Winston Churchill

[Fluctuation0161]

Thing is there is good and bad in all humanity, nobody is free from any form of sin.

Celebrating to the good people have done and key points in history shouldn’t be completely swept aside because a person grew up in an era where racism was a completely normal everyday fact of life.

Once again, you claim you want balance to be recognised. But many of these people are celebrated and their racism has been brushed under the carpet for years. Where is the balance in that?

Education is key. Britain has glossed over its colonial history for far too long and has only celebrated the "good" while completely missing the barbarity that took place.

 

[RUCK4444]

Well done on missing the point. Because judging people on race alone is the epitome of racism. Not judging people by their actions.

It is not that difficult.

I see that it’s entirely that difficult for you, and many others, to transport your mind outside of 2020 and realise that the world didn’t always have first world problems.

I’m not condoning racism, as a person in 2020 I find it deplorable, disgusting and the opinion of mentally challenged uneducated arseh@les...

That said, you cannot totally disregard historical context. The environment and outlook that the blanket population had back then is frighteningly different to today. ‘It’s not that difficult.’

Try to be balanced, after all it’s a trait the racists of yesteryear didn’t have. You have the privilege of modern day ethics that didn’t exist back then.

 

[RUCK4444]

Once again, you claim you want balance to be recognised. But many of these people are celebrated and their racism has been brushed under the carpet for years. Where is the balance in that?

Education is key. Britain has glossed over its colonial history for far too long and has only celebrated the "good" while completely missing the barbarity that took place.

Hey listen, I agree and have posted previously in other threads that British history is every bit as disgraceful and barbaric as any other.

I’m with you on that. But ironically it is you who is missing the point I’m trying to make - historical context.

Unless you can at least acknowledge the obvious different in ethics and outlook for the masses across the globe back then compared to ours in 2020 then please don’t bother replying to my posts. It’s tedious. As I said, add some balance to your argument rather than sheer pandering to the current narrative.

 

[Cassidy]

Hey listen, I agree and have posted previously in other threads that British history is every bit as disgraceful and barbaric as any other.

I’m with you on that. But ironically it is you who is missing the point I’m trying to make - historical context.

Unless you can at least acknowledge the obvious different in ethics and outlook for the masses across the globe back then compared to ours in 2020 then please don’t bother replying to my posts. It’s tedious. As I said, add some balance to your argument rather than sheer pandering to the current narrative.

That is one way to think about it, another it to realise that you could also take the out look of the subjugated/colonised/slaughtered back then and their ethics.
What you refer to as the ethics of the masses is only one side of the historical context.
As they say though history is written by the victors...

 

[Zlatan 7]

You can’t say I recognize the racism and turn around to argue against removing his statue. That defeats the entire purpose. Surely, you can see that.

No.

 

[Zlatan 7]

What does Islamaphobia have to do with a comparison which was what you brought up earlier in a reply?

Hey I'm sorry if I haven't made myself clear or that it is just too simple a concept but my position is to cut the crap and point out where inconsistencies have been brought into this whole soppy debate.

Churchill was a racist but his statue in Parliament Square does not represent him as a racist but rather his role as the wartime leader who along with the Allies defeated Nazi Germany. The references in the statue are clear, what he's wearing, the same as he wore at the Yalta Conference and other events, and that the sculptor used a photograph of his pose from during the war. My position is that we can take the statue down but Churchill's heritage during the war and not his statue is what the people of Britain see. Why should a mob of a few hundred or thousand get to decide that?

The mob and some here are just looking to win a battle and it isn't enough. It has never been enough to take down symbols against a people's will and it isn't winning the war. The issue with the British people isn't that the majority don't realise that we have serious problems with Racism in our Society and institutions but for some who think sooner or later statues of Churchill will become irrelevant then be prepared for a long wait. The public haven't tired of Nelson's Column in Trafalgar Square which has been in place for 177 years. Lord Wellington's statue in Glasgow has been up since 1844. It's not just the British either that desire their history to be on show and both men had racist credentials.

The mob won a battle when they pushed Colston's statue into the harbour and the council have already retrieved it so if it proves anything that was a short term gain and in the meantime the Government couldn't be happier these activities have distracted from other issues and also woken up the right wingers. It's not winning a war on Racism in Britain as if that is the only country that has issues.

