George Floyd murder | Clashes between US police and protestors

Status
Not open for further replies.
What's the best platform to start rumors?

170px-A_statue_of_Sir_Alex_Ferguson_at_Old_Trafford.jpg
 
Blue Hefner said:
Anyone mentioned “White History Month” yet......
Click to expand...

Morgan Freeman has a good point on Black History month.

Why consign their history to a month, black people in the US and UK’s history is our history, teach it alongside the rest.

We’ve really got to move on with this “them and us” mentality, it’s poison and divisive.

I am not saying you’re doing it at all mate, I’m talking generally about people on both sides of the argument.
 
Last edited:
Rascal said:
Davis

I missed his surname out of the sentence

Sorry
Click to expand...

No worries, that’s a lot less controversial than I thought, for removing it.

A sensible view for any statue would be to let the community decide via some sort of vote.
 
hedkandi said:
30,000 is quite alot in one year, 82 assaults a day too many.
Click to expand...
I have a friend who is a Paramedic for West Mid's Ambulance Service. He's been assaulted 6 times, including being stabbed. Mainly drunks and druggies, but the occasional Alzheimer's patient can be quite a handful. Luckily for him he is pretty handy, so he's been relatively okay (apart from a laceration in his shoulder when he was stabbed from behind).
 
Psychedelic Casual said:
Should the Abraham Lincoln statue in Town also be taken down?

Seen as important in the end of slavery in the US, but his treatment of the Native Americans was abhorrent.

He ordered massacres on Native Americans and organised the removal of Native Americans from their lands onto reservations.
Click to expand...
Lincoln owned slaves, many on the Confederate side of the divide saw Lincoln as a dictator, who in modern terms would be classed as a fascist due to his mercantile/corporatist policies.

Lincolns link to Manchester is because of the Mancunian peoples refusal to take southern cotton which in effect starved the Confederate war effort of funds to buy weapons, our lovely neighbours down the East Lancs however ran the blockades of the Union navy in order to supply the Confederacy with goods and especially luxuries that the Southern landowners had become accustomed too.

I read a really interesting book on Lincoln by Thomas Di Lorenzo, who I believe is linked to the Mises institute, who for the unaware is a pro free market small govt institution. Lincoln is accused of being the progenitor of American big state government whilst Jefferson Davis was more akin to the ideals of the small state free market right. The book is wrote from a Confederate viewpoint which you have to take into account.

These things in my opinion cloud the issue of Lincoln, and I prefer to look on the statue of Lincoln as monument to the Mancunian people who suffered tremendous hardship because of their stance rather than Lincoln himself. Whether that is a fair appraisal I suppose demands on your outlook on politics
 
Ban-jani said:
Morgan Freeman has a good point on Black History month.

Why consign their history to a month, black people in the US and UK’s history is our history, teach it alongside the rest.

We’ve really got to move on with this “them and us” mentally, it’s poison and divisive.

I am not saying you’re doing it at all mate, I’m talking generally about people on both sides of the argument.
Click to expand...

I agree with you

It probably shouldn’t be just a month but a month of focus is better than what we have now. It may have changed but when I was in school it was:

Oliver Cromwell
Queen Victoria
Queen Elizabeth
Henry VIII
Churchill
Etc

We didn’t even touch on MLK, Nelson Mandela or the entire continent of Africa

As for teaching black history along side. You talk about picking sides but I can see the same type of nutters now outside schools complaining out kids being taught about different relationships being at the gates accusing schools of neglecting our good old monarchs(the ones who cut heads of people)

It’s a tricky one but I joked re ‘WHM’ because Mrs Hef is on FB and noticed my uncle posting and sharing some very odd stuff around white lives matter and all that so I can imagine protests at the school gates if we start teaching Malcolm X rather than Queen Victoria
 
BobKowalski said:
Read somewhere that Lee was against any monuments of statues commemorating the Confederacy or himself. Thought it would hinder reconciliation between the States.

Most of the statues were put up decades after the war ended. Agree on Forrest although the statue makes him look like a deranged twat so pros and cons.
Click to expand...
Bedford Forrest was a Grand Wizard of the KKK, I think he was the first GW too, I may be wrong on that but I am pretty certain, that is why I think he is a ****.

He was a brilliant cavalry general in the Army of Tennesse, whose troops were incredibly loyal to him by the accounts I read, although he was overshadowed as a cavalry General by Jeb Stuart who was in Lee's Army of Northern Virginia
 
Cheadle_hulmeBlue said:
The mighty boosh and the league of gentlemen have been dropped by Netflix now. What on earth is happening, it’s getting ridiculous now
Click to expand...
Liberals at the forefront of illiberal censorship as usual. In stalinist terms we're somewhere around 1935. Nothing to worry about yet..........
 
Rascal said:
Lincoln owned slaves, many on the Confederate side of the divide saw Lincoln as a dictator, who in modern terms would be classed as a fascist due to his mercantile/corporatist policies.

