Quizzes & Puzzles3 mins ago
Jimmy Saville
Think of it this way...Jimmy Saville.
Whilst he was alive, he raised about £40m for Stoke Mandeville Hospital. He was a hero. A national treasure. He earned an O.B.E.
Then he was knighted.
If in the 1970s, Stoke Mandeville decided to erect a statue in honour of him, knowing what we now know - isn’t it understandable that people would want it removed?
Wouldn’t the children of those that Saville abused not want to see a public monument to him?
Whilst he was alive, he raised about £40m for Stoke Mandeville Hospital. He was a hero. A national treasure. He earned an O.B.E.
Then he was knighted.
If in the 1970s, Stoke Mandeville decided to erect a statue in honour of him, knowing what we now know - isn’t it understandable that people would want it removed?
Wouldn’t the children of those that Saville abused not want to see a public monument to him?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sp1814. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
As has been explained ad nauseum he was regarded as a philantropist and benefactor. At the time his statue went up he had done no wrong.
This country later rectified that so perhaps the descendants of 150,000 slaves who were rescued by the Royal Navy West Africa Squadron might commemorate the loss of thousands of British sailors who died liberating them.
This country later rectified that so perhaps the descendants of 150,000 slaves who were rescued by the Royal Navy West Africa Squadron might commemorate the loss of thousands of British sailors who died liberating them.
> Without question there's racists in the country (there are in every country on the face of the planet), but to tar a whole nation as racist is incorrect and unfair.
Nope, we're systematically racist, and that's why we're even having a debate about whether a monument to a perpetrator of crimes against humanity is appropriate or not. It shouldn't even be a debate. It's absolutely obvious it's not appropriate.
Let's personalise this a little. Derek lives in Bristol. He used to walk past the Colston statue twice a day, five days a week. Derek's grandparents came from Jamaica in 1948, part of the Windrush generation encouraged by British government in 1948 to come over and fill shortages in the labour market. Derek's parents were both born and raised in England. So was Derek.
Derek's grandparents were in Jamaica in the first place because Colston and others like him forced them out of Africa and put them to work as slaves in a completely different part of the world. Many of those slaves were raped, tortured and murdered alongside being kidnapped, expatriated and subjected to forced labour.
So here's Derek, his ancestors suffering crimes against humanity at Colston's hands, his grandparents coming to England by invitation and being granted citizenship by the UK government, his parents and himself born and raised here, walking twice daily past a monument to the slave trader. What does he make of it? What would you make of it.
What I would make of it is that this country, that I'm a citizen of, has something so seriously against me that it would tolerate that statue standing to that man in the city I've been born and raised in.
Nope, we're systematically racist, and that's why we're even having a debate about whether a monument to a perpetrator of crimes against humanity is appropriate or not. It shouldn't even be a debate. It's absolutely obvious it's not appropriate.
Let's personalise this a little. Derek lives in Bristol. He used to walk past the Colston statue twice a day, five days a week. Derek's grandparents came from Jamaica in 1948, part of the Windrush generation encouraged by British government in 1948 to come over and fill shortages in the labour market. Derek's parents were both born and raised in England. So was Derek.
Derek's grandparents were in Jamaica in the first place because Colston and others like him forced them out of Africa and put them to work as slaves in a completely different part of the world. Many of those slaves were raped, tortured and murdered alongside being kidnapped, expatriated and subjected to forced labour.
So here's Derek, his ancestors suffering crimes against humanity at Colston's hands, his grandparents coming to England by invitation and being granted citizenship by the UK government, his parents and himself born and raised here, walking twice daily past a monument to the slave trader. What does he make of it? What would you make of it.
What I would make of it is that this country, that I'm a citizen of, has something so seriously against me that it would tolerate that statue standing to that man in the city I've been born and raised in.
"African participation in the slave trade
Slave traders in Gorée, Senegal, 18th century
Africans played a direct role in the slave trade, selling their captives or prisoners of war to European buyers.[22] The prisoners and captives who were sold were usually from neighbouring or enemy ethnic groups.[citation needed] These captive slaves were considered "other", not part of the people of the ethnic group or "tribe"
"Although Europeans were the market for slaves, Europeans rarely entered the interior of Africa, due to fear of disease and fierce African resistance.[56] In Africa, convicted criminals could be punished by enslavement, a punishment which became more prevalent as slavery became more lucrative. Since most of these nations did not have a prison system, convicts were often sold or used in the scattered local domestic slave market"
It seems that a lot of the African slaves were forced to leave Africa by there fellow Africans.
