Come on, nobody here is the last word in facts. We're all just having a discussion. Park the "you make statements" bullshit.
There is plenty of education and awareness - things that were OK just 15 - 20 years ago when I left school are now absolutely not OK. The progress is fast. The changes are happening. We're all changing every day. (Mostly) younger people haven't had a moment to see the changes happening, because they haven't lived long enough to see it. I doubtless wasn't aware at the time of the changes that took place from the mid 80s until the early 2000s when I was growing up. The things my kids and nephews talk about nowadays are nothing like what I talked about. It's a different world.
There is no pressure to apply. People know. We're taught it, we see it, it's night and day to how it was when I was in school.
Being angry about the world doesn't mean you start vandalising some old statues though. It's pathetic.
I obviously don’t disagree with the notion that violence and vandalism doesn’t help anything. But your logic here is underpinned by the idea that as long as change is happening, people shouldn’t protest and let natural change run its course.
That’s what I disagree with. Why should the current rate of change be acceptable on matters like these in today’s society? Protesting shouldn’t be violent but this is damn well something worth protesting because what it does do is raise awareness and focus efforts to enact change. Just because that change is happening doesn’t mean we shouldn’t aim to make it happen faster.
Protests like these don’t directly achieve things by virtue of protesting but they shape how things are addressed because it causes people to actively think and act on something they otherwise would only passively consider.
I don’t get the whole statues thing, I’m not sure how much that’s helping, but I don’t think the focus of the vast majority of the protest is to removing statues.