View Full Version : Justifiable vandalism?
I don't like vandalism but there are times when my commitment to non-vandalism wavers.
https://thelincolnite.co.uk/2020/11/council-to-spend-100k-on-thatcher-statue-unveiling/
Grantham had one famous citizen and one, lets say, more controversial. One advanced science the other helped with soft ice cream (and destroyed mining/heavy industry as a side line).
Lincolnshire is a relatively poor rural county so spending £100k on the ̶w̶i̶t̶c̶h̶ lady's statue seems a poor choice of priorities.
Finally, I don't think a 10' plinth will help, the Colston (Bristol) statue was on a 10.5' plinth and he went swimming.
(disclaimer: I'm not a fan)
It all comes down to opinion. Whether that is based on true facts and research is a different question all together. Many people seem to like jumping on a band wagon jump without doing their own research and deciding their own opinion based off facts, and not propaganda or an unbalanced argument.
SV650rules
01-12-20, 02:54 PM
It all comes down to opinion. Whether that is based on true facts and research is a different question all together. Many people seem to like jumping on a band wagon jump without doing their own research and deciding their own opinion based off facts, and not propaganda or an unbalanced argument.
+1
Just like BLM don't want to know that not only did Britain abolish slavery but spent huge amounts of money keeping our naval ships blockading west coast of Africa to make sure other nations could not continue with it.
+1
Just like BLM don't want to know that not only did Britain abolish slavery but spent huge amounts of money keeping our naval ships blockading west coast of Africa to make sure other nations could not continue with it.
Wow, what an amazing piece of whitewashing. Yes, William Wilberforce (from Hull) was instrumental in ending the slave trade and introduced several bills to parliament from 1789. Until it was abolished though, England was (with Portugal) one of the "successful" slave trading countries. Slavery wan't abolished in England until 1833.
There is no way we English can look back at this era with any sense of pride.
History is History. Learning from it is what makes the difference between the past & Future, and preventing things from repeating.
Adam Ef
01-12-20, 09:37 PM
There's recording history to learn from and then there's celebrating people by (literally) putting them on a pedestal.
The Colston thing has hung over Bristol for a long long time. Glad to see the back of the statue that stood there as an insult to so many people for too many years.
what people seem to forget about Britain is we were slaves to the Romans for around 300+ years but do we moan about it.... ermm no, so why should the colour of ones skin make things different. after all its not like all the other slave trading country's are caucasian dominated.
i think people need to give all the hate up and live in the now, this includes the Jews. who gives a fek what happened 80 years ago never mind 100-200. all of those people are dead. what was done was done no point crying about it.
it makes me sick just thinking about some of the atrocities but the past is the past.
some people in countries are still chopping each other up with machetes but people would rather moan about something that happened in the past and pull down statues...... you might as well include the royal family.
yes it get my goat........
what people seem to forget about Britain is we were slaves to the Romans for around 300+ years but do we moan about it.... ermm no, so why should the colour of ones skin make things different. after all its not like all the other slave trading country's are caucasian dominated.
i think people need to give all the hate up and live in the now, this includes the Jews. who gives a fek what happened 80 years ago never mind 100-200. all of those people are dead. what was done was done no point crying about it.
it makes me sick just thinking about some of the atrocities but the past is the past.
some people in countries are still chopping each other up with machetes but people would rather moan about something that happened in the past and pull down statues...... you might as well include the royal family.
yes it get my goat........
+1. As it happens, there's plenty of evidence of whites being slaves (esp Irish.), as well as evidence of many other terrible events/behaviours throughout history that we should never see repeated.
Yes, there's nothing to be proud of but we can only influence the future and personally I don't think that's best served by trying to forcefully and violently wipe out the signs of the past.
IMHO, the sort of unilateral judgement that has been demonstrated recently is more a symptom of anarchy than an indicator of a civilised, mature society. If one objects to something then protest by all means, debate of course, but be aware that in my eyes you undermine your own cause if you jump to self-appointed acts of destruction instead of gaining consensus by persausion.
Craig380
02-12-20, 08:10 AM
The statue should be made of raw cast iron in honour of the Iron Lady, so it can rust into an unidentifiable lump.
keith_d
02-12-20, 08:30 AM
Like it or not a lot of people in this country voted for her more than once. She's part of our history.
As several people have already said, we can't unwrite our history only learn from it.
I wonder if it's egg proof?
https://news.sky.com/story/margaret-thatcher-statue-more-than-1-000-vow-to-attend-egg-throwing-contest-at-unveiling-amid-backlash-12147303
The £100k debacle was on our local news last night. The (Conservative led) council are "hoping" to raise the £100k through donations but if that fails it will fall upon the locals to fund it.
Poverty in Grantham: https://www.lincolnshirelive.co.uk/news/local-news/child-poverty-by-neighbourhood-lincolnshire-4079820
35% child poverty in Trent rd area. 10th worst in county
Incidentally, the statue was intended for London but was deemed too controversial.
SV650rules
02-12-20, 09:24 AM
These statues and monuments are there for a reason, there is a famous quote along the lines of 'if you forget history you are condemned to repeat it'.... should we destroy all the concentration camp remains left in various European countries because some people are offended by them, destroy all the tank museums, aircraft collections etc. etc. Some people are terminally offended, they can be offended by anything because they are always looking for things to be offended at.. Democracy is rule by majority, not rule by baying groups of special interest, special agenda people, all trying to cause more disruption and damage than the other groups to get themselves noticed more and get more media coverage 'the oxygen of publicity' that way lies catastrophe for our society as we know it.
