[Livia]

Originally Posted by JoshBB

You wouldn't have hitler statues as 'history' and I think this is similar tbh.

Plenty of statues of Stalin dotted around, and Mao Zedong and plenty of other questionable men. Removing them would be like trying to rewrite history.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Livia

Plenty of statues of Stalin dotted around, and Mao Zedong and plenty of other questionable men. Removing them would be like trying to rewrite history.

Bang On Right
Livia.


Its Like Isis
who take down all former Statues

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by Livia

Plenty of statues of Stalin dotted around, and Mao Zedong and plenty of other questionable men. Removing them would be like trying to rewrite history.

This

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Livia

Plenty of statues of Stalin dotted around, and Mao Zedong and plenty of other questionable men. Removing them would be like trying to rewrite history.

Indeed

A bunch of spoilt prissy students just need something to complain about tbh

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Livia

Plenty of statues of Stalin dotted around, and Mao Zedong and plenty of other questionable men. Removing them would be like trying to rewrite history.

'The removal of statues is not unprecedented. Indeed, removing iconography has always been central to the process of a nation’s reckoning with its problematic past. After the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak in 2011, Egyptians waded through every street removing imagery of their finally-toppled dictator. Libyan rebels similarly tore down the statue of Muammar Gaddafi in his Bab al-Azizya compound in Tripoli. Statues of Josef Stalin are still – as recently as 2011 – being removed from all over Russia and Eastern Europe.
Of course, it would be absurd to claim that these moments deleted these figures from historical memory – rather, they represented a collective will to atone for their widely condemned actions, with the hope that by removing artefacts that idolise unethical ideologies, we can begin to learn from history’s mistakes.'

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education...is-crimes.html

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Merry Kizzmas

'Of course, it would be absurd to claim that these moments deleted these figures from historical memory – rather, they represented a collective will to atone for their widely condemned actions, with the hope that by removing artefacts that idolise unethical ideologies, we can begin to learn from history’s mistakes.'

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education...is-crimes.html

Sheer hypocrisy.

Shall we tear down the Pyramids of Giza, the Great Wall of China? and other priceless antiquities built by the blood, sweat and tears of slaves?

Shall we burn the American Declaration of Independance and demolish all that is good which followed from it, because Adams and Jefferson and the other authours of it were 'slave-owners' ?

Shaka Zulu killed, oppressed, and displaced more Africans than Rhodes and a hundred like him could ever have achieved. Shall we tear down and burn the airport in Durban South Africa named after him?

(His statue was removed from the airport in 2010 - not because of his tyrannical past, but because it showed him unarmed and tending cattle, whereas the protesters demanded that such a 'fine, legendary warrior king' should be shown with a spear and shield')

What about here in the United Kingdom - Shall we demolish every institution and technological advancement which the wealth gained by the imperialistic practices of our Victorian ancestors afforded us?

The argument against Rhodes statue is not only hypocritical, but one being voiced by sinister political agitators for their own anti-British, anti-Democratic, anti-Western agendas.

Rhodes was a creature of his time. As were the great Egyptian Pharoes, the Roman Emperors, the Chinese Emperors, the American 'Founding Fathers' and the great Industrialists of the Victorian Era.

It is enough to recognise and condemn the wrongs that they did from our lofty perches of 'New Enlightenment', but it is equally as wrong to seek to destroy the monuments they left or the statues which commemorate the undoubted good that flowed from some of those wrongs - especially when the architects of such destruction are subversive political agitators manipulating the weak-minded and gullible into supporting that sinister agenda.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Sheer hypocrisy.

Shall we tear down the Pyramids of Giza, the Great Wall of China? and other priceless antiquities built by the blood, sweat and tears of slaves?

Shall we burn the American Declaration of Independance and demolish all that is good which followed from it, because Adams and Jefferson and the other authours of it were 'slave-owners' ?

