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?

@flaxmeadow I don’t understand your point. I just told you I know the Irish weren’t slaves in Barbados etc. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_slaves_myth

And yes, lots of English people went to the West Indies as indentured servants, but they chose to go (although many regretted it) or it was some sort of penal sentence. They had to work for 4 - 9 years to pay off their journey, as far as I remember.

@AlexandPea....on fact your 'utter ignorance' is breathtaking have you 'travelled ' a lot then?

There are people who say that travel broadens the mind but recently I have come to realise that if anything it narrows minds.

Read some Saviano for a start.

@flaxmeadow I don’t understand your point. I just told you I know the Irish weren’t slaves in Barbados etc

My point was, that I'm agreeing with you. I know they weren't slaves. My other point was that unfortunately this kind of meme history is widely believed and regurgitated

Another myth that does the rounds, is that the British cut off the thumbs of Indian weavers. Which is simply not true

Cromwell and Irish genocide? How many is a genocide? I guess the 2,000 at Drogheda isn’t stufficient?

The idea of statues as a force for education is tosh, isn’t it? Few knew of Colston as the Tory MP with a murderous disrespect for life before this week. His statue offered nothing but insult.

I like good statuary and sculpture. It can be a trigger for learning. The shoes on the banks of the Danube urged us to discover more about the Hungarian Jews in WW2,
Christ the a Redeemer asks all sorts of engineering questions. David is just beautiful and incredibly made from rejected marble. Statues such as the Arrival at Liverpool Street do make one want to know more.

A bronze of slave traders is repellent. Nobody learns from them; they glorify a past we should not be proud of. Unfit even for a museum.

How anyone can compare them with the ultimate Memorial and mass grave that is Auschwitz is beyond my comprehension. Auschwitz is testimony to the lost lives of those who were murdered and the courage of those who, somehow, managed to survive. Auschwitz has an awe inspiring dignity. The exact opposite of statues of Colston.

Ah sorry, I thought you were having a go at me. Apparently it all comes from some book in the 90s that over egged the pudding quite a bit and a lot of people just presumed it was true. I also think some people genuinely don’t know the difference between a slave and an indentured servant too.

@CherryPavlova, how did you get to be so good at words?

Re: genocide, I suppose a lot of it counts the starvation when people were kicked off their land and had to try to grow food in The Burren. To hell or to Connacht! But some sources might not count that. (I bloody do.)

I love the examples you’ve used as well. The shoes by the Danube nearly ended me when I saw them, so poignant.

Amongst other things, the positioning of Cromwell as a hero of democracy is caught up in Victorian propaganda and is not uncontroversial.

‘Here is a theocratic military dictator reviled for more than a century after his death but rehabilitated when he proved useful to Victorian politicians’ would be a more honest plaque.

Fewer statues might lead to more critical thinking. Too many people seem to see a statue and say, ‘hey, he [almost always he] gets a statue, he must have been a pretty important and great guy’ rather than actually thinking about the cultural factors behind the statue. So that we’re glorifying a bloke who in England, to his own people (let alone his grim exploits in Ireland and elsewhere) was closer to Ayatollah Khomeini than Thomas Jefferson - as a champion of democracy.

Right, I need to stop arguing with people on the internet before I give myself high blood pressure.

Before I go, like some of you said, surely there needs to be a line in regard to what is acceptable and what is not, lest we destroy all our public statues and monuments. I feel slavery is a pretty good line in the sand.

@IDefinitelyHaveFriends

You can find a place for them in museums, which hold a lot of exhibits concerning stories and people of which we are not proud. Remembered as part of our history but not up on an actual literal pedestal.

This +1

Cromwell and Irish genocide? How many is a genocide? I guess the 2,000 at Drogheda isn’t stufficient?

But it isn't as simple as that is it. Drogheda was a garrison town. Not all the people who died in the siege were Irish, some were English, some of those who fought with Cromwell were Irish. Some who fought against Cromwell in Ireland were English.

When Royalists, composed of both English and Irish soldiers, seized the Parliamentarian town of Bolton in Lancashire (28 May 1644) they slaughtered just as many civilians there as at Drogheda. But how many people in England, or Ireland, remember that?

Re: genocide, I suppose a lot of it counts the starvation when people were kicked off their land and had to try to grow food in The Burren. To hell or to Connacht! But some sources might not count that. (I bloody do.)

There is no evidence that Cromwell, or anyone else, ever declared "Hell or Connaught" and most were not kicked off their land

It is a sad truth that much of the UK's wealth was derived from the the horror of the slave trade and this should not be celebrated in our shared public spaces. Removing these statues from public pedestals and moving them to museums is not erasing history ... it's simply saying we do not honour those who took part in this despicable trade .. however we keep them our museums .. to remember and reflect and respect those who suffered at their hands .. but not to honour.

It is a sad truth that much of the UK's wealth was derived from the the horror of the slave trade and this should not be celebrated in our shared public spaces

I'm sorry I keep going on about this but "much of the UK's wealth" was not from colonialism or the "slave trade". Some was yes, but most of the wealth, a large percent, was built on industrialisation, from our own resources, coal for example, and our own industrial labour

I've actually seen a posts on another forum where someone mentioned industrialisation and that their ancestors were industrial labourers in a discussion about colonialism and that person was accused of "microagressions" and "racism", merely for mentioning it.

I fear this lack of context will become a regular retort to any attempt at a class based perspective in the future. It is already happening in American discussions. The idea that to mention a class perspective, eg the white working class, in a colonial history topic is racist. Which is crazy.

