Bunch of scruffy trouble causing b***ds they don’t give a toss about George Floyd.
Oh yeah. Like you'd know.
Removing statues is it right or wrong
- Thread starter Jedi boro
- Start date
Oh yeah. Like you'd know.
Linny
Well-known member
Jesus Christ. You’re clutching at straws there aren’t you
It’s stupid points like that that dilute the real issues being raised by these protests.
Maybe you are just trying to show how clever you are by referencing this piece of trivia with an ambiguous question.
Either way, give it a rest.
Randy
Well-known member
Ah, thankyou for the heads up and the education mate.
Appreciated.
FartingGnome
Well-known member
Does that apply to the statue of the late Saddam Hussein?
ThePrisoner
Well-known member
Surely this can only be a good thing. Nobody was hurt except maybe a few fish.
Everyone in Bristol knew who this person was but most others did not but they may now query why a statue to commemmorate his 'philanthropy', funded by mass murder, was still standing in 2020. Education and lnowledge is never a bad thing.
Everyone in Bristol knew who this person was but most others did not but they may now query why a statue to commemmorate his 'philanthropy', funded by mass murder, was still standing in 2020. Education and lnowledge is never a bad thing.
Skirmish
Well-known member
If the Iraqis want it then why not
Randy
Well-known member
It's educated me certainly. In the space of a few hours.
What it has got me questioning though is differences which I need help with. The statue of the slave trader I now realize the bad that comes with it. But what about places built by slaves? Should they not be treated the same? I'm not even ignorant by the way just confused.
ThePrisoner
Well-known member
The saving grace of this is that a statue can be replaced. So the city council can allocate funds for it. Or put a one off £10 on council tax for it. Or failing that maybe private citizens in favour of its restoration could crowd fund it. Good luck with that.
Well, the city of Bristol is built upon slavery, but also, it was an important sea port. People in Bristol are aware of the role slavery played in making their city a good place to live. They aren't going to tear down the fabulous terraces of Clifton village, but that statue was a potent symbol. What happened was a cathartic moment because it linked Colston with broader oppression of African people. Interestingly, the chief of Police made the decision to allow it to happen.
hopesoboro
Well-known member
Oh, that's alright then.
hopesoboro
Well-known member
Silly Lee had a wee right in the middle of Germany
And when he came back he had a cack and wiped his bum on the Union Jack.
JM14
Well-known member
so should we stick a statue up of Hitler so future generations know what he did?
better ways to show future generations someone’s horrific history than putting up a statue to celebrate them
Corcaigh_the_Cat
Well-known member
It's criminal to keep them up if they're offending people.
Muttley
Well-known member
I believe that the Colston Hall (Bristol Equivalent of Newcastle's City Hall) is due to reopen after refurbishment this year and will no longer bear the name.
From research done by a relative I know that my ancestors ended up in Liverpool (from Scotland) in the 18th Century working as Chandlers and Riggers, no doubt on slave ships. Liverpool had overtaken Bristol as a slave port by 1740. Were my ancestors slavers? No but they almost certainly were employed albeit indirectly in the Slave Trade.
Of course, it is a fact sometimes forgotten that the Slaves that the British (and other European nationalities) "traded" did not appear in the West African ports by chance, they were procured by native slavers who traded them for European manufactured goods. Europeans did not commonly venture into the African interior for fear of disease.
Looking further back into history the Barbary Pirates (modern Morocco) of the 16th to 18th Century raided European coasts (including England) and took captives into slavery for the Ottoman Empire. Slavery of course goes back into antiquity. White people have been victims too, slavers do not deserve commemoration and the best place for that statue is in a briny grave like that afforded to many of his victims who were judged unsaleable or were unfortunate enough to become ill in transit. A monstrous man.
From research done by a relative I know that my ancestors ended up in Liverpool (from Scotland) in the 18th Century working as Chandlers and Riggers, no doubt on slave ships. Liverpool had overtaken Bristol as a slave port by 1740. Were my ancestors slavers? No but they almost certainly were employed albeit indirectly in the Slave Trade.
Of course, it is a fact sometimes forgotten that the Slaves that the British (and other European nationalities) "traded" did not appear in the West African ports by chance, they were procured by native slavers who traded them for European manufactured goods. Europeans did not commonly venture into the African interior for fear of disease.
Looking further back into history the Barbary Pirates (modern Morocco) of the 16th to 18th Century raided European coasts (including England) and took captives into slavery for the Ottoman Empire. Slavery of course goes back into antiquity. White people have been victims too, slavers do not deserve commemoration and the best place for that statue is in a briny grave like that afforded to many of his victims who were judged unsaleable or were unfortunate enough to become ill in transit. A monstrous man.
TheLodger
Well-known member
Toppling of statues have been a huge part of protests right through history starting from the roman empire. Quite often it changes things, even after today and this past week's protests, sadly I still doubt things will change, if things continue then it may, I do hope this continues....
uncle_rico
Well-known member
West African and Arab slave traders were as complicit as Europeans. It’s still going on in some countries!
Many African rulers would sell and swap slaves (prisoners and their own people) for money and weapons with Europeans.
This is the problem, it’s very complex, but please do your own research.
The UK is one of the most tolerant countries in the world, and some of this mindless violence, which has hijacked the real cause, will set us back years. It’s very sad.
