Churchill statue defaced, Edward Calston statue pulled down

[Bt1 5,213]

3 hours ago, Buddy said:

If we're going to give credit to any Brit for that, it should be hunty Alan Turing for creating computation machines that cracked the Enigma  Code. Not only that, he is largely attributed to kickstarting The Computer Age, so hihi.

Despite this, he was chemically castrated under the Churchill administration for his homosexuality and committed suicide as a result. So yeah, sorry to beef with you as always, but **** Winston Churchill. Wish I was there to remove his statue's balls! x

And? Churchill did that? 

I think Alan Turning was condemned when the actual queen ruled. She is also guilty?

Churchill didnt win the war by himself. No one can do that. He was a very important factor. There was always the option of peace with Germany, which he opposed. 

[The Child 18,997]

14 hours ago, Rio said:

Sorry but I don’t know much about Churchill’s views on racism, but he led us through a world war. I won’t stand for his statue to be thrown in the Thames. Colston was deserved, he was a known slave treader. But Churchill, really? If that happened, the rest of the country would not take this movement seriously and it will 100% backfire and cause more racism. London protesters need to be careful. I don’t think tearing down Churchill will help.

 

 

13 hours ago, StrawberryBlond said:

This isn't even the worst thing that happened. Police officers had missiles thrown at them and their horses. A man is caught on camera purposefully rolling a bike into a horse, causing it to bolt through the crowds, causing the female officer to fall off, resulting in her having a broken collarbone, collapsed lung and shattered ribs. Unlike in America, these cops weren't attacking protesters, they were just standing around, observing, keeping the peace, as officer should do at protests. They were attacked while just doing their jobs as they are paid to do so. And my heart goes out to the poor horses as former horse rider myself, this is animal abuse. The fact this topic focuses on statues being defaced over that stuff and this is what we're more outraged about tells you a lot.

But no matter, defacing statues of historic racist figures, while understandable, will not erase history. Don't get me wrong, we shouldn't honour bad people, however, the mere sight of a statue isn't actually going to lead to your discrimination, only real life events can do that. I don't even notice statues. However, if we want to pull them down, it should be done so under controlled conditions by professionals, not protestors.

Absolutely not every white person thinks this. People in history are just that to me - people from the past. Plenty of bad stuff has come out about people we thought were good, so I just take historical information as it is, I don't glorify anyone. I actually didn't learn all that much about Churchill, so I can't speak much on his practices but I don't hold up anyone from history to a high degree. I just find out the facts about them and that's that. It's difficult to glorify someone who didn't live in my time. You really can't make a broad generalisation like that. A lot of young people now especially don't know this type of history or care.

[gag 22,449]

5 hours ago, elijahfan said:

Right, I knew this would probably be an unpopular opinion... If he indeed ever represented a symbol of oppression to any minority, there definitely needs to be a conversation about it. Like, I was personally unaware of all this, or of how severe this was. Unfortunately, all our modern societies are built on systems of oppression, and colonization, and evangelization... Then, should we bring down all the statues and burn all the paintings? Idk, maybe it's a good thing to actually be reminded of what a shitty place we come from, in order to learn from it and not repeat those mistakes. Maybe we need to be reminded and be taught that Churchill was a war criminal. Maybe we need to remember who all those bastards were in order to learn from past mistakes. I'm not sure erasing their trace is the best approach.

Is this event not teaching people? You can see from this very thread, and your own comment, that people were unaware of how brutal Churchill's oppression against Indian people was. Defacing the statue has effectively prompted more conversations about history than the 60 years that the statue has been up.

[RichAssPiss 5,032]

14 hours ago, Cookies said:

erasing history won't erase racism.

A statue is not the knowledge of history. For that we have museums and books, essays and plays, poems and songs. We know history. A statue is a tribute to honor someone. Imagine if Germany had a statue of Hitler or if people still hung Nazi flags. That doesn't happen because you don't pay tribute to past evils. You keep them alive in forums where they are able to be contextualized and critiqued, not celebrated. Did we forget Nazi Germany because there were no statues? Has that history been erased? No. There are many ways to appropriately document history and honor victims. You don't tribute their oppressors. 

