Felling of British slave trader statue heats up simmering debate

[jayboy]

We should all take a moment to reflect on our transgressions, acknowledge our white man's privilege and educate ourselves on systemic racism - and of course bow the knee.The latter is optional if you want to stand a snowball's chance in hell of winning the next general election.Ooops too late!

[kingdong]

4 hours ago, jayboy said:

We should all take a moment to reflect on our transgressions, acknowledge our white man's privilege and educate ourselves on systemic racism - and of course bow the knee.The latter is optional if you want to stand a snowball's chance in hell of winning the next general election.Ooops too late!

Stand up you mug

[GinBoy2]

On 6/14/2020 at 1:21 AM, DrTuner said:

Were they state enterprises or private companies?

I don't know whether this is good or bad.

 

But it was State sanctioned private enterprise. 

 

The ships which transported slaves in the triangular trade were private companies, the people who owned the slaves ranged from the high and mighty to the parish priest.

[RuamRudy]

Another statue toppled - this cancel culture is getting out of hand!

 

Statue of Thatcher’s head on a spike appears on Grantham plinth

A local artist placed the plaster bust in the town centre at 4am on Sunday. The council has removed it

 

[EVENKEEL]

A funny take on this is from The Conservative Twins. Hilarious. What about the Blacks who first captured the slaves and sold them. See if you want to dig all this up you better start from the beginning. 

[Chomper Higgot]

5 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

A funny take on this is from The Conservative Twins. Hilarious. What about the Blacks who first captured the slaves and sold them. See if you want to dig all this up you better start from the beginning. 

So skipped ‘Market Economics 101’ and decided to demonstrate this to the forum.

[polpott]

10 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

What about the Blacks who first captured the slaves and sold them.

Are they celebrated with statues of them?

[Bluespunk]

16 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

A funny take on this is from The Conservative Twins. Hilarious. What about the Blacks who first captured the slaves and sold them. See if you want to dig all this up you better start from the beginning. 

Tear down any and all statues to all those involved in slavery. 

[Bluespunk]

Just now, kingdong said:

By that token also tear down any statue to all those involved with terrorism.

Certainly and war criminals...

[kingdong]

1 minute ago, Bluespunk said:

Certainly and war criminals...

Has there been any statues of tony blair erected?

[Bluespunk]

Just now, kingdong said:

Has there been any statues of tony blair erected?

Ooh I’m thinking much further back than that...

[robblok]

Yes the slave trade was bad but like others said the black people themselves took slaves too before the whites ever wanted them. Then when there was market for them the blacks in power made sure they got their cut. So to be fair that side should be discussed too. 

 

Dutch made a lot from slave trading, but I don't feel responsible for that it happened years ago. Any empire / big power has done bad things to get in power. Mongols were not nice, neither were the Turks, Romans were not nice, USA also committed genocide (on their native people by killing their food and spreading disease). Dutch massacred people in Indonesia. 

 

In the past these things happened, its sad why not just look forward and make sure things get better. I can see why statues need to go. No need to celebrate a bad past. But to apologize for stuff that happened long ago is stupid. 

 

Just like some people on this forum still hate the Germans, things from the past should stay there and current actions should be judged not past actions. 

[Solinvictus]

On 6/8/2020 at 7:13 PM, simon43 said:

Seems like mob rule has taken over in the UK..... police deciding not to intervene..... rule of law broken time and time again.  I'm glad to have left the UK 18 years ago - it's gone to the dogs!

Well if it represents slavery wouldn't it be right to rid something such as that? In the states all this gender neutral stuff is way out of proportion compared to more important issues.

 

Lastly, hasn't democracy always been about the majorities decision?

[Solinvictus]

2 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

A funny take on this is from The Conservative Twins. Hilarious. What about the Blacks who first captured the slaves and sold them. See if you want to dig all this up you better start from the beginning. 

Yeah all the way from the black tribal leaders who participated in it that sold his people out or simple act of slavery itself is all wrong. My thing is folks focus on the racial issues rather than the notion of slavery itself.

[Scott]

The topic is about removing statues of BRITISH Slave Traders.  Unless Britain has statues of Black Africans who captured slaves in Africa and sold them, it is nothing more than a deflection from the topic.  

 

Stay on topic or face a suspension.  

 

[nkg]

3 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Tear down any and all statues to all those involved in slavery. 

 

That's fine, but who gets to decide which people were "involved in slavery"?

 

I assume that you'd support bulldozing Nelson's column, for example. Francis Drake is gone. You could probably make an argument for toppling Churchill and Queen Victoria, too.

[Bluespunk]

13 minutes ago, nkg said:

 

That's fine, but who gets to decide which people were "involved in slavery"?

 

I assume that you'd support bulldozing Nelson's column, for example. Francis Drake is gone. You could probably make an argument for toppling Churchill and Queen Victoria, too.

If they had anything whatsoever to do with slavery...fine by me. 
 

Take them all down. 

Edited February 26, 2021 by Bluespunk

[nkg]

Just now, Bluespunk said:

If they had anything whatsoever to do with slavery...fine by me. 
 

Take them all down. 

 

You didn't answer my question - who gets to decide? "Take them all down" is a feeble cop-out. It demonstrates that you aren't interested in using logic to defend your statement.

 

Emmeline Pankhurst made some controversial remarks about slavery, so presumably I would be correct in saying "Bluespunk wants the UK to destroy Emmeline Pankhurst's statues". After all, you want to "Take them all down".