What has it got to do with Gandhi and his many statues that are still being put up today? The same things.

Bang on

 

[Hoof the ball]

Once again, you claim you want balance to be recognised. But many of these people are celebrated and their racism has been brushed under the carpet for years. Where is the balance in that?

Education is key. Britain has glossed over its colonial history for far too long and has only celebrated the "good" while completely missing the barbarity that took place.

There's not a monument in antiquity that would stand if we applied such rules. Not one. Colosseum? gone. My Christians and slaves slain in their thousands upon thousands. Darwin on the currency? his views on the black person as less evolutionarily developed are well documented by serious historians. How about Isaac Newton? His shares in a company that profits from slavery. Statue gone. Roman triumphal arches? gone. All imperial conquests resulting in raping, sacking, enslaving, etc. Greeks are safe? not on your life. Not a Greek monument would remain either. You have to be consistent. If a few statues go down on the account of retaining balance, then they all go down.

 

[MyOnlySolskjaer]

35 million Indians civilians were killed by the british and yet nazis are considered worse

Good watch.

 

[Snafu17]

If you do a little digging is generally quite difficult to find a respected historical figure who hasn't been a giant cnut in some respect, possibly by contemporary, but almost certainly by today's standards. At the end of the day, they were all humans, lacking the context, knowledge and social awareness we have today. It's generally a bit pointless to idolise people rather than their achievements.

But yeah, Churchill was a huge racist.

 

[RUCK4444]

That is one way to think about it, another it to realise that you could also take the out look of the subjugated/colonised/slaughtered back then and their ethics.
What you refer to as the ethics of the masses is only one side of the historical context.
As they say though history is written by the victors...

Yes that's true and I take that response as a balanced view. What I can't necessarily agree with is the mass destruction of statues and monuments that recognise the good those people did and in no way celebrate the racist views they had.

Let''s put it another way, hero's who battled in WW1 and WW11 - should we look into their potentially racist views (as people of that era) and no longer acknowledge that they risked their lives and indeed died to protect their country? It affected all walks of life, in a very different time.

What is the cut off point? I ask that because unless you do factor in the environment and upbringing these people had that ultimately shaped their opinion on race then it's all a waste of time and serves nothing but to pander to the current mob.

As many have pointed out, nobody is born racist, it's learnt behaviour from parents and those around you. We are lucky that we live in this modern society where the vast majority of us aren't shaped by racists with a distinct lack of education.

 

[RUCK4444]

There's not a monument in antiquity that would stand if we applied such rules. Not one. Colosseum? gone. My Christians and slaves slain in their thousands upon thousands. Darwin on the currency? his views on the black person as less evolutionarily developed are well documented by serious historians. How about Isaac Newton? His shares in a company that profits from slavery. Statue gone. Roman triumphal arches? gone. All imperial conquests resulting in raping, sacking, enslaving, etc. Greeks are safe? not on your life. Not a Greek monument would remain either. You have to be consistent. If a few statues go down on the account of retaining balance, then they all go down.

Precisely. As I've said, I've been behind the BLM movement from the beginning but taking down historical statues and monuments is a complete nonsense.

 

[Cassidy]

Yes that's true and I take that response as a balanced view. What I can't necessarily agree with is the mass destruction of statues and monuments that recognise the good those people did and in no way celebrate the racist views they had.

Let''s put it another way, hero's who battled in WW1 and WW11 - should we look into their potentially racist views (as people of that era) and no longer claim that they risked their lives and indeed died to protect their country?

What is the cut off point? I ask that because unless you do factor in the environment and upbringing these people had that ultimately shaped their opinion on race then it's all a waste of time and serves nothing but to pander to the current mob.

As many have pointed out, nobody is born racist, it's learnt behaviour from parents and those around you. We are lucky that we live in this modern society where the vast majority of us aren't shaped by racists with a distinct lack of education.

Not sure that is what is being advocated, but the whitewashing of certain histories is unacceptable also. It is also an a front for people who live here who for instance have family who were owned/traded/killed by someone like Edward Colston to have to walk past a statue celebrating the man with zero context as to who he was and his impact on the world we live in.