@Flaxmeadow

It is a sad truth that much of the UK's wealth was derived from the the horror of the slave trade and this should not be celebrated in our shared public spaces

I'm sorry I keep going on about this but "much of the UK's wealth" was not from colonialism or the "slave trade". Some was yes, but most of the wealth, a large percent, was built on industrialisation, from our own resources, coal for example, and our own industrial labour

I've actually seen a posts on another forum where someone mentioned industrialisation and that their ancestors were industrial labourers in a discussion about colonialism and that person was accused of "microagressions" and "racism", merely for mentioning it.

I fear this lack of context will become a regular retort to any attempt at a class based perspective in the future. It is already happening in American discussions. The idea that to mention a class perspective, eg the white working class, in a colonial history topic is racist. Which is crazy.

Even if we remove the aspect of how our (and I use collective loosely) collective wealth was built .. should we be comfortable (ie complicit) in celebrating / honouring slave traders on pedestals in shared public spaces?

Whit society wouldn’t be disputing or debating the removal of Nazi statues - so why is it disputing the removal of slavery statues? Both black slavery and Nazism are events in living memory. Are black lives worth less to white society?

Why is it that people struggle to understand or show empathy or compassion just because it wasn't something they suffered or whitnessed first hand?

What if you scale it right down and make it personal, would your compassion stretch further?

For example, say you live in a small town that is failing economically so the community are struggling. If some guy comes into your home, snatches your children from their beds and heads off into the night with them to exploit them for financial gain. You never see your children again and will never know the truth of what awful things they experienced.

However, snatchers back in town now with his fat load of cash, injects it into businesses, maybe even the school.

The community begins to slowly thrive, and out of gratitude, the people of the community decide they will erect a statue of your child snatcher right in the centre of your town, you see it almost daily all big and shiny.

How would that statue make you feel?

Sounds over simplistic of course but I don't know how else to help you understand that you are wrong in your beliefs - in accordance to mine.

If a statue is old enough that no one can recognise who they arewithout a name plaque, I’d rather the name plaque be removed and the statue just left as decorative artwork. Maybe find out the sculptor and put their name on it. A lot of them are good art made by artists that put in years to create them. I agree that if a person doesn’t deserve to be commemorated anymore, then we should not, but I think it’s a shame to destroy the statue. It’s still a piece of art.

Imagine if Michaelangelos David had been destroyed, or the Venus de Milo....(the names we call them by are not the names of whoever was sculpted).

Even if we remove the aspect of how our (and I use collective loosely) collective wealth was built ..

Yes I understand why you say loosely because this is a point which also seems to have been lost. That the vast majority of British people owned nothing and gained nothing from colonialism

Today a well known Amercian said to a worldwide audience something like "and in England the white grt grt grandchildren of slave owners threw the statue of a slave owner in the river". I get that this is a statement about progression and get his general point but words and historical accuracy are important because it is unlikely that the white protesters were actual descendants of slave owners. It was almost as if he was saying "ALL white English people owned slaves" and everything that that might imply for the future

should we be comfortable (ie complicit) in celebrating / honouring slave traders on pedestals in shared public spaces

No, we must move with the times but where does it end? Who decides what other statues are offensive. What if I find Ghandi offensive or mosques built by slaves offensive. Should I lead a mob and tear these things down? Because feelings?

We might desire that history and historical figures be perfect and politically correct but as someone touched on earlier in the thread, with history that's impossible

But I don't think peel and Cromwell are slavery statues really, it's not what the statues are about. As far as I know peels father was involved in the slave trade, hut not peel itself and Cromwells statue outside the houses of Parliament represents democracy and the fight for democracy.

But not peel himself

@Flaxmeadow

A statue of Queen Victoria has been vandalised, (in Leeds? I think)

The vandals scrawled slave owner on it, which is bizarre because slavery in the BWI was abolished before she came to the throne. She was a teenager at abolition, if I've remember my dates correctly

She wasn’t a teenager when the 1857 riots happened in India and all the atrocities that ensued.

Onthebrink87 I agree totally ... whittle it down totally you are right and correct .. not over simplistic at all ... we should not be celebrating slavery, racisim with statues etc I don't want my kids to be playing in parks, squares otherwise with these shrines to our abhorent past held up as heroes .. they are relics which should be removed from our shared spaces and removed to museums where we can remember our history ... and reflect / learn from it in context

She wasn’t a teenager when the 1857 riots happened in India and all the atrocities that ensued

Do you think she could have prevented that? Foreseen it and stopped it happening? Could anyone at the time?

OP some people are wanting to pull down statues of Gladstone because a relative of his was a slave owner. Gladstone was anti slavery and famous for the reforms he introduced.

What they want is blood libel. Where does it end?

@Flaxmeadow

She wasn’t a teenager when the 1857 riots happened in India and all the atrocities that ensued

Do you think she could have prevented that? Foreseen it and stopped it happening? Could anyone at the time?

So is there a way you will be able to explain all of that in front of a statue that is placed randomly in the middle of the city somewhere? What about Churchill? Considered a hero of Britain, he was an atrocious villain elsewhere. Where do we draw the line? Putting these away in museums is the best way forward. I can imagine that one day we will have detailed and unbiased history in museums too. Imagine an electronic plaque in front of a statue of Victoria or Churchill. You can’t have that in a park or a town centre reaslitically. We have a country full of heroes. What kind of a system teaches us that we will run out of history and heroes if we remove statues like these?