ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 11th June 2020, 03:12 PM   #361
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 92,502
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
How about you explaining to me the “due process” involved when a group of people decide to pull down a statue?
I would have thought they would vary tremendously depending on the public bodies involved in these matters. Over here you'd probably start with a local campaign, try to get your council on side. appeal to your MP and so, on.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2020, 03:46 PM   #362
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 22,046
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
I've found myself wondering in the last few days, why is a courthouse a place to have statues of people who furthered powerful interests?

So often this involves acts of injustice, tyranny, and oppression on innocent people.

Tomorrow is the anniversary of the Loving v. Virgina decision. There should be a statue of the Lovings at the Richmond courthouse.

Petitioners who stood down the government (and assorted violent intimidation) and won rights for the masses against power with the pen and with words should be seen in places of honor. Not some general on a horse, not a profiteering merchant on some crown-backed exploitative enterprise, not some fat judge who rubbed shoulders with the local gentry.
I found myself thinking about the fact that statues of revered figures are really a very 19th century phenomenon. I have a theory that as the industrial revolution started to take hold, it became easier to cast really large quantities of bronze, and rich people started commissioning statues. They might be of themselves, or of someone who represents a cause, like a civil war general. (I can find several of those in Michigan. I'm sure the white Georgians would be happy to come to Detroit and tear down General Sherman.)

In more recent times, statues are rarely of specific people. There are some, but there aren't all that many. Now, statues represent things. A war memorial probably doesn't have a human figure at all. If it does, it's a generic private soldier. There's no bronze model of Norman Schwartzkoff. (And certainly not of William Westmoreland, what with the fact that he lost.)
I don't even know if you could find McCarthur or Eisenhower. I'm sure there is a bust or two of Eisenhower somewhere.

There must be one of Churchill. We're talking about him, and wondering if a mob will take that one down for us.

Once the camera was invented, statues didn't seem quite as important as a way of preserving memories.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2020, 04:06 PM   #363
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 22,046
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
It is not so simple. Liberal democracies recognize that minorities have rights too. The views and rules by the majority cannot, and morally should not, violate those rights. Beyond legal rights alone, the majority should seek as much as possible to respect minorities and their legitimate viewpoints and ideas.

The honoring of an individual responsible for the enslaving and murder of a people is abhorrent. Abhorrent not only to the people whose ancestors were subjected to these evils, but also to the majority whose ancestors inflicted them.

A statue to a slaver and murderer is a daily insult to those descended from his victims, being not only a constant reminder that they were one considered property rather than human beings, but also a constant reminder that even now the majority does not recognize this past as ugly and evil enough to question the morality of the person responsible.

A statue to a murderer and a slaver should be abhorrent to all, including those in the majority. If the majority fail to see this or just don’t care it is their moral failing. IMO they have lost the moral right to impose their will over the objections of the minority.
If you include people who supported from murderers and slavers, you'll need to cut down a lot of statues. If you include people who benefited from murderers and slavers, that's pretty much all of them.

I still want statues of Columbus, Washington, Jefferson, Grant (briefly owned one slave). I'm sure there are others, and I'm sure that even among the ones who were not actually slave owners, there were plenty of racists, aristocrats, and all sorts of people who would be condemned today. I just got an email from William Clay Ford talking about the importance of equality and such, but I have also worked in buildings with a portrait of his great grandfather, Henry, who was not, by our standards, a very nice man. He was a staunch anti-Semite, as in Hitler admiring nearly Nazi levels of anti-Semite. In spite of that, he changed the world for the better, and I wouldn't take down his portrait. I don't know if he has a statue.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2020, 04:13 PM   #364
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 17,306
Originally Posted by trustbutverify View Post
If so, that's murder, in my opinion.
I looked up the Virginia statutes and it might technically be “felony” murder - a death, even accidental, that occurred during commission of a felony. Vandalism resulting in more than $1000 damage is a class 6 felony (the weakest category of felony) in Virginia.

