What’s happening?

[fallen-archie]

With the destruction of the Colston statue in Bristol it is reported that along with the Rhodes memorial, Churchill and nelson are in the firing line as well as the following:-
The Kitchener Memorial, Orkney
Duke of Sutherland statue, Golspie
“Jim Crow” Rock, Dunoon, Argyllshire
Lord Roberts Monument, Glasgow
Sir Robert Peel, Glasgow
Colin Campbell, Lord Clyde, Glasgow
John Moore statue, Glasgow
Henry Dundas, Edinburgh
William Armstrong Memorial, Newcastle Upon Tyne
Captain James Cook in Great Ayton
Robert Peel statue, Preston
Peel Park, Bradford
Robert Peel statue, Bradford
Sir Robert Peel statue, Leeds
Peel Tower, Bury
Robert Peel statue, Bury
Robert Peel, Manchester
Martin’s Bank Slavery Relief, Liverpool
Christopher Columbus statue, Liverpool
Blundell House, Liverpool
The Leverhulme Memorial, Wirral
William Gladstone statue, Hawarden
HM Stanley column, St Asaph
HM Stanley, Denbigh
Elihu Yale Wetherspoons Pub, Wrexham
Robert Clive, Shrewsbury in Shropshire
Picton Memorial, Carmarthen
General Nott statue, Carmarthen
Thomas Phillips memorial plaque, Brecon
Thomas Picton statue, Cardiff
Henry Austin Bruce, Lord of Aberdare, Cardiff

Are we rewriting history and if so why?

[upthecreekyetagain]

It may be the truth but most certainly is no reason why those descendants should be thankful nor believe that it in any way justified the slave trade!

What relevance does the colour of those rounding up slaves have to justifying the behaviour of those who were trading in slaves?  Are you trying in some way to justify the trade?

[cee-dee]

Over here is a soft target. Those protestors wouldn't dare do what they do here "over there". Anyway, check this out:-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Africa

[cee-dee]

Getting back to history.... It happened, there's no denying it. It wasn't "nice", there's no denying that either.

However, where do these "protests" end? What part of history and the remnant examples are to be allowed to remain? Where does it all stop?

The Romans invaded Britain, do we destroy all the remaining Roman relics?

The Normans also invaded Britain, are we supposed to destroy everything associated with the Norman conquest and vilify those of Norman descent?

The statues of men who were associated with the slave trade were not errected to commemorate their efforts in that trade were they? Weren't they were errected because of something they did that was of benefit to their community in their day?

Do we go around destroying statues of religious symbols because we don't happen to share that belief?

There are relatively well preserved concentration camps still existing, do we level those in an attempt to wipe out history?

There has to be tolerance here or the anachists will take over. Some people are so intolerant that the slightest thing will start them off. Those chips on shoulders have a lot to answer for.

[upthecreekyetagain]

There is no need to destroy anything.  The statues belong in museums, not on the streets - if this had been recognised as the appropriate place for them then they would not be in any danger.

What though is the excuse for honouring those who were major 'players' in the slave trade with street and building names?

Yes, these honours weren't for their part in the slave trade but for the philanthropy they carried out - carried out with money they made from the slave trade and from the "compensation, (equivalent in value to the recent bail out for the banks), paid to them when the slave trade ended - this compensation was financed by issuing bonds which were only finally paid off by the British taxpayer five years ago!

No, we mustn't forget history but at the same time we shouldn't glorify those who committed horrific acts for financial gain.

[bankhaunter]

If all monuments which have any connection to slavery have to go, that would include all churches, mosques and synagogues.

The God of the Bible was quite happy with slavery and he is openly worshipped in those buildings.

Leviticus 25:44-46

44 As for the male and female slaves whom you may have, it is from the nations around you that you may acquire male and female slaves. 45 You may also acquire them from among the aliens residing with you, and from their families that are with you, who have been born in your land; and they may be your property.

46 You may keep them as a possession for your children after you, for them to inherit as property.

However I don't think the hive mind of a mob should dictate public policy.

[upthecreekyetagain]

I'm struggling to think of a religion that has made a profit from slave trading and advocates such a trade today.

To suggest that organisations, (including religions, nations and political parties), that at some time in the past either accepted or even actively partook in slavery are commensurate with individuals who actively traded in slaves is a spurious argument.

[fallen-archie]

Let’s lighten things up a little

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7eXdt1eGgCA

Funny or what?

[upthecreekyetagain]

Tragicomic interview. 

[fallen-archie]

Ali was always a controversial figure because like many of us he was of a particular time. His outspoken views on inter race and religious marriages would also no longer be appropriate.
For years as a country we have made huge strides in health and sanitation, life expectancy and standard of living, So why all of a sudden are we being faced with this onslaught of race v
The indigenous population and are we being constantly run down by political correctness!
I love my country and all it has provided for me, I cannot stand these endless demonstrations against everything and the constant demands for justice, Justice is for all of us not just one part of society, We have a democracy which is precious and yet we are told that democratic decisions are flawed, but isn’t all society flawed in some way? Whether you lived in Grenfell tower or attended the Hillsboro disaster or lived in abervan or you voted Tory all were deemed as disasters waiting to happen, but what is the answer, must we keep looking for scapegoats or should we move on! What I do kkk no ow is that erasing history or hiding it from plain sight isn’t an option! Or shouldn’t be, anymore than stopping little Britain and gone with the wind being shown!
Woke is a joke.

