Quote ="Cronus"Well, given almost everyone on here disregards anything said from an opposing viewpoint, it makes sense to listen to the views of someone who has experience of being a black American in the US. But you STILL ignore it. Do the left ever listen to anyone with opposing views? So how about this chap: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1268 ... 34279.html ? Some very insightful numbers and strong points in there. The most astounding being that, when you break it down, 50% of ALL murders in the US are committed by 3.5% of the population: black men aged 15-40.'" I think the questions this begs reflect one of the great gammon-snowflake psychological bifurcations, with both sides astonished at the other’s ability to ignore the bleeding obvious and twist the narrative to fit their worldview. Gammon: Isn’t it terrible that black people are so brutal? Is it any wonder that they so often live in deprivation in the US? Snowflake: Isn’t it terrible that black people are so brutalised and deprived in the US? Is it any wonder that they so often live amidst violence?

Quote ="Cronus"Well, given almost everyone on here disregards anything said from an opposing viewpoint, it makes sense to listen to the views of someone who has experience of being a black American in the US. But you STILL ignore it. Do the left ever listen to anyone with opposing views? So how about this chap: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1268 ... 34279.html ? Some very insightful numbers and strong points in there. The most astounding being that, when you break it down, 50% of ALL murders in the US are committed by 3.5% of the population: black men aged 15-40.'" I think the questions this begs reflect one of the great gammon-snowflake psychological bifurcations, with both sides astonished at the other’s ability to ignore the bleeding obvious and twist the narrative to fit their worldview. Gammon: Isn’t it terrible that black people are so brutal? Is it any wonder that they so often live in deprivation in the US? Snowflake: Isn’t it terrible that black people are so brutalised and deprived in the US? Is it any wonder that they so often live amidst violence?

Quite. Poor people killing other poor people in the same communities is horrific, but hardly unexpected.
What people with agendas are doing trying to conflate that with the repeated murder of black people by white police officers I think we can guess. Both are terrible tragedies, but one is enacted by those who are there to protect the people they are killing and feeds back into the cycle of deprevation and hopelessness that drives the other.

Well luckily over here we’ve now got Tommy Robinson trying to whip up “protesters” to “protest” against the protesters who are protesting against racism.

This is where your views are not a true reflection of the situation. Here the police are engaged to keep law an order, in the states the police are engaged in prevent anarchy - there is a very subtle difference in attitude. The police in the states are far more aggressive than they are here.

One thing that is worth considering - why is that whenever you have these protests in the states in nearly always leads to looting - but not random looting targeted looting of branded product? The cameras might be deceiving but there does appear to mostly black males/females involved?

Quote ="Sal Paradise"This is where your views are not a true reflection of the situation. Here the police are engaged to keep law an order, in the states the police are engaged in prevent anarchy - there is a very subtle difference in attitude. The police in the states are far more aggressive than they are here. One thing that is worth considering - why is that whenever you have these protests in the states in nearly always leads to looting - but not random looting targeted looting of branded product? The cameras might be deceiving but there does appear to mostly black males/females involved?'" You’ve seen the infamous examples of black people ‘looting’ and white people ‘rescuing their possessions’ in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina? When you live in a fundamentally divided society, these sort of comparisons aren’t really sensible. People are more likely to be law abiding if they feel like they have a meaningful stake in society, irrespective of their melanin levels. How would we feel about some cosseted representative of the Home Counties wondering out loud about the level of crime and educational performance and tax contribution in/from Wigan or Hull, and whether ‘these people’, at a whole population level, are just inherently aggressive, dishonest, stupid and bring it on themselves? Race is a social-cultural construct, but that isn’t even consistently reflected in science. In Genetics, while you do get studies of specific ethnic groups (e.g. Ashkenazi Jews or the Yoruba) race is generally (I do hope somebody highlights the exception of James Watson ) seen as being too crude to be even remotely useful. However, I read a lot of medical reports nowadays and the ethnic demographics of patients are typically presented as race - usually along the lines of black, Caucasian, Asian and Hispanic in US studies. While it is a convenient short hand, it doesn’t seem a very useful, being so imprecise. And yet it is used, occasionally, in treatment decisions and even approvals of medicines: e.g. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1687161/

