17-06-2020, 10:02 AM
301
Re: Statues
Originally Posted by Mups
->
May I poke me nose in here and put a whole different slant on the subject of destroying Statues.Now these aren't my own words, I just wanted to quote something from the Sunday paper which looks at wrecking these statues from a different angle.
Quote:
"The Prime Minister says that to remove statues - even ones commemorating people such as slave trader Edward Colston - is to ' lie about our history.'
This seems fair.
"So presumably, when so many in Britain were cheering Iraquis as they tore down the statue of Saddam Hussein, Boris screamed: "NO. They must leave him up there. He's part of their history.'
He must feel the same about the statues of Stalin that were torn down.
And he must be furious that in France, or anywhere else invaded by the Germans, there are no monuments to Hitler."
Unquote.
Interesting way of looking at it, I thought.
17-06-2020, 10:16 AM
302
Re: Statues
Originally Posted by bakerman
->
It would be nice if statues showed only the best that a nation has to offer. Personally, I can think of hundreds and hundreds of moral, high caliber people who deserve statues. Perhaps, at the very top of my list of deserving people is Gandhi. I can think of no other moral, service to his country, man than Gandhi.
Unfortunately, there are modern day people who don't give a hoot about morality.
People who "did good" in their day and observed accepted standards of behaviour should not be condemned because of changes in what comprises good morality today.
They were people of their time.
17-06-2020, 10:16 AM
303
Re: Statues
Tearing down statues is just a Mao'ist way of destroying the country so it can be rebuilt on communism like Poll Pot did.Interesting quote from Jordan Petersen I saw yesterday.
[quote]
Just like the terrorists in the Middle East surrounded their hideout with innocent women and children, so if you bomb the hideout, you kill these innocent people. The social justice warrior types do exactly the same thing. They find a group and they use them as a protective shield while they move incrementally forward. If you object, suddenly, your picking on the poor, vulnerable people.
[unquote]
Last time I saw statues torn down like this it was the Islamic State tearing down religious artefacts and statues in the Middle East, in the same way that BLM have been tearing down historic statues in London.
17-06-2020, 10:23 AM
304
Re: Statues
Originally Posted by Mups
->
Krauts, Japs, Yids, Yanks, Brits, Frogs . . . are all these banned from now on then? 
As Shirley Conran wrote "Life's too short to stuff a mushroom"
17-06-2020, 10:35 AM
306
Re: Statues
Originally Posted by spitfire
->
But, it seems Life's not too short to keep the Mushrooms in the dark, and feed them on Bullshit.
17-06-2020, 10:52 AM
307
Re: Statues
Originally Posted by Mups
->
May I poke me nose in here and put a whole different slant on the subject of destroying Statues.Now these aren't my own words, I just wanted to quote something from the Sunday paper which looks at wrecking these statues from a different angle.
Quote:
"The Prime Minister says that to remove statues - even ones commemorating people such as slave trader Edward Colston - is to ' lie about our history.'
This seems fair.
"So presumably, when so many in Britain were cheering Iraquis as they tore down the statue of Saddam Hussein, Boris screamed: "NO. They must leave him up there. He's part of their history.'
He must feel the same about the statues of Stalin that were torn down.
And he must be furious that in France, or anywhere else invaded by the Germans, there are no monuments to Hitler."
Unquote.
Interesting way of looking at it, I thought.
Just a quick point I noticed in the quote you posted.....
I don't think many people were cheering in the UK since most people didn't want to go to war there in the first place. And the argument drags on, with many people wanting to see Blair prosecuted over the war crimes he committed.
17-06-2020, 10:53 AM
308
Re: Statues
Originally Posted by The Artful Todger
->
What represented good morality in the past when the whole moral compass was very different from today should not be condemned because of significant changes in the moral compass today, many of which are stupid and deplorable and based on emotion rather than fact. People who "did good" in their day and observed accepted standards of behaviour should not be condemned because of changes in what comprises good morality today.
They were people of their time.
|
|
