Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 16 Aug '17 12:39
    Should the Jefferson Memorial be pulled down considering he had slaves?
  2. Standard member shavixmir
    Guppy poo
    16 Aug '17 13:03
    Originally posted by @whodey
    Should the Jefferson Memorial be pulled down considering he had slaves?
    I was going to start a thread on this subject, but larger:

    Should statues be removed?

    Winston Churchill sent a generation of New Zealand men to their deaths in Turkey.

    Thatcher is hated by 50% of the English, 90% of the Welsh and 100% of the Scots.

    William Wallace killed civilians.

    Nelson Mandela was a convicted terrorist.

    Etc.

    Should statues be removed because of a changed political climate? Or is it alright to have statues only a minority will like?

    Personally, at this moment, I've never really given it much thought. But, in a first wave of emotion, I reckon statues / painting / art shouldn't be subject to political views and whimsy.

    That being said, I'm eagre to hear the views on the matter.
    Try not to focus on slaves, Trump and evil. But on the larger issue.
  3. 16 Aug '17 13:19
    Originally posted by @shavixmir
    I was going to start a thread on this subject, but larger:

    Should statues be removed?

    Winston Churchill sent a generation of New Zealand men to their deaths in Turkey.

    Thatcher is hated by 50% of the English, 90% of the Welsh and 100% of the Scots.

    William Wallace killed civilians.

    Nelson Mandela was a convicted terrorist.

    Etc.

    Shoul ...[text shortened]... r the views on the matter.
    Try not to focus on slaves, Trump and evil. But on the larger issue.
    This sort of thing is similar to MLB wanting or not wanting to induct players into the Hall of Fame due to various personal problems.

    Pete Rose is the all time hit king but because he was shown to have gambled on games he was kept out of the Hall. Recently, he was also shown to have had sex with under age girls while playing baseball.

    In my opinion, history is history. It's the good, the bad, and the ugly. When we get into beauty competitions and PC wars as to who should or should not be remembered we run into trouble.

    I say take all statues down or simply let them stand to remind us of our checkered past.

    As far as Pete Rose is concerned, he should be in the Hall of Fame as well as an in depth history showing his short comings.
  4. 16 Aug '17 13:22
    In a recent interview Al Sharpton seemed to indicated that the Jefferson Memorial should beg taken down.

    Any takers?
  5. 16 Aug '17 13:29
    Originally posted by @whodey
    Recently, he was also shown to have had sex with under age girls while playing baseball.
    You would have thought one of the umpires would have spotted this.
  6. 16 Aug '17 13:54 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by @rank-outsider
    You would have thought one of the umpires would have spotted this.
    He must have done it between innings in the dugout is all I can figure

    It's kinda sad really. The team that he played for is now labeled a small market team and have been horrible for some time. All they have are the memories from when Pete played and the years they played winning baseball. Every so often they pay tribute to him to try and bring in fans once again. After this latest revelation, it was the final knife in their gut.
  7. 16 Aug '17 14:12
    It seems to me the obvious answer is to quit with erecting all these silly memorials and statues of temporary heroes and just plant a bunch of trees instead.

    But that's probably too rational :/
  8. 16 Aug '17 14:14
    Originally posted by @great-king-rat
    It seems to me the obvious answer is to quit with erecting all these silly memorials and statues of temporary heroes and just plant a bunch of trees instead.

    But that's probably too rational :/
    No hero worship?

    After all, if it were not for all of our intellectual elite governing over us we would all be dying in the streets.

    Where is your gratitude and dependence man?
  9. 16 Aug '17 14:34
    Originally posted by @whodey
    No hero worship?

    After all, if it were not for all of our intellectual elite governing over us we would all be dying in the streets.

    Where is your gratitude and dependence man?
    You are projecting your own need for an all-powerful "hero" again, Whodey.

    How sad.
  10. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    16 Aug '17 14:35 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by @shavixmir
    I was going to start a thread on this subject, but larger:

    Should statues be removed?

    Winston Churchill sent a generation of New Zealand men to their deaths in Turkey.

    Thatcher is hated by 50% of the English, 90% of the Welsh and 100% of the Scots.

    William Wallace killed civilians.

    Nelson Mandela was a convicted terrorist.

    Etc.

    Shoul ...[text shortened]... r the views on the matter.
    Try not to focus on slaves, Trump and evil. But on the larger issue.
    ....in a first wave of emotion, I reckon statues / painting / art shouldn't be subject to political views and whimsy....