But I think that charging anyone with murder would be hideously unfair. I doubt anyone intended to harm any one else. The death was clearly accidental. If vandalism is less than $1000 no felony applies, nor does felony murder. It feels very wrong to punish someone for murder if they would not be so charged if all the same events occurred but the statute had been cheaper. That a murder charge was based on revenge for the statue rather than the person so tragically killed.

One could argue that the injury and death were due to careless disregard, etc. But even here that usually would not be considered “murder.” Plus I don’t know the details. Did the people pulling over the statue warn others? Was it not obvious that the statue was going to tumble? Was the injured person part of the demonstration? Were they in fact among those seeking to topple the statue?
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2020, 04:17 PM   #365
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 20,370
We're in a singular moment in history. Let's just decide that for now, public order and the people who want the statues preserved are sacrifices we're willing to make. When someone drags a statues and rolls it in the river, they're not burning anything. These seem like harmless outlets for protestors to vent on. It's expedient. We don't need long, drawn-out court battles or hang wringing over these statues. Let's just avail us to the opportunity the destruction of these statues create, feign disapproval and then do nothing. It's the sensible solution. Sometimes, the smart play is to cut your loses. The only people being hurt are people who aren't good enough for out attention anyway.
__________________
A MAGA hat = a Swastika arm band. A vote for Trump is a vote for treason.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2020, 04:20 PM   #366
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 17,306
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
If you include people who supported from murderers and slavers, you'll need to cut down a lot of statues. If you include people who benefited from murderers and slavers, that's pretty much all of them.

I still want statues of Columbus, Washington, Jefferson, Grant (briefly owned one slave). I'm sure there are others, and I'm sure that even among the ones who were not actually slave owners, there were plenty of racists, aristocrats, and all sorts of people who would be condemned today. I just got an email from William Clay Ford talking about the importance of equality and such, but I have also worked in buildings with a portrait of his great grandfather, Henry, who was not, by our standards, a very nice man. He was a staunch anti-Semite, as in Hitler admiring nearly Nazi levels of anti-Semite. In spite of that, he changed the world for the better, and I wouldn't take down his portrait. I don't know if he has a statue.
We in the USA all benefited from murderers and slavers. The country was built in part on the backs of slaves. Where to draw the line when seeking to honor someone depends on the individual circumstances. But no longer honoring the murderers and slavers themselves seems a good start. Certainly they would need a very, very impressive positive side of the balance sheet to outweigh their evils.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2020, 04:22 PM   #367
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 22,046
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
I looked up the Virginia statutes and it might technically be “felony” murder - a death, even accidental, that occurred during commission of a felony. Vandalism resulting in more than $1000 damage is a class 6 felony (the weakest category of felony) in Virginia.

But I think that charging anyone with murder would be hideously unfair. I doubt anyone intended to harm any one else. The death was clearly accidental. If vandalism is less than $1000 no felony applies, nor does felony murder. It feels very wrong to punish someone for murder if they would not be so charged if all the same events occurred but the statute had been cheaper. That a murder charge was based on revenge for the statue rather than the person so tragically killed.

One could argue that the injury and death were due to careless disregard, etc. But even here that usually would not be considered “murder.” Plus I don’t know the details. Did the people pulling over the statue warn others? Was it not obvious that the statue was going to tumble? Was the injured person part of the demonstration? Were they in fact among those seeking to topple the statue?
Skeptic Tank posted a video. (I know some people have to go to extra effort to view things posted by Skeptic Tank.)

