Edward Colston/Trans rights/Stamp collecting
Comments
-
Who decides that?rick_chasey said:
Why not have the discussion on a case by case basis?ballysmate said:I see Nancy Pelosi has got into the virtue signalling game, demanding that statues of Confederate leaders are removed from the Capitol, including Jefferson Davis and Robert E Lee.
I posted earlier, somewhat tongue in cheek, that Mount Rushmore should go. But if it is argued that Lee has to go, how can they keep a monument of a man, who owned 600 slaves, looking down on the state of S Dakota? Do Native Americans not find the presence of these 4 Presidents insulting?
But the way things are going, nothing is safe.
How about Muhammad Ali, who espoused the same vile segregation polices of George Wallace?
Has he gotta go?
I think it's not unreasoanble to take a few statues down wwho are clearly not fit to grace a public space without expecting them all to be taken down.
Are you suggesting not taking any of them down in case you have to take them all down?
0 -
Society.nickice said:
Who decides that?rick_chasey said:
Why not have the discussion on a case by case basis?ballysmate said:I see Nancy Pelosi has got into the virtue signalling game, demanding that statues of Confederate leaders are removed from the Capitol, including Jefferson Davis and Robert E Lee.
I posted earlier, somewhat tongue in cheek, that Mount Rushmore should go. But if it is argued that Lee has to go, how can they keep a monument of a man, who owned 600 slaves, looking down on the state of S Dakota? Do Native Americans not find the presence of these 4 Presidents insulting?
But the way things are going, nothing is safe.
How about Muhammad Ali, who espoused the same vile segregation polices of George Wallace?
Has he gotta go?
I think it's not unreasoanble to take a few statues down wwho are clearly not fit to grace a public space without expecting them all to be taken down.
Are you suggesting not taking any of them down in case you have to take them all down?0 -
When you realise that Mother Theresa had her critics then the woke are going to get tied up in knots as this can of worms spirals out of control.
To mix some metaphors. 😉The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Well society wasn't too fussed about this particular statue being up.rick_chasey said:
Society.nickice said:
Who decides that?rick_chasey said:
Why not have the discussion on a case by case basis?ballysmate said:I see Nancy Pelosi has got into the virtue signalling game, demanding that statues of Confederate leaders are removed from the Capitol, including Jefferson Davis and Robert E Lee.
I posted earlier, somewhat tongue in cheek, that Mount Rushmore should go. But if it is argued that Lee has to go, how can they keep a monument of a man, who owned 600 slaves, looking down on the state of S Dakota? Do Native Americans not find the presence of these 4 Presidents insulting?
But the way things are going, nothing is safe.
How about Muhammad Ali, who espoused the same vile segregation polices of George Wallace?
Has he gotta go?
I think it's not unreasoanble to take a few statues down wwho are clearly not fit to grace a public space without expecting them all to be taken down.
Are you suggesting not taking any of them down in case you have to take them all down?0 -
https://youtu.be/-mbs_H3Fki4
It was suggested by one of my 'diverse' work colleagues that I look at this video. A few years old so some stats will have changed. All the same makes for interesting viewing.Always be yourself, unless you can be Aaron Rodgers....Then always be Aaron Rodgers.0 -
When someone mentioned who would be next I almost mentioned Baden-Powell and then on the news this morning it was reported his statue in Poole is to be taken down.0
-
Weird how he doesn't object to all private member's bills.nickice said:
Good point but one that will fall on deaf ears. When Christopher Chope blocked the upskirting bill some people couldn't get their head round that he should apply his principles even to legislation he'd support were it presented correctly.shortfall said:
Town hall politics is crippled by bureaucracy who knew? Just remember that if you support the sort of direct action that results in statues you disapprove of getting lobbed in the ocean, next time it might be something you wish to protect, and then what?rjsterry said:
In Bristol that is exactly what happened. Long before last weekend. For years Colston's apologists blocked the efforts to remove the statue, then they blocked the efforts to change the plaque.shortfall said:
Yeah I'm up for that, except it didn't happen that way.tailwindhome said:How hard would it be just to say, that a statute celebrating a slave trader isn't how we want to remember our past or the vision we have for our public spaces in the 21st century and they should be taken down, without deflecting into discussions on trainers, phones and whatnot?
