Jump to content

Racism Part two


Demitri_C

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, bickster said:

Serious Question: Do you imagine that it was a democratic decision to put a statue of Colston up in the first place?

That is rarely how it works

I don't know about back in the day of the Colston statue , though Wiki  suggests his statue was proposed by a charity and funds raised via a public appeal    ... 

But now its kinda exactly how it works , there are planning applications and public consultations for statues  ..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never saw BLM grinding to a halt on the rocks of contravening local planning procedures, but that’s what happens when you don’t get professional advice at an early stage.

Any of you guys thinking of setting up some sort of popular uprising, PM me for a fee quote.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, bickster said:

 

Can I guess it was a charity that bore his name? Doubt the bookies would take my money tbh

You'd technically lose your money. It was proposed by The Anchor Society.

(The Anchor Society, founded in 1769 at a dinner held in honour of Edward Colston)

A quick look at their website though suggests they are a thoroughly decent local charity doing a lot of good, irrespective of the misdeeds of their inspiration. 

Edited by ml1dch
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

Tearing down a statue erected to commemorate the BLM movement that took down the original statue is not a good look. It will just show them up to be the massive racists that they are.

Some people will indeed view the new  statue as the ideal monument to the symbolic act of toppling the statue of a slave trader  , but  (caveat I've not followed the BLM debate that closely ) weren't there some questionable objectives with the BLM movement that are not really something a lot of  people would feel comfortable commemorating  ?  So , some of those people, who aren't all gammons and racists ,who were probably ambivalent are now potentially going to be a bit irked by it ? Jen Reid might just be your run-of-the-mill activist  and not a diehard Marxist :)  ,  but I'm sure someone  is currently trawling through her Internet history looking for dirt.

On the general debate , I think it is  a mistake to automatically adopted this default position that everyone objecting to the statue is a gammon or a racist  ... My view has been that the existing Colston statue was probably right to come down  , but  the way they toppled it was wrong (Its well documented I'm not a fan of mob rule taking the law into their own hands  ). The artists stunt today is quite provocative and should spark some more debate and awareness, which is a good thing,  but ultimately the statue has to come down (correctly and not carried out by a baying mob )  .... or they could  go through the process of having it approved like any other statue would be . The people of Bristol were promised a consultation of what should go on the plinth ,who knows, they might be proud of the statue and want it to stay in place.  That opinion is neither gammon , nor racist  , but in effect the conversation is already essentially fingers in the ear and la la la I can’t hear you ..quite sad really , I think its important discussions should be had .

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Never saw BLM grinding to a halt on the rocks of contravening local planning procedures, but that’s what happens when you don’t get professional advice at an early stage.

Any of you guys thinking of setting up some sort of popular uprising, PM me for a fee quote.

 

 I'm assuming the people who spent hours analysing the planning permission on Dominic Cummings parents house are  probably having wet dreams about  investigating every planning application law this statue  has broken   :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, tonyh29 said:

 I'm assuming the people who spent hours analysing the planning permission on Dominic Cummings parents house are  probably having wet dreams about  investigating every planning application law this statue  has broken   :)

 

That was a bit after I’d lost interest, so I’m sketchy on it, the bit where we found out he came from a family of entitled rich liars and cheats out to scam the system for personal gain. Who knew! Wasn’t it the additional house next to theirs that was the issue? The one they were keeping secret so not paying rates on? Having not [aid for planning, meaning they didn’t pay for building regs, meaning if it was insured, it was insured fraudulently. Or they had people sleeping in a property with no fire insurance.

Bloody rules and regulations. You can see why they shouldn’t apply to the ruling classes.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

Some people will indeed view the new  statue as the ideal monument to the symbolic act of toppling the statue of a slave trader  , but  (caveat I've not followed the BLM debate that closely ) weren't there some questionable objectives with the BLM movement that are not really something a lot of  people would feel comfortable commemorating  ?  So , some of those people, who aren't all gammons and racists ,who were probably ambivalent are now potentially going to be a bit irked by it ? Jen Reid might just be your run-of-the-mill activist  and not a diehard Marxist ,  but I'm sure someone  is currently trawling through her Internet history looking for dirt.

On the general debate , I think it is  a mistake to automatically adopted this default position that everyone objecting to the statue is a gammon or a racist  ... My view has been that the existing Colston statue was probably right to come down  , but  the way they toppled it was wrong (Its well documented I'm not a fan of mob rule taking the law into their own hands  ). The artists stunt today is quite provocative and should spark some more debate and awareness, which is a good thing,  but ultimately the statue has to come down (correctly and not carried out by a baying mob )  .... or they could  go through the process of having it approved like any other statue would be . The people of Bristol were promised a consultation of what should go on the plinth ,who knows, they might be proud of the statue and want it to stay in place.  That opinion is neither gammon , nor racist  , but in effect the conversation is already essentially fingers in the ear and la la la I can’t hear you ..quite sad really , I think its important discussions should be had .

Pretty sure there hasn't been a movement in history where people haven't tried to discredit it. That's the same thing here with BLM. At its most basic, and the reason people have been protesting, is in protest at racial inequality, against racism, and, obviously, the horrendous way black people keep getting killed by police in America. It's all of that though.

People haven't been protesting in order to overthrow capitalism (although, we should note capitalism is an ever-evolving thing, and a lot of what we see these days is exploitative and bullshit, and deserves a critical eye). But there are a lot of people who would like to make people with only half an eye on the situation think that actually BLM is anti-white (bullshit) and about communism (also bullshit—although there are people everywhere with the view that our economic system caters for and benefits a select few, and who would argue with that? Sure, capitalism generates wealth too, but there are flip sides to this. We should be able to discuss everything, all of it openly without people crying about Marxist this and that. I kept this in the brackets because, as I say, contrary to some people's desires, the issues raised by BLM are about racism.)