Quote ="Sal Paradise"This is where your views are not a true reflection of the situation. Here the police are engaged to keep law an order, in the states the police are engaged in prevent anarchy - there is a very subtle difference in attitude. The police in the states are far more aggressive than they are here. One thing that is worth considering - why is that whenever you have these protests in the states in nearly always leads to looting - but not random looting targeted looting of branded product? The cameras might be deceiving but there does appear to mostly black males/females involved?'" You’ve seen the infamous examples of black people ‘looting’ and white people ‘rescuing their possessions’ in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina? When you live in a fundamentally divided society, these sort of comparisons aren’t really sensible. People are more likely to be law abiding if they feel like they have a meaningful stake in society, irrespective of their melanin levels. How would we feel about some cosseted representative of the Home Counties wondering out loud about the level of crime and educational performance and tax contribution in/from Wigan or Hull, and whether ‘these people’, at a whole population level, are just inherently aggressive, dishonest, stupid and bring it on themselves? Race is a social-cultural construct, but that isn’t even consistently reflected in science. In Genetics, while you do get studies of specific ethnic groups (e.g. Ashkenazi Jews or the Yoruba) race is generally (I do hope somebody highlights the exception of James Watson ) seen as being too crude to be even remotely useful. However, I read a lot of medical reports nowadays and the ethnic demographics of patients are typically presented as race - usually along the lines of black, Caucasian, Asian and Hispanic in US studies. While it is a convenient short hand, it doesn’t seem a very useful, being so imprecise. And yet it is used, occasionally, in treatment decisions and even approvals of medicines: e.g. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1687161/

I'm sure there are examples of this, but that's not a mindset I've ever come across.

You simply cannot avoid the facts. Criminality in the black population is far more prevalent than the white population. Why is that? There are many contributory factors but "white oppression" isn't anywhere near the cause BLM would have you think. The biggest cause of death and deprivation in the black community is not 'whites' or the police.

Seeing as it appears most people ignore the numbers, here are some:
- The biggest cause of killings of black men aged 15-45 is other black men.
- 93% of all killings of black people are done by other blacks.
- Blacks kill whites at almost 3x the rate of the reverse.
- In 2018 there were 547,000 black on white violent crime incidents, and only 59,778 white on black.
- For every 10,000 blacks arrested for violent crime, 3 are killed by the police.
- For every 10,000 whites arrested for violent crime, 4 are killed by the police.
- In 2019, 49 unarmed people were killed by the police: 9 were black, 19 were white.
- 50% of all murders in the US are by black men aged 15-40. That's 3.5% of the ENTIRE population of the USA.

The facts are that black men aged 15-40 are far more violent than any other section of the US population and carry out a massively disproportionate amount of crime, including murder. The same rings true for drugs, gangs, etc. And I think we can safely assume it's only a small percentage of that group. It's likely less than 0.5% of the US population are responsible for 50% of ALL murders and probably most other violence and criminality. Get your head around that.

That's before we even consider societal issues: 77% of all black babies are born to single mothers. Between 66%-75% of black children live in single parent households. No paternal figure - the damage this does is widely known and is probably one of the major factors in the route a young black man will take.
Self-perpetuating influences such as widespread casual drug use, low-level crime, casual unemployment and rife gang culture as well as the criminality, violence, gangs and drugs glamourised in music and movies all play their part in influencing a person's path. I.e. - if you come from a neighbourhood where all of this is normal, you will most likely consider it normal.

Now - you might read that as me saying "it's all their fault". Absolutely not. Blacks often live in far more deprived neighbourhoods with challenges to education and employment, and where criminality, drugs etc might seem the only means of making their way. While it's certainly possible to legitimately 'make it' and get out of those neighbourhoods in a decent job, it's also certainly true to say it's far more challenging to do so. There are many factors to all of this - but racism is a pretty insignificant one. Can the neighbourhoods themselves be turned around? I'm not sure.