Basically, it was very chaotic, and there was no warning. They were using towing straps to pull it down. (i.e. those heavy duty flat nylon ropes. Tie-down straps.) It looked to me like there were a couple of guys on the statue. Someone in the crowd tossed them the line to the guys on the statue, and they put the rope on. Almost immediately, the people holding it in the crowd pulled, and it fell. There was a huge cheer, that went silent fairly quickly. The guy who got hit was between the rope holders and the statue.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2020, 04:23 PM   #368
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 22,046
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
We in the USA all benefited from murderers and slavers. The country was built in part on the backs of slaves. Where to draw the line when seeking to honor someone depends on the individual circumstances. But no longer honoring the murderers and slavers themselves seems a good start. Certainly they would need a very, very impressive positive side of the balance sheet to outweigh their evils.
I can agree with that. Colston wouldn't make the cut if I had the decision to make. Washington, Jefferson, Drake and Columbus would.

ETA: I can't think of anyone on the Confederate side that would make my cut, just because I don't know of any of them known for anything except the Civil War.

Last edited by Meadmaker; 11th June 2020 at 04:28 PM.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2020, 04:29 PM   #369
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 17,306
I would also add that for the most part these statutes were not raised based on a carefully prepared and vetted list of great people, beginning with the number one saint of a man (and yes, almost all of them were men). The statutes were typically raised by small groups of politically driven, narrow advocates with specific agendas. Often by the wealthy relatives and friends of the honored person, or by a institution swayed by the monetary generosity of the honoree himself. Much more worthy white men were ignored. Much, much more worthy women and minorities were never in the running.

I have no reason to respect many of these statutes in the first place and less still if the honoree turns out to have a deep, dark side. There are lots of better people to replace them on pedestals.

Last edited by Giordano; 11th June 2020 at 04:31 PM.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2020, 05:43 PM   #370
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 67,472
Here's the problem I have with statues. You put them on a pedestal. When you walk past one, you look up to them. There are certain people I don't want to put on a pedestal. Certain people I don't think should be looked up to. Yes, that's metaphorical but the fact that these phrases exist in our language shows how statues are viewed by society.

I don't think statues should be destroyed. They're works of art, after all, and someone worked very hard on them. I'm in favour of putting them in museums of history, where the complete cultural context can be provided. It would also emphasise that they are part of history.

I've been ambivalent on this issue until this morning, when I read what a certain Brussels Sprout said on radio, which pretty much instantly galvanised my opinion.
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2020, 06:14 PM   #371
trustbutverify
Philosopher
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 8,091
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
I looked up the Virginia statutes and it might technically be “felony” murder - a death, even accidental, that occurred during commission of a felony.
But I think that charging anyone with murder would be hideously unfair. I doubt anyone intended to harm any one else. The death was clearly accidental.
Intent has nothing to do with it. "Accident" has nothing to do with it. It's extreme indifference to life- murder in the second degree. However, the more likely charge would be involuntary manslaughter, which these idiots richly deserve.
__________________
"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated." -- Mahatma Gandhi

Wollen owns the stage
trustbutverify is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2020, 07:35 PM   #372
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 17,306
Originally Posted by trustbutverify View Post
Intent has nothing to do with it. "Accident" has nothing to do with it. It's extreme indifference to life- murder in the second degree. However, the more likely charge would be involuntary manslaughter, which these idiots richly deserve.
Extreme indifference? I view it more as stupidity, chaos, and excitement clouding judgement, leading to terrible tragedy. Stupidity is not indifference. Indifference requires that someone knows the risks but chooses to ignore them. But it’s not as if the crowd had a lot of training on how to properly topple a statue and chose to ignore the established safety rules. It was dark, the scene was chaotic, multiple people were pulling and shouting and moving around. I think everyone was surprised how easily and quickly the statute toppled. They probably expected no one would be in the way - it was clear they were trying to pull the statue down.

BTW in Virginia extreme indifference does not make a killing second degree murder or even first degree manslaughter I think it is likely a form of second degree manslaughter.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2020, 09:12 PM   #373
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 12,273
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
I found myself thinking about the fact that statues of revered figures are really a very 19th century phenomenon. I have a theory that as the industrial revolution started to take hold, it became easier to cast really large quantities of bronze, and rich people started commissioning statues. They might be of themselves, or of someone who represents a cause, like a civil war general. (I can find several of those in Michigan. I'm sure the white Georgians would be happy to come to Detroit and tear down General Sherman.)

In more recent times, statues are rarely of specific people. There are some, but there aren't all that many. Now, statues represent things. A war memorial probably doesn't have a human figure at all. If it does, it's a generic private soldier. There's no bronze model of Norman Schwartzkoff. (And certainly not of William Westmoreland, what with the fact that he lost.)
I don't even know if you could find McCarthur or Eisenhower. I'm sure there is a bust or two of Eisenhower somewhere.

There must be one of Churchill. We're talking about him, and wondering if a mob will take that one down for us.

Once the camera was invented, statues didn't seem quite as important as a way of preserving memories.
The series of works that have occupied the empty fourth plinth in Trafalgar Square is of interest in that respect. Of the 13 so far, only two were statues of a real person (only one, if you don't think Jesus was a real person).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth...afalgar_Square
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2020, 09:44 PM   #374
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 19,736
While I certainly understand that there are a lot of cases where people have grievances against those in statues, I think that sometimes it just goes to far.

So today a statue of Captain John Fane Charles Hamilton​, for whom the city of Hamilton was named, was removed after threats of vandalism to it.

The person making the threats claimed that Hamilton was a "Muderous *******" and should not be honoured as a hero.

I decided to look him up and find out what it was that was so bad about him.

So Hamilton was the Captain of the HMS Esk which was sent to New Zealand during the land wars. It arrived from Australia Station in NSW, picked up the Commander of the British Forces in NZ, Lieutenant-General Duncan Cameron, in Auckland, and sailed down to Tauranga to where the British Forces were being attacked and incited to do battle with the local Maori after they landed and set up camp. The British forces had been told not to engage the locals whom they viewed as neutral, but the local Chief decided to strike first believing that the British would attack them eventually anyways.

As Part of this, the local Maori built a Pa (fortifications) above the British camps, called Gate Pa. After arriving at the site on the 21st of April, 1864 and studying the situation for several days, Cameron determined that they would have to assault the Pa, an action that lead to one of the biggest defeats in British Colonial history.

Hamilton's part in the battle was to lead his 43rd Light Infantry into the battle. However accounts of his part in the battle indicate that his sum total of action was to draw his sword, shout, "Follow me" and then on entering the battle he was immediately killed after being shot in the head. He had been in New Zealand for just eight days.

Now, there is certainly an argument that naming a city and having a statue of a guy that died almost instantly in what was consider to have been one of the worst defeats of British Forces is a bad idea. However is staggers me and baffles me how a guy that was in New Zealand for just eight days and then died on entering the one military operation he was involved in could possible be a "Murderous *******" worthy of such vitriol.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)


Last edited by PhantomWolf; 11th June 2020 at 09:49 PM.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th June 2020, 10:12 PM   #375
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
Pronouns: he/him
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 67,472
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
Hamilton's part in the battle was to lead his 43rd Light Infantry into the battle. However accounts of his part in the battle indicate that his sum total of action was to draw his sword, shout, "Follow me" and then on entering the battle he was immediately killed after being shot in the head. He had been in New Zealand for just eight days.
Daniel Fortescue!
__________________
Self-described nerd.

My mom told me she tries never to make fun of people for not knowing something.
- Randall Munroe
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 01:35 AM   #376
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 92,502
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Here's the problem I have with statues. You put them on a pedestal. When you walk past one, you look up to them. There are certain people I don't want to put on a pedestal. Certain people I don't think should be looked up to. Yes, that's metaphorical but the fact that these phrases exist in our language shows how statues are viewed by society.

I don't think statues should be destroyed. They're works of art, after all, and someone worked very hard on them. I'm in favour of putting them in museums of history, where the complete cultural context can be provided. It would also emphasise that they are part of history.

I've been ambivalent on this issue until this morning, when I read what a certain Brussels Sprout said on radio, which pretty much instantly galvanised my opinion.
But as someone said in different words earlier in the thread most of them are not the equivalent of MA's David, they are "workaday" pieces, I bet many of them we don't even know who was commissioned to do the work. The plinths are probably of equal quality in regards to art and took a long time to produce.

Yes there are some of artistic and/or historical interest but I bet they are the minority.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 01:57 AM   #377
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 29,017
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
From my modern perspective, above all, I'm pro democracy. Mob rule is bad. Very, very, bad. If you want to get rid of a statue, use a petition, not a rope. I was appalled when people said, "But what if the government isn't doing what we want?" That's sad. Really. If you don't like it, run for office and then you can take down the statue yourself, as part of a democratically elected government.
If you're talking about your conversation with me then, no, that's not what I said. What I said was what if the petitions don't work because of the institutional racism inherent in the system? I explained the institutional racism a little while ago.

As far as "run for office" goes, you are again ignoring the fact that one of the biggest advocates for removing the statue was the mayor.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 02:14 AM   #378
The Common Potato
Critical Thinker
 
The Common Potato's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: The Scunthorpe Problem
Posts: 301
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Surely, statues do not need to be 'torn down'.

Whatever happened to going through the proper channels?
The Bristol Channel is a proper channel. It's in the name.
The Common Potato is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 02:16 AM   #379
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 29,017
FWIW, Little Britain, Come Fly With Me, and Bo Selecta have been removed from many streaming platforms due to their use of blackface.* "The Germans" episode of Fawlty Towers has also been removed (presumably for its use of racial slurs pertaining to black people more than its lampooning of Germans and invocation of Hitler).

*Leigh Francis posted a sincere-seeming video apologising for his use of blackface, claiming not to have had any negative feedback at the time and not having fully understood the implications, and apparently also sent personal apologies to at least one person he was doing an impression of. It's also worth noting that according to Channel 4 Francis was involved with the decision to pull the shows, although what exactly that means is unclear.

OTOH, Harry Enfield went on Radio 4 to defend blackface and used a racial slur, as he did so. There was a backlash over that, over the fact that he and the white host kept talking over the black guest and mispronouncing her name, and over the fact that Radio 4 thought that the issue of blackface even deserved a "both sides" debate.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 02:28 AM   #380
ThatGuy11200
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: London
Posts: 253
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
But as someone said in different words earlier in the thread most of them are not the equivalent of MA's David, they are "workaday" pieces, I bet many of them we don't even know who was commissioned to do the work. The plinths are probably of equal quality in regards to art and took a long time to produce.

Yes there are some of artistic and/or historical interest but I bet they are the minority.
I don't care about 'art' but they're historical artifacts in their own right. Frankly, it doesn't matter how good they are.

And the same argument about "workaday" pieces and unknown producers can be made about most ancient statues as well. Most statues of kings, emperors and gods would have been made by unknowns as copies, or even copies of copies.

In my local history museum, where I used to volunteer, we had all kinds of historical objects. Like plaques with the names of the local firms that built a gasworks that was demolished. They weren't artistic but they did have a context in local history.

These statues will have even more historical context than most now, if they get pulled down in protest. They tell a story and should be preserved in museums.
ThatGuy11200 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 02:29 AM   #381
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 26,439
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Why not Churchill?
Well Baden Powell had a lot of things to say on the subject of homosexuality and how it was a crime against nature and god.
Also in 1939 he expounded on how Hitler had it right about the Jews and Slavs and what a good plan for society was contained in Mein Kampf.
I don't know why there is a statue of him in the first place.
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 02:34 AM   #382
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 26,439
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
While I certainly understand that there are a lot of cases where people have grievances against those in statues, I think that sometimes it just goes to far.

So today a statue of Captain John Fane Charles Hamilton​, for whom the city of Hamilton was named, was removed after threats of vandalism to it.

The person making the threats claimed that Hamilton was a "Muderous *******" and should not be honoured as a hero.

I decided to look him up and find out what it was that was so bad about him.

So Hamilton was the Captain of the HMS Esk which was sent to New Zealand during the land wars. It arrived from Australia Station in NSW, picked up the Commander of the British Forces in NZ, Lieutenant-General Duncan Cameron, in Auckland, and sailed down to Tauranga to where the British Forces were being attacked and incited to do battle with the local Maori after they landed and set up camp. The British forces had been told not to engage the locals whom they viewed as neutral, but the local Chief decided to strike first believing that the British would attack them eventually anyways.

As Part of this, the local Maori built a Pa (fortifications) above the British camps, called Gate Pa. After arriving at the site on the 21st of April, 1864 and studying the situation for several days, Cameron determined that they would have to assault the Pa, an action that lead to one of the biggest defeats in British Colonial history.

Hamilton's part in the battle was to lead his 43rd Light Infantry into the battle. However accounts of his part in the battle indicate that his sum total of action was to draw his sword, shout, "Follow me" and then on entering the battle he was immediately killed after being shot in the head. He had been in New Zealand for just eight days.

Now, there is certainly an argument that naming a city and having a statue of a guy that died almost instantly in what was consider to have been one of the worst defeats of British Forces is a bad idea. However is staggers me and baffles me how a guy that was in New Zealand for just eight days and then died on entering the one military operation he was involved in could possible be a "Murderous *******" worthy of such vitriol.
Lindybeige has a talk on it 30 minutes long

The Storming of Gate Pah - the defeat of the British by Maori warriors

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 02:40 AM   #383
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 29,017
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Why not Churchill?
Indeed. Why not?
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 03:12 AM   #384
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 45,746
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
Indeed. Why not?
Apart from the fact that he was one of the most revered Brits of the 20th century?

Christ, what a joke this thread had become! A handful of people in a mob disgruntled by some ancient event can vandalise with impunity? This seems to be what you are suggesting.

Please list the reasons Churchill’s statue should be destroyed. And don’t try to weasel out of my request by saying “I didn’t say it should be destroyed”. That won’t fool anyone.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 03:21 AM   #385
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 29,017
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Apart from the fact that he was one of the most revered Brits of the 20th century?
The question is whether the myth reflects the reality.

Quote:
Please list the reasons Churchill’s statue should be destroyed. And don’t try to weasel out of my request by saying “I didn’t say it should be destroyed”. That won’t fool anyone.
Please list the reasons why you beat your wife. And don't try to weasel out of my request by saying "I don't beat my wife". That won't fool anyone.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 03:25 AM   #386
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 92,502
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
FWIW, Little Britain, Come Fly With Me, and Bo Selecta have been removed from many streaming platforms due to their use of blackface.* "The Germans" episode of Fawlty Towers has also been removed (presumably for its use of racial slurs pertaining to black people more than its lampooning of Germans and invocation of Hitler).

*Leigh Francis posted a sincere-seeming video apologising for his use of blackface, claiming not to have had any negative feedback at the time and not having fully understood the implications, and apparently also sent personal apologies to at least one person he was doing an impression of. It's also worth noting that according to Channel 4 Francis was involved with the decision to pull the shows, although what exactly that means is unclear.

OTOH, Harry Enfield went on Radio 4 to defend blackface and used a racial slur, as he did so. There was a backlash over that, over the fact that he and the white host kept talking over the black guest and mispronouncing her name, and over the fact that Radio 4 thought that the issue of blackface even deserved a "both sides" debate.
Blackface was not originally using makeup to change your skin colour, it was the disgusting parody of black people - in the UK infamously illustrated by the "The Black and White Minstrel ShowWP".