As for Maggie Thatcher, she did what she had to do to drag this country into the modern world, away from the power of unions. Incidentally Tony B liar was to the right of Maggie in a lot of things, 'New' Labours agenda was the same as Maggie, but B liar was a greasy weasel - even the poll tax should have been a good thing but badly implemented due to the fact that it doubled or tripled most households bills compared to normal council tax payments. Labour went for Private finance initiative scheme in a massive way ( a conservative idea that they themselves hardly used ) to make it look as though new labour was building plenty of stuff, but in reality they were giving contracts to donors and storing up massive bills for the future, it is reckoned that using PFI cost many times the cost to build hospitals and schools etc. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/pfi-deals-will-cost-taxpayers-ps209bn-over-next-35-years-a6966986.html Personally I would be very offended by a statue of B Liar - he did untold harm to this country.
Adam Ef
02-12-20, 09:35 AM
Do the statues have a true account of their history written under them? I know the Colston one didn't mention a thing about his acheivements being funded by kidnapping, transporting and selling people (at least the ones who survived). Only that he built parts of Bristol. Statues are rarely actually put there to inform of full history.
Concentration camp remains etc are there exactly to remind us of the horrfically negative history they have. Not to celebrate them in any way. A very different thing.
Concentration camp remains etc are there exactly to remind us of the horrfically negative history they have. Not to celebrate them in any way. A very different thing.
Agreed.
Thatcher was/is a divisive figure. Whilst people may not have liked the power of Trades Unions they were (are) necessary and most of the worker's rights of today were because the unions fought for them. Companies are not renowned for their altruism and generosity.
The Grantham Conservatives believe a statue to that woman will generate interest in the town, I think they are right, just not the sort of interest they were hoping for.
The decision within Grantham is divided and do not forget she introduced the concept of the "internal market" within the NHS which started the privatisation of services.
https://www.granthamjournal.co.uk/news/thatcher-statue-divides-town-9004505/
The money could be better spent.
why dont we have a prime ministers garden with all of the former prime ministers as statues..
punyXpress
02-12-20, 02:42 PM
Stick 'em on the Garden Bridge ?
redtrummy
02-12-20, 04:23 PM
I agree that the past cannot be discarded and any statutes e.t.c should have an explanatory explanation of what the person/memorial was all about. The problem with that is it should be unbiased and truthful which may be difficult to obtain. I could just about imagine what an obituary to Trump would be like if I wrote it! (But then it would all be true)
Re slavery - at the time when it was rife in America. here in the UK children from the age of 5 were working 12 hr shifts in the cotton mills, crawling amongst the dangerous steam driven looms, was that no more than slavery?.
As a nation we certainly have nothing to be proud about when it comes down to treatment of the working class.
100k could be better spent, but then the obscene amount spent on HS2 well that is another issue.
History is written by the winners.
The plain and simple truth is hardly ever plain and never simple.
The slave trade in western Africa was run principally by ......................... western Africans. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade
It doesn't often get discussed of course.
...
Whilst people may not have liked the power of Trades Unions they were (are) necessary and most of the worker's rights of today were because the unions fought for them. Companies are not renowned for their altruism and generosity.
Although interestingly, some of the most enlightened company owners back in the days of the industrial revolution didn't need to be 'forced'. Think Bournville, Port Sunlight, Saltaire.
More recently, I blame the lawmakers. Powerful Unions can be just as frustrating and debilitating as powerful Company Owners. 'Them and Us' mixed with 'Never the Twain shall meet' is a bad way to have to operate. I think more companies would operate more fairly if the law was changed to change the primary obligation for company directors to act in the best interests of their shareholders (or at least to formally recognise that employees are important shareholders by default and not by significant cash purchase).
The money could be better spent.
In this instance I do tend to agree. Having said that, going back to the OP question, I still don't think it gives the right to those who disagree to impose their own will by destroying an a lawfully erected statue/structure/plaque etc.
History is written by the winners.
The plain and simple truth is hardly ever plain and never simple.
I agree. Although in this information age it seems that history is being written by those who publish the most visible propaganda or shout the loudest! Even a 'loser' can gain traction by shouting "fake news", "racist", "remoaner" or similar so loudly or frequently enough that those who have different opinion are drowned out. Opinions are becoming more polarised and the majority seem to be unable or unwilling to seek out a variety of accurate sources to be able to make up their own minds independently. The apparent deterioration of trust in previously respected reporting channels doesn't help.
100k could be better spent, but then the obscene amount spent on HS2 well that is another issue.
Part of the problem for decision makers, especially in the public sector, is that there is usually no consensus on most things. There is no right answer for everyone, yet that is what everyone is clamouring for - their own preferred solution. Nuanced debate, thorough analysis and trade-off judgement is lost in this 'digital' era. It's all being boiled down to black or white, right or wrong, using selective soundbite and polarised propaganda that aims to promote an 'all or nothing' outcome as if it's some kind of utopia.
keith_d
03-12-20, 09:40 PM
I agree that the past cannot be discarded and any statutes e.t.c should have an explanatory explanation of what the person/memorial was all about. The problem with that is it should be unbiased and truthful which may be impossible to obtain.
Corrected for you. History is written by the winners, and they're the ones who are still around to put up statues. The only unbiased history is archaeology, and even that gets misused occasionally (see Piltdown Man (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man)).
vBulletin® , Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.