As for the behaviour of the police, the numbers again speak for themselves. If you've ever spent some time on one of the US police YouTube channels, you'll be familiar with just how quickly a normal police encounter can turn into a lethal shootout. Are the police jittery at times? Of course. But again the numbers speak for themselves. Statistically speaking, they are hardly trigger-happy.

Yes, black lives do matter. But that causes of black deaths matter more and just blaming 'da police' or 'whites' is nonsensical. If you're sharing black squares online right now, you're a mug buying into a movement that cares more about targeting whites than actual black deaths. Otherwise why are they silent on the deaths of blacks unless committed by white police? More innocent blacks have been killed by rioters during BLM marches than by Minnesota Police. Silence from BLM.

As Morgan Freeman has stated repeatedly - "how do you get rid of racism? Stop talking about it."

Quote ="Mild Rover"You’ve seen the infamous examples of black people ‘looting’ and white people ‘rescuing their possessions’ in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina? When you live in a fundamentally divided society, these sort of comparisons aren’t really sensible. People are more likely to be law abiding if they feel like they have a meaningful stake in society, irrespective of their melanin levels. How would we feel about some cosseted representative of the Home Counties wondering out loud about the level of crime and educational performance and tax contribution in/from Wigan or Hull, and whether ‘these people’, at a whole population level, are just inherently aggressive, dishonest, stupid and bring it on themselves? Race is a social-cultural construct, but that isn’t even consistently reflected in science. In Genetics, while you do get studies of specific ethnic groups (e.g. Ashkenazi Jews or the Yoruba) race is generally (I do hope somebody highlights the exception of James Watson ) seen as being too crude to be even remotely useful. However, I read a lot of medical reports nowadays and the ethnic demographics of patients are typically presented as race - usually along the lines of black, Caucasian, Asian and Hispanic in US studies. While it is a convenient short hand, it doesn’t seem a very useful, being so imprecise. And yet it is used, occasionally, in treatment decisions and even approvals of medicines: e.g. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1687161/'" I would agree with your comments to a point - you will never create a society that is harmonious for all citizens that they will all be law abiding - even Sweden which is supposedly a paragon of equality has seen increased incidents of violence and bombings/ The facts speak for themselves - London generates significantly greater element of GDP than the rest of us and don't we know it - do you think the people in the north east don't feel disenfranchised? Investment in London has been much higher than anywhere else in the UK - Cross rail for a start!! Crime in the NE isn't like in a ghetto in Chicago!! Gang culture in London - is similar to inner city Chicago - what is the common factor? George Floyd was hardly a model citizen - so I take with a pinch of salt all this out pouring. What happened to him should not have happened but he should not have put himself into a position where that could have happened.

Quote ="Mild Rover"You’ve seen the infamous examples of black people ‘looting’ and white people ‘rescuing their possessions’ in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina? When you live in a fundamentally divided society, these sort of comparisons aren’t really sensible. People are more likely to be law abiding if they feel like they have a meaningful stake in society, irrespective of their melanin levels. How would we feel about some cosseted representative of the Home Counties wondering out loud about the level of crime and educational performance and tax contribution in/from Wigan or Hull, and whether ‘these people’, at a whole population level, are just inherently aggressive, dishonest, stupid and bring it on themselves? Race is a social-cultural construct, but that isn’t even consistently reflected in science. In Genetics, while you do get studies of specific ethnic groups (e.g. Ashkenazi Jews or the Yoruba) race is generally (I do hope somebody highlights the exception of James Watson ) seen as being too crude to be even remotely useful. However, I read a lot of medical reports nowadays and the ethnic demographics of patients are typically presented as race - usually along the lines of black, Caucasian, Asian and Hispanic in US studies. While it is a convenient short hand, it doesn’t seem a very useful, being so imprecise. And yet it is used, occasionally, in treatment decisions and even approvals of medicines: e.g. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1687161/'" I would agree with your comments to a point - you will never create a society that is harmonious for all citizens that they will all be law abiding - even Sweden which is supposedly a paragon of equality has seen increased incidents of violence and bombings/ The facts speak for themselves - London generates significantly greater element of GDP than the rest of us and don't we know it - do you think the people in the north east don't feel disenfranchised? Investment in London has been much higher than anywhere else in the UK - Cross rail for a start!! Crime in the NE isn't like in a ghetto in Chicago!! Gang culture in London - is similar to inner city Chicago - what is the common factor? George Floyd was hardly a model citizen - so I take with a pinch of salt all this out pouring. What happened to him should not have happened but he should not have put himself into a position where that could have happened.