Shaka Zulu killed, oppressed, and displaced more Africans than Rhodes and a hundred like him could ever have achieved. Shall we tear down and burn the airport in Durban South Africa named after him?

(His statue was removed from the airport in 2010 - not because of his tyrannical past, but because it showed him unarmed and tending cattle, whereas the protesters demanded that such a 'fine, legendary warrior king' should be shown with a spear and shield')

What about here in the United Kingdom - Shall we demolish every institution and technological advancement which the wealth gained by the imperialistic practices of our Victorian ancestors afforded us?

The argument against Rhodes statue is not only hypocritical, but one being voiced by sinister political agitators for their own anti-British, anti-Democratic, anti-Western agendas.

Rhodes was a creature of his time. As were the great Egyptian Pharoes, the Roman Emperors, the Chinese Emperors, the American 'Founding Fathers' and the great Industrialists of the Victorian Era.

It is enough to recognise and condemn the wrongs that they did from our lofty perches of 'New Enlightenment', but it is equally as wrong to seek to destroy the monuments they left or the statues which commemorate the undoubted good that flowed from some of those wrongs - especially when the architects of such destruction are subversive political agitators manipulating the weak-minded and gullible into supporting that sinister agenda.

Weak minded, would it not be weak minded to assume that Britain has never historically had a role to play in subversion, displacement or oppression?
All these students have done is nod to that and the establishment have closed ranks, that is sinister.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Merry Kizzmas

Weak minded, would it not be weak minded to assume that Britain has never historically had a role to play in subversion, displacement or oppression?
All these students have done is nod to that and the establishment have closed ranks, that is sinister.

No One has suggested that Britain has never historically been subversive etc... No one. And yet you keep suggesting it, like you're the only one with enough intelligence to grasp the facts, which is clearly not true.

The students demanded the statue is removed and quite rightly they have been told no.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Livia

No One has suggested that Britain has never historically been subversive etc... No one. And yet you keep suggesting it, like you're the only one with enough intelligence to grasp the facts, which is clearly not true.

The students demanded the statue is removed and quite rightly they have been told no.

I don't need to reaffirm my intelligence by calling into question the intelligence of others, it's irrelevant to me and my take frankly.

I posed a question, it wasn't suggesting anyone had suggested anything.

They called into question his legitimacy is all.

[RichardG]

I don't think each new generation should remove a structure from the past just becsuse it doesn't fully represent modern values. They add to our culture and make our streets a little more diverse. Loads of people had probably never heard of Rhodes before this campaign was launched so why should we remove the statue to prevent future generations from learning? Take this opportunity to put an information board nearby explaining all about him so that people can make up their own minds about who he was. They say that if we don't learn from the mistakes of our past then we are doomed to repeat it so I don't see the point in removing such an easily accessible piece of history like a statue.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by RichardG

I don't think each new generation should remove a structure from the past just becsuse it doesn't fully represent modern values. They add to our culture and make our streets a little more diverse. Loads of people had probably never heard of Rhodes before this campaign was launched so why should we remove the statue to prevent future generations from learning? Take this opportunity to put an information board nearby explaining all about him so that people can make up their own minds about who he was. They say that if we don't learn from the mistakes of our past then we are doomed to repeat it so I don't see the point in removing such an easily accessible piece of history like a statue.

Yes - another great post Richard.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by RichardG

I don't think each new generation should remove a structure from the past just becsuse it doesn't fully represent modern values. They add to our culture and make our streets a little more diverse. Loads of people had probably never heard of Rhodes before this campaign was launched so why should we remove the statue to prevent future generations from learning? Take this opportunity to put an information board nearby explaining all about him so that people can make up their own minds about who he was. They say that if we don't learn from the mistakes of our past then we are doomed to repeat it so I don't see the point in removing such an easily accessible piece of history like a statue.

A statue says nothing, we have other things that are even more easily accessible that tell of our past... they're called books

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Merry Kizzmas

Weak minded, would it not be weak minded to assume that Britain has never historically had a role to play in subversion, displacement or oppression?
All these students have done is nod to that and the establishment have closed ranks, that is sinister.

If we - and they - are talking here of "subversion, displacement or oppression", not only have you not addressed my points about Shaka Zulu, but also perhaps, these 'students' should stop focusing their rage solely on a statue of their benefactor - historical imperialist oppressor or not - and instead broaden such 'genuine' outrage to include monuments, statue, and all forms of euologies to Saint Nelson Mandela, the self-confessed murderer and terrorist who at his trial pleaded guilty as the head of terrorist organisation UmKhonto we Sizwe, (MK), to 156 acts of violence perpetrated against innocent South African civilians.

These acts comprised of organising terrorist bombing campaigns which injured and killed innocent civilians - including women and children - in public places such as railway stations, shopping centres, Magistrate’s Courts, and cinemas.

I know this may not weigh as heavily in your view as the deeds of that nasty imperialist Rhodes, but if these students protests ARE truly based on the injustice and oppression of South African people, then surely Mandela should be high on their 'Statue Removal' hit list?

Finally - it is over 20 years since the abhorrent regime of Apartheid ended in South Africa, so I would be interested in anyone posting a factual account of just how much that country has progressed and evolved, and how life for ORDINARY South Africans has improved since that day.

How are the ANC doing?

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

If we - and they - are talking here of "subversion, displacement or oppression", not only have you not addressed my points about Shaka Zulu, but also perhaps, these 'students' should stop focusing their rage solely on a statue of their benefactor - historical imperialist oppressor or not - and instead broaden such 'genuine' outrage to include monuments, statue, and all forms of euologies to Saint Nelson Mandela, the self-confessed murderer and terrorist who at his trial pleaded guilty as the head of terrorist organisation UmKhonto we Sizwe, (MK), to 156 acts of violence perpetrated against innocent South African civilians.

These acts comprised of organising terrorist bombing campaigns which injured and killed innocent civilians - including women and children - in public places such as railway stations, shopping centres, Magistrate’s Courts, and cinemas.

I know this may not weigh as heavily in your view as the deeds of that nasty imperialist Rhodes, but if these students protests ARE truly based on the injustice and oppression of South African people, then surely Mandela should be high on their 'Statue Removal' hit list?

Finally - it is over 20 years since the abhorrent regime of Apartheid ended in South Africa, so I would be interested in anyone posting a factual account of just how much that country has progressed and evolved, and how life for ORDINARY South Africans has improved since that day.

How are the ANC doing?

He most certainly was and as that is the topic currently up for discussion I choose to maintain my focus on that. If you wish to begin a thread in which to question Nelson Mandelas ethics go ahead, I don't feel the two are comparable personally.
That said it has been suggested that without Rhodes there would have been no apartheid, therefore ANC would never have come to be.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Merry Kizzmas

He most certainly was and as that is the topic currently up for discussion I choose to maintain my focus on that. If you wish to begin a thread in which to question Nelson Mandelas ethics go ahead, I don't feel the two are comparable personally.
That said it has been suggested that without Rhodes there would have been no apartheid, therefore ANC would never have come to be.

It has also been suggested that without Rhodes - and others like him - South Africans would still be living in mudbrick and rammed earth houses, without sanitation, and in primitive conditions.

I do not need to begin a new thread in which to 'question Mandela's ethics', this is Serious Debates and Mandela is highly relevant to this topic.

Up to now, despite this forum being called Serious Debates, your posts have not countered any of the arguments against this agitator - Rhodes will, Mandela, Shaka Zuklu etc - only ignored them because you have no legitimate counters, and just as one glance at any newspaper will confirm that your subversive black student has lost his argument in the real world, then likewise, even the most cursory of glances through this thread will confirm that you too have lost your argument in support of him on here.

A victory then for common sense and democracy.