[Bluespunk]

3 minutes ago, nkg said:

 

You didn't answer my question - who gets to decide? "Take them all down" is a feeble cop-out. It demonstrates that you aren't interested in using logic to defend your statement.

 

Emmeline Pankhurst made some controversial remarks about slavery, so presumably I would be correct in saying "Bluespunk wants the UK to destroy Emmeline Pankhurst's statues". After all, you want to "Take them all down".

Anyone who research reveals had any connection to slavery should have statues removed. 
 

You will never be correct in speaking for me. I can do that for myself. 
 

Take Them All Down. 

[nkg]

1 minute ago, Bluespunk said:

Anyone who research reveals had any connection to slavery should have statues removed. 
 

You will never be correct in speaking for me. I can do that for myself. 
 

Take Them All Down. 

 

Ah, so you've changed your tune now. "Anyone who research reveals had any connection to slavery should have statues removed."

 

Who does the research? Who makes the decision? "Take Them All Down once some research has been done and a committee has been formed (by whom?) to interpret the results of the research".

 

Emotional blanket statements like "Take them all down" rarely stand up to any scrutiny.

 

[Bluespunk]

6 minutes ago, nkg said:

 

Ah, so you've changed your tune now. "Anyone who research reveals had any connection to slavery should have statues removed."

 

Who does the research? Who makes the decision? "Take Them All Down once some research has been done and a committee has been formed (by whom?) to interpret the results of the research".

 

Emotional blanket statements like "Take them all down" rarely stand up to any scrutiny.

 

What exactly have I changed? I never said research should not be used to identify those contemptible enough to engage in slavery. 

 

Historians or anyone prepared to study the historical record can quite easily research those vile individuals who benefited from slavery. 
 

Take Them All Down. 

Edited February 26, 2021 by Bluespunk

[Morch]

12 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Anyone who research reveals had any connection to slavery should have statues removed. 
 

You will never be correct in speaking for me. I can do that for myself. 
 

Take Them All Down. 

 

IMO, "any connection" is a rather wide definition. What amounts to a 'connection', are all 'connections' the same etc. are not adequately addressed by such wide-brush comments. Probably not meant to, anyway.

[Bluespunk]

14 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

IMO, "any connection" is a rather wide definition. What amounts to a 'connection', are all 'connections' the same etc. are not adequately addressed by such wide-brush comments. Probably not meant to, anyway.

Connection is a wide ranging term and I’ll keep to it.
 

However let me add anyone who benefited due to their direct involvement in the slave trade, through trading, buying, selling, transporting or any other form of involvement should not be celebrated. 

Edited February 26, 2021 by Bluespunk

[nkg]

38 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

What exactly have I changed? I never said research should not be used to identify those contemptible enough to engage in slavery. 

 

Historians or anyone prepared to study the historical record can quite easily research those vile individuals who benefited from slavery. 
 

Take Them All Down. 

 

Different historians will come to different conclusions based on identical data. If you asked 10 different historians to make a list of "which people's statues should be knocked down", you would get 10 different lists.

 

Which takes me back to my original point - who gets to decide? Who chooses the historians?

 

In my opinion, it is far from obvious whose statues deserve to be removed. Maybe you should change your slogan to "Take Some Of Them Down After Careful Consideration".

 

 

Edited February 26, 2021 by nkg

[Bluespunk]

1 minute ago, nkg said:

 

Different historians will come to different conclusions based on identical data. If you asked 10 different historians to make a list of "which people's statues should be knocked down", you would get 10 different lists.

 

Which takes me back to my original point - who gets to decide? Who chooses the historians?

 

In my opinion, it is far from obvious whose statues deserve to be removed.

 

 

Different historians may come to different conclusions based on identical data?
 

Don’t think that will be the case when identifying  who was involved in the slave trade. If there is evidence they were involved in the slave trade in the historical record then they were involved.
 

Motivations or the extent of involvement or how much they profited or how they truly felt about trading in human misery may be open to interpretation but if factual evidence they were involved in this most vile trade is revealed, then I fail to see how 10 different historians or researchers  into the historical record would disagree whether they were involved or not. 
 

For one thing either they were involved or they weren’t, and I fail to see how their can be 10 different views on that...

 

 

 

[herfiehandbag]

12 hours ago, Solinvictus said:

Well if it represents slavery wouldn't it be right to rid something such as that? In the states all this gender neutral stuff is way out of proportion compared to more important issues.

 

Lastly, hasn't democracy always been about the majorities decision?

In the case of this particular statue I believe that the people of Bristol were asked. The majority wished for the statue to be kept.

[EVENKEEL]

4 minutes ago, herfiehandbag said:

In the case of this particular statue I believe that the people of Bristol were asked. The majority wished for the statue to be kept.

A vote by the people of the area would be the right way, and not mobs toppling statues while police stand by.

[Scott]

Off-topic, racist, troll posts and replies removed.  Continue with blaming Black Africans for slavery isn't going to be permitted.  

 

[polpott]

1 minute ago, RJRS1301 said:

Read and comprehend what is being said .

There were also balck/coloured shipping owners, and slave owners in colonies and capured /colonised lands. .

The Dutch traded slaves in local Indonesian ownership, just as one example.

However the thread I guess is about statues in UK.

Read and comprehend what is being said .

 

Did the local traders have statues erected in their honour?

[herfiehandbag]

35 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

A vote by the people of the area would be the right way, and not mobs toppling statues while police stand by.

From the "Bristol Post": "Whenever the question was asked in the past two decades in opinion polls, letters pages and radio phone-ins, it seemed that the majority of people in Bristol said they wanted the Colston Statue to stay."