Now some of those statues need either to have context or be put in a museum so the education around the context of their histories can take place. Acting like it never happened is not helpful on either side. However there had been a campaign in Bristol for over 6 years regarding the Colston statue and nothing was done. People had enough and took action.

Recognising and celebrating people as heroes for the the good they have done whilst hiding their heinous past is not helpful, now we're not talk about people who simply held racist views. we are talking about those who actively participated, and or profited from death/slavery/subjugation or those who were responsible for mass deaths due to their beliefs about bing a superior race.

You can't compare that to someone who battled in WW1

Not sure I agree on your last point, as modern society is still majority racist

 

[TheReligion]

Instead of latching on to one word you dont like for whatever reason, why not actually reply to what he wrote?
That word has little to do with the point being made.

Because the forum is trying it's best to clamp down on the use of ridiculous and uncalled for insults, especially when it's simply because people don't share exactly the same opinion.

 

[Cassidy]

WW2 claimed 70m in 6 years, majority civilian.
I think if the East India Company continued what they were up to for longer they could maybe compete. Famines, repression, taxation.
But I don't think the comparison isn't valid because of the time scale. they they put zero value on indian life while hitler went out of his way to exterminate jews, gypsies, slavs, which makes some moral difference probably.

e - probably not right to attribute chinese deaths to hitler since the japanese invaded 2 years before the world war, that reduces it to 55m.

East India Company atrocities were no just in India

 

[TwoSheds]

Not sure that is what is being advocated, but the whitewashing of certain histories is unacceptable also. It is also an a front for people who live here who for instance have family who were owned/traded/killed by someone like Edward Colston to have to walk past a statue celebrating the man with zero context as to who he was and his impact on the world we live in.

Now some of those statues need either to have context or be put in a museum so the education around the context of their histories can take place. Acting like it never happened is not helpful on either side. However there had been a campaign in Bristol for over 6 years regarding the Colston statue and nothing was done. People had enough and took action.

Recognising and celebrating people as heroes for the the good they have done whilst hiding their heinous past is not helpful, now we're not talk about people who simply held racist views. we are talking about those who actively participated, and or profited from death/slavery/subjugation or those who were responsible for mass deaths due to their beliefs about bing a superior race.

You can't compare that to someone who battled in WW1

Not sure I agree on your last point, as modern society is still majority racist

Agree with all this.

 

[RUCK4444]

Not sure that is what is being advocated, but the whitewashing of certain histories is unacceptable also. It is also an a front for people who live here who for instance have family who were owned/traded/killed by someone like Edward Colston to have to walk past a statue celebrating the man with zero context as to who he was and his impact on the world we live in.

Now some of those statues need either to have context or be put in a museum so the education around the context of their histories can take place. Acting like it never happened is not helpful on either side. However there had been a campaign in Bristol for over 6 years regarding the Colston statue and nothing was done. People had enough and took action.

Recognising and celebrating people as heroes for the the good they have done whilst hiding their heinous past is not helpful, now we're not talk about people who simply held racist views. we are talking about those who actively participated, and or profited from death/slavery/subjugation or those who were responsible for mass deaths due to their beliefs about bing a superior race.

You can't compare that to someone who battled in WW1

Not sure I agree on your last point, as modern society is still majority racist

Again I appreciate your trying to bring a balanced view however it still doesn't address the question - where is the cut off point?

Every major monument from Britain to Rome to China all invariably involve heinous pasts - but do you know why? Because it was a heinous time, with nothing but war to celebrate, set in a backdrop of widespread normalised racism fuelled by a huge lack of education and desire for ones own country/race to climb the ladder.

Show me a country that uses statues to celebrate fairies and bedtime stories, or monuments that reflect nothing but good deeds of the past. What of the Colosseum in Rome? Should we pull it to the ground and turn away the millions that flock to see the place where people were slaughtered for entertainment?

You could argue these monuments serve more of a purpose to remind people of our current ethical standards and how we should never let them drop to the way they where.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

If you read the history on the Colston statue there was no good reason for it to be up. It was only erected over 100 years after his death through the endeavours of a single superfan. He tried to raise capital from the public for the statue but failed to reach the target so it is thought to have paid for the remainder himself.

 

[Cassidy]

Again I appreciate your trying to bring a balanced view however it still doesn't address the question - where is the cut off point?