Lincolns link to Manchester is because of the Mancunian peoples refusal to take southern cotton which in effect starved the Confederate war effort of funds to buy weapons, our lovely neighbours down the East Lancs however ran the blockades of the Union navy in order to supply the Confederacy with goods and especially luxuries that the Southern landowners had become accustomed too.

I read a really interesting book on Lincoln by Thomas Di Lorenzo, who I believe is linked to the Mises institute, who for the unaware is a pro free market small govt institution. Lincoln is accused of being the progenitor of American big state government whilst Jefferson Davis was more akin to the ideals of the small state free market right. The book is wrote from a Confederate viewpoint which you have to take into account.

These things in my opinion cloud the issue of Lincoln, and I prefer to look on the statue of Lincoln as monument to the Mancunian people who suffered tremendous hardship because of their stance rather than Lincoln himself. Whether that is a fair appraisal I suppose demands on your outlook on politics
Click to expand...

This is the crux of the issue for me. People can interpret statues however they wish.

The Oliver Cromwell statue outside Parliament being the prime example. He ruled a far more authoritarian regime than Charles I ever did. He also led a military coup against said Parliament!

Yet his legacy, getting rid of a divine monarchy, paved the way for a more democratic society which we have all benefitted from.

I view Cromwell’s statue as a reminder to the British Civil Wars and to those who fought for a more democratic sense rather than the brutal, religious zealot that Cromwell was.

This brings the issue back to education IMO.
 
Blue Hefner said:
I agree with you

It probably shouldn’t be just a month but a month of focus is better than what we have now. It may have changed but when I was in school it was:

Oliver Cromwell
Queen Victoria
Queen Elizabeth
Henry VIII
Churchill
Etc

We didn’t even touch on MLK, Nelson Mandela or the entire continent of Africa

As for teaching black history along side. You talk about picking sides but I can see the same type of nutters now outside schools complaining out kids being taught about different relationships being at the gates accusing schools of neglecting our good old monarchs(the ones who cut heads of people)

It’s a tricky one but I joked re ‘WHM’ because Mrs Hef is on FB and noticed my uncle posting and sharing some very odd stuff around white lives matter and all that so I can imagine protests at the school gates if we start teaching Malcolm X rather than Queen Victoria
Click to expand...

It’s a little difficult as all of those you’ve mentioned aren’t British.

The focus is usually on UK history in history, no offence intended but I only left high school 12 years ago and I remember it closely.

You get one hour a week to teach kids history. We did learn about British atrocities, we watched Zulu and learned what we were doing there in actual detail the film doesn’t cover, we watched Bloody Sunday and got context there.

We barely covered American history at all.

There should be more of a focus on why there are immigrants here and what we did that made them come here, I totally agree but our history is focused on English monarchs because our history is very much internally focused due to the limited time.
 
Fame Monster said:
It's not a precondition. It's about education.

You were questioning why people were pointing out that other European countries/the Romans/African empires were involved in slavery and my response to that is that some people talk about the TST as if it were the only slave trade that ever existed. That's historical nonsense that fuels a sense of grievance and people are rebutting the implication.

How is the TST anymore relevant to other slave trades in the UK today? It was abolished about 200 years ago: it's irrelevant. Racism existed long before the TST and will exist long after it.

As to your last point, people can express their grievances however they want. I personally would rather them do it legally, democratically, or if they want to protest in number, do it outside of a pandemic. If they do protest though, and bring up issues that aren't relevant or people disagree with, they should expect to hear those arguments.
Click to expand...

It’s relevant to Black British people. That is the point. It is relevant to them. Just as we, as predominantly white British people, remember or celebrate what we regard as relevant to us, the same courtesy should be extended to other groups. Just as Jewish British remember the Holocaust because of its relevance to them.

As for not being able to see the link between how Black people were viewed then and how they are viewed or treated now, it kind of speaks for itself. You might as well just say ‘I don’t get it’ and you don’t. It has no meaning or relevance to you. It doesn’t touch your life until something like this happens and then you lecture them about ‘education’ and ‘history’. But it does touch their lives, so whilst you may not get it the least you can do is respect it.
 
AlexWilliamsGloves said:
i kinda reluctantly agree with this...makes sense.

Maybe we can stop all the "Lest We Forget" flag wavers too...banging on about wars "we won"...but had absolutely nothing to do with?
Click to expand...

If our history was taught properly and not focused on myths of exceptionalism then the people of our country might understand, until then though as long as we media banging on about "Dunkirk" spirit, Churchillian myths winning the war etc we have no chance.

I would bet a lot of money that most posters on here couldn't name a major battle on the Eastern front apart from Stalingrad.

All this war winning stuff, lest we forget, poppy police stuff gets right on my fucking nerves as it mostly comes from uneducated cunts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top