Stop looking at me
Huh. Wonder if they are going to do the same to.... Well 98% of the founding fathers and presidents up to Lincoln. Including but certainly not limited to George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, and Thomas Jefferson. Just curious is all.
I actually dont condone these acts of vandalism personally but thats just me.
(P.S Edit: And before i am crucified by the nerds of fp, yes i am aware that Franklin was President of the Abolitionist Society and, in his later years, condemned slavery. He still owned two slaves throughout most of his life.)
@LaDarkProphet, all Presidents before Obama should be deleted from history and any attempts historical figures made to lift up communities should be forgotten.
@Bad Suggestions, Ima... just uh... ignore this comment ^-^
@LaDarkProphet, I appreciate your opinion and all that downvote my previous comment.
It was written entirely in mockery of the people who actually feel anything like agreeing with that post.
@LaDarkProphet, Not much room for comparison, this dude was a literal slave trader. As in made his living dealing in human lives. Big difference between that and owning a couple slaves in a time period where it was considered standard practice for wealthy landowners. And no before I get those comments I'm not defending slavery, just pointing out the contrast between situations.
@KermitSmash, Yea well the dude also used the money he made from the slave trade to support and endow schools, hospitals, almshouses and churches in Bristol, London and other places in England. It is for that reason why he had a statute in the first place and any number of streets named after him. Some of them actually still exist to this very day.
Not many of the founding fathers can say the same. Most, not all, were selfish with their wealth and basically incited rebellion because they didn't want to pay taxes. Sure, i dont think any of them actively participated in the act of capturing and transporting slaves but a good lot of the southern ones certainly profited from the slave industry all the same.
Hence my first post. How many icons of history do we tear down because they did some bad things despite the fact they where entirely legal at the time? Personally, i dont care if they erect statues or tear them down. Long as they dont try to actually change historical fact idc.
@LaDarkProphet, the whole point of tearing down the statues is so they can push a revisionist version of history as seen through their eyes. If they are allowed to continue they will doom is all to repeat the mistakes of the past because they are quite literally that dumb. Edit: Fixed a noticeable error that upon discovery I simply could not leave.
@LaDarkProphet, yes we should do the same with those people
@LaDarkProphet, someone who smokes is not comperable to cigarette marketing companies basically
@Bad Suggestions, this is hilarious. Your screen name says it all.
@LaDarkProphet, this why you should never judge historical people by current cultural standards.
@Hot Coffee, Normally i totally agree. Unless people are ignoring history fact and or putting someone on a pedestal. Then i think it is ok to simply recite historical fact.
@LaDarkProphet, that’s not the same thing as judging the historical figure by modern sensibilities. The founding fathers of the USA owned slaves. I have no issue with the founding fathers of the USA owning slaves. They’re all dead.
Now, if President Obama owned slaves, I would object and call for his censor and imprisonment. Because he’s alive today and a functioning member of our society.
Hopefully you can see the difference.
@Hot Coffee, No where, in any of my posts, did i suggest otherwise.
@LaDarkProphet, your last reply was open to interpretation. I have encountered people who argue similarly to what you’ve said and the conclusion they draw is X historical figure’s ideas are invalid because they believed/did Y idea/action. It’s fine to discuss how a historical figure falls short of modern standards as long as you understand that 100 years from now people will see what we do as backward and ‘wrong’.
If we demand purity from history then all will fail and we might as well burn everything down.
@Hot Coffee, Uh... No. What i was referring to was how some people put some historical figures up on pedestals while ignoring the whatever evils or wrongs they committed. I am saying you need to acknowledge the good and the bad, while recognizing of course that historical context is key. No where in any of my posts or statements did i even remotely say that a historical figures ideas/actions where invalid or bad based on x or y, unless we ARE discussing how those ideas/beliefs/actions/values hold up today. But otherwise? It is in the past, and to unduly judge them with our modern understanding of the world is a little unfair. Unless, like i said, modern people are trying to put said person on a pedestal. Then they are fair game for that individual discussion. Hope that clears things up.
@Bad Suggestions, only in America where you can be famous after being famous aka being President...
@KermitSmash, omg! he believed slavery happen??! That means he defending it and must like it! Shun him!
@LaDarkProphet, I hear what you’re saying, and I agree, but the majority of people who give lip service to this idea then proceed to only focus on what would be considered a moral failing by modern moral standards. You may be lucky and rarely have encountered this, but in my experience it is nearly ubiquitous.
And while I think it’s valid to look at all actions and beliefs of an individual, I have seen this applied with far great scrutiny, for example,of historical figures in the USA that are traditionally respected, yet someone like Marx, who was staunchly pro-slavery and an open racist typically gets a pass.