Every major monument from Britain to Rome to China all invariably involve heinous pasts - but do you know why? Because it was a heinous time, with nothing but war to celebrate, set in a backdrop of widespread normalised racism fuelled by a huge lack of education and desire for ones own country/race to climb the ladder.

Show me a country that uses statues to celebrate fairies and bedtime stories, or monuments that reflect nothing but good deeds of the past. What of the Colosseum in Rome? Should we pull it to the ground and turn away the millions that flock to see the place where people were slaughtered for entertainment?

You could argue these monuments serve more of a purpose to remind people of our current ethical standards and how we should never let them drop to the way they where.

1. It is not a person.
2. We also don't tear down Cape Coast Castle in Ghana as it serves for historical context and education

My point was having statues celebrating people (without their historical context i.e whitewashing those peoples history) is unacceptable

The Colosseum should stay where it is as long as the history of the place is taught as that serves a purpose.

Celebrating people and hiding their past doesn't serve any purpose but to hide history is what I am saying

Also it wasn't fuelled by lack of education, it was design for capital gain, but thats another conversation.

 

[Dante]

James Penny was a slave trader, so signs for Penny Lane are being defaced in Liverpool.

 

[Infra-red]

James Penny was a slave trader, so signs for Penny Lane are being defaced in Liverpool.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know, there is no evidence that the road was named after him.

 

[Dante]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I know, there is no evidence that the road was named after him.

I'm no expert on the issue. Apparently the scousers are investigating.

Hopefully The Beatles get cancelled, the fecking overrated cnuts.

 

[Infra-red]

I'm no expert on the issue. Apparently the scousers are investigating.

Hopefully The Beatles get cancelled, the fecking overrated cnuts.

I'm a big fan, but am perfectly prepared the countenance the cancellation of Paul, with immediate effect, if only to avoid any further tarnishing of their reputation. The man cannot sing a note and should have hung up his piano 15 years ago, but I digress...

 

[sullydnl]

Was there no contemporary criticism of Churchill at all for his racist attitudes or what happened in India?

 

[DoomSlayer]

We've had similar statue arguments in Bulgaria as well. Some want the statues from communist era to be demolished, others want WW2 memorials to be destroyed, because we were on the losing side and they believe at the end of the war, the Allies needlessly bombarded and destroyed some of our cities, even when we declared defeat and had surrendered.

Actually, in the 90s, the government publicly destroyed the most famous communist mausoleum in the centre of the capital city Sofia. It's definitely a very polarising topic.

I do agree that if we start getting rid of statues for moral reasons, we can't just pick and choose.

 

[oates]

Was there no contemporary criticism of Churchill at all for his racist attitudes or what happened in India?

We were taught about the Indian Mutiny of 1857, Amritsar might have been mentioned briefly and the Thuggees were given a whole lesson once. I suppose that doesn't count does it?

I read a decent book a few years ago, maybe 5 or 6, I think it was called Britain's Empire, Resistance, Revolt and Repression or some such order of Rs but I lent it to someone and never got it back so can't be sure which order. It does seem that we cannot rely on the Curriculum for now.


Edit. Looking back it was an English lesson that was spent discussing the **** of Thuggee.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Interesting thing about the box is that they’ve been employed at numerous large scale protests before on various statues.

 

[sammsky1]

Because the forum is trying it's best to clamp down on the use of ridiculous and uncalled for insults, especially when it's simply because people don't share exactly the same opinion.

So you’re not going to answer the post and instead just deflect. OK.

 

[sammsky1]

A representation of ‘England’s finest: am sure Churchill would be proud.

For this I really do have sympathy for the police

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Such a nice atmosphere

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[sammsky1]

Must be antifa in disguise, right?

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[sammsky1]

Serlf appointee protectors of Churchill statute perform nazi salute.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[RUCK4444]

1. It is not a person.
2. We also don't tear down Cape Coast Castle in Ghana as it serves for historical context and education

My point was having statues celebrating people (without their historical context i.e whitewashing those peoples history) is unacceptable

The Colosseum should stay where it is as long as the history of the place is taught as that serves a purpose.

Celebrating people and hiding their past doesn't serve any purpose but to hide history is what I am saying

Also it wasn't fuelled by lack of education, it was design for capital gain, but thats another conversation.

Racism is widely agreed to exist through lack of education and ignorance.

