Statues should be left alone

[Rubyroost]

Ffs why target statues of Oliver Cromwell, Peel etc. They are history and should be left. Sorry, I know this is probably controversial. When will the book burning start?

"I am assuming the people who voted to retain the statue are in favour of lauding a slave trader." So OchonAgusOchonO you make unfounded assumptions and proceed as though they were fact. I imagine that must have caused you problems before.

I just found out today that if I object to the removal of statues of Churchill I am a racist. You couldn't make it up.

The lockdown is partly to blame of course. We always had the hard-of-thinking people, but now they have too much time on their hands.

IMO most people don't 'see' statues. For example, there's a statue to Edmund Burke near to where the Colston statue stood. I can guarantee that most people haven't noticed it and don't know/care who he was.
The Colston statue was brought to the attention of the public by a group of people who had an interest in stirring the shit (and putting themselves forward as guardians of the public).
I think (but don't know) that the majority didn't want it pulled down because they resented a self-interested group directing events.

My information suggests that the public vote on the Colston statue was about 2012. So reasonably recent. I'm not bothered enough to trawl for the exact date. But if the black population of the city couldn't be bothered to vote then...

Would you have objected to an unfavourable review on TripAdvisor?

Your post was jingoist. Not quite the same as an unfavorable review. But yes, I would have objected to that type of jingoism on TripAdvisor too.

@LastTrainEast - So OchonAgusOchonO you make unfounded assumptions and proceed as though they were fact

The vote was called as some people wanted to remove a statue of a slave trader. Anyone who voted for it to be retained knew he was a slave trader but obviously felt that was not sufficient reason to remove the statue. They were happy for a slave trader to be lauded (which is the usual purpose of a statue).

@OchonAgusOchonO

@ Rubyroost - I don't think Jimmy Saville is a good comparison to the likes of Peel and Cromwell.

Are you seriously suggesting that Cromwell and Peel were more worthy than Savile? For starters, Cromwell committed genocide in Ireland.

Omg, you are seriously asking the question of whether Peel is more worthy than Saville?! Someone who preyed on and abused the vulnerable for decades? What has Peel done that’s comparable to that, do you think? He never engaged in or endorsed the slave trade, he was chiefly responsible for the emancipation of catholics, he brought down his own party and destroyed his political career to force through the repeal of the corn laws, because he thought it was a moral imperative to lessen the suffering of the poor, particularly in Ireland after the famine.

What do you think he’s done that’s so bad. The campaign to remove statues gives two reasons why his should be removed. 1) he invented the police force. I know BML favour the dismantling of the police and I know there are systemic problems in it, but personally I think the notion of policing by consent to enforce the rule of law that he developed is pretty important and I’m glad we have a police force. 2) his father was pro-slavery and made money out of slavery. He is not responsible for the views of his father.

I don’t understand why he’s even on these lists. He certainly was far from perfect, but frankly in this day an age I think we should be celebrating a politician who put what he thought to be right beyond his personal gain rather than tearing him down.

the trouble is, cremuel that the people who create these lists are not intelligent enough to bother to find this out, and arrogant enough not to care.

What has Peel done that’s comparable to that, do you think?

Peel's role in the Irish famine was not brillant and many died because he refused to stop export of food grown in Ireland. He was not willing to go against the British landlords in Ireland. However, he was a lot better than many of his peers in his attitude towards the poor and he helped on a personal lack in the famine.

But no, he was not chiefly responsible for Catholic emancipation. In fact, he was vehemently opposed to Catholic emancipation throughout his career. He only changed his position after Daniel O'Connell was elected in Clare and public opinion in Britain started to lean towards support of emancipation. The major reason for him finally supporting the reform was fear of a religious war in Ireland.

The penal laws in Ireland resulted in catholics living in abject poverty. His support of the remaining penal laws when he was in power perpetuated this poverty and certainly contributed to the famine.

However, I take your point that on a personal level he is not comparable to Cromwell or Saville. He did a lot of good for the poor in Britain and, on a personal level, he made significant donations to famine relief in Ireland.

I was responding to a post suggesting Saville was a more odious individual than Cromwell and Peel. I should have seperated them out. Peel is more complex and I could see why the good he did should be lauded with a statue, despite his support of Catholic subjugation for most of his career.

However, nothing Cromwell did could mitigate against his behaviour in Ireland and his actions were significantly worse than anything done by Savile. Both odious individuals. Neither deserve a statue.

The 'vote' on whether to keep Edward Colston's statue was actually an opinion poll in a local newspaper. I'm not sure why people are talking about it as if it was an official referendum.

