Winston Churchill

amolbhatia50k said:
Or the sensible. I'm not a believer, but I respect the right of others to be.
Click to expand...

As an atheist I find your defence of the bigoted institutions who burned thousands of people to death for not believing in their nonsense after death fantasy deeply offensive.

Imagine what it must be like to walk past, not a statue on a street but massive buildings topped by the very symbols of oppression at the center of every town and village paid for by the unjust tithing of the the poor, mercilessly extracted by force of arms and harnessed by tyrants to subdue the masses.

Lets be consistent I say, take down your buildings celebrating bigots and murderers and cleanse the history of oppression once and for all.
 
nickm said:
Because he symbolises Britain standing alone against one of history's greatest evils and if you haven't noticed, a lot of British people tend to get pretty sentimental about that since we never fecking shut up about the war.
Click to expand...

Bit of a side note but if we're talking about the dark side of the British empire being addressed more in schools then maybe the bubble of myth-making around WW2 could also do with being punctured.
 
Posh Red said:
I keep reading stuff along the lines of ‘the attention/media is being taken away from the real message of BLM‘, yet whenever I turn on the news they are talking about racism and how it can be tackled etc. Is this actually a thing or do people just like saying it?
Click to expand...
berbatrick said:
this mob has done a better job educating the public at large about the man depicted in the statue, than the monument itself. says something about the historical/educational value of just having statues.
Click to expand...
Both true. These statues are nothing more than a symbolic battleground in a shift in political culture and historical awareness. Everybody understands this is the core issue (which is why the row is so fierce), and it doesn't hurt the message at all. Quite the opposite.
 
TheReligion said:
Yeah the comparisons are barmy to say the least.

This thread just goes around in circles. As another poster pointed out earlier I very much doubt the statue will be taken down. What will happen is it will remain covered for a while, the lockdown will be lifted, and gradually people will return to normal life. Off the back of that the violent element of there far left and far right "protests" will lose interest and latch on to something else. In doing so the rest of the mature population can continue to push and work towards meaningful, lasting positive change. A great start would be reviewing the educational curriculum.
Click to expand...
Good post but what will make anyone change the National Curriculum?
 
oates said:
Good post but what will make anyone change the National Curriculum?
Click to expand...

Perhaps a petition? Get some influential people to speak out about it? In fairness now is a perfect time to go down this route when you consider much of the population have been home schooling. This would have the most long lasting impact on our future generations rather than the neanderthal fighting and vandalism both sides have displayed in parts over the past week. That just breeds further division in my opinion without any meaningful purpose.
 
I think the statue should be in a war museum for historical context, not in a public place. I think it's a bit much to ask people not be be offended by his statue displayed in central London while still being subjected to racism and xenophobia on a regular basis. It's fine if people are grateful for what he did during WW2 and can separate that from his other actions but that's easier to do as a white British person.
 
TheReligion said:
Perhaps a petition? Get some influential people to speak out about it? In fairness now is a perfect time to go down this route when you consider much of the population have been home schooling. This would have the most long lasting impact on our future generations rather than the neanderthal fighting and vandalism both sides have displayed in parts over the past week. That just breeds further division in my opinion without any meaningful purpose.
Click to expand...

This has been on the agenda for years. Its also part of the BLM agenda too. Plenty of petitions have been signed, plenty of influential people have spoken about it.

Hopefully something is done this time.
 
Sweet Square said:
The fact a decent number on here are desperately attempting to justify keeping a statue up for this guy really should be an argument for getting rid of it. No adult should have this level of attachment to an inanimate fecking object!
Click to expand...
Goes both ways that if you want to be clever.
No adult should have this level of attachment to the removal of inanimate fecking objects
 
Zlatan 7 said:
Goes both ways that if you want to be clever.
No adult should have this level of attachment to the removal of inanimate fecking objects
Click to expand...

When the inanimate object is a celebration of a bygone era which is no longer acceptable in modern society, I think it’s probably fair?
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
As an atheist I find your defence of the bigoted institutions who burned thousands of people to death for not believing in their nonsense after death fantasy deeply offensive.

Imagine what it must be like to walk past, not a statue on a street but massive buildings topped by the very symbols of oppression at the center of every town and village paid for by the unjust tithing of the the poor, mercilessly extracted by force of arms and harnessed by tyrants to subdue the masses.

Lets be consistent I say, take down your buildings celebrating bigots and murderers and cleanse the history of oppression once and for all.
Click to expand...
You seem to get offended very easily.

Go and ransack all churches /mosques/temples then I suppose because of actions of other Christians/Muslims/Hindus. Would make a whole lot of sense and you'd totally end up not getting in trouble.

You can't cleanse history of anything. What you can do is change the present. And while taking down a few symbols of hatred shouldn't be standing aloft, I don't think it's part of a genuine solution.
 
People: Slavery was centuries ago, get over it!

Also same people: History is important, leave our celebratory statues of racists, slavers and warmongers alone.
 
fergies coat said:
You mean like church's who condemn homosexuality?
Click to expand...

I have said I’d happily see the dismantling of organised religion across the world and replaced with places for those who believe to gather where there isn’t the connection to the systemic oppression of millions throughout history.
 
That'sHernandez said:
I have said I’d happily see the dismantling of organised religion across the world and replaced with places for those who believe to gather where there isn’t the connection to the systemic oppression of millions throughout history.
Click to expand...
The union flag could be seen as a racist symbol. Should we change that aswell? You would be literally getting rid of every monument in Britain from over 100 years ago its madness.

Every country has a past good and bad. Its only been the last 50 years or so, that the world has been a bit more stable.
 
Dan_F said:
The news is being led by the media. They have decided the topic is now Churchill’s statue, off the back of Colston, which are two completely unrelated things. They know fully that it’s an easy way to discredit the movement, as Churchill is so loved.

I’m not sure who you’re referring too? The couple of people at the protests last week who I mentioned?
Click to expand...

Of course, the people doing these things know the media drives it. They're not interested in the BLM movement, it's just another cause to pin their name to. They are the Antifa/Momentum types who just want to cause trouble however they can, and they know attacking things at the heart of British culture is the easiest way to do that. They're at every protest trying to do the same thing and every time the original aims get forgotten as everybody focuses on these small groups of idiots trying to stir things up.


The people I'm referring to = in the videos of the statues being vandalised and the people starting violence at the protests, they are almost always white middle class millennials. Hardly the oppressed minorities.
 
fergies coat said:
The union flag could be seen as a racist symbol. Should we change that aswell? You would be literally getting rid of every monument in Britain from over 100 years ago its madness.

Every country has a past good and bad. Its only been the last 50 years or so, that the world has been a bit more stable.
Click to expand...

I’d agree that the union flag and flag of st. George can be seen as racist symbols. That’s because racist nationalists hijack them, not because they are intrinsically racist.
 
Cassidy said:
What? Alone? When?
Click to expand...

Until the US were dragged in because of Pearl Harbour And the soviet union were dragged in because hitler betrayed their alliance and invaded them. Britain were the only ones to do the right thing and declare war on Nazi Germany once their aggressive plans became apparent and manifest.
 
What a curse to be British:lol: It must be quite annoying to have the whole world (including half your own population) weigh in on your history and demand repentence and reparations and whatnot for the deaths of a millions of people, despite the fact that since 1688 it is by far the country which has contributed most to human freedom and prosperity. Despite all its cruelties you'll be hard pressed to find a more benign Empire in human history in terms of leaving a lasting legacy of lifting generations of people out of poverty, bondage and repression.

And now it boils down to "Let's remove the statue of the guy who symbolizes facing and defeating an existential threat to everything we value".
 
Shamana said:
Until the US were dragged in because of Pearl Harbour And the soviet union were dragged in because hitler betrayed their alliance and invaded them. Britain were the only ones to do the right thing and declare war on Nazi Germany once their aggressive plans became apparent and manifest.
Click to expand...
Just a small mention for Canada, Australia, New Zealand.... South Africa (not sure whether I should mention SA)....

Edit. Of course all of the ahem...Commonwealth countries should get a mention too, before I am bombarded with outrage....
 
amolbhatia50k said:
You seem to get offended very easily.

Go and ransack all churches /mosques/temples then I suppose because of actions of other Christians/Muslims/Hindus. Would make a whole lot of sense and you'd totally end up not getting in trouble.

You can't cleanse history of anything. What you can do is change the present. And while taking down a few symbols of hatred shouldn't be standing aloft, I don't think it's part of a genuine solution.
Click to expand...

I'm not being serious, but I am trying to make a point. In this debate it is not about what is offensive, its about what offends you. ( not you personally). There is no empirical scale we can measure each statue against to decide which stay and which go. If we did try to make a cold clear analysis, organised religious buildings would go the way of the monastery post Henry.
 
That'sHernandez said:
I’d agree that the union flag and flag of st. George can be seen as racist symbols. That’s because racist nationalists hijack them, not because they are intrinsically racist.
Click to expand...
That's always how it works. There are plenty of people we all know who are genuinely good and see their faith (which they strongly believe in) as a force for good. Now while I have little interest in it myself, I doubt religion is inherently evil either. It's usually somebody or a group that takes a philosophy and bends it to their crooked tune, or applies something archaic and misguided (usually specific sections etc) which doesn't belong in today's world.

I'm just interested in how far we go with the history thing. As an Indian, watching Brits dismantle their own past leadership who indeed hand blood (especially ours) on their hands, is mildly amusing. But the logic of this exercise seems to be a bit strange. Also, it has to be said that racism is only evil of all the evils to have existed in this world. So if we have to, we should extend this to all sorts of misdemeanors.
 
pierrethesnack said:
What a curse to be British:lol: It must be quite annoying to have the whole world (including half your own population) weigh in on your history and demand repentence and reparations and whatnot for the deaths of a millions of people, despite the fact that since 1688 it is by far the country which has contributed most to human freedom and prosperity. Despite all its cruelties you'll be hard pressed to find a more benign Empire in human history in terms of leaving a lasting legacy of lifting generations of people out of poverty, bondage and repression.

And now it boils down to "Let's remove the statue of the guy who symbolizes facing and defeating an existential threat to everything we value".
Click to expand...

:lol:

Almost a 'what have the Romans ever done for us' kind of question.
 
pierrethesnack said:
What a curse to be British:lol: It must be quite annoying to have the whole world (including half your own population) weigh in on your history and demand repentence and reparations and whatnot for the deaths of a millions of people, despite the fact that since 1688 it is by far the country which has contributed most to human freedom and prosperity. Despite all its cruelties you'll be hard pressed to find a more benign Empire in human history in terms of leaving a lasting legacy of lifting generations of people out of poverty, bondage and repression.

And now it boils down to "Let's remove the statue of the guy who symbolizes facing and defeating an existential threat to everything we value".
Click to expand...

The history of the British Empire does not belong to the U.K. or the British people, for reasons that are fecking obvious.
 
pierrethesnack said:
What a curse to be British:lol: It must be quite annoying to have the whole world (including half your own population) weigh in on your history and demand repentence and reparations and whatnot for the deaths of a millions of people, despite the fact that since 1688 it is by far the country which has contributed most to human freedom and prosperity. Despite all its cruelties you'll be hard pressed to find a more benign Empire in human history in terms of leaving a lasting legacy of lifting generations of people out of poverty, bondage and repression.

And now it boils down to "Let's remove the statue of the guy who symbolizes facing and defeating an existential threat to everything we value".
Click to expand...
We can only have these conversations because of what many people sacrificed 80 years ago. Could you imagine if Chamberlain stayed in office? Things might of been very different. Everyone seems to be sh*tting on everything British at the minute.
 
Don't Kill Bill said:
I'm not being serious, but I am trying to make a point. In this debate it is not about what is offensive, its about what offends you. ( not you personally). There is no empirical scale we can measure each statue against to decide which stay and which go. If we did try to make a cold clear analysis, organised religious buildings would go the way of the monastery post Henry.
Click to expand...
People are offended far too easily. It's often what stifles genuinely constructive discourse and progress. And I'm not sure what cold and clear analysis you seem to be suggesting be done. Religious places serve a purpose for those have faith. Because XYZ belonging to that religion or its clerics/priests was an Uber cnut isn't sufficient basis to disband it given it is for the people who use it and their belief. Not would that ever be allowed except for being proposed in armchairs couch potato panels such as this thread.
 
afrocentricity said:
People: Slavery was centuries ago, get over it!