0 -
When a man shows you who he is, believe him the first time.nickice said:
You see this is where you always take it too far.coopster_the_1st said:I am going to enjoy seeing a few vandals getting their heads cracked open as a lesson to respect the property of others and our country.
They have confidence at the moment that they are above the law and will learn the hard way that is not the case.“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!1 -
Last week says otherwise.nickice said:
Well society wasn't too fussed about this particular statue being up.rick_chasey said:
Society.nickice said:
Who decides that?rick_chasey said:
Why not have the discussion on a case by case basis?ballysmate said:I see Nancy Pelosi has got into the virtue signalling game, demanding that statues of Confederate leaders are removed from the Capitol, including Jefferson Davis and Robert E Lee.
I posted earlier, somewhat tongue in cheek, that Mount Rushmore should go. But if it is argued that Lee has to go, how can they keep a monument of a man, who owned 600 slaves, looking down on the state of S Dakota? Do Native Americans not find the presence of these 4 Presidents insulting?
But the way things are going, nothing is safe.
How about Muhammad Ali, who espoused the same vile segregation polices of George Wallace?
Has he gotta go?
I think it's not unreasoanble to take a few statues down wwho are clearly not fit to grace a public space without expecting them all to be taken down.
Are you suggesting not taking any of them down in case you have to take them all down?0 -
We've already done this.kingstongraham said:
Weird how he doesn't object to all private member's bills.nickice said:
Good point but one that will fall on deaf ears. When Christopher Chope blocked the upskirting bill some people couldn't get their head round that he should apply his principles even to legislation he'd support were it presented correctly.shortfall said:
Town hall politics is crippled by bureaucracy who knew? Just remember that if you support the sort of direct action that results in statues you disapprove of getting lobbed in the ocean, next time it might be something you wish to protect, and then what?rjsterry said:
In Bristol that is exactly what happened. Long before last weekend. For years Colston's apologists blocked the efforts to remove the statue, then they blocked the efforts to change the plaque.shortfall said:
Yeah I'm up for that, except it didn't happen that way.tailwindhome said:How hard would it be just to say, that a statute celebrating a slave trader isn't how we want to remember our past or the vision we have for our public spaces in the 21st century and they should be taken down, without deflecting into discussions on trainers, phones and whatnot?
0 -
Hopefully that is something that will now get addressed, as it's clear that people are no longer prepared to be fobbed off.rjsterry said:
Interesting that in that case the promises of adding an explanatory plaque some years previously came to nothing as well. Almost as though it was an attempt to fob people off.blazing_saddles said:Don't hide history, says Oxford head in statue row
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-52999319
"We need to confront our past, we need to learn from it," said Prof Richardson.
"My own view on this is that hiding our history is not the route to enlightenment.
We need to understand this history and understand the context in which it was made and why it was that people believed then as they did.
Goes on to make several more relevant/irrelevant points (depending on POV) and some background info."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.0 -
OK, giving him the benefit of the doubt, he's decided that his principle about proper procedure in the commons always being followed, and him having the right to object is more important than getting a law about upskirting or FGM on the books. Fair enough, but he can't expect to be immune from criticism for that.nickice said:
We've already done this.kingstongraham said:
Weird how he doesn't object to all private member's bills.nickice said:
Good point but one that will fall on deaf ears. When Christopher Chope blocked the upskirting bill some people couldn't get their head round that he should apply his principles even to legislation he'd support were it presented correctly.shortfall said:
Town hall politics is crippled by bureaucracy who knew? Just remember that if you support the sort of direct action that results in statues you disapprove of getting lobbed in the ocean, next time it might be something you wish to protect, and then what?rjsterry said:
In Bristol that is exactly what happened. Long before last weekend. For years Colston's apologists blocked the efforts to remove the statue, then they blocked the efforts to change the plaque.shortfall said:
Yeah I'm up for that, except it didn't happen that way.tailwindhome said:How hard would it be just to say, that a statute celebrating a slave trader isn't how we want to remember our past or the vision we have for our public spaces in the 21st century and they should be taken down, without deflecting into discussions on trainers, phones and whatnot?
0 -
I am suggesting it is just virtue signalling to remove statues that in the scheme of things, few people actually see but leave a monument to slave owners and racists for the world to see as a tourist attraction.rick_chasey said:
Why not have the discussion on a case by case basis?ballysmate said:I see Nancy Pelosi has got into the virtue signalling game, demanding that statues of Confederate leaders are removed from the Capitol, including Jefferson Davis and Robert E Lee.
I posted earlier, somewhat tongue in cheek, that Mount Rushmore should go. But if it is argued that Lee has to go, how can they keep a monument of a man, who owned 600 slaves, looking down on the state of S Dakota? Do Native Americans not find the presence of these 4 Presidents insulting?
But the way things are going, nothing is safe.
How about Muhammad Ali, who espoused the same vile segregation polices of George Wallace?
Has he gotta go?
I think it's not unreasoanble to take a few statues down who are clearly not fit to grace a public space without expecting them all to be taken down.
Are you suggesting not taking any of them down in case you have to take them all down?
Bit like SC's point about people being OK with removing a few street names but drawing the line at anything that would mean putting a hand in a pocket.
The point about Ali is that if we only allow statues of those people who do not cause offence to anyone, sculptors will be claiming Job Seekers.0 -
In fairness, we're the only country in the world not having riots.TheBigBean said:
I thought you would oppose mob justice given its prevalence in your neck of the woodstailwindhome said:How hard would it be just to say, that a statute celebrating a slave trader isn't how we want to remember our past or the vision we have for our public spaces in the 21st century and they should be taken down, without deflecting into discussions on trainers, phones and whatnot?
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
I believe at the time the comments were something like 'couldn't he save his principles for less important bills'. Criticise him all you want but people lied about why he objected. He even said he supported a ban. It's not really different in principle to people supporting removing a statue but by using correct means (however frustrating they may be) and not a mob toppling it.kingstongraham said:
OK, giving him the benefit of the doubt, he's decided that his principle about proper procedure in the commons always being followed, and him having the right to object is more important than getting a law about upskirting or FGM on the books. Fair enough, but he can't expect to be immune from criticism for that.nickice said:
We've already done this.kingstongraham said:
Weird how he doesn't object to all private member's bills.nickice said:
Good point but one that will fall on deaf ears. When Christopher Chope blocked the upskirting bill some people couldn't get their head round that he should apply his principles even to legislation he'd support were it presented correctly.shortfall said:
Town hall politics is crippled by bureaucracy who knew? Just remember that if you support the sort of direct action that results in statues you disapprove of getting lobbed in the ocean, next time it might be something you wish to protect, and then what?rjsterry said:
In Bristol that is exactly what happened. Long before last weekend. For years Colston's apologists blocked the efforts to remove the statue, then they blocked the efforts to change the plaque.shortfall said:
Yeah I'm up for that, except it didn't happen that way.tailwindhome said:How hard would it be just to say, that a statute celebrating a slave trader isn't how we want to remember our past or the vision we have for our public spaces in the 21st century and they should be taken down, without deflecting into discussions on trainers, phones and whatnot?
0 -
Pross said:
When someone mentioned who would be next I almost mentioned Baden-Powell and then on the news this morning it was reported his statue in Poole is to be taken down.
Sad but apparently for its own protection as they believe it was going to be attacked.
The list of TV programmes and films that has been removed from netflix is quite long - who thought Little Britain was racist - Chris Lilley has been pulled etc.[Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]0 -
Why do you think the only 2 options for the police were to do nothing or beat the shit out of people?tailwindhome said:To be honest the UK should be quite proud of how their police handled the riots over the past couple of days, though I fear people who ask, 'Why didn't they do something?' really mean 'why didn't they beat the censored out of them?'