Slave traders in Gorée, Senegal, 18th century
Africans played a direct role in the slave trade, selling their captives or prisoners of war to European buyers.[22] The prisoners and captives who were sold were usually from neighbouring or enemy ethnic groups.[citation needed] These captive slaves were considered "other", not part of the people of the ethnic group or "tribe"
"Although Europeans were the market for slaves, Europeans rarely entered the interior of Africa, due to fear of disease and fierce African resistance.[56] In Africa, convicted criminals could be punished by enslavement, a punishment which became more prevalent as slavery became more lucrative. Since most of these nations did not have a prison system, convicts were often sold or used in the scattered local domestic slave market"
It seems that a lot of the African slaves were forced to leave Africa by there fellow Africans.
Derek isn't suffering from crimes against humanity at all. Any more than anyone else in the UK is (with possible very rare undiscovered exceptions, maybe, the facts of which we trust the police will uncover soonest). As for passing a statue of a benefactor of the city, why would he choose to give it any heed, let alone cause trouble making a fuss ? I think folk should speak only for themselves and their own attitudes, rather than accuse everyone.
> I don't know, maybe Derek will be along soon with an answer.
The nearest we have to him is sp1814.
> It seems that a lot of the African slaves were forced to leave Africa by there fellow Africans.
We're discussing Colston here.
> As for passing a statue of a benefactor of the city, why would he choose to give it any heed
Because of what it represents - the glorification of somebody who traded in the lives of his ancestors, who only had the money to benefit the city in the first place because of the appalling treatment he presided over.
The nearest we have to him is sp1814.
> It seems that a lot of the African slaves were forced to leave Africa by there fellow Africans.
We're discussing Colston here.
> As for passing a statue of a benefactor of the city, why would he choose to give it any heed
Because of what it represents - the glorification of somebody who traded in the lives of his ancestors, who only had the money to benefit the city in the first place because of the appalling treatment he presided over.
> we see no evidence here of accusations against known individuals, merely the desire to accuse and pin blame on a known name for everything
No, not everything, but he was a known slave trader, and he made a heck of a lot of money out of it. With that money, he set up various charities - but he wouldn't have been able to do that if he hadn't presided over the murder, rape, torture, kidnap and more, of black people in the process.
No, not everything, but he was a known slave trader, and he made a heck of a lot of money out of it. With that money, he set up various charities - but he wouldn't have been able to do that if he hadn't presided over the murder, rape, torture, kidnap and more, of black people in the process.
//What does he make of it? What would you make of it.//
What if Derek asked his parents why Grandpa and Granny came to England and they replied that someone on AB called Ellipses stated earlier that the Windrush generation came to Britain to enjoy the better prospects that were freely available to all who were willing to work for them. Prospects that were not available in their native Jamaica. Prospects like work, education, employment , housing and a National Health Service. Those prospects are there for all and,in this modern day, most of us are grateful for it. Those who are not grateful are always free to seek better alternatives elsewhere.
That's why grannie and grandpa came here son.
What if Derek asked his parents why Grandpa and Granny came to England and they replied that someone on AB called Ellipses stated earlier that the Windrush generation came to Britain to enjoy the better prospects that were freely available to all who were willing to work for them. Prospects that were not available in their native Jamaica. Prospects like work, education, employment , housing and a National Health Service. Those prospects are there for all and,in this modern day, most of us are grateful for it. Those who are not grateful are always free to seek better alternatives elsewhere.
That's why grannie and grandpa came here son.
> Those prospects are there for all and,in this modern day, most of us are grateful for it
Different people in this country have different prospects based on a number of factors like class, sex, age, gender and race. It's a fact. We're discussing race here, and in particular a statue. What the statue demonstrates are the underlying systemic issues behind the race element.
> Those who are not grateful are always free to seek better alternatives elsewhere.
All citizens of the UK can be grateful for the society they have and still want to improve that society for the future. They don't have to "seek better alternatives elsewhere", they are home. The better alternatives are here, in the future.
Different people in this country have different prospects based on a number of factors like class, sex, age, gender and race. It's a fact. We're discussing race here, and in particular a statue. What the statue demonstrates are the underlying systemic issues behind the race element.
> Those who are not grateful are always free to seek better alternatives elsewhere.