@NotDavidTennant - The 'vote' on whether to keep Edward Colston's statue was actually an opinion poll in a local newspaper.

So there wasn't a vote then. I wonder why pp's are claiming there was then?

My information suggests that the public vote on the Colston statue was about 2012. So reasonably recent. I'm not bothered enough to trawl for the exact date. But if the black population of the city couldn't be bothered to vote then...

So what you're saying basically is: "I'm not bothered to check my facts but I have an opinion about how a specific group of other people reacted to something I know very little about and may not have actually taken place anyway."

You are Donald Trump and I claim my five pounds.

@NotDavidTennant
Well, we are in the process of leaving the EU on the basis of a non-legally binding advisory vote so I guess a newspaper poll could justify keeping a slave trader's statue up...

@Crackerofdoom - Well, we are in the process of leaving the EU

You have already left the EU. This is the transition period during which the final details of the post brexit deal are being ironed out. At least that is the theory. The reality is that this is the transition period and the UK are still not engaging in any meaningful or constructive way to come up with even a bare bones deal. Most of the EU is actively preparing for no deal.

Most of the EU is actively preparing for no deal.

While most of the UK is sticking its fingers in its ears going, "lalalalalala! Can't hear you!". (Which, I suppose, is the way Westminster deals with most things these days.)

While most of the UK is sticking its fingers in its ears going, "lalalalalala! Can't hear you!"

And will then blame the EU for the ensuing economic disaster.

And will then blame the EU for the ensuing economic disaster.

Aye.

"why change the landscape"?

If it embraces racism and prejudice, change it.

I received the information about the vote from a near-Bristol source I regard as trrustworthy. My apologies if it wasn't on the ballot paper. My point holds. Of the people who cared enough to vote, 57% wanted to keep the statue of Edward Colston.

Second point. You can aim to airbrush history as prettified as a Disney princess but it doesn't change what happened then.

Third point. Slavery was alive and well and happening in the 1990s century... in India, the middle east (Oman/Zanzibar) and Africa (Chad, Mauretania). No white persons involved; just Arab/black on black/tribal.

Yesterday. A GP friend received a video of a 19 year old white boy lynched and filmed live this week in South Africa by a group of six black men. And that is featuring where on social media?

Every life matters: black, white, Asian, Chinese and Inuit. But we are heading for territory where race war happens. And I don't want that, does anyone? I'm female, and have the odd grievance with some men, but I don't want sex war. Please, can we get a sense of perspective and row back a bit from the extreme positions?

... in the 1990s... not the 19th century, for clarification ...I know this is true. I talked to a friend in insurance who wrote a policy to cover it in the 1990s.

@XingMing - My point holds. Of the people who cared enough to vote, 57% wanted to keep the statue of Edward Colston.

No, it doesn't. A newspaper opinion poll is very different to a vote run by the local authorities to help form policy. It's also a very biased sample. Run a poll with daily mail readers and you'll get a very different result to the same poll run by the times.

I am guessing that if it was a newpaper/online newspaper, it would have been in the Bristol Evening Post... which is the main regional evening paper. Who buys it and reads it is between the business department and the readers themselves. There are people who read the news actively and those who see it second hand and filtered on social media. As I said earlier this evening, I understood that it was originally a question asked on a local government ballot paper, and I apologise if my source is incorrect.

@XingMing

I am guessing that if it was a newpaper/online newspaper, it would have been in the Bristol Evening Post... which is the main regional evening paper. Who buys it and reads it is between the business department and the readers themselves. There are people who read the news actively and those who see it second hand and filtered on social media. As I said earlier this evening, I understood that it was originally a question asked on a local government ballot paper, and I apologise if my source is incorrect.

Because the only two options are buying the Bristol Evening Post (if it was that, you don't seem to know anything about this), and getting all your news from social media.

The difference between an actual vote and a poll in a newspaper is massive. Unless it suits your narrative.

But we are heading for territory where race war happens. And I don't want that, does anyone?

There are plenty who are eagerly anticipating a "bugaloo".

Like I said earlier @Paska, I no longer live there, but a friend who lives within the region told me there had been a vote that favoured its retention. I have no reason to disagree with a straightforward statement of fact, as I believed it to be factual, accurate and legit.

Sadly, I think there are people who are planning to overturn the rule of law to wreak revenge for all the slights, imagined and real, they feel have been inflicted on them throughout history. ANd, call me a pessimist, but I can't see the world being improved as a result.