2 -
I agree with that last sentence, but come to a different conclusion.nickice said:
I believe at the time the comments were something like 'couldn't he save his principles for less important bills'. Criticise him all you want but people lied about why he objected. He even said he supported a ban. It's not really different in principle to people supporting removing a statue but by using correct means (however frustrating they may be) and not a mob toppling it.kingstongraham said:
OK, giving him the benefit of the doubt, he's decided that his principle about proper procedure in the commons always being followed, and him having the right to object is more important than getting a law about upskirting or FGM on the books. Fair enough, but he can't expect to be immune from criticism for that.nickice said:
We've already done this.kingstongraham said:
Weird how he doesn't object to all private member's bills.nickice said:
Good point but one that will fall on deaf ears. When Christopher Chope blocked the upskirting bill some people couldn't get their head round that he should apply his principles even to legislation he'd support were it presented correctly.shortfall said:
Town hall politics is crippled by bureaucracy who knew? Just remember that if you support the sort of direct action that results in statues you disapprove of getting lobbed in the ocean, next time it might be something you wish to protect, and then what?rjsterry said:
In Bristol that is exactly what happened. Long before last weekend. For years Colston's apologists blocked the efforts to remove the statue, then they blocked the efforts to change the plaque.shortfall said:
Yeah I'm up for that, except it didn't happen that way.tailwindhome said:How hard would it be just to say, that a statute celebrating a slave trader isn't how we want to remember our past or the vision we have for our public spaces in the 21st century and they should be taken down, without deflecting into discussions on trainers, phones and whatnot?
0 -
Interesting to note that the women who campaigned to have Jane Austen as female representation on bank notes received death threats and a level of abuse that resulted in two men being jailed.TheBigBean said:I'm wondering about making the case for Jane Austen being a bit racist. I could then encourage everyone to dump their tenners.
I guess some people don't like change“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
I'm not the one vandalising remembrance or national monuments. It is very easy for them to avoid this but they now think they are above the law and will learn a valuable lesson the hard way and a way which I 100% supportnickice said:
You see this is where you always take it too far.coopster_the_1st said:I am going to enjoy seeing a few vandals getting their heads cracked open as a lesson to respect the property of others and our country.
They have confidence at the moment that they are above the law and will learn the hard way that is not the case.0 -
Nothing in my post suggests I think that.ballysmate said:
Why do you think the only 2 options for the police were to do nothing or beat the censored out of people?tailwindhome said:To be honest the UK should be quite proud of how their police handled the riots over the past couple of days, though I fear people who ask, 'Why didn't they do something?' really mean 'why didn't they beat the censored out of them?'
Try reading it again.
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
It's been fished out.
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
For someone who lives in a society where sectarian mob justice is a stain on the place that you live, you are either a member of one of the mob justice groups or a raging hypocritetailwindhome said:To be honest the UK should be quite proud of how their police handled the riots over the past couple of days, though I fear people who ask, 'Why didn't they do something?' really mean 'why didn't they beat the censored out of them?'
0 -
You think that protest represents a cross section of society?rick_chasey said:
Last week says otherwise.nickice said:
Well society wasn't too fussed about this particular statue being up.rick_chasey said:
Society.nickice said:
Who decides that?rick_chasey said:
Why not have the discussion on a case by case basis?ballysmate said:I see Nancy Pelosi has got into the virtue signalling game, demanding that statues of Confederate leaders are removed from the Capitol, including Jefferson Davis and Robert E Lee.
I posted earlier, somewhat tongue in cheek, that Mount Rushmore should go. But if it is argued that Lee has to go, how can they keep a monument of a man, who owned 600 slaves, looking down on the state of S Dakota? Do Native Americans not find the presence of these 4 Presidents insulting?
But the way things are going, nothing is safe.
How about Muhammad Ali, who espoused the same vile segregation polices of George Wallace?
Has he gotta go?
I think it's not unreasoanble to take a few statues down wwho are clearly not fit to grace a public space without expecting them all to be taken down.
Are you suggesting not taking any of them down in case you have to take them all down?
Come on."Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.2 -
Put it back up so to demonstrate that mob justice does not win and let the democratic process decide its fate.tailwindhome said:It's been fished out.
0 -
Maybe it's just the locals didn't want a statue up and after a campaign was thwarted by obstinate local officials it became a focal point for what was wrong in that particular town re race?ballysmate said:
I am suggesting it is just virtue signalling to remove statues that in the scheme of things, few people actually see but leave a monument to slave owners and racists for the world to see as a tourist attraction.rick_chasey said:
Why not have the discussion on a case by case basis?ballysmate said:I see Nancy Pelosi has got into the virtue signalling game, demanding that statues of Confederate leaders are removed from the Capitol, including Jefferson Davis and Robert E Lee.