    Remind us again just why these statues were erected, if not to reflect the political views and whimsy of the moment. It is those very political views these statues represent and in some cases it is not a bad thing to notice that the views are outdated and no longer welcome. To take a random case, let's say a celebration of racism and slavery might be unwelcome in a mixed society where the descendents of slaves and their owners want to build a better world together. A statue erected to remind white supremacists of their heyday is an in-your-face insult to their black victims.

    Dublin had a statue of Nelson on the top of a very tall column in its main street. I recall in my childhood walking up the steep and very unnerving spiral staircase to the top, pushing past people coming the other way (mostly them pushing and me being pushed). Then it blew away, leaving a gap filled with Irish air. There is no English Nelson-shaped hole to be seen. I disapprove of the bombing of course, and the Irish nationalist sentiment, but then again Nelson was there to represent an English nationalist sentiment and like other Irish people I resented it. So on balance, it had to go one way or t'other. Sometimes history just needs a helping hand.
  11. 16 Aug '17 15:25
    Originally posted by @rank-outsider
    You would have thought one of the umpires would have spotted this.
    He would have been called out before he -- wait for it -- got to first base.
  12. Standard member shavixmir
    Guppy poo
    16 Aug '17 16:24
    Originally posted by @finnegan
    ....in a first wave of emotion, I reckon statues / painting / art shouldn't be subject to political views and whimsy....

    Remind us again just why these statues were erected, if not to reflect the political views and whimsy of the moment.
    Obviously.
    So, people are proud (or are told that they are proud) of say the accomplishments of Rolf Harris: great entertainer, great musician, great drawer, etc.
    So, to celebrate his greatness they erect (excuse the pun) a statue for him in the centre of London.

    20 years later he's jailed because he's a paedophile.
    Does that make his music, entertainment and paintings any less good? Can that not be celebrated in someone?

    Or, another example, take Bomber Harris (I seem to be on a Harris-role here for some reason). A statue erected for him, because he helped win the war.
    50 years later opinions have changed about fire bombing cities with civilians in them.
    Should the statue be removed, because concepts of wrong and right have changed? Should the statue remain, because he did help win the war? Can the two things coincide together?

    Is it possible to celebrate someone today, yet find out tomorrow that he's different?
    And if so, does that actually remove the celebration from history? Should it?
    Or should the celebration remain commemorated, even if only to remind is of what was and what we were once applauding?

    I don't find it so black & white at all.
  13. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    16 Aug '17 17:18
    Originally posted by @shavixmir
    Obviously.
    So, people are proud (or are told that they are proud) of say the accomplishments of Rolf Harris: great entertainer, great musician, great drawer, etc.
    So, to celebrate his greatness they erect (excuse the pun) a statue for him in the centre of London.

    20 years later he's jailed because he's a paedophile.
    Does that make his music, ent ...[text shortened]... nd is of what was and what we were once applauding?

    I don't find it so black & white at all.
    Plenty of historical statues are secure on their pedestals.

    People get excited about those which have a direct relevance today.

    If it is understandable that some people might want to erect a monument to their opinions at one time, why is it not understandable that people might want to remove the same monument to those opinions at another time? Why is one privileged and the other condemned?

    Statues and monuments are erected because they are effective - it follows that they matter. People who share the values expressed by the monument may well want it retained, people rejecting those values may well want it removed. That is not a silly debate about an inanimate piece of stone, and it also is not a foolish debate about a matter of historical interest only. If it was only of historical interest it would be ignored because nobody would care. It is a lively debate about values that matter to them today.

    And why is the row over one specific statue being generalised in this way? The specific issues provoked by this statue are specific to this statue in this location. I can get angry with one statue while ignoring another down the road and I am not under some kind of a duty to treat all statues equally.

    Next week I may indeed get cross about a statue of Rolf Harris. In fact I already am - tell me where it is so I can protest.
  14. 16 Aug '17 17:34
    Originally posted by @finnegan
    ....in a first wave of emotion, I reckon statues / painting / art shouldn't be subject to political views and whimsy....

    Remind us again just why these statues were erected, if not to reflect the political views and whimsy of the moment. It is those very political views these statues represent and in some cases it is not a bad thing to notice t ...[text shortened]... So on balance, it had to go one way or t'other. Sometimes history just needs a helping hand.
    Is heritage like our sex, can we choose it?
  15. 16 Aug '17 17:35
    Originally posted by @finnegan
    Plenty of historical statues are secure on their pedestals.

    People get excited about those which have a direct relevance today.

    If it is understandable that some people might want to erect a monument to their opinions at one time, why is it not understandable that people might want to remove the same monument to those opinions at another time? Why ...[text shortened]... ross about a statue of Rolf Harris. In fact I already am - tell me where it is so I can protest.
    As you point out, erecting a statue is a political statement, as is getting rid of one.

    It's all about making political statements