I would argue that the "blackface" in Little Britain is "acceptable" as they are creating and acting as different characters and when playing a non-white character being black/non-white was just one of the character's attributes, not the focus of the character. The two creative people behind Little Britain are white males, I would say it would have been more wrong for them not to include characters that are "representative" of Britain today. They dress up as a variety of non-white male characters. From my memory there is one character that I think was probably not OK and that was the "mail order bride" that I think was meant to be from Thailand. For that character being "asian" was the focus of the character.

(All this is from memory so I may not be remembering the extent of their use of non-white characters so what I've said above may be completely wrong!)
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 03:34 AM   #387
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 45,746
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
The question is whether the myth reflects the reality.



Please list the reasons why you beat your wife. And don't try to weasel out of my request by saying "I don't beat my wife". That won't fool anyone.
Pathetic dodge.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 03:37 AM   #388
dann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 11,420
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Why not Churchill?

I don't know. Why not? Because he was antifa?
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 04:08 AM   #389
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 29,017
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Blackface was not originally using makeup to change your skin colour, it was the disgusting parody of black people - in the UK infamously illustrated by the "The Black and White Minstrel ShowWP".

I would argue that the "blackface" in Little Britain is "acceptable" as they are creating and acting as different characters and when playing a non-white character being black/non-white was just one of the character's attributes, not the focus of the character. The two creative people behind Little Britain are white males, I would say it would have been more wrong for them not to include characters that are "representative" of Britain today. They dress up as a variety of non-white male characters. From my memory there is one character that I think was probably not OK and that was the "mail order bride" that I think was meant to be from Thailand. For that character being "asian" was the focus of the character.

(All this is from memory so I may not be remembering the extent of their use of non-white characters so what I've said above may be completely wrong!)
I didn't really watch it, because I didn't find it funny. But I think there are problems with blacking up beyond what you're listed. And, as you say, it's not the only prejudicial aspect of the programme (and there are more besides).

It is perhaps worth noting that Matt Lucas apologised a while ago, citing it being a different time. Walliams has not.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 04:09 AM   #390
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 29,017
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Pathetic dodge.
If you think it pathetic of me not to defend a position I don't hold and haven't voiced just because you've tried to bully me into doing so, but that seems more like a you problem than a me problem.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 06:12 AM   #391
Skeptic Tank
Trigger Warning
 
Skeptic Tank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,844
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Apart from the fact that he was one of the most revered Brits of the 20th century?

Christ, what a joke this thread had become! A handful of people in a mob disgruntled by some ancient event can vandalise with impunity? This seems to be what you are suggesting.

Please list the reasons Churchill’s statue should be destroyed. And don’t try to weasel out of my request by saying “I didn’t say it should be destroyed”. That won’t fool anyone.
1.) Firebombing Dresden, killing countless women, children and other innocents.

2.) Refusing repeated German peace overtures, including when he ordered a peace envoy locked up so parliament couldn't even hear his offer.

Plenty of other bloodthirsty, shortsighted decisions made during that unnecessary war.

Even so, I wouldn't have his statue destroyed. I'd take it down, put it in a museum, and replace it with one of Oswald Mosley or Enoch Powell.
Skeptic Tank is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 06:17 AM   #392
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 45,746
Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
1.) Firebombing Dresden, killing countless women, children and other innocents.

2.) Refusing repeated German peace overtures, including when he ordered a peace envoy locked up so parliament couldn't even hear his offer.

Plenty of other bloodthirsty, shortsighted decisions made during that unnecessary war.

Even so, I wouldn't have his statue destroyed. I'd take it down, put it in a museum, and replace it with one of Oswald Mosley or Enoch Powell.
I think I know why you are making such a ridiculous point. I think it’s because your side didn’t win.

Whatever, your points about his strategies in the war are, frankly, wrong.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 06:54 AM   #393
Skeptic Tank
Trigger Warning
 
Skeptic Tank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,844
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
I think I know why you are making such a ridiculous point. I think it’s because your side didn’t win.

