The history re-writers are like the Mormons, they want to save the souls of the dead by using them as martyrs for the god of pure Socialism. The capitalist elite should compensate the relatives of their past victims via the taxes paid by the relatives of everybody else they exploited.Ancient statues from medieval times and scuptures should not be destroyed but let's think that Colston statue was made in the 1890s long after he died and was never necessary to be put up in the first place.
It is like the cunnard building in Liverpool was constructed in 1914, so why the fuck would you carve a fucking slave ship into the facia?
That should be sanded down or resculptured as there was no need in the first place
ISIS the same but we just let them back in and sing don't look back on anger.Elizabeth and Mary both carried out religious genocides. Those were pretty bad.
ISIS the same but we just let them back in and sing don't look back on anger.
Well I'd suggest to the people on the receiving end of it, it's absolutely a big deal.I didn't say it didn't go on. In fact I said the opposite.
What I said was it is not as big a deal as people like to make out. In certain circles perhaps it is, but generally not. Looking at the rioting cunts over the weekend you would think we still had slavery.
The history re-writers are like the Mormons, they want to save the souls of the dead by using them as martyrs or the god of pure Socialism.
The capitalist elite should compensate the relatives of their past victims via the taxes paid by the relayives of everybody else they exploited.
Your right but taking down a couple of statues isn't going to change history. Might aswell knock down Auschwitz aswell whilst were at it. Most country's profited from slavery so did blacks enslaving millions of whites. If Winston Churchill gets taken down I think there would be carnage. Just a step too far that in my opinion.Haven't seen many ISIS statues about.
Slavery was abolished in the UK in 1833 so we can only discuss those prior to that.
Again, people involved in slavery at the time. when it was a social norm, may have done greater things outside of the trade, like the founding fathers of the US but Colston was only famous due to money he earned as a slave trader and a notoriously brutal one at that.
why can we only discuss prior to 1833?
as I said there are thousands of examples where the empire was used. Or kings and queens committed genocide.
world war 1 the empire was used and thousands died. Waterloo - I’m sure some of that was probably funded by money made from slavery
I understand what your saying and parts of it I agree with, but it’ll never end
You off again?
I don't believe in erasing history, the point was statues and building carvings built centuries after glorifying cunts and practices are different than monuments built at the actual time and of cultural and historical value which colstons isn't
Same as that clown farages arguement that toppling this statue is the same as the taliban blowing up buddhas which it isn't and a total bollocks comparrison.
send in the clowns then he's right - makes more sense than the boneheads pulling down effigies of those they don't happen to like what they've read about. Ideas change, we have to live with it and learn from it. Colston's statue was put up in Victorian times when what are now called anglo-saxon exceptionalists, white supremacists, racist imperialists etc confidently and honestly regarded themselves as advancing civilization as well as lining their pockets. The appalling conditions experienced by the majority of the working poor then was pretty similar everywhere and probably much worse than in eighteenth century when Colston was doing his worst.You off again?
I don't believe in erasing history, the point was statues and building carvings built centuries after glorifying cunts and practices are different than monuments built at the actual time and of cultural and historical value which colstons isn't
Same as that clown farages arguement that toppling this statue is the same as the taliban blowing up buddhas which it isn't and a total bollocks comparrison.
I don't really agree that mobs should tear down statues but for this particular one I can't see the problem.
The history of this up here in Lancashire is particularly important because Lancashire was the powerhouse of the country at one point thanks to imported cotton and exported cloth. Much of that cotton however came from slave labour in US colonies until the civil war created the US and slavery was abolished.
Would I want to celebrate this history today or somehow honour the people responsible for it, no way. Even as a white person it troubles me that such statues even exist and I find it odd that anyone would want to acknowledge that persons achievements.
It is a really dark history that we cannot judge by todays standards but we can educate and I think the removal of that statue is a good symbol of how we don't accept the standards of the past anymore.
This is like the BM usual suspects 'blah blah but but racism doesn't even exist we don't even call them c**ns anymore but but blah blah'.
I’d not heard the Taliban mentioned for a while.
Maybe our Irish friends are right and we’ve lost our collective marbles.
Wibble.
Mexico, 1970.The point is where do we stop? When is too far back enough?