Minimo Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 I could understand it better if, for instance, the students who object to the statue of Cecil Rhodes didn't accept one of the scholarships in his name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pettytom Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 1 hour ago, West 77 said: The historic statues should remain where they were designed to be erected. A museum will never show the true beauty of the artwork contained within them. The statue in Bristol was awarded Grade II status in 1977. Grade II listing takes place because the structures or buildings are of special interest that warrant the effort to preserve for future generations. The current generation should not be allowed to decide the future of historic Grade II listed structures such as statues. Adding an addition plaque containing current day thinking is the correct thing to do rather than giving in to the over the top hysteria created by the media over the last few weeks. You might wish to read about the attempts to add a plaque to Colston’s statue. Things move on. Times change. Morality shifts. It seems that these days, most people don’t see slave traders as someone to look up to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PRESLEY Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 6 minutes ago, Halibut said: So are you saying Churchill wasn't a great leader? You said he was a great leader, A great leader leads by example, I wouldn't say being a racist is a good example or a crudential to lead anyone. You started up with the Churchill rubbish, best get back on topic and stop trying to bicker like you always do on here, end of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJRB Posted June 11, 2020 Author Share Posted June 11, 2020 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-53006006 That’s one statue that we won’t have to worry about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box11 Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 (edited) At the end of the day you need to know where racism comes from it is taught to people when they are young by older generations,all races from around the world can be racist even to their own kind..... Many black people will call black people that have done well for themselves ie ...... Big house,nice clothes and wealthy, COCONUTS or BOUNTY BARS what they mean by this is that they are black on the outside but white on the inside... No-one will ever be able to stop racism i have a very good friend who is black and he says you should rise above it... He says tearing down statues does not stop racism talking to each other and understanding other peoples cultures is a start.... There is good and bad in every culture around the world and that's the way it will always be..... Edited June 11, 2020 by Box11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RollingJ Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 Thanks, @Box11, a very intelligent and truthful post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carosio Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 3 hours ago, Halibut said: Do you now accept that Churchill was a racist? It depends what you mean by racist, Halibut. Before WW2, half the country could have been racist (or rather prejudiced) in some sense. In Sheffield, my mother told me that black people were relatively rare and people would stop in the street and stare. In fact, it was considered amongst many that it would encourage bad luck to befall any houshold that let a black man over the threshold. Prejudice I know, but that's how it was. Africans in there own countries would be thought of as natives or savages wearing a loin cloth and holding a spear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 17 minutes ago, carosio said: It depends what you mean by racist, Halibut. How does the following sound to you ''I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place."? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Hardie Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 Most of the posts on this thread seem to have nothing to do with its title. Removing a statue is not rewriting history: it's making history. Banning a comedy show that doesn't conform to today's standards is not rewriting history: it's an act of sensitivity towards other people's feelings. Removing a certain word from the books of Mark Twain is not rewriting history: it's censorship of what are works of fiction for the same reason. Of all the examples I've heard this week of the supposed rewriting of history, the renaming of Guy Gibson's dog in a screenplay is the only one that stands up to scrutiny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RollingJ Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 1 minute ago, Jim Hardie said: Most of the posts on this thread seem to have nothing to do with its title. Removing a statue is not rewriting history: it's making history. Banning a comedy show that doesn't conform to today's standards is not rewriting history: it's an act of sensitivity towards other people's feelings. Removing a certain word from the books of Mark Twain is not rewriting history: it's censorship of what are works of fiction for the same reason. Of all the examples I've heard this week of the supposed rewriting of history, the renaming of Guy Gibson's dog in a screenplay is the only one that stands up to scrutiny. Valid point. Maybe the title should be changed to something like 'Denying History'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts