Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Nelson and his Column
- Thread starter The Rivet
- Start date
GT49er
Well-known member
OK, I'll bite. What?
theboybilly
Well-known member
And what would be next...Churchill? Oliver Cromwell? Left wingers have always got something to moan about. It must be a barrel a laughs being one
- Thread starter
- #4
- Thread starter
- #5
I am not offering any view as yet. Make your own mind up.
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...statues-nelsons-column-should-be-next-slavery
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...statues-nelsons-column-should-be-next-slavery
LamieRobertson
Not awoke
Doh I thought Gary Nelson had taken up writing in the Sun or some other rag 
- Thread starter
- #7
Doh I thought Gary Nelson had taken up writing in the Sun or some other rag
Keep your eye on the ball Nelson has been gone for years. Gary that is.
studio150
Well-known member
No, this is not America.
Whether it's overlooking the past, Nelson is remembered mainly for the Battle of Trafalgar and his other sea victories, and why 21st October is celebrated.
If there is a desire to confront the British Empire period, rather than knocking down statues it would be better to erect new ones to educate a new generation about the pro and cons of the Empire. Fortunately such statues are not beacons for the far right in the UK.
Whether it's overlooking the past, Nelson is remembered mainly for the Battle of Trafalgar and his other sea victories, and why 21st October is celebrated.
If there is a desire to confront the British Empire period, rather than knocking down statues it would be better to erect new ones to educate a new generation about the pro and cons of the Empire. Fortunately such statues are not beacons for the far right in the UK.
GT49er
Well-known member
"• Afua Hirsch is a writer and broadcaster."
...............with an agenda, and a desire to rewrite history. 200-250 years ago, virtually the whole of Britain would have thought of black people as a primitive, less advanced, less sophisticated and ultimately inferior race. That no doubt included Lord Nelson (who, incidentally, spent little time and contributed even less in the House of Lords). So yes, he was, like everybody else at the time, technically a white supremecist.
We now know better - but as any real historian or commentator on history will tell you, you can't judge the actions of hundreds of years ago by the mores of today.
In Nelson's day it was acceptable to send serving sailors into the community to club young men unconscious, drag them on to ships and force them to sign up to the Royal Navy, Death if you refused. If you agreed the likelihood of staying alive long enough to see your home and family was remote. That was OK then - obviously unacceptable now.
Once upon a time we burnt witches at the stake (plus a few Bishops) - believed to be the right thing to do at the time, but not acceptable now. Times and morals change. Trying to judge Lord Nelson by the leftish leanings of (self appointed) bright young things writing in the Guardian and their current standards is just bo11ox.
Keep your f**king hands off Nelson's column!
...............with an agenda, and a desire to rewrite history. 200-250 years ago, virtually the whole of Britain would have thought of black people as a primitive, less advanced, less sophisticated and ultimately inferior race. That no doubt included Lord Nelson (who, incidentally, spent little time and contributed even less in the House of Lords). So yes, he was, like everybody else at the time, technically a white supremecist.
We now know better - but as any real historian or commentator on history will tell you, you can't judge the actions of hundreds of years ago by the mores of today.
In Nelson's day it was acceptable to send serving sailors into the community to club young men unconscious, drag them on to ships and force them to sign up to the Royal Navy, Death if you refused. If you agreed the likelihood of staying alive long enough to see your home and family was remote. That was OK then - obviously unacceptable now.
Once upon a time we burnt witches at the stake (plus a few Bishops) - believed to be the right thing to do at the time, but not acceptable now. Times and morals change. Trying to judge Lord Nelson by the leftish leanings of (self appointed) bright young things writing in the Guardian and their current standards is just bo11ox.
Keep your f**king hands off Nelson's column!
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,301
I was making the same argument the other day. Very hypocritical of us (Brits) to support removal of statues when we've got some highly dubious figures over here immortalised in metal.
There is an important difference to statues of Stalin etc.. and whatever they have built in North Korea. That's a very very different thing.
So I agree with the previous poster. There is no reason why a statue can't be reconsidered as a remembrance of someone who retrospectively is considered to be a bit of a prick. As long as there aren't hundreds of them of them in which case they can happily be melted down.
There is an important difference to statues of Stalin etc.. and whatever they have built in North Korea. That's a very very different thing.
So I agree with the previous poster. There is no reason why a statue can't be reconsidered as a remembrance of someone who retrospectively is considered to be a bit of a prick. As long as there aren't hundreds of them of them in which case they can happily be melted down.
Guy Fawkes
The voice of treason
- Sep 29, 2007
- 8,195
Why stop there, why not target other famous historical figures from our past too.
Maybe target someone like Isambard Kingdom Brunel and tear down all his remaining contributions to society and remove him and references to his achievements from the history books because of his lack of adherence to modern Health and safety legislation when carrying out his works
And there must be so many other important figures from our history we can also go after in this way too
(the whole thing seems like click bait sensationalism trying to provoke a reaction for the sake of it and completely unnecessary)
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,301
Because that's a completely different scenario to one (for instance) who owned slaves isn't it
Each on it's own er.. merits.
How about replacing with a less divisive person that people can actually relate to :-
Nelson Mandela
Michael Jackson
Emily Pankhurst
Ronnie Corbet
David Bowie
or John Noaks ,
who can forget this amazing moment of TV history
[yt]p4YFCJETmwI[/YT]
Nelson Mandela
Michael Jackson
Emily Pankhurst
Ronnie Corbet
David Bowie
or John Noaks ,
who can forget this amazing moment of TV history
[yt]p4YFCJETmwI[/YT]
Juan Albion
Chicken Sniffer 3rd Class
Are you kidding ? ? ? He was a Croydon scummer.
True and also ex RAF so probably not an appropriate suggestion .
Bladders
Twats everywhere
Why is it when a handful of Uber lefties come up with a new way to make a fuss they get national coverage? As if the vast majority even thinks or cares about this .
I'd be more in favour of removing these twunts from our society than a couple of statues .
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'd be more in favour of removing these twunts from our society than a couple of statues .
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Communist Rules for Revolution
In May 1919 at Dusseldorf, Germany, the allied forces discovered a copy of these ‘Rules.’ They were first printed in the United States in the ‘Bartlesville (Oklahoma) Examiner-Enterprise’ the same year, 1919.
1. Corrupt the young, get them away from religion. Get them interested in sex. Make them superficial. Destroy their ruggedness.
2. Get control of all means of publicity.
3. Get people’s minds off their government by focusing their attention on athletics, sexy books and other trivialities.
4. Divide the people into hostile groups by constantly harping on controversial matters of no importance.
5. Destroy the people’s faith in their natural leaders by holding the latter up to contempt, ridicule and obloquy.
6. Always preach true democracy, but seize power as fast and as ruthlessly as possible.
7. By encouraging government extravagance, destroy its credit and produce fear of inflation with rising prices and general discontent.
8. Foment unnecessary strikes in vital industries, encourage civil disorders, and foster a lenient and soft attitude on the part of government toward such disorders.
9. By specious argument cause the breakdown of the old moral virtues, honesty, sobriety, continence, faith in the pledged word, ruggedness.
10. Cause the registration of all firearms on some pretext, with a view to confiscating them and leaving the populace helpless.
BadFish
Huge Member
- Oct 19, 2003
- 17,102
Yep, thinking about shit and considering the meaning portrayed by things and how they affect others is such a grind.
From one of the opinion pieces posted.
So much of this across this board on a range of issues. Sadly it means that issues cannot even be discussed let alone thing changed. More damaging to debate that Political Correctness IMO.
I read the Guardian for free. Now I'm going to stop reading it.
BadFish
Huge Member
- Oct 19, 2003
- 17,102
I tend to agree, tearing down statues is tantamount to brushing stuff under the carpet. Leave the statues and lets talk about the way things were done. Rightly or wrongly things were done and done for a reason.
How can we learn from the past if we airbrush out the nasty bits?