The changing of history continues

[siam]

It never phased me a bit. If I saw one of those statues in person it would have no impact on me whatsoever, other than maybe admiring the artwork and detail, but void of any historical significance about it. The fact you're white and it phases you more than me is the creepiest and most bizarre thing to me.

Interesting perspective....
So, the removal of a statue has no impact on you whatsoever...because they have no meaning for you?

If you were American, you would be OK with a statue of a plane---the Zero (A6M Zero) and a Japanese pilot standing besides it---in a honored public location in Pearl harbor or Washington DC? (In case you did not know, these are the planes that attacked Pearl harbor) ---or perhaps a large one of General Tojo, the wartime General and Prime minister, in a prominent public location in your hometown where you could see it every day?...where you could "admire" the artistry....
...and while you are admiring it, you might also contemplate how much of your hard-earned tax money went into financing it?

[seanD]

Interesting perspective....
So, the removal of a statue has no impact on you whatsoever...because they have no meaning for you?

If you were American, you would be OK with a statue of a plane---the Zero (A6M Zero) and a Japanese pilot standing besides it---in a honored public location in Pearl harbor or Washington DC? (In case you did not know, these are the planes that attacked Pearl harbor) ---or perhaps a large one of General Tojo, the wartime General and Prime minister, in a prominent public location in your hometown where you could see it every day?...where you could "admire" the artistry....
...and while you are admiring it, you might also contemplate how much of your hard-earned tax money went into financing it?

Personally, I don't care whether they remove it or not. I believe they should take it to a vote, not tear it down by unruly mobs. I just don't understand why white liberals are so triggered by it when I'm not (though i do have my theories that most liberals might not find too pleasant). About your Pearl Harbor memorial -- It wouldn't bother me in the slightest. Why would something that happened long before I was born bother me? I guess I just have more of a backbone about these circumstances? I wasn't sheltered as a child? I don't know what it is, but these things just don't offend me. I would see it as a part of history, and if it was sculpted, as a part of art. Don't we already have a Pearl Harbor memorial? Does that trigger you? Do you take offense when you look at that?

[Leonhard]

I agree with seanD, it should happen by vote.

[Catholicity]

I went and looked it up. The replacement statue captures a moment when a protestor, after the other stature was toppled, climbed up on the pedestal on which it stood and raised her fist in the black power salute.

The artist just did it without being asked or prompted, its actually a very nice statue.

Personally, I think it's great, and a fitting replacement for a statue honoring a slave trader. It captures what I think should be our attitude towards racism and the legacy of slavery.

Lets finally rid ourselves of it.

We need to rid ourselves certainly of statues that were erected between 1893 and 1970 to remind people that whites were in charge. But the black power salute I find just as offensive. It was utilized first by the 1st generation of Black panthers who were essentially the KKK of the "civil rights" It was later emulated by Yahweh Ben Yahweh of the black hebrew israelite cult (and notorious murderer of whites and blacks who he deemed a threat to his need to take over Christianity) Louis Farrakhan and the black muslims, and now the reincarnations of the KKK. I find "black power" salutes as offensive as "nazi salutes" It's the implication that one person is superior over another. My worldview has no room to hate anyone because of the color of their skin, the culture in which they were raised, and certainly my world does not promote one person over another.

[rogue06]

I went and looked it up. The replacement statue captures a moment when a protestor, after the other stature was toppled, climbed up on the pedestal on which it stood and raised her fist in the black power salute.

The artist just did it without being asked or prompted, its actually a very nice statue.

Personally, I think it's great, and a fitting replacement for a statue honoring a slave trader. It captures what I think should be our attitude towards racism and the legacy of slavery.

Lets finally rid ourselves of it.

Oh joy. A statue commemorating his celebrating his act of vandalism while he makes a racist gesture. That's soooo much better.

[Roy]

The statue of slave trader Edward Colston was replaced in Bristol on Wednesday morning – with a sculpture of one of the protesters whose anger brought him down.....

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...tter-protester

This isn't "changing of history" in any way.

[rogue06]

I vote for a statue of Maxwell Smart.

I understand that the vote was close but

[oxmixmudd]

Oh joy. A statue commemorating his celebrating his act of vandalism while he makes a racist gesture. That's soooo much better.

You"re being ridiculous as usual on this topic, but have no fear. The new statue was removed, probably as it should be, but it was done lawfully and with respect, which is good, with the indication that what replaces the original statue will be decided by the people of Bristol. Law and order is important, hopefully the people of Bristol will put in its place something that reflects respect for all.

The new statue was placed in a museum to be collected by the artist or donated to the museum itself.

[Maranatha]

It never phased me a bit. If I saw one of those statues in person it would have no impact on me whatsoever, other than maybe admiring the artwork and detail, but void of any historical significance about it. The fact you're white and it phases you more than me is the creepiest and most bizarre thing to me.

I apparently walk by statues and don't even know they are there.

Some people just live their lives, some people live to make you live as they want you to.

What do these people over in jolly old England call themselves?

African Englanders
North African Englanders?

I don't really understand why people over in Europe riot over something in America. When bad things happen in Zimbabwe, does Europe riot?

[mossrose]

This isn't "changing of history" in any way.

You're right.

It's erasing it.