Single parent issue is an interesting one. There are so few eligible black men the women think the best way of getting one is to get pregnant - go figure?

Are these serious posts or are you just trying to ‘trigger’ us? I’m not sure the latter would be in very good taste.

Cronus - this mindset that you’ve never come across... you’ve just gone on a massive gammon box-ticking exercise. I know you like to see yourself as a free-thinker and bristle at being stereotyped, but you make it helluva hard for us to play along sometimes. I’m at least happy to acknowledge I’m predictable. How can you be regularly tripping over copies of Mein Kampf and have never encountered these attitudes? Not even because reading Mein Kampf increases your ‘not a racist’ insurance premium, but because, in my experience, it isn’t a book many people own, whereas casual, lazy gammony racism is close to as prevalent as reflexive snowflakey apologism.

I like the ‘cannot avoid the facts’ and the ‘facts speak for themselves’ rhetoric. I don’t know where to start with that, I’m so spoiled for choice. I’ll have a ponder.

Anyway, go on then, if cultural, historical and current racism is not a significant factor what do you guys think are the underlying issues? I know I may regret this.

WTF is the Mein Kampf lecture? I don't own it. I read it once. It's not a big deal and the only indicator on my personality is that I though it might be interesting (it wasn't).

If you're' 'triggered' by my post, you've got issues. I've laid out my argument and identified some underlying issues, with supporting stats. You instantly dismiss it as a "massive gammon box-ticking exercise", presumably because you've bought into the BLM/white oppression rhetoric and I haven't. But here's the thing - facts aren't rhetoric. It's patently clear black communities do far more damage to themselves than whites and there is evidence to support that. It's also patently clear that white cops aren't slaughtering innocent unarmed blacks en masse. Far from it. Why aren't BLM marching against the gangs peddling drugs that do so much more damage in so many more ways? Where's the BLM outrage there?

Why don't you tell me why the average black person from a deprived neighbourhood might find it difficult to advance themselves? Is there a white person turning them away? Are white cops likely to kill them? Are companies advertising for 'whites only'? Are there no equality laws in the US? Are the teachers all white and therefore by BLM logic, racist? Do the schools only take whites? Instead, why is it we see people of all colours and creeds across all political levels across the US, and succeeding in the workplace? I thought they were all oppressed?

Or is it more likely that being born that a run-down community rife with casual drug use, low-level criminality, unemployment, gang influence, etc is a terrible starting point? Could it be that the majority not having a father figure is an influence? Could it be they find themselves in a community that holds them back and drags them into a destructive lifestyle? Could it be they feel it's not worth trying before even giving it a chance? Could peer pressure drag them out of education? Could peer pressure drag them into criminality? It's a self-perpetuating cycle, as I've already said, and there is no easy solution - that doesn't make it 'their fault', although breaking this cycle has proven hugely difficult to any significant degree. But white oppression is not doing this. There are thousands of tales of kids growing up in places such as Compton and experiencing precisely these circumstances and this cycle - more autobiographical books and films that I care to mention. Even frickin 'Boyz n the Hood' is based on John Singleton's youth and battle to overcome and escape gang culture.

