Exactly, you don't see statues of Nazi's responsible for the holocaust. That was a major part of German history I'd say. Oh but I can read about the whole horrendous event. All I'm hearing is slave traders= figures of historical significance which need to be on show to everyone to see including descendants of slaves. Savile = nonse; take down statue straight away.
Bloody hell, gotten the wrong end of the stick. I agree. Put it in a museum. That would be brilliant. Can't now though, can we? It's probably in the bloody sea by now. Christ.
Sorry if I misunderstood - actually Bristol have said they are seriously considering picking it up and and putting in the museum so it may well finish up there - not sure if they will want to leave it in the river Only question is do you display it vertically or horizontally ( nicked of twitter who also suggested a damien hurst style water tank)
That's the point you're missing. People have been campaigning for its removal for years and years. But it's fallen on deaf ears. Just take the knee and carry on with your peaceful protest, just be good boys and girls. The fact that it has come to this is because of the lack of action of those in charge.
I'd display it horizontally as vertically suggests an element of "putting it back up" and doesn't sit right
I hope they do put it in a museum. It would have been good if before now Bristol Council could have turned the area into a site of education like I've seen in a few cities around the world. Still, why deface the Abraham Lincoln statue? Lincoln is one of my heroes. I have a bust of him in my house. It suggests to me that things have surpassed their initial intentions.
So your contribution to BLM Along with all.those slaves he traded. Except they were flesh and blood unlike a metal statue.
Totally agree there is no sane justification for that - totally different to the symbolic destruction of the Colston statue
Wasn't Lincoln - while better than his replacement and many of his compatriots - still quite a massive racist by modern standards? His in-laws were slaveowners, he supported compensation for slaveowners, and his stated aim was the preservation of the Union, not freedom for slaves.
What are you talking about? I'm not allowed to call out violence and the symbolic burning of my country's flag on a war memorial? And, more shocking to me, violence towards an animal? Where do we draw the line? Can they literally burn down all of London in the name of BLM? Of course, you've got me, I want to bring back the slave trade.
Would you had rather the slaveownwrs continued their trade or they be bought and the trade ended? The only way the trade would have ended was if the confederacy were defeated. You could make the argument you are making, but he knew what he was doing and he despised slavery. Brave man. And he took a bullet for doing what he did. And you cite, by modern standards. This is a problem, it's so easy to get all high and might in judging by the standards of today. Give it another 100 years and things both you and I do today will be considered appalling I've no doubt. Like eating meat, for example.
I agree and yes racism has to be stopped but what Rahim Stirling has said about the only disease we're fighting at the moment is racism is totally out of order and I think he should apologise to everyone. Saying that makes him no better than the racists
W Whats happening here is that lines are being drawn by the usual ‘these days’ posters who have decided that if you oppose the demonstrations, the violence, the flag burning and the vandalism none of which can be justified then you must also be anti the sentiment of the demonstrations which plainly isn't true, the implication being that you oppose the demonstrations because you must be a racist, hence the references to Tommy Robinson and the dismissive ‘I wonder why’ Unfortunately it’s starting to get tribal - if you’re not in our gang you must be wrong.
If the most important thing is concentrating on a minority of protesters in your posts and never once putting anything that accepts racism is an issue, then unfortunately you will be see as racist. It's not a tribal thing.
Surely you mean why should he say that we have all had 4 months of hell and he says the only disease is racism that is an insult to all those who have died and their families
Be it stood up or laid down, they ought to wrap seaweed around the statue when it goes into a museum. History.
Not arguing with what he did, just that people are complex and it is possible for him to be a racist and free slaves - although by the end he was killed after a speech outlining plans for blacks to get votes. His successor, Andrew Johnson, put things into place that were only overturned in the 60s and 70s - and is seen as one of the worst presidents in history. Surprisingly if you look back, Lincoln was a Republican and Johnson was a Democrat.
I wouldn't dignify a response to him to be honest - he's a proper we want our country back type. I'm surprised he didn't tell Sterling to go back to his own country
He's not taking Covid lightly, BAME members of society have been affected most by it. NHS staff and carers have died, the majority of which belong to BAME communities probably due to inadequate PPE. He's saying in most aspects of life the racist disease exists. Covid is virus which hopefully can be cured via a vaccine. Racism can't be cured via vaccine. Folk are getting extremely sensitive about statues and flags. The union flag like any flag means nothing if the nation's owner is divided and subjects any of its population to unequal practices.