property. The real issues are WHO the statue is there to glorify.

Spray painting the statue of Churchill enraged the right wing in Britain, not because it was a statue per se. It enraged them because it was a statue of Churchill, the subject is more important than the artifact.

This is another reason why statues are false history. I doubt any of those people going barmy over what happened in Parliament Square have ever read A History of the English Speaking Peoples. They should. Churchill was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature for writing it.

But I bet none of them have. They haven't read his innermost thoughts on the Empire and other things. They probably know nothing of his time in the Army in India and Sudan, or his time in South Africa as a journalist. Or his political career in England before the second world war. They probably know nothing of his support for concentration camps. British ones, that is.

All they know of Churchill is a few wartime speeches, repeated over and over and over.............

“the Aryan stock is bound to triumph”. Who said that...? Adolph Hitler...? Nope. That line is taken from one of Winston Churchill's speeches as an MP.

When the Kurds rebelled against British rule, he said: “I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes...[It] would spread a lively terror.”

When Saddam Hussein did in fact use poisoned gas against the Kurds in 1988, I wonder if he took Winston Churchill as his inspiration for that act...?



Churchill supporters probably won't read this link. It would make far too uncomfortable reading for them.

Not His Finest Hour - The Dark Side of Winston Churchill

They won't read it because it doesn't paint him in the heroic light that is all they want to see. But it's all true.

The statue doesn't say anything about that bit of history. It doesn't say anything about history at all.
dihctatr On November 06, 2020




Upland, California
#57New Post! Jun 26, 2020 @ 06:19:18
hey your obvious pandering frenzy won't protec you\

SUPPORT CONSTITUTION=SUPPORT SLAVERY---
Amendment XIII (13): Abolition of slavery
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude,
except as a punishment for crime
whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
LEVS DOOR WIDE OPEN BY FAILURE TO EXCLUDE RUNAWAY FROM SLAVERY FROM BEING A CRIME\
bob_the_fisherman On January 30, 2023
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#58New Post! Jun 26, 2020 @ 06:38:51
@Jennifer1984 Said

There has been much talk about what happened in Bristol as an "act of vandalism".... as "the wilful destruction of somebody elses property".... of "defilement".

I recently asked somebody on another forum what he thought of the tearing down of the Berlin Wall in 1989. He replied (I'm cutting and pasting his comments now) "That was justified because the berlin wall is a monument to communism and oppression."

In my next post I asked him if it was right to tear down another country's (East Germany) property. Reply: "it dont matter whoit belongs to. it had to go."

And there you have it. Double standards.

The real issues for some people are not alleged acts of vandalism or concern for property. The real issues are WHO the statue is there to glorify.

Spray painting the statue of Churchill enraged the right wing in Britain, not because it was a statue per se. It enraged them because it was a statue of Churchill, the subject is more important than the artifact.

This is another reason why statues are false history. I doubt any of those people going barmy over what happened in Parliament Square have ever read A History of the English Speaking Peoples. They should. Churchill was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature for writing it.

But I bet none of them have. They haven't read his innermost thoughts on the Empire and other things. They probably know nothing of his time in the Army in India and Sudan, or his time in South Africa as a journalist. Or his political career in England before the second world war. They probably know nothing of his support for concentration camps. British ones, that is.

All they know of Churchill is a few wartime speeches, repeated over and over and over.............

“the Aryan stock is bound to triumph”. Who said that...? Adolph Hitler...? Nope. That line is taken from one of Winston Churchill's speeches as an MP.

When the Kurds rebelled against British rule, he said: “I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes...[It] would spread a lively terror.”

When Saddam Hussein did in fact use poisoned gas against the Kurds in 1988, I wonder if he took Winston Churchill as his inspiration for that act...?



Churchill supporters probably won't read this link. It would make far too uncomfortable reading for them.

Not His Finest Hour - The Dark Side of Winston Churchill

They won't read it because it doesn't paint him in the heroic light that is all they want to see. But it's all true.

The statue doesn't say anything about that bit of history. It doesn't say anything about history at all.


I actually agree with you that history is far too nuanced to be contained in a statue, which is why I am ambivalent about some of what is taking place. Interestingly enough, one of the American guys whose statue has caused controversy specifically argued against having his statue erected because he believed it would cause problems (Lee, maybe. Honestly can't remember now).

Churchill did some great things worthy of note. WWII may well have worked out far less pleasant without him. However he also did and said some terrible things by the standard of today. Should we ignore the good he did and focus only on the bad? It does not matter to him either way, but if we sanitise the past does it not pose its own dangers?

A plaque on a statue speaking of the good and bad could have been an alternative.

On balance I argue against tearing these things down in a climate like this, although that ship has sailed. One thing people seem not to comprehend is that the world is an ugly place, and people can go from civilised to something else very quickly once a mob is involved. We have seen it over and over.

In an ideal world a discussion would be had about statues and people would arrive at a peaceful consensus on them, but, that ain't gonna happen either. The ball is rolling and it will continue to roll beyond the control of any individual.

Hopefully, whatever the outcome, the violence does not escalate.
Jennifer1984 On July 20, 2022
Returner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#59New Post! Jun 26, 2020 @ 09:15:58
@bob_the_fisherman Said

I actually agree with you that history is far too nuanced to be contained in a statue, which is why I am ambivalent about some of what is taking place. Interestingly enough, one of the American guys whose statue has caused controversy specifically argued against having his statue erected because he believed it would cause problems (Lee, maybe. Honestly can't remember now).

