George Floyd/Black Lives Matter Protests

[WhiteRoseKillie]

1 hour ago, Stellaboz said:

Is that a photoshop? If not, why would anyone behead the Little Mermaid ffs? Wid btw.

It's happened more than once, I think. She's also been removed by explosives(!) and had her arm sawn off.

I reckon it's disgruntled tourists after they realise this fantastic tourist attraction is about four feet tall. A rival to La Gioconda in underwhelmingness*.

 

*Yes it is, I just made it up.

[WhiteRoseKillie]

1 hour ago, GordonS said:

"Who decides" and "who do you think ought to decide" are two different things. You're right that the second question is unanswerable and I really don't want us to waste any more time on semantics, as they had done in Bristol for decades about Colston's statue. It's time for decisions rather than more discussion.

IMO the views of BAME people should carry most weight. It's unfair to expect them to walk under the gaze of likenesses of monstrous racists just because we've got used to them and they did a bit of work for white people's charidee.

There are two massive differences between Churchill and Drake. Churchill did not participate in slavery whereas Drake was as bad as literally any slave trader and is directly responsible for the murders of thousands; and Churchill played a major role in saving freedom and democracy in Western Europe while Drake was just fighting to defend one oligarchy from another. For ordinary people the outcome of all those wars of the 17th, 18th and 19th century meant sod all to their daily lives.

While completely accepting Sir Geoff Palmer's opinion is worth about a billion times more than my own, I do wonder how much someone with both a knighthood and an OBE is the tear-things-down type. And I'm sure that, regardless of the specific issue, the notion that we need statutes depicting the people who did terrible things to remember their terrible things, otherwise we're more likely to forget, is blatant nonsense. The logical conclusion of that argument is that they should have a statue of Osama bin Laden in New York and the Irish will forget the famine if they don't stick up a few of Trevelyan.

Good post, and I am in total agreement as to those affected having more say in the disposal of these monuments to slavery.

While I agree that Churchill and Drake are not comparable, I disagree that this makes Churchill any less of a cúnt. The "freedom and democracy" he and his class wanted to preserve was that of a pre-war society run along "Downton Abbey" social levels. By the time the war was over, the people had decided they didn't much fancy that, and would prefer new ideas such as a national transport system, decent education and healthcare for all. Churchill's incompetence led to the deaths of thousands of British and Commonwealth soldiers, and his entire life was dedicated to making sure the Working Class never, ever, got out of their box. Fell free to defend this absolute fucking monster, and don't forget to mention which boat brough him back from Dunkirk, which Squadron he flew with in the Battle of Britain, which convoys he was part of, how many night bombing missions he took part in, and which of the five D-Day beaches he landed on. In fairness, I'm not a fan.

[Sinner-to-Saint]

1 hour ago, GordonS said:

"Who decides" and "who do you think ought to decide" are two different things. You're right that the second question is unanswerable and I really don't want us to waste any more time on semantics, as they had done in Bristol for decades about Colston's statue. It's time for decisions rather than more discussion.

IMO the views of BAME people should carry most weight. It's unfair to expect them to walk under the gaze of likenesses of monstrous racists just because we've got used to them and they did a bit of work for white people's charidee.

There are two massive differences between Churchill and Drake. Churchill did not participate in slavery whereas Drake was as bad as literally any slave trader and is directly responsible for the murders of thousands; and Churchill played a major role in saving freedom and democracy in Western Europe while Drake was just fighting to defend one oligarchy from another. For ordinary people the outcome of all those wars of the 17th, 18th and 19th century meant sod all to their daily lives.

While completely accepting Sir Geoff Palmer's opinion is worth about a billion times more than my own, I do wonder how much someone with both a knighthood and an OBE is the tear-things-down type. And I'm sure that, regardless of the specific issue, the notion that we need statutes depicting the people who did terrible things to remember their terrible things, otherwise we're more likely to forget, is blatant nonsense. The logical conclusion of that argument is that they should have a statue of Osama bin Laden in New York and the Irish will forget the famine if they don't stick up a few of Trevelyan.

The Colston statue was erected over one hundred years ago, at a time before there was any significant presence of BAME people in the UK. It's wrong IMHO to choose to move to another country and then demand that they start removing statues that they find offensive. What if I was to move to Rome, and then decide that the Italians should remove statues of Roman emperors because they invaded Britain and enslaved native Britons?

[Mr Waldo]

2 hours ago, GordonS said:

"Who decides" and "who do you think ought to decide" are two different things. You're right that the second question is unanswerable and I really don't want us to waste any more time on semantics, as they had done in Bristol for decades about Colston's statue. It's time for decisions rather than more discussion.

IMO the views of BAME people should carry most weight. It's unfair to expect them to walk under the gaze of likenesses of monstrous racists just because we've got used to them and they did a bit of work for white people's charidee.