Whatever, your points about his strategies in the war are, frankly, wrong.
Both sides lost, decisively. Took longer for one to see that was the case than it did for the other.
Skeptic Tank is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 07:35 AM   #394
dann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 11,420
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
I think I know why you are making such a ridiculous point. I think it’s because your side didn’t win.

No, the pont is this (FTFH):

Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
1.) Firebombing Dresden, killing countless white women, children and other innocents. (...)

It is no coincidence that he would want to replace it with statues of two Brits, a Nazi and a white supremacist.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx

Last edited by dann; 12th June 2020 at 07:41 AM.
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 07:40 AM   #395
dann
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 11,420
Slavehandlerstatuer rives ned verden over: Hvad skal vi gøre i Danmark? (DR.dk, June 12, 2020)
Statues of slave traders are being torn down all over the world: What should we do in Denmark?

The answer is pretty obvious, but since a couple of Danish kings were involved in the slave-trading business, the question is embarrassing for Danish monarchists and nationalists.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 07:42 AM   #396
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 22,347
Originally Posted by Gilbert Syndrome View Post
In another thread, the topic of Lovecraft's racism was mentioned, yet we continue to celebrate him as an important author who influences many. In fact, his very likeness was made into an award for authors of Fantasy fiction!
Something that was changed five years ago, with howls of protest from the Usual Suspects.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 07:44 AM   #397
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 22,347
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
I believe it was called the South Sea Bubble.
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Be fair. He did teach people to go, 'Clunk, Click, every trip', and out their seat belts on.
Pathetic.

Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Only because he was in a storm and thought he was going to drown.
No. It was rather more than that.

Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Fighting talk! Take down Nelson?!!! <choke> It will never happen as the average Brit rates Nelson as one of the greatest admirals who ever lived, if not the greatest Brit.
So?
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.

Last edited by catsmate; 12th June 2020 at 07:45 AM.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 07:47 AM   #398
Arcade22
Philosopher
 
Arcade22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 6,577
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
We're in a singular moment in history. Let's just decide that for now, public order and the people who want the statues preserved are sacrifices we're willing to make. When someone drags a statues and rolls it in the river, they're not burning anything. These seem like harmless outlets for protestors to vent on. It's expedient. We don't need long, drawn-out court battles or hang wringing over these statues. Let's just avail us to the opportunity the destruction of these statues create, feign disapproval and then do nothing. It's the sensible solution. Sometimes, the smart play is to cut your loses. The only people being hurt are people who aren't good enough for out attention anyway.
If history is any guide then iconoclastic outbursts like this are only a symptom of even greater social unrest and conflict.
__________________
We would be a lot safer if the Government would take its money out of science and put it into astrology and the reading of palms. Only in superstition is there hope. - Kurt Vonnegut Jr

And no, Cuba is not a brutal and corrupt dictatorship, and it's definitely less so than Sweden. - dann
Arcade22 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 07:54 AM   #399
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 22,347
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
A group of protesters from the American Indian Movement toppled a Columbus statue outside the Minnesota state capitol building today, which was symbolically more powerful than someone anonymous beheading the statue in Boston for instance. Although, I still confess myself puzzled about why Minnesota would have a Columbus statue at the state capitol.
Everyone else has one...

Though, to be less glib for once, it was part of the Italian immigrant integration movement, especially after the 1024 Immigration Act; remember in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries Italians weren't considered "properly" white. Southern Europeans were classed as "black" for working purposes in the Iron Range, for example. Hence the 'Christopher Columbus Memorial Association'.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.

Last edited by catsmate; 12th June 2020 at 08:01 AM.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th June 2020, 07:57 AM   #400
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 22,347
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
I wonder if felony murder charges will be filed. (Assuming pulling down a public statue is a felony.)
It would appear that ST is wrong and on-one was seriously injured.

I see the Confederate apologists over there were upset.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:37 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.