Churchill did some great things worthy of note. WWII may well have worked out far less pleasant without him. However he also did and said some terrible things by the standard of today. Should we ignore the good he did and focus only on the bad? It does not matter to him either way, but if we sanitise the past does it not pose its own dangers?

A plaque on a statue speaking of the good and bad could have been an alternative.

On balance I argue against tearing these things down in a climate like this, although that ship has sailed. One thing people seem not to comprehend is that the world is an ugly place, and people can go from civilised to something else very quickly once a mob is involved. We have seen it over and over.

In an ideal world a discussion would be had about statues and people would arrive at a peaceful consensus on them, but, that ain't gonna happen either. The ball is rolling and it will continue to roll beyond the control of any individual.

Hopefully, whatever the outcome, the violence does not escalate.


Hmmmm.... I read that expecting a 'but' somewhere along the line. I was pleasantly surprised not to see one. Well, not an obvious one anyway, but OK... you make your point and that's fair. Let's take it from there.

I don't think Churchill was as complex a character as some would like him to be remembered as. He was an empirist and believed strongly in the superiority of the white man, something that has never been adequately acknowledged. My point about statues is that they are superficial. They can't see into the intricacies of an individuals' character. Only education can do that.

I think we're very fortunate in Britain in that we DO have a good education system, particularly in matters relating to our history. UK has no 'official' history. The education of our children is directed at giving them enough salient facts to stimulate their interest so that they will then study for themselves. By accessing works written by educated scholars who specialise in specific areas of history. Investigate, challenge, consider and conclude. Make your own mind up.

Our history is flexible and not easily contained. Every time some new evidence comes to light, it challenges what we thought we knew before and makes us review our opinions and beliefs.

For example, the discovery of the remains of King Richard III stimulated a lot of new research into his life and reign. Until then we had been highly influenced by Shakespeare's hatchet job on him from the 16th century. But Shakespeare was writing about a Plantagenet King who had been overthrown by the grandfather of Elizabeth I. A Tudor. It might have been expedient of him at the time to paint Richard in the worst possible light to gain the patronage of the Queen. He sure as hell didn't want to upset a red head with a volatile temperament with a man like Walsingham around who would throw anybody who looked like a subversive into the Tower.

Now we see Richard III in a different light. History hasn't been re-written or discarded, it's been reviewed and updated in the light of new evidence. That is what objective and honest scholarly institutions do.

And so it should be with Churchill. For seven decades he has been revered as almost faultless.... the saviour of the nation.... The Greatest Ever Briton according to the poll carried out in a popular BBC series some ten years or so ago.

Isn't it time that this figure, who commands such a lofty place in our national psyche, be reviewed and other parts of his life, that occurred before 1939, be brought to the table...?

As for your comment that peaceful consensus isn't going to happen, I disagree. I think the dumpings and the vandalism would stop very quickly if there was enough goodwill for the protesters to believe that their grievances were being adequately addressed.

It takes two to tango. The trouble is, white people haven't learned how to do that particular dance. Many black councillors in a number of places around the country have tried to raise the question of objectionable memorials but have been rejected. Petitions have been ignored. Questions to MP's and local councils have not been responded to.

How Bristol Resisted The Removal Of Colston's Statue For Years

Protests about the statue had been going on since 2016. Nobody listened.

Protesters eventually felt they had no recourse but to take direct action (a phrase I personally dislike and I'm sure you do too, but it rather fits). They pulled Colston down and that has put the issue on the table.

Councils aren't ignoring the issue any more.

I'd rather it hadn't been done this way. I hope you'll take my word for that. But because I speak with black people.... listen to them.... hear their grievances and in making up my own mind, I agree that their complaints are legitimate, I sympathise with them.

Many years from now, probably when you and I have shuffled off this mortal coil, schoolchildren might read about this in a history book. They'll make up their own minds, which is how I hope we will still do history in this country. My feeling is that they'll think the removal of statues that celebrated racists was a good thing.
dookie On December 16, 2023
Foolish Bombu





, United Kingdom
#60New Post! Jun 26, 2020 @ 11:01:31
@Jennifer1984 Said



Many years from now, probably when you and I have shuffled off this mortal coil, schoolchildren might read about this in a history book. They'll make up their own minds, which is how I hope we will still do history in this country. My feeling is that they'll think the removal of statues that celebrated racists was a good thing.



Who knows what those in the future will think. Maybe they might even have the compassion and empathy - even the basic education - to actually understand "our days". In Mr Colston's day, when the GDP of the UK revolved a lot around the Slave Trade, most were happy to turn a blind eye and enjoy what wealth actually trickled down to them. Most had lives to live, making ends meet as it were. Today we are quite happy to enjoy the benefits to us from Arms Sales - in their Billions - and the bonuses that keep rolling in from exploitation of the "third world." And if a few refugees flee the terror we in part support by our silence, well we can tell them to get back where they come from, we don't want freeloaders here looking to hop on the gravy train.
Reply to Topic<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>
Pages: << · 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 · >>

1 browsing (0 members - 1 guest)

Quick Reply
Be Respectful of Others

      
Subscribe to topic prefs

Similar Topics
    Forum Topic Last Post Replies Views
New posts   News & Current Events
Mon Dec 15, 2014 @ 18:01
36 3052
New posts   Politics
Sat Sep 12, 2009 @ 01:38
97 4222
New posts   Racism
Tue Feb 17, 2009 @ 10:15
2 746
New posts   Music
Tue Dec 23, 2008 @ 16:52
5 672
New posts   Australia
Tue May 23, 2006 @ 09:24
3 1192