Last edited:
HarryVegas
Well-known member
Apologies if this dilutes any of the serious exchanges going on here, but it did make me laugh...
HundredRoom
Well-known member
The slave trade is thriving in the rich middle eastern countries. It is openly practiced with no protection in law for the slaves. The slaves are usually foreign and of a different ethnicity.
Will we ever bring these countries into the 21st century ?
This is what really needs stopping.
Will we ever bring these countries into the 21st century ?
This is what really needs stopping.
Redwurzel
Well-known member
The Colston stature is a clear cut example of celebrating a slave trader. Thus I would have voted to have it removed if I had power to do so. We can safely assume a slave trader would be extremely racist. Providing money for public good does not clean your hands if you were a slave trader to me.
Connecting modern racism and slavery is a bit of a diluted link for me. There is and was a lot of racism in the USA and UK that affected Asian people who were not slaves. Also many criminals of all races were used as slave labour in the UK and USA in 1600s, 1700s and 1800s and even 1900s in the USA, although it usually had a set time limit say 7 years for convicts sent to Australia (went on till 1868). There were large transportation of white slaves to the West Indies from England after the failed Glorious Revolution of 1688, they were people who had supported the Duke of Monmouth and I suspect Bristol Merchants benefited from these shipments direct from Bristol too.
I agree Africans did promote the slave trade as well by selling fellow Africans to the slave traders, but many say this was enhanced by the slave traders providing such a big demand who also needed a big demand in the West Indies and Americas for slaves from plantations.
There were mass shipments of Irish and Scottish people in the 1840s & 1850s by large landowners (often absentee ones in Ireland), around 30% of those shipped from land clearances died on the Coffin ships or in fever hospitals in Canada and USA soon after landing. This was over 40 years after the slave trade was outlawed for UK ships. Some convict ships to Australia had 30% death rates too. So cruel deaths on ships was not unique to Africans transported as slaves. These abuses were about abuses of power by the powerful and wealthy over the poor.
The danger of looking at historical figures like say Churchill who was an imperialist (and probably a racist), was he a product of his age? if he had been born in 1979 instead of 1879 would his beliefs be quite different? How would have felt about recent killings of non white people in the USA? Remember there were no laws about racial discrimination in the UK till 1965, the year Churchill died. The World have changed a lot since 1965.
What particularly surprised me and shocked me was the widespread ownership of slaves in the UK in say the 1830s. I thought slaves were owned by plantation owners, but this was often not true. The slaves were often owned by middle class women in the UK. They effectively rented their slave(s) to a plantation owner for a regular income. They may have never known who they owned and certainly never visited a plantation. Slaves provided a relatively high income, so these middle class people could live off the income without working, which was particularly useful to widows and unmarried women with some wealth. It had been a major issue when emancipation was discussed in Parliament. Compensation from the UK Government was very generous to slave owners when emancipation came. A lot of that money fuelled the growth of the railways.
Of course, we have modern day slavery, in the UK, often women forced into prostitution I hope young people also put their energies into stopping this too.
Connecting modern racism and slavery is a bit of a diluted link for me. There is and was a lot of racism in the USA and UK that affected Asian people who were not slaves. Also many criminals of all races were used as slave labour in the UK and USA in 1600s, 1700s and 1800s and even 1900s in the USA, although it usually had a set time limit say 7 years for convicts sent to Australia (went on till 1868). There were large transportation of white slaves to the West Indies from England after the failed Glorious Revolution of 1688, they were people who had supported the Duke of Monmouth and I suspect Bristol Merchants benefited from these shipments direct from Bristol too.
I agree Africans did promote the slave trade as well by selling fellow Africans to the slave traders, but many say this was enhanced by the slave traders providing such a big demand who also needed a big demand in the West Indies and Americas for slaves from plantations.
There were mass shipments of Irish and Scottish people in the 1840s & 1850s by large landowners (often absentee ones in Ireland), around 30% of those shipped from land clearances died on the Coffin ships or in fever hospitals in Canada and USA soon after landing. This was over 40 years after the slave trade was outlawed for UK ships. Some convict ships to Australia had 30% death rates too. So cruel deaths on ships was not unique to Africans transported as slaves. These abuses were about abuses of power by the powerful and wealthy over the poor.
The danger of looking at historical figures like say Churchill who was an imperialist (and probably a racist), was he a product of his age? if he had been born in 1979 instead of 1879 would his beliefs be quite different? How would have felt about recent killings of non white people in the USA? Remember there were no laws about racial discrimination in the UK till 1965, the year Churchill died. The World have changed a lot since 1965.
What particularly surprised me and shocked me was the widespread ownership of slaves in the UK in say the 1830s. I thought slaves were owned by plantation owners, but this was often not true. The slaves were often owned by middle class women in the UK. They effectively rented their slave(s) to a plantation owner for a regular income. They may have never known who they owned and certainly never visited a plantation. Slaves provided a relatively high income, so these middle class people could live off the income without working, which was particularly useful to widows and unmarried women with some wealth. It had been a major issue when emancipation was discussed in Parliament. Compensation from the UK Government was very generous to slave owners when emancipation came. A lot of that money fuelled the growth of the railways.
Of course, we have modern day slavery, in the UK, often women forced into prostitution I hope young people also put their energies into stopping this too.