There are two massive differences between Churchill and Drake. Churchill did not participate in slavery whereas Drake was as bad as literally any slave trader and is directly responsible for the murders of thousands; and Churchill played a major role in saving freedom and democracy in Western Europe while Drake was just fighting to defend one oligarchy from another. For ordinary people the outcome of all those wars of the 17th, 18th and 19th century meant sod all to their daily lives.

While completely accepting Sir Geoff Palmer's opinion is worth about a billion times more than my own, I do wonder how much someone with both a knighthood and an OBE is the tear-things-down type. And I'm sure that, regardless of the specific issue, the notion that we need statutes depicting the people who did terrible things to remember their terrible things, otherwise we're more likely to forget, is blatant nonsense. The logical conclusion of that argument is that they should have a statue of Osama bin Laden in New York and the Irish will forget the famine if they don't stick up a few of Trevelyan.

I don't see why one unelected section of a community should decide what is acceptable to others.  That opens up a whole new box of crap. As far as I know, the decision was made, Bristol has a statue.  Some people thought that was the wrong decision, so flung it in the water.

I would guess these were built for people who spent a lot of money bettering their community without really taking into account where the money came from. Didn't see Osama building schools in New York.  Incidentally,  should we destroy Auschwitz, or keep it as a reminder?

41 minutes ago, WhiteRoseKillie said:

Never lived in Milngavie, but seriously? That is an argument at best rather than a point, and one which is impressively stupid.

It was not me that made it, it was Scotland's first black professor.

Edited June 10, 2020 by Mr Waldo

[Bairnardo]

The Colston statue was erected over one hundred years ago, at a time before there was any significant presence of BAME people in the UK. It's wrong IMHO to choose to move to another country and then demand that they start removing statues that they find offensive. What if I was to move to Rome, and then decide that the Italians should remove statues of Roman emperors because they invaded Britain and enslaved native Britons?

This is one step away from the classic "if they want tae live here they need tae learn our language" shout.

[Forest_Fifer]

And of course, no one other than BAME people find the statues offensive...

[WhiteRoseKillie]

27 minutes ago, coprolite said:

Why should the views of BAME people be given most weight? 

What sort of ratio do you think they should be weighted at compared to white people? 3:1, or just an incremental 10%.

What about different ethnicities? Obviously the chinese were less affected by the Atlantic slave trade than black people on average, so should they get the same weighting just for being a minority? 

Surely everyone's views should be given equal weight, even if they are "wrong". 

Anyone whose location is dictated by the fact that previous generations of their family were forcefully removed from their homes has an absolute right to have their vie front and centre.

Anyone who has been directly affected by an issue has an absolute right to have their feelings and views considered first. This is so obvious, I can't believe you're questioning it.

You do realise there are is more to Slavery than the Triangle Trade, I hope? There is still slavery, forced and indentured labour, being inflictd on people all over the globe - including China.

There is one fortunate group who are, in the overwhelming majority, free of the experience of being treated as another's property, and direct or indirect racism based on their faith or skin colour so that they an see this as largely theoretical - white Westerners. As we have no experience of this issue, maybe it's time for us to shut the fúck up for a change and listen to what people have experienced, are experiencing and, without the will to change our society, will continue to experience.

[Dunning1874]

5 minutes ago, Sinner-to-Saint said:

It's wrong IMHO to choose to move to another country and then demand that they start removing statues that they find offensive.

"If they don't like it they should shut up or go back to their own country"

[oneteaminglasgow]

8 minutes ago, Sinner-to-Saint said:

The Colston statue was erected over one hundred years ago, at a time before there was any significant presence of BAME people in the UK. It's wrong IMHO to choose to move to another country and then demand that they start removing statues that they find offensive. What if I was to move to Rome, and then decide that the Italians should remove statues of Roman emperors because they invaded Britain and enslaved native Britons?

Are you of the opinion that any BAME people in Britain weren’t born here?

Edited June 10, 2020 by oneteaminglasgow

[Sinner-to-Saint]

Just now, Bairnardo said:

4 minutes ago, Sinner-to-Saint said:

The Colston statue was erected over one hundred years ago, at a time before there was any significant presence of BAME people in the UK. It's wrong IMHO to choose to move to another country and then demand that they start removing statues that they find offensive. What if I was to move to Rome, and then decide that the Italians should remove statues of Roman emperors because they invaded Britain and enslaved native Britons?

This is one step away from the classic "if they want tae live here they need tae learn our language" shout.

If I was to move to Rome, would it be reasonable for me to demand that certain statues are removed? I am British and Britons were conquered and enslaved by Romans. Therefore should I object to statues glorifying the people who enslaved my ancestors? I'm merely applying the logic used by many people on here to another situation.