All citizens of the UK can be grateful for the society they have and still want to improve that society for the future. They don't have to "seek better alternatives elsewhere", they are home. The better alternatives are here, in the future.
/Unfortunately there was a time in our history when slavery was accepted. I can't ever remember reading about a time in our history when peadophilia was accepted./ by royfromaus.
I often wonder why ships' Captains used to have a cabin boy. I also read, quite some time ago that pederasty was a fashionable thing for "gentlemen" on the Grand Tour in the 18th century. Sorry can't find a link to that. I'm sure it was in one of the broadsheets.
Naomi said Jimmy Saville was a criminal. But as others have pointed out, he was never brought to justice. Bt in tghe light of the allegations, it's understandable to think of him that way. And as quickly as all the allgations surfaced about him, his family had his headstone removed from his grave.
I often wonder why ships' Captains used to have a cabin boy. I also read, quite some time ago that pederasty was a fashionable thing for "gentlemen" on the Grand Tour in the 18th century. Sorry can't find a link to that. I'm sure it was in one of the broadsheets.
Naomi said Jimmy Saville was a criminal. But as others have pointed out, he was never brought to justice. Bt in tghe light of the allegations, it's understandable to think of him that way. And as quickly as all the allgations surfaced about him, his family had his headstone removed from his grave.
I still think by the same criteria statues of former monarchs should be removed. All those who chopped heads off Catholics, all those who burnt protestants at the stake, all those who employed any form of torture - and how about all holders of any title relating to the British Empire? And whilst we're at it let's demolish the schools, colleges, art galleries and all that benefitted from today's notions of criminal behaviour too. Come on, let’s go the whole hog! Let’s abandon our heritage and banish our history forever to obscurity! Come on brothers! To the revolution!! Hurrah!
Maybe, but I think not.
You have to question why the statue is there. Statues can be erected for many reasons. One reason is glorification.
In Colston's case, the statue is there is to glorify him for the charitable donations he made. But he made the money to make the donations through presiding over the kidnapping, rape, murder and forced labour of human beings. There's a direct link between the foul deeds presided over by Colston, the money he made in that process, the charitable donations he gave, and the statue. That's why his glorification in that statue is no longer appropriate. The same statue in a museum is fine; it's not glorification in that context, it's historical record.
As for a monarch, you'd have to identify why the statue was there, and what context it was set in, and then you could figure out whether it was appropriate in that setting. Mostly yes, I'd have thought.
You have to question why the statue is there. Statues can be erected for many reasons. One reason is glorification.
In Colston's case, the statue is there is to glorify him for the charitable donations he made. But he made the money to make the donations through presiding over the kidnapping, rape, murder and forced labour of human beings. There's a direct link between the foul deeds presided over by Colston, the money he made in that process, the charitable donations he gave, and the statue. That's why his glorification in that statue is no longer appropriate. The same statue in a museum is fine; it's not glorification in that context, it's historical record.
As for a monarch, you'd have to identify why the statue was there, and what context it was set in, and then you could figure out whether it was appropriate in that setting. Mostly yes, I'd have thought.
For centuries, our Judeo / Christian heritage was the foundation of many of our important institutions.
With the advance of secular humanist atheism, there has been a loss of natural moral authority, leaving a moral vacuum.
The vacuum is now being filled by something, I'm not sure what it will turn out to be, but it is ugly, and I think will be paid for in racist murders and riots, the USA giving us the role model for destruction.
The BAMEs have never had such a loud voice, and its getting louder, led by the likes of Lammy and prominent Leftists who are showing us an emerging Fascism.
White culture is on the back foot, and being pushed further and further back, by giving more and more to the demands of BAMEs.
The Atheist Secular Humanists will never fill the vacuum mentioned earlier, frightening times indeed, and a challenge for all who believe I truth and decency.
With the advance of secular humanist atheism, there has been a loss of natural moral authority, leaving a moral vacuum.
The vacuum is now being filled by something, I'm not sure what it will turn out to be, but it is ugly, and I think will be paid for in racist murders and riots, the USA giving us the role model for destruction.
The BAMEs have never had such a loud voice, and its getting louder, led by the likes of Lammy and prominent Leftists who are showing us an emerging Fascism.
White culture is on the back foot, and being pushed further and further back, by giving more and more to the demands of BAMEs.
The Atheist Secular Humanists will never fill the vacuum mentioned earlier, frightening times indeed, and a challenge for all who believe I truth and decency.