I posted earlier, somewhat tongue in cheek, that Mount Rushmore should go. But if it is argued that Lee has to go, how can they keep a monument of a man, who owned 600 slaves, looking down on the state of S Dakota? Do Native Americans not find the presence of these 4 Presidents insulting?
But the way things are going, nothing is safe.
How about Muhammad Ali, who espoused the same vile segregation polices of George Wallace?
Has he gotta go?
I think it's not unreasoanble to take a few statues down who are clearly not fit to grace a public space without expecting them all to be taken down.
Are you suggesting not taking any of them down in case you have to take them all down?
.
I understand the virtue signalling argument, and i think you share that with many black activist campaigners too; that it's very easy to be seen to be doing the right thing by making a blackout instagram post or saying something to your mates in the pub, but not actually doing anything about it.
It's often the case in business; I've been on a few diversity committees over the years and almost all of them are quite focused on business development and marketing, and people tend to be very quiet or even resistant when you talk about internal policies and changes in behaviour or practices.
I also get that that is hypocritical, and you would just rather people be honest and not feel they have to be seen to think in a certain way because the morale police say so - and that makes you feel uncomfortable.
I guess what I would say is that is that, in this instance, the symbol is the entire point, so the entire thing is a signal, so I'm not sure the virtual signalling argument applies.
More broadly, I don't have such a clear view on it, but my sense is that it's not necessarily productive or helpful to heavily criticise people who are obviously trying to do the right thing, even if it is signalling - assuming they're doing it in good faith and are not being cynical about it.
What is very deep problem won't be solved overnight, but each little step surely helps. Maybe next time the virtue signaller might think that bit differently, or be more receptive to a different pov, and before you know it, there's been a small positive change.
What I am sceptical of however, is the good faith in the "hypocrisy" argument, as I suspect quite a few actually object to the virtue that is being signalled, rather than the hypocrisy...
0 -
A mob perhaps 20-30 strong at the most is society now?rick_chasey said:
Last week says otherwise.nickice said:
Well society wasn't too fussed about this particular statue being up.rick_chasey said:
Society.nickice said:
Who decides that?rick_chasey said:
Why not have the discussion on a case by case basis?ballysmate said:I see Nancy Pelosi has got into the virtue signalling game, demanding that statues of Confederate leaders are removed from the Capitol, including Jefferson Davis and Robert E Lee.
I posted earlier, somewhat tongue in cheek, that Mount Rushmore should go. But if it is argued that Lee has to go, how can they keep a monument of a man, who owned 600 slaves, looking down on the state of S Dakota? Do Native Americans not find the presence of these 4 Presidents insulting?
But the way things are going, nothing is safe.
How about Muhammad Ali, who espoused the same vile segregation polices of George Wallace?
Has he gotta go?
I think it's not unreasoanble to take a few statues down wwho are clearly not fit to grace a public space without expecting them all to be taken down.
Are you suggesting not taking any of them down in case you have to take them all down?0 -
it looks like, from the footage at least, that the police have backed off from rioters and even run away. In other words, not doing much. This is what, we're assuming, you are proud of.tailwindhome said:
Nothing in my post suggests I think that.ballysmate said:
Why do you think the only 2 options for the police were to do nothing or beat the censored out of people?tailwindhome said:To be honest the UK should be quite proud of how their police handled the riots over the past couple of days, though I fear people who ask, 'Why didn't they do something?' really mean 'why didn't they beat the censored out of them?'
Try reading it again.
You then make the link that people who say 'do something' means they want the police to beat people up. If there was a more nuanced meaning to what you were saying, it wasn't really apparent.0 -
The police often take a third method to crowd control when they are outnumbered. Push protestors to somewhere they can do the least damage. Film their actions and then pay them a visit the next day. I am always surprised by the number who think they wont get a visit after they have damaged stuff.0
-
I would hope that most of the people who accuse others of hypocrisy for owning a mobile phone when they should disapprove of the way in which cobalt is mined also suffer from the same "hypocrisy".rick_chasey said:
What I am sceptical of however, is the good faith in the "hypocrisy", as I suspect quite a few actually object to the virtue that is being signalled, rather than the hypocrisy...0