[oxmixmudd]

We need to rid ourselves certainly of statues that were erected between 1893 and 1970 to remind people that whites were in charge. But the black power salute I find just as offensive. It was utilized first by the 1st generation of Black panthers who were essentially the KKK of the "civil rights" It was later emulated by Yahweh Ben Yahweh of the black hebrew israelite cult (and notorious murderer of whites and blacks who he deemed a threat to his need to take over Christianity) Louis Farrakhan and the black muslims, and now the reincarnations of the KKK. I find "black power" salutes as offensive as "nazi salutes" It's the implication that one person is superior over another. My worldview has no room to hate anyone because of the color of their skin, the culture in which they were raised, and certainly my world does not promote one person over another.

I understand, and tend to agree. I don't think it makes sense to replace one sort of abuse (white racism against blacks) with another sort of abuse (black hatred of oppressive whites). But it's not trivial to get there. Even Christians often have a hard time forgiving serious wrongs in spite of the fact their religion allows them no choice to nurture a grudge or seek revenge. And many Christians have nurtured and fostered racism even though they are taught God loves all men and women equally, that there are no divisions of that sort in the Kingdom of God. How much harder then to get those elements that may place no intrinsic value on forgiveness or love to adopt forgiveness and work towards a constructive solution.

[seanD]

I understand, and tend to agree. I don't think it makes sense to replace one sort of abuse (white racism against blacks) with another sort of abuse (black hatred of oppressive whites). But it's not trivial to get there. Even Christians often have a hard time forgiving serious wrongs in spite of the fact their religion allows them no choice to nurture a grudge or seek revenge. And many Christians have nurtured and fostered racism even though they are taught God loves all men and women equally, that there are no divisions of that sort in the Kingdom of God. How much harder then to get those elements that may place no intrinsic value on forgiveness or love to adopt forgiveness and work towards a constructive solution.

That sounds rather self-accusatory. Like the preacher that secretly sleeps with prostitutes will have the tendency to be the most outspoken against sexual sin and judgemental of others.

[oxmixmudd]

That sounds rather self-accusatory. Like the preacher that secretly sleeps with prostitutes will have the tendency to be the most outspoken against sexual sin and judgemental of others.

It's not. The KKK itself co-opts Christian concepts and teachings. It's founder considered himself Christian. Many members of the KKK in the past where Christians, members of churches, self professed believers in the teachings of Christ. In fact, in the height of the jim crow south, it was not at all unusual for people to go to church, and bring a picnic lunch along to watch a lynching of a black 'criminal' after the service. White Christian churches in the south were quite resistive to integration of their services on Sunday morning. And it was only those more 'liberal' elements within the southern church that embraced the civil rights movement, and Billy Graham, whatever you may think of him, lost popularity in southern white churches because of his efforts to support Martin Luther King. And let us not forget that the Southern Baptist Church and convention owes its origins to a break from other Baptists over the issue of slavery, over the right of it's Christian members to have and use slaves.

[seanD]

It's not. The KKK itself co-opts Christian concepts and teachings. It's founder considered himself Christian. Many members of the KKK in the past where Christians, members of churches, self professed believers in the teachings of Christ. In fact, in the height of the jim crow south, it was not at all unusual for people to go to church, and bring a picnic lunch along to watch a lynching of a black 'criminal' after the service. White Christian churches in the south were quite resistive to integration of their services on Sunday morning. And it was only those more 'liberal' elements within the southern church that embraced the civil rights movement, and Billy Graham, whatever you may think of him, lost popularity in southern white churches because of his efforts to support Martin Luther King. And let us not forget that the Southern Baptist Church and convention owes its origins to a break from other Baptists over the issue of slavery, over the right of it's Christian members to have and use slaves.

Your history lesson duly noted, which is probably full of untruths, half truths and misinfo, I was under the impression you were speaking in the present. Is the KKK even a thing anymore other than somewhere backwoods in the south? Democrats have done far more damage to black communities (i.e LBJ, Biden, etc.) because their actions were actually put to national policy. Biden was just an all out racist, though LBJ's policy was guised as a trojan horse, like most liberal polcies.

[oxmixmudd]

Your history lesson duly noted, which is probably full of untruths, half truths and misinfo, I was under the impression you were speaking in the present. Is the KKK even a thing anymore other than somewhere backwoods in the south? Democrats have done far more damage to black communities (i.e LBJ, Biden, etc.) because their actions were actually put to national policy. Biden was just an all out racist, though LBJ's policy was guised as a trojan horse, like most liberal polcies.

Maybe you could look into what I claimed seanD instead of just not liking the history you apparently just are not aware of.

Do you know the history of the KKK? Are you aware that as late as the 1980's they still had strongholds all over the deep south? And they are still around, as well as a resurgence of such ideas in other forms. Are you aware of what happened during the Jim Crow years, are you aware of the number of black men and women lynched during that time. You might want to look into:

https://eji.org/projects/community-remembrance-project/

speaking of history lessons, yes, in the 60's and during the civil rights movement there were in fact government efforts to keep black people oppressed. These efforts include LBJ and Nixon and did indeed set up programs that to this day have impact on the oppression of the black community. I've never claimed otherwise.

But right now, it is the more liberal elements of our government that are giving real recognition to these problems, which tends to mean Democrats. Not that conservative ideas don't need to be considered, especially wrt 'teaching a man to fish' as opposed to 'giving a man a fish' if you are aware of the saying. Conservatives tend to be more of the 'teach a man to fish' persuasion, but they also harbor some of the most racist elements found in our society. That is why one can never just take one political side or the other. Politics is about power. Politics will not solve this problem, but right now one can't talk about much of any problem without it being recast into political terms with battle lines drawn and compassion and reason tossed in favor of conflict and shallow thinking.