GB News

[IT Minion]

That is the real objective.

It is a shame GB News weren't prosecuted for their contempt of court.

 

[ajohn]

He might be viewed as a member of the main board of a company. As they do these days people probably invested their money in companies. Some do just that and some will work for them. People are needed to organise and some to do.

Bristol and Liverpool were not the only ports involved or people either. Nor the only country and even race that was involved. Arabs figure too, collecting.
https://www.rmg.co.uk/stories/topics/how-did-slave-trade-end-britain

So a small group people probably communicating via email to get more pull a statue down. The bloke did do some good with his money. A fact. His problem is how he made it. Pulling it down doesn't do anything about that but what to do with it?. Some of the people involved would find they had effectively been slaves if they go back far enough in their ancestry what ever country they come from. Slavery is nothing new and in a small way still goes on now via illegal immigrants. More powerful and richer countries have other ways of exploiting others now but is that good or bad. Tricky subject. Going back in time maybe Rhodes was a more interesting aspect of that. What would it mean if he had never existed and no one else had done the same.

TBH I couldn't care a jot if it remained standing or got pulled down as that does absolutely nothing about how his money was made. It being there isn't going to bring slavery back. The best use I have seen of slavery was in Liverpool. Sort of museum. It gives people the history, mostly tourists and perhaps more importantly a job for a few people. The history can be obtained in a number of ways.

 

[sxturbo]

has anybody (apart from you) suggested that he single-handedly ran the slave trade?

No

It's just a foolish attempt at diversion on your part.

The proposed wording of the amended plaque said otherwise.

 

[AngleEyes]

Having managed to find a bit more out about the structure of the company, it does appear that Colston was heavily involved.

Although he was a share holder from 1680, he became a part time 'assistant' (one of the key executives operating the company) in 1681, becoming a full time assistant in 1685 and then becoming deputy governor in 1689.

He was involved in multiple sub committees that set the direction for the company, so would have been involved in the direction the company took.

Therefore, i would expect it's safe to assume he was directly involved in pursuing slaves as a tradeable commodity.

Bearing in mind that the abolition movement started about 1780, it is highly unlikely that Colston would not have been aware of the arguments against slavery.

After the formation of the Committee for the Abolition of the Slave Trade in 1787, William Wilberforce led the cause of abolition through the parliamentary campaign.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolitionism_in_the_United_Kingdom​

 

[AngleEyes]

but they weren't ever colstons ships and he wasn't solely responsible for the direction the company took. thus to hold colston solely accountable is re-writing history and is inaccurate.

No-one is suggesting he was solely responsible.
And Colston did not write the history about himself, at least in his lifetime.

There are many other statues that depict slavers.

i dont mind getting rid of the statue times change and history moves on, but lets give it some accuracy.

Better still, why don't we correct the narrative of the depiction of these people.

 

[AngleEyes]

the rhetoric being put out by activists and the media is innacurate and damaging, it is stirring up hate and devision and imo is a hate crime in itself.

That is the real objective.

So let's correct the false narrative depicted by the statues, with genuine facts about all of the reasons why these people are 'immortalised'?
The intention of erecting statues is to remind and stir up emotions. So let us allow the statues do achieve that objective, for all concerned.

 

[EFLImpudence]

So let's correct the false narrative depicted by the statues, with genuine facts about all of the reasons why these people are 'immortalised'?

What is the false narrative regarding Coulston? Did he not do good work in and for Bristol?

The intention of erecting statues is to remind and stir up emotions.

Did the statue not remind the people of Bristol of Coulston's philanthropy?
My emotions have never been stirred [up] by a statue.

So let us allow the statues do achieve that objective, for all concerned.

Do you mean by leaving them in place and concentrating on why they were erected?


If there were no statues, other methods would be chosen by the left wing activists to divide the population.

 

[JohnD]

The proposed wording of the amended plaque said otherwise.

there have been several versions, including attempts to expunge any mention of slavery and deaths.

show me the one that said "solely responsible" or "single handedly."

 

[ajohn]

left to divide the population

LOL.

 

[AngleEyes]

What is the false narrative regarding Coulston? Did he not do good work in and for Bristol?

He was described as a philanthropist.
He wasn't a philanthropist, he made his money with the bloody sacrifice of many thousands of slaves. That's not philanthropy.

Did the statue not remind the people of Bristol of Coulston's philanthropy?
My emotions have never been stirred [up] by a statue.

If you were a Jew, and your ancestors suffered at the hands of the Nazis, I suspect you'd feel pretty repulsed if you were faced with a statue of Hitler, describing him as a philanthropist.

Do you mean by leaving them in place and concentrating on why they were erected?

By leaving them in place and describing their involvement in the nefarious actions, not just those that benefitted the citizens of Bristol.

If there were no statues, other methods would be chosen by the left wing activists to divide the population.

Sure they would see those "other methods" employed by the right to whitewash history.
Left wing activists don't seek to divide the population, they seek to remove the whitewashing of history.
If we don't learn from history...etc.
How can we learn from history when it is whitewashed to remove all traces of our utter stupidity and offensive actions?

 

[fillyboy]

How can we learn from history when it is whitewashed to remove all traces of our utter stupidity and offensive actions?

Isn't that what Milo Ponsford and his chums have succeeded in doing?

 

[AngleEyes]

Isn't that what Milo Ponsford and his chums have succeeded in doing?

No, they sought to remove the statue of someone which was erected to celebrate his philanthropy, only after ten years of attempting to correct the history.
Bloody sacrifice of others is not philanthropy, never was, never will be.

 

[fillyboy]

No, they sought to remove the statue of someone which was erected to celebrate his philanthropy, only after ten years of attempting to correct the history.
Bloody sacrifice of others is not philanthropy, never was, never will be.

All they've achieved is that the law will be rewritten to prevent a similar verdict in the future. They've gotten away with it (criminal damage), it won't happen again, we owe them a debt of gratitude for exposing a weakness in the law I suppose.

 

[AngleEyes]

All they've achieved is that the law will be rewritten to prevent a similar verdict in the future. They've gotten away with it (criminal damage), it won't happen again, we owe them a debt of gratitude for exposing a weakness in the law I suppose.

A justifiable act will always be dependent on the context. You cannot legislate that away.
If you try, you may well go too far the other way, and some may be found guilty when their actions would have been justifiable by any normal thinking person.

 

[transam]

Loop hole needs closing in the law

other wise it’s a licence for

fruit cakes

dead beats and no hopers

to run riot destroying property as they see fit