@Hot Coffee, Ah. You will find i am not of that school of thought. No one gets a pass and no one is above scrutiny, if the discussion calls for it of course. The prime example being the first few presidents. Yes, they were great men. Of their time period. They built a nation from scratch fighting off the yoke of a superior empire to strike out as a democratic republic. But. Like all humans they had flaws, and where products of their time. Alexander Hamilton wrote a thesis explaining why he believed blacks to be inferior to whites. Does that detract from his many accomplishments? I have no idea and believe there is no right or wrong answer. When it comes to something as fickle and ever evolving as morality its all a grey area and falls solely upon the individual wheather or not ones sins can outweigh ones virtues. If you are trying tk be as objective as possible then you have to take these things by a case by case basis while taking into account things like the time period an education.
@Desiderata, such a statue may not belong in the streets, but it certainly belongs in a museum.
@member berry, nah, belongs in a lake
@Orlandude, It reminds me of when the Taliban destroyed all those relics in transit from a museum.
@Orlandude, @member berry has a excellent point. Do you also support the defacing and destruction done by the Taliban? They where only taken down stuff they deemed immoral afterall. By your logic, was it ok for them to do so? If not, why? Do we explode Mt. Rushmore simply because it has George Washington on it? Who are you to dictate what can and cannot be made into a statue? I am most curious. What about statues of Alexander the Great, Julius Ceasar or Genghis Khan? They killed and enslaved faaaar more people then Edward ever could. Do we tear down their statue's as well? And what about history books? Do we destroy those as well because they might be offensive? Just curious ^-^
@LaDarkProphet, ok, let's just put up statues of Hitler at every corner then, why the hell, not sounds cheerful doesn't it. Afterall it's history
@Orlandude, Nice non sequitur there. Its cute really. You answered a very simple question with another question banking on my emotional reaction. It would be clever if you where arguing with a child maybe. But that is not the case ^-^
Hitler killed roughly about a million people give or take. The entirety of ww2 saw the life of about 85 mil people snuffed out. Thats including every country involved on both sides. Genghis Khan alone saw to the death of roughly 40 million people. By himself, under his orders, he killed nearly half the number of people killed in a actual modern global conflict. Yet he has statues all over the world. Your self righteous indignation and sheer arrogance will not allow you to think clearly or rationally. Statues are very much like words. They hold absolutely no meaning unless someone gives them meaning. If people elected to erect statues of Hitler on every street corner who would i, a simple man, be to dictate what the masses can or cannot do? (TBC)
@Orlandude, Now i might not agree with them. I might even vote against it and peacefully protest the statues. Know what i wont do? Vandalize and commit crimes against the will of the people because of my own selfish morals. And by the way? There are statues of Hitler in museums. As are his paintings, his written works and his recordings. You can even purchase copies of his book Mein Kampf right now if you were so inclined. Now stop being a child and answer my question. Do you, or do you not, support the Talibans destruction of statues they deemed immoral or offensive?
@LaDarkProphet, history must not be erased, it must be preserved in its truest form so any who see it in the future can make up their own minds about events in the past. Painting over it and blanking out the bad bits is just lying.
If you bother to remember the good then remember the bad too.
This is one of those posts that my name is being ironic, I actually feel this way.
The Witch’s Test.
I'm excited to see the Google Street View using the new Google Sub
There’s no man or woman without sin. It’s easy to point out someone else’s imperfections, but no one wants to work on their own.
cool, now they just need to burn down the city, since that guy basically funded its construction with money he got from trading with slaves and other wares
@Deadkizz, yeah it's pretty hypocritical to hide the guy because parts of his life was unethical (even tho almost all humans were doing it literally the entirety of human history all over the world) but still reap the rewards from it. I just think none of it shoulduve of happend. You don't scrap art just because the guy who made it was a bastard. The art is separate.
@RomeoStealYoGurl, Yeah, in my opinion defacing a statue to make a statement is ok, that can be repaired.
But destroying a part of local history and a piece of art is not ok.
@Deadkizz, I think people wouldn't mind if there was peaceful protest and a vote to simply remove the statue and putting it into a museum would've been the better way.
@Deadkizz, "Well he gave a lot of money to build houses for white people, we should celebrate him for ever, sold black people? Eh who cares"
@Orlandude, A lot of cities on the shores of UK were apperently founded and or expanded by slave traders.
Should this be celebrated? Absolutly not.
Should we destroy anything that reminds of that history? Also no
Its not about him beeing a slave trader, its about him being part of history. If we want to get rid of everything bad that happened by todays standards, we gotta tear down the pyramids, mayan temples, mount rushmore, lincoln memorial, the entire middle east where there are still slaves to this day, every china sweatshop having company and so on.
History HAS to be viewed objectivly and destroying this statue is in my opinion not much better than when ISIS destroyed statues from the 9th century in Iraq.