[WhiteRoseKillie]

7 minutes ago, Sinner-to-Saint said:

The Colston statue was erected over one hundred years ago, at a time before there was any significant presence of BAME people in the UK. It's wrong IMHO to choose to move to another country and then demand that they start removing statues that they find offensive. What if I was to move to Rome, and then decide that the Italians should remove statues of Roman emperors because they invaded Britain and enslaved native Britons?

I was born in this country, and I find the comemmoration of those connected with slavery offensive. I don't know how you're defining Minority Ethnic, but trust me, there's been a significant presence of non-indigenous people for many centuries - you may know a few of their groups as Romans, Danes, Angles, Saxons, Normans, Celts..

You do realise the Windrush immigrants were invited  tocome to the UK, yeah? And that the biggest influx of South Asians was as a result of the UK (unusually) allowing the influx of Asians expelled by Amin?

[Sinner-to-Saint]

4 minutes ago, Dunning1874 said:

"If they don't like it they should shut up or go back to their own country"

See my reply to Bairnardo. If I were to move to Rome, would it be reasonable for me to demand the removal of statues commemorating Roman emperors who oversaw the colonisation of foreign lands and enslavement of the inhabitants of those lands? If not, why not?

[Benjamin_Nevis]

Just now, Sinner-to-Saint said:

See my reply to Bairnardo. If I were to move to Rome, would it be reasonable for me to demand the removal of statues commemorating Roman emperors who oversaw the colonisation of foreign lands and enslavement of the inhabitants of those lands? If not, why not?

What % of the BLM protestors in the United Kingdom at the moment have recently "moved here to demand the removal of statues"? 

[Sinner-to-Saint]

2 minutes ago, WhiteRoseKillie said:

I was born in this country, and I find the comemmoration of those connected with slavery offensive. I don't know how you're defining Minority Ethnic, but trust me, there's been a significant presence of non-indigenous people for many centuries - you may know a few of their groups as Romans, Danes, Angles, Saxons, Normans, Celts..

You do realise the Windrush immigrants were invited  tocome to the UK, yeah? And that the biggest influx of South Asians was as a result of the UK (unusually) allowing the influx of Asians expelled by Amin?

So am I a Dane, an Angle, a Saxon, a Celt or a Norman, then?

[Sinner-to-Saint]

Just now, Day of the Lords said:

What % of the BLM protestors in the United Kingdom at the moment have recently "moved here to demand the removal of statues"? 

Go on then, tell me!

[WhiteRoseKillie]

11 minutes ago, Mr Waldo said:

I don't see why one unelected section of a community should decide what is acceptable to others.  That opens up a whole new box of crap.

I would guess these were built for people who spent a lot of money bettering their community without really taking into account where the money came from. Didn't see Osama building schools in New York.  Incidentally,  should we destroy Auschwitz, or keep it as a reminder?

It was not me that made it, it was Scotland's first black professor.

Obama (and I'm no fanboy) has made significant personal charity donations, and the Foundation bearing his name administers hundreds of millions of dollars annually. Not a complete cúnt, I'm thinking.

As fo Auschwitz  I'm honestly not seeing the relevance here, and it raises some concerns over your thought processes. FWIW, it should remain as a reminder of what the Human Race is capable of.

[coprolite]

6 minutes ago, WhiteRoseKillie said:

Anyone whose location is dictated by the fact that previous generations of their family were forcefully removed from their homes has an absolute right to have their vie front and centre.

Anyone who has been directly affected by an issue has an absolute right to have their feelings and views considered first. This is so obvious, I can't believe you're questioning it.

You do realise there are is more to Slavery than the Triangle Trade, I hope? There is still slavery, forced and indentured labour, being inflictd on people all over the globe - including China.

There is one fortunate group who are, in the overwhelming majority, free of the experience of being treated as another's property, and direct or indirect racism based on their faith or skin colour so that they an see this as largely theoretical - white Westerners. As we have no experience of this issue, maybe it's time for us to shut the fúck up for a change and listen to what people have experienced, are experiencing and, without the will to change our society, will continue to experience.

So people shouldn't be listened to because of the colour of their skin. 

[hearthammer]

1 minute ago, Sinner-to-Saint said:

So am I a Dane, an Angle, a Saxon, a Celt or a Norman, then?

 

[Dons_1988]

5 minutes ago, Sinner-to-Saint said:

See my reply to Bairnardo. If I were to move to Rome, would it be reasonable for me to demand the removal of statues commemorating Roman emperors who oversaw the colonisation of foreign lands and enslavement of the inhabitants of those lands? If not, why not?

You're making a quite dreadful argument here, just FYI.

 

[Forest_Fifer]

Go on then, tell me!

So you dont know how many of them recently moved here to protest statues. Thereby making your whole analogy a crock of shit.