[Bt1 5,213]

18 minutes ago, RichAssPiss said:

A statue is not the knowledge of history. For that we have museums and books, essays and plays, poems and songs. We know history. A statue is a tribute to honor someone. Imagine if Germany had a statue of Hitler or if people still hung Nazi flags. That doesn't happen because you don't pay tribute to past evils. You keep them alive in forums where they are able to be contextualized and critiqued, not celebrated. Did we forget Nazi Germany because there were no statues? Has that history been erased? No. There are many ways to appropriately document history and honor victims. You don't tribute their oppressors. 

Here people defaced the statue of the person who helped defeat Hitler. That's the problem here. 

[RichAssPiss 5,032]

1 minute ago, Florin said:

Here people defaced the statue of the person who helped defeat Hitler. That's the problem here. 

The comment I responded to accused those who move to strike down statues of erasing history. And implied there was no connection between removing statues and addressing systemic racism. I am disagreeing with that particular point, which your comment doesn't account for. So, I am unsure if you are opposed to removing statues of slave traders like Colston or just particularly want to defend Churchill.

I am not really interested in debating the worth of each individual historical figure in this context.  But, in general, I will add that we must be realistic and accurate in our representations of history. Part of addressing systemic racism involves acknowledging the racism of so many who have been heralded as heroes in white European nations and their former colonies. For example, in the U.S. many have replaced Columbus Day with Indigenous Peoples' Day. Our racist systems don't come from nowhere. And a public tribute made to a racist does little to reassure BIPOC that we meaningfully want to atone for the sins of our past.

 

[Biggest Fan 988]

15 hours ago, M Monstre said:

So we should just erect a statue of Adolf Hitler as big as the Statue of Liberty, right?  

After all, if removing statues won't erase racism, adding more statues of figures that represent hate and oppression won't add more racism, right?

Thank you so much for your response

[Biggest Fan 988]

I always thought he as a good guy

even some famous celebrities praised him 😶

which I thought would be good, and now this only makes me feel sad the reason being because my favorite “famous celebrity” adores this guy

There has been several interview where he addresses this GUY 😔

idk if I should be following that “celebrity” and their ideas

[xoxo Craig 55,649]

3 hours ago, Florin said:

And? Churchill did that? 

I think Alan Turning was condemned when the actual queen ruled. She is also guilty?

Churchill didnt win the war by himself. No one can do that. He was a very important factor. There was always the option of peace with Germany, which he opposed. 

There wasn't a Queen during those times. QEII was made Queen in 1952, which after the war. 

If we wanted to learn about Churchill's role in WW2, we can easily put it in or write about it in history books. We don't need a statue for that. Statues only glorify him, which is wrong because he was very much a war criminal. 

[Bt1 5,213]

20 minutes ago, xoxo Craig said:

There wasn't a Queen during those times. QEII was made Queen in 1952, which after the war. 

If we wanted to learn about Churchill's role in WW2, we can easily put it in or write about it in history books. We don't need a statue for that. Statues only glorify him, which is wrong because he was very much a war criminal. 

Well. You are wrong. Alan Turning was convicted after the actual queen started her reign.

Churchill wasnt a war criminal and he wasnt more racist that the common brits at the time. Only if you cherry pick certain statements and events and judge them without context, you can say something like this. 

[LetsGetHigh2 88]

Good riddance. About time we smoked em all.

[xoxo Craig 55,649]

6 minutes ago, Florin said:

Well. You are wrong. Alan Turning was convicted after the actual queen started her reign.

Churchill wasnt a war criminal and he wasnt more racist that the common brits at the time. Only if you cherry pick certain statements and events and judge them without context, you can say something like this. 

Well. You are wrong. Churchill committed vile acts of racism and killed about as much people as Hitler did. Stop overlooking that fact because "he won the war". 

[Bt1 5,213]

4 minutes ago, xoxo Craig said:

Well. You are wrong. Churchill committed vile acts of racism and killed about as much people as Hitler did. Stop overlooking that fact because "he won the war". 

Receipts? 

[Karl 3,575]

There's a reason every racist gammon has him as their profile picture on Facebook. Just sayin'

[xoxo Craig 55,649]

6 minutes ago, Florin said:

Receipts? 

Posted them in this thread earlier, and also in the OP. Check the thread again, and also do your own research