I'm all for eliminating racism. But I won't support a racist anti-white movement like BLM that advocates violence and destruction on the streets. Skin colour means nothing to me, never has. I assess someone by their personality. If you're a dick, you're a dick. That's why I agree with Morgan Freeman - making racism an issue makes racism an issue. Yes, racism exists in many forms and I don't deny there are individual examples that may get in the way, but in general does racism or white oppression stop a black kid in, say, Nottingham or Philadelphia getting anywhere? No.

And I'll reword my earlier reply - you defined your statements in terms of 'snowflake' or 'gammon'. Given they are very detailed statements presumably thought up by you and therefore also defined by your personal definition of 'snowflake' or 'gammon' - there's every reason I haven't come across them in terms of the political leanings you describe. Just because you decide to define your own thoughts in that manner doesn't make it a societal defining statement. Put simply, people across all spectrums have differing views.

Mein Kampf and racist mindsets - I was noting a pretty extreme disparity in our experiences, and the frequency with which we have each encountered each of those things. However, I accept your last point and that my convenient binary shorthand is not meaningful to you. I suspect other posters/readers will be able to relate, despite the deliberate lack of granularity.

I wasn’t triggered. I was just wondering if you were trying - it is something you have admitted to enjoying previously. And it did tick enough of those boxes to make me genuinely wonder.

My opinions are based on me buying into rhetoric and yours are based on facts, you believe? Well, that’s not really a tenable position. Facts are facts, but they’re meaningless without context and interpretation.

The whataboutery section - Even white lady dog walkers know there’s an issue with Police racism. Black people are often turned away, in all sorts of contexts. While there are no longer ‘white only’ job adverts, black candidates do face discrimination in the employment market. Studies have looked at responses to applications with typically black and white names, for example. Anti-discrimination legislation existing is better than it not, but it won’t be as effective as we’d like.

Black communities in the US started at a massive disadvantage, from slavery, through apartheid and redlining, to the more informal and slightly more subtle prejudices and barriers of the 21st century. At least the direction of travel is good, eh? Like anybody else, black people are responsible for their actions as individuals. However, differences in circumstances need to be acknowledged at a population level and they’re pretty extreme in this context.

Without getting too anthropological about it, why do you think issues/trends have arisen, for example, around absentee fathers in African American and some Afro-Caribbean communities, that are not seen in African communities to the same degree?

My last post is an opinion to which there are many references - Christopher Hitchens being one.

There are many examples of people living in poverty - all you lefties on here keep pointing out how many there are in this country - but we don't see the degree of violence to others especially within their own ethnic group. Black on black killing especially in the gangs in London are significant - why do they do that. The idea that opportunities don't exist for black kids is also untrue. You have to question why are there so many single parent families in that Ethnic group? that has nothing to do with racism. Kids have no structure, again that is not racist issue, so they don't attend school and they wonder why it is difficult to get on the career ladder - again that is a cultural issue nothing to do with racism. You don't have the same issues in the South East Asian or Indian communities - why?

Just to note, as I mentioned elsewhere recently, that I always found Hitchens a pretty unimpressive figure.

On deprivation and relative lack of privilege, it is a question of degree. You’ve asked a lot of questions there, and fundamentally that is what my answers will come back to.

Assuming you don’t accept that, do you have any answers to suggest? Do you think there’s some sort of inherent racial biological and/or cultural issue? If the latter, why and how do you think that issue arose? Or is it just a mystery?

I don't disagree there is racial issues in this country - what I dispute is the reaction to that and the differentials between different cultures. Something you haven't wanted to answer - perhaps the real truth is simply too unpalatable for today's woke culture?

What haven’t I answered? I believe the differences are largely a result of socioeconomic factors and the social-cultural construct of race and the racism that has arisen from it. You may agree or disagree, but surely it is an answer. Acknowledging that we live in a racist society is not hugely palatable - I wish we didn’t. There’d be a huge dividend for white people from an end to racism, imo.

This ‘real truth’ that you allude to, which is perhaps too unpalatable for woke folk... would I be correct in thinking that you’re reluctant to expand on it because it might breach the AUP?