Again - cut off point.

These statues don’t serve as some point to worship the person. They are symbols of history and moments in time for somebody who invented this or somebody who created the scouts or somebody who led us to victory against the Nazi regime etc etc. They are just moments in time that we’re important and serve to educate.

We should forget these moments because the person had some skewed views on race? And not for one minute should we explore the reasons that shaped that persons view?

If people think this will fix racism or even help at all they are entirely wrong, if anything I can’t really think of anything more inflammatory to harden a racist view than by taking down statues / monuments to appease the very people they already (wrongly) dislike.

Edit: Regarding my last sentence, see videos above my post that now show people making Nazi salutes at Churchill’s statue.
Only goes to show these statues should have been kept well away from the subject, they will now be flashpoints to only heighten segregation.

 

[sammsky1]

Racism is widely agreed to exist through lack of education and ignorance.

Again - cut off point.

These statues don’t serve as some point to worship the person. They are symbols of history and moments in time for somebody who invented this or somebody who created the scouts or somebody who led us to victory against the Nazi regime etc etc. They are just moments in time that we’re important and serve to educate.

We should forget these moments because the person had some skewed views on race? And not for one minute should we explore the reasons that shaped that persons view?

If people think this will fix racism or even help at all they are entirely wrong, if anything I can’t really think of anything more inflammatory to harden a racist view than by taking down statues / monuments to appease the very people they already (wrongly) dislike.

So you do t think removing a statue of a known and undisputed can be a very powerful way of educating about racism?

What do you think even happened last six days after scribbles I’m Churchill statue including today’s response by supporters of Churchill currently violently abusing police and performing nazi salutes? You think it all just entrenched people if echo chambers even further?

 

[Zlatan 7]

A representation of ‘England’s finest: am sure Churchill would be proud.

For this I really do have sympathy for the police

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Such a nice atmosphere

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

You post these but they can easily be videos posted like this for the protests over the previous week.

I’m not defending either but you can’t pick or choose what to show and defend either. When it was protesters this behaviour was brushed aside as just a few.

this was all to be expected sadly

 

[marukomu]

James Penny was a slave trader, so signs for Penny Lane are being defaced in Liverpool.

The whole city should be knocked down. They played the biggest role in the slave trade and over 1 million slaves passed through there.
That is where the majority of the city's wealth came from.

 

[Cassidy]

Racism is widely agreed to exist through lack of education and ignorance.

Again - cut off point.

These statues don’t serve as some point to worship the person. They are symbols of history and moments in time for somebody who invented this or somebody who created the scouts or somebody who led us to victory against the Nazi regime etc etc. They are just moments in time that we’re important and serve to educate.

We should forget these moments because the person had some skewed views on race? And not for one minute should we explore the reasons that shaped that persons view?

If people think this will fix racism or even help at all they are entirely wrong, if anything I can’t really think of anything more inflammatory to harden a racist view than by taking down statues / monuments to appease the very people they already (wrongly) dislike.

Edit: Regarding my last sentence, see videos above my post that now show people making Nazi salutes at Churchill’s statue.
Only goes to show these statues should have been kept well away from the subject, they will now be flashpoints to only heighten segregation.

Today, it is not widely agreed to have been how it started.

No we should not forget WW2, is the statue the only historical memorial we have of this?

Regarding Churchill specifically if you think its just racist views why people object to the statue then more education is needed.

Ensuring statues of certain people are displayed in the correct historical context will help to educate people. Many didn't even know that Churchill was a racist arian supremacist let alone know much about his role in the bengal famine of 1943

The whole issue around Churchill has more to do with the fact his history has been airbrushed.

 

[Moby]

The whole city should be knocked down. They played the biggest role in the slave trade and over 1 million slaves passed through there.
That is where the majority of the city's wealth came from.

Plus they all supported Suarez when he racially abused Evra.

 

[marukomu]

Plus they all supported Suarez when he racially abused Evra.

30 point deduction should suffice.

 

[SalfordRed18]

The UK's not a racist country, though.

 

[VP89]

The UK's not a racist country, though.

Every major city and most countries has these kind to be honest.

 

[Zlatan 7]

I’m disgusted with that. I sincerely hope that’s a minority of Britain and not representive of mosts thoughts.