The Colston Four

[Mr Kobayashi]

I suspected you were in that age group.

Well at aged 30, I would expect a rational discussion to discuss the topic, which you clearly no longer seem incapable of.

I would also expect you to know more about how local Councils receive money, especially from Central Government, which all tax payers pay to fill the coffers.

We clearly are going around in circles as well as disagree.
Let's leave it there

Double negative.

Which you should know has been massively cut back since 2010.

But as you are so well informed maybe you could produce the councils funding sources for us to look at.

 

[mosssideblue]

Double negative.

Which you should know has been massively cut back since 2010.

But as you are so well informed maybe you could produce the councils funding sources for us to look at.

Give it a rest. You don't want to discuss, you just want to argue, so will leave you to find someone who might accommodate your churlish stance.

 

[Bigga]

So can I

Very odd. You seemed to bypass [ergo being okay with] taxpayers' money to pay for a racist mass murderer's statue, but have a problem with taxpayers' money having to pay out for the removal/ damage repair of said statue!

As I said earlier, you support the removal based on its history or you don't.

Makes me wonder why you won't state upon which action you support.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Very odd. You seemed to bypass [ergo being okay with] taxpayers' money to pay for a racist mass murderer's statue, but have a problem with taxpayers' money having to pay out for the removal/ damage repair of said statue!

As I said earlier, you support the removal based on its history or you don't.

Makes me wonder why you won't state upon which action you support.

Tax payers funds weren't paid to install it.

Although they would have been used for any maintenance or cleaning.

History Was Never Subject to Democratic Control

Elite merchants put up a statue of a British slave trader. A band of protesters toppled it. Who decides what happens now?

www.theatlantic.com

The Colston monument has, likewise, always been political. Cole told me that the statue was put up in 1895—some 174 years after Colston’s death—in response to another statue. That one celebrated the politician and philosopher Edmund Burke, a conservative who disapproved of Britain’s high-handed attitude toward its colonies.

Those agitating for a Colston memorial wanted it to stand within what Cole calls “statue spitting distance” of Burke, who had been critical of the city’s slave trade. Burke had also argued for fair taxation, while Bristol’s 19th-century merchants championed trickle-down economics, which, according to Cole, “says that actually the way wealth is redistributed in society is through acts of philanthropy.” Colston, who endowed schools, hospitals, almshouses, and other institutions, was therefore the merchants’ hero. His statue was funded not by the taxes of a grateful populace but by private, and largely anonymous, donors. In other words, it was an eight-foot-tall bronze middle finger to Burke’s admirers. It was the product of a culture war from the start.

 

[mosssideblue]

Very odd. You seemed to bypass [ergo being okay with] taxpayers' money to pay for a racist mass murderer's statue, but have a problem with taxpayers' money having to pay out for the removal/ damage repair of said statue!

As I said earlier, you support the removal based on its history or you don't.

Makes me wonder why you won't state upon which action you support.

Then you have misunderstood what I wrote. I am appalled at the taxpayer picking up the tab for this mess.

I never at any point approved the erecting of the statue, which was done before we were all walking this planet

 

[Bigga]

Tax payers funds weren't paid to install it.

Although they would have been used for any maintenance or cleaning.

History Was Never Subject to Democratic Control

Elite merchants put up a statue of a British slave trader. A band of protesters toppled it. Who decides what happens now?

www.theatlantic.com

Well, well.

A private statue in public space. Was the taxpayer consulted and why wasn't it on private grounds? Essentially, there's no argument that it could come down as it's not really criminal damage.

Just removal.

 

[Bigga]

Then you have misunderstood what I wrote. I am appalled at the taxpayer picking up the tab for this mess.

I never at any point approved the erecting of the statue, which was done before we were all walking this planet

As conceded I didn't know the taxpayer didn't fund it.

'The Colston Four' have argued and won that it shouldn't have been up.

Is 'criminal damage' still the argument you hold?

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

If it is just about tax payers money wouldn't it have made sense for no prosecutions to be made and to ask the accused to make a contribution to the costs of cleanup?

As was the case with the artist behind the unauthorised replacement.

Jen Reid statue removal 'to be paid for by artist'

The statue of a Black Lives Matter activist was removed from a plinth in Bristol by the council.

www.bbc.co.uk

The prosecution costs most likely dwarf cost of clean up or cost of a replacement statue.

 

[mosssideblue]

As conceded I didn't know the taxpayer didn't fund it.

'The Colston Four' have argued and won that it shouldn't have been up.

Is 'criminal damage' still the argument you hold?

Nothing has changed in my mind. I've stated my opinion, if you don't agree, fine

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Well, well.

A private statue in public space. Was the taxpayer consulted and why wasn't it on private grounds? Essentially, there's no argument that it could come down as it's not really criminal damage.

Just removal.

Because it was erected in a time when most men and women weren't eligible to vote?