Also same people: History is important, leave our celebratory statues of racists, slavers and warmongers alone.
Click to expand...

Or you could be more honest and say,

My history is important to me but your history isn't.

Your history is important to you but mine isn't.

Then at least we can understand the debate better, but that means we have to live with being hypocrites and it seems we all like being right more than we like getting along.
 
sullydnl said:
Bit of a side note but if we're talking about the dark side of the British empire being addressed more in schools then maybe the bubble of myth-making around WW2 could also do with being punctured.
Click to expand...
I'd agree with that.
 
pierrethesnack said:
What a curse to be British:lol: It must be quite annoying to have the whole world (including half your own population) weigh in on your history and demand repentence and reparations and whatnot for the deaths of a millions of people, despite the fact that since 1688 it is by far the country which has contributed most to human freedom and prosperity. Despite all its cruelties you'll be hard pressed to find a more benign Empire in human history in terms of leaving a lasting legacy of lifting generations of people out of poverty, bondage and repression.

And now it boils down to "Let's remove the statue of the guy who symbolizes facing and defeating an existential threat to everything we value".
Click to expand...

You think that’s a curse, try being of African descent.
 
oates said:
Just a small mention for Canada, Australia, New Zealand.... South Africa (not sure whether I should mention SA)....

Edit. Of course all of the ahem...Commonwealth countries should get a mention too, before I am bombarded with outrage....
Click to expand...

It's good you mentioned them and fair, but without Britains declaration of war at the time, the course of the war may have been completely different. The vast majority of Europe may now have been Nazi Europe. You're right, Britain was not comepletely alone.
 
Zlatan 7 said:
Goes both ways that if you want to be clever.
No adult should have this level of attachment to the removal of inanimate fecking objects
Click to expand...

Since attachment to symbols and the willingness to march for and against different ones is a constant throughout history, you are probably a bit late to that one.
 
nickm said:
Since attachment to symbols and the willingness to march for and against different ones is a constant throughout history, you are probably a bit late to that one.
Click to expand...
I don’t get your point
 
Shamana said:
It's good you mentioned them and fair, but without Britains declaration of war at the time, the course of the war may have been completely different. The vast majority of Europe may now have been Nazi Europe. You're right, Britain was not comepletely alone.
Click to expand...
I don't mean to be argumentative but both Britain and France declared war at the same time, I think the Commonwealth and Empire (oh fe*k) declared war a week later. But I could be wrong.
 
That'sHernandez said:
Personally I don’t thing organised religion and belief in/worship of God(S) are the same thing to be honest.

I agree everyone has a right to their beliefs and indeed I would not prevent them from expressing them.
Click to expand...
They're pretty bloody closely interlinked though, eh?
 
oates said:
I don't mean to be argumentative but both Britain and France declared war at the same time, I think the Commonwealth and Empire (oh fe*k) declared war a week later. But I could be wrong.
Click to expand...

You're right but France surrendered within 7 weeks. It's not something I hold against them sometimes surrender is the only way to save the lives of your people and obviously the countries with the biggest guns are the ones who can go face to face.
 
oates said:
Just a small mention for Canada, Australia, New Zealand.... South Africa (not sure whether I should mention SA)....

Edit. Of course all of the ahem...Commonwealth countries should get a mention too, before I am bombarded with outrage....
Click to expand...
Good to see France doesn't count.

edit: saw your later post. Not that it did count anyway :)
 
nickm said:
The point is, symbols matter. There's no point in pretending they don't.
Click to expand...
I never said they didn’t matter?
I was pointing out the hypocrisy of the poster I replied to stating no adult should have this level of attachment to an inanimate object.

sorry if I’ve lost the track of thought you’re on
 
You must log in or register to reply here.