[cee-dee]

I think that the scapegoat angle is "If something happens, there MUST be someone to blame"....

It doesn't matter who did what or for what reason, someone, (anyone?) must be to blame and should be blamed publicly?

[bankhaunter]

A spurious argument?

What is the difference between accepting or partaking in slavery and trading in slaves.

[fallen-archie]

I don’t know bh, I wasn’t around at the time however I bet social media gave them hell! Anyway I cannot hang around I have an 8 Year old lad coming to sweep my chimney from the inside, then I will fill the galvanised bath for us all to bathe in!
Mind you I won’t be going out as the press gangs are on the proud again, even as the local hangman I don’t get any release from the pressers!

[suzieseaside]

Oh fgs, now documentaries are banned because of implied racism ....

https://metro.co.uk/2020/06/12/sir-david-attenborough-video-deleted-wwf-charity-racism-claims-128447...

We all learned in school geography that birth rate falls as a country becomes more wealthy / more developed. More children were often deemed necessary when child mortality was high and when senior members needed looking after. Birth rates are high where poverty, disease and famine are rife. If you Google highest birth rates the top 4 countries are in sub-saharan Africa.

This is fact. Surely most people, if they learned anything in their lives, know that high birth rates are not because of skin colour but more to do with economic, social and other reasons and that these countries need help. Will such subjects stopped being taught in school in case they engender racism by the white privileged?

[astrologica]

That is unbelievable Suzie! Sir David is a member of Population Matters, an organisation that I also am interested in. He is a big advocate for population control, all over this Earth. Seems to me these complainers don't want to face uncomfortable truths. Whatever will they ban next? 

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@suzieseaside wrote:
Oh fgs, now documentaries are banned because of implied racism ....

https://metro.co.uk/2020/06/12/sir-david-attenborough-video-deleted-wwf-charity-racism-claims-128447...

We all learned in school geography that birth rate falls as a country becomes more wealthy / more developed. More children were often deemed necessary when child mortality was high and when senior members needed looking after. Birth rates are high where poverty, disease and famine are rife. If you Google highest birth rates the top 4 countries are in sub-saharan Africa.

This is fact. Surely most people, if they learned anything in their lives, know that high birth rates are not because of skin colour but more to do with economic, social and other reasons and that these countries need help. Will such subjects stopped being taught in school in case they engender racism by the white privileged?

---

Yes, you are right Susie - as you say, high birth rates are a symptom of socio-economic poverty and not skin colour - that is why the WWF withdrew the advert.  There wasn't a problem with what Sir David Attenborough said but with the editing that didn't show people obviously suffering from poverty but a group of Asians happily bathing in a river.

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@bankhaunter wrote:

A spurious argument?

What is the difference between accepting or partaking in slavery and trading in slaves.

---

Yes a spurious argument - you are comparing past "teachings" of an organisation, (teachings which are no longer accepted by its members), with the specific actions of individuals.

An apple and oranges scenario. 

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@astrologica wrote:

That is unbelievable Suzie! Sir David is a member of Population Matters, an organisation that I also am interested in. He is a big advocate for population control, all over this Earth. Seems to me these complainers don't want to face uncomfortable truths. Whatever will they ban next? 

---

Simply not true Astro - Sir David's comments are included in other adverts for the WWF but without the visual implication that high birth rates are linked to the colour of a person's skin.

[upthecreekyetagain]

I notice that nobody has attempted to answer the simple questions I asked earlier in this thread.

Were the Allies and later the German government wrong to remove all public monuments to the Nazi regime and its leaders? - in doing so were they rewriting history?

[dark_castle1]

If you could point out all the good the nazi regime did either in their own country or across the countries they invaded then a debate could be opened to try and answer your question.

The statues that they want pulled down were not erected because they were solely slave traders but at some point did some good for which they were recognised. 

A question for you now, should the UK government be admonished severely or disbanded for selling arms to other countries as they are promoting wars and killing ?

[cee-dee]

Going back to the original question about rewriting history..... it seems to me that's exactly what they want. As I said earlier, they wouldn't dare do what they do here in other countries where there are statues concerning the slave trade or traders from that country.

Also, they want "special treatment". They don't want to respect the laws everyone else does.

I watched a video of a chap getting approached by two cops. He'd fallen asleep in his car, right in the way. He was, at first, compliant and got out of the car. The cops could smell alcohol and suspected he was over the limit so asked him to provide a specimen of breath. He was compliant and did so but it proved positive = over the limit so the cops went to arrest him. THEN the trouble started! He fought with the cops and eventually grabbed a taser belonging to one cop and fought his way out of their grip and started to run off with the taser. I'm not quite sure if he fired it at the cops but one cop drew his gun and as the bloke was still running the cop shot the bloke, DEAD.

That was in the USA. Here, he wouldn't be dead (???) but why did he start fighting the cops?

Time out of number I've seen on "cop programmes" the cops have been polite in dealing with people (stopped for many reasons) and straight away they're verbally aggressive with the cops and try to play the race card. If the cops try to arrest them, they fight!!! Why? Sometimes it's only a really simple thing and wouldn't even end up with anything other that a telling off but oh no, they have to get nasty and end up assaulting the cops. Madness?