This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
SW-User
Yes, I think they do. Taking the statues away doesn't change anything. Colston was still a slaver and the people of Bristol in 1895 thought he was worth commemorating 170 years after his death. I think the statue will now be in a museum, where far fewer people will see it. Possibly a missed opportunity to educate more people.
Bristol seems to be particularly, or maybe deliberately, ignorant of the role of slavery in its history. There is a good article in the local paper about it here. Until recently, only 100 people had signed a petition to remove it.
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/how-city-failed-remove-edward-4211771
Having said that, I'm not saying no statues should be removed. I'm sure there aren't any statues of Cromwell left in Ireland. I think it's a very difficult judgement to decide what should be removed. Were the Taliban right to destroy 1700 year old statues of Buddha?
Bristol seems to be particularly, or maybe deliberately, ignorant of the role of slavery in its history. There is a good article in the local paper about it here. Until recently, only 100 people had signed a petition to remove it.
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/how-city-failed-remove-edward-4211771
Having said that, I'm not saying no statues should be removed. I'm sure there aren't any statues of Cromwell left in Ireland. I think it's a very difficult judgement to decide what should be removed. Were the Taliban right to destroy 1700 year old statues of Buddha?
@SW-User At least, there were 1700 year old statues of Buddha for the Taliban to destroy... the way that things are going - our current statues will be ending up in some warehouse before being sold off to the highest bidder in some private auction somewhere...
SW-User
@HootyTheNightOwl I'd be happy to get rid of them all if someone wants to buy them. I'm not a fan of statues at all to be honest. But that's just my personal tastes.