I'm as open-minded about this as can be. The BLM statue in Bristol is a stunt it seems? I kind of think it's way too provocative and a bit of a dickish thing to do. Of course there should be a different statue in Bristol—a statue that marks something specific to Bristol, one that doesn't depict a slave trader like he's some kind of thing to be lauded. There are a lot of options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I seem to recall that the public subscription for the Colston statue failed to raise sufficient funds, and that people in the city were ambivalent about it, even in a time when statues were being raised across the country by public subscription, so I think the idea its installation was in any way 'democratic' is ludicrous.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

Some people will indeed view the new  statue as the ideal monument to the symbolic act of toppling the statue of a slave trader  , but  (caveat I've not followed the BLM debate that closely ) weren't there some questionable objectives with the BLM movement that are not really something a lot of  people would feel comfortable commemorating  ?  So , some of those people, who aren't all gammons and racists ,who were probably ambivalent are now potentially going to be a bit irked by it ? Jen Reid might just be your run-of-the-mill activist  and not a diehard Marxist :)  ,  but I'm sure someone  is currently trawling through her Internet history looking for dirt.

On the general debate , I think it is  a mistake to automatically adopted this default position that everyone objecting to the statue is a gammon or a racist  ... My view has been that the existing Colston statue was probably right to come down  , but  the way they toppled it was wrong (Its well documented I'm not a fan of mob rule taking the law into their own hands  ). The artists stunt today is quite provocative and should spark some more debate and awareness, which is a good thing,  but ultimately the statue has to come down (correctly and not carried out by a baying mob )  .... or they could  go through the process of having it approved like any other statue would be . The people of Bristol were promised a consultation of what should go on the plinth ,who knows, they might be proud of the statue and want it to stay in place.  That opinion is neither gammon , nor racist  , but in effect the conversation is already essentially fingers in the ear and la la la I can’t hear you ..quite sad really , I think its important discussions should be had .

Nobody has said that anybody who objects to the statue is racist or a gammon.

Your last line isn't true. you've just made that up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

Some people will indeed view the new  statue as the ideal monument to the symbolic act of toppling the statue of a slave trader  , but  (caveat I've not followed the BLM debate that closely ) weren't there some questionable objectives with the BLM movement that are not really something a lot of  people would feel comfortable commemorating  ?  So , some of those people, who aren't all gammons and racists ,who were probably ambivalent are now potentially going to be a bit irked by it ? Jen Reid might just be your run-of-the-mill activist  and not a diehard Marxist :)  ,  but I'm sure someone  is currently trawling through her Internet history looking for dirt.

On the general debate , I think it is  a mistake to automatically adopted this default position that everyone objecting to the statue is a gammon or a racist  ... My view has been that the existing Colston statue was probably right to come down  , but  the way they toppled it was wrong (Its well documented I'm not a fan of mob rule taking the law into their own hands  ). The artists stunt today is quite provocative and should spark some more debate and awareness, which is a good thing,  but ultimately the statue has to come down (correctly and not carried out by a baying mob )  .... or they could  go through the process of having it approved like any other statue would be . The people of Bristol were promised a consultation of what should go on the plinth ,who knows, they might be proud of the statue and want it to stay in place.  That opinion is neither gammon , nor racist  , but in effect the conversation is already essentially fingers in the ear and la la la I can’t hear you ..quite sad really , I think its important discussions should be had .

You appear to be making the mistake of considering the statue as intended to be permanent, it clearly wasn't. The statue is just another part of a protest, not designed for permanence. the artist himself even said as much

The statue itself, keeps the debate moving

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, bickster said:

You appear to be making the mistake of considering the statue as intended to be permanent, it clearly wasn't. The statue is just another part of a protest, not designed for permanence. the artist himself even said as much

The statue itself, keeps the debate moving

Although I reckon that when a shortlist is established for what should go there permanently,  it's possibly jumped to the head of the queue. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ml1dch said:

Although I reckon that when a shortlist is established for what should go there permanently,  it's possibly jumped to the head of the queue. 

I think given the current politics of the area, you are correct

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 minute ago, bickster said:

You appear to be making the mistake of considering the statue as intended to be permanent, it clearly wasn't. The statue is just another part of a protest, not designed for permanence. the artist himself even said as much

The statue itself, keeps the debate moving

you appear to be making the mistake of not considering what I know  and also not following the conversation

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

Oh, I can help bring you up to speed here.

There are two sides, the one side, we’ll call them the good guys, they believe black lives matter.

The other side, we’ll call them retards, gammons and racists, they believe we shouldn’t be hasty and it’s important to consider cultural change and examine the small print and worry about the impact on others and how the message could be accidentally misconstrued and we must also think of the white people and we mustn’t all end up wearing hijabs and Washington redskins is just a name and we never thought the robinsons golly was racist and my best friend is black and he says its a trap and when i went to Nigeria they were rude to me so its possible some black people are horrible and that guy that was strangled by the police well he already had a criminal record and I heard they’re communists and anyway if they don’t like it here they can go back home, yeah but, yeah but, warrabout...

 

so all the sky sports presenters who decided to stop wearing BLM badges are racist gammon retards ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

Nobody has said that anybody who objects to the statue is racist or a gammon.

Your last line isn't true. you've just made that up.

remember the other week when in your eagerness to jump on one of my posts you didn't actually  read it    .... might be a good start point , just saying

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â