@Deadkizz, Statues aren't how we learn history. Statues are made to celebrate the life of the person, and we shouldn't be celebrating that. Nothing in history should be hidden but it can be learned from Museums and History books, you do not need statues for that. The idea of also tearing down things that were build by slaves is dumb, as it pretty much makes their suffering useless (although the pyramids were not in fact build by slaves).
You do not need celebratory monuments to teach history, they should be to celebrate those that brought out world to be better, and slave owners and Confederate generals did not do that.
@Orlandude, I think you are not 100% correct.
If I go sightseeing in a city and I see a statue I can read the sign that informs me of the history of that place.
Even then, if the people of bristol dont want the statue any longer, it should have been put to a democratic vote and be placed in a museum.
And many bad people did good things, many good people did bad things.
Hitler build the german autobahn that we use to this day, Lincoln was a piece of sh!t towards native americans.
That doesnt mean that the lincoln memorial celebrates the treatment of indiginous tribes by him, but still it is a historical fact that should be taught.
@Orlandude,Statues aren’t built to celebrate peoples’ sins, but to celebrate the qualities that made people admire them. This is why people push back against their removal. There’s something of value, even if he did something awful. But stupid people reduce the issue to “he was a bad person”. I don’t like this stupid sense of righteousness from people. There’s not one single person who is perfect, including you. We are not better than him, we were born in a time where society is the safest and slavery is illegal. So we get to cast stones without ever facing the hardships previous generations faced, and also get to enjoy the fruits of slavery while having the opportunity to say we are against it.
You get a cookie. Wonder where they will be when actual people are being murdered and hurt and abused. The “bystander” effect I bet. Ahh. But a defenseless statue will show their true strength.
@MrTrivia, they’ll be filming and not much else.
My home city 👍
Ok people lets do the math to find out just how dumb these protests are. There are over 800,000 police officers in the u.s. according to statistica 1004 people were killed by police. Assuming that each of these cops interacts with only 10 people a year and that all 1004 of these deaths were completely unjustified murders ( yes i know cops probably interact with atleast like a thousand people a year, and probably only like 3 of those shootings were unjustified at the most but give them their arguments at their strongest) that means that out of 8 million interactions from the police a year only 1004 of them ended in a brutal slaying. Percentage wise that means these protests are over 0.001255 percent of all police interactions. And thats being rediculously generous.
@CocoasBro, it's crazy seeing all these people fall for this absolute garbage lie that dems are pushing. Lol at the Trust fund anarchists.
I like how you got down voted twice for just doing math. Crazy.
@Noctobo, not much better when you calculate for just arrests. Only gets rid of like 1 zero.
@PottedPlant, they dont like their bubble burst.
@CocoasBro, Do what ever dumb math you want, that number should be 0
@Orlandude, are you serious man are you really that ideological.
@CocoasBro, not wanting people to die from police hands is idiological? Didn't know wanting people to live was a radical idea.
@Orlandude, no do be like that. You know thats a dishonest, and unreasonable argument. People are gonna die from police. No matter how you set it up, no matter what safegaurds you put into place. Evil people exist, human people exist a very very tiny minority will die. But you know whats gonna kill more people? Abolishing the fvcking police! Its like saying one doctor was evil so abolish doctors its stupid and insane.
@CocoasBro, defunding the police doesn't mean just making them not exist, it means proportionally using funds to create programs that are guaranteed to lower crime more than the police. such as Police responding to calls that have to do with mental illnesses, it shouldn't be their job, someone else should be the ones to deal with that, not the police as unfortunately most of them are I'll prepared to attend to such calls.
I absolutely urge you to watch the last episode of the show Last Week Tonight, it was the one for last Sunday, June 7th. It explains exactly why people are angry, why it is justified and how defunding the police can work. It is an excellent explanation that will help anyone understand way more than a random comment on a funny picture app.
if you are in America I believe the most important part of the episodes are posted on YouTube, and this is a very important episode.
@Orlandude, i highly doubt its going to end up like you believe. The people who want this sh!t are massive racists. Nothing good comes from that. It wont end up like your imagining it.
@CocoasBro, massive racists? You mean the people literally in the streets right now fighting against racism?
@Orlandude, these people believe being colorblind is racist. They litterally seek to pass laws that benefit them for the color of their skin. 10 seconds actrually listening to them and you would have figured that out.
@CocoasBro, I mean, I haven't heard that from anyone, and if you're referring to the democrats in power, they're terrible too.
@Orlandude, have.... have you not heard of intersectionality? Like you gotta be honest here no joshing me.
Throwing things in the harbor...I wonder where they got that idea
*cries freedom tears*
"Threw it in"? I'm sorry but it's already been established that it tripped and fell into the water!
I’m curious if they had a bunch of black movements in England before this.