Perhaps we can build instead from a point of agreement and joint-wokeness. Is there minority ethnic group who you think have suffered extensively from oppression and unfair characterisation? I’ll let you choose, but you mentioned Indian communities in an earlier post... or if not them, then maybe Jewish people? Australian or American native peoples? While the role of oppressor is by no means unique to white people, I’m thinking about British, European and colonial examples, for familiarity’s sake (rather than something like Myanmar-Rohingya or Indonesia-West Papua, unless you happen to know a lot about them and have an especial sympathy for their plight).

It's largely a culture thing, but before anyone blows up, it's not a black thing. If we're assuming many blacks come from deprived, poor neighbourhoods - you will see the same behaviour in similarly poor white neighbourhoods. Perhaps a lack of enthusiasm for education leading to either low-level jobs, no jobs and/or criminality. Single parents households. Drugs and drink part of everyday life. Low-level criminality also part of every day life. Drug peddlers and gangs making their money at the expense of those who can't afford it.

The only difference I see in black neighbourhoods is the glamourisation of gang culture, drugs and criminality in music and movies - not so prevalent in white culture although although that hilarious 'fake Jamaican' accent has spread from London and the Yardie gangs, and is now commonplace among street criminals across the country regardless of race - an example of mirroring what is perceived to be a desirable gang culture.

Why are many black US communities poor? Well, I looked at Compton as the most infamous example. Originally a middle-class white neighbourhood, wealthier middle class blacks began to move in. Racial friction in the 50's led to some 'white flight' although it remained still majority white. The Watts Riots (ironically triggered by a police arrest) destroyed large parts of the town and local industry and led to more 'white flight'. Resulting poverty and unemployment contributed to the formation of gangs, resulting in the Bloods vs Crips feud which only added to the violence and deprivation. The emergence of hard drugs in the 70's & 80's escalated things massively and things have never really improved, indeed black on black violence remains by far the biggest cause of death. I'm sure there's more to it but it's a quick synopsis and possibly not dissimilar to other black communities and lends itself to my previous post - how to break the cycle of communities held back far more by gang culture, drug use and criminality than by 'white oppression', although I'm not blind to incidents of white racism, including the police.

Anyway, I see today every historical monument is now under threat and more have been pulled down. The BBC broadcast several hours of the funeral of a violent career criminal and drug user and Labour chose to 'take a knee' in a fricking hilarious photo release. Media pressure is forcing everyone in this country to kneel figuratively and literally to a movement that promotes the destruction of...well everything by the looks of it. This last week has done more to blow up racial tension than Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon has ever done. Take a knee boys, the cameras are watching.

Indeed, I have been saying for a long time that, if we were to retrospectively apply today's "standards" then most of the archives would be empty. Taking Little Britain as a case in point, it is satirical, nothing more. Are they deleting The Two Ronnies, they 'blacked up' and cross-dressed for sketches. Morecambe and Wise featured frequent innuendo and sexism, is it/should it just be about 'white oppression', will Russia be taking down statues of Lenin, Stalin, Germany removing the Khaiser statues. Are we going to close the V&A, and all other history museums (largely built by monies that can be traced back to The Empire and oppression in India) is The Empire State building to be renamed... where does it stop?

Why is it we celebrate London is "multi cultural"but people want to remove markers to the history that contributed to that? (surely things that happened 2,3,4,500 years ago should be remembered, the good and the bad).

Racism and Intolerance isn't purely directed by white people at black people, Indians hate Pakistani's (at least in their 'own' countries they do), Canadians are far from fond of Americans, Australia and America were largely built by the oppression of the indigenous peoples. Attitudes and society have changed, in the case of the snowflakes and milennials a lot of that change hasn't been positive. Will people be happy when BAME becomes WAME, which in some parts of some cities in the UK is already happening....?

Most statues of Lenin and Stalin were removed after the fall of the Soviet Union.
TBH it's amazing that people can't take a moment to reconsider the role of people in history. The standards of their time are static but the standards of our time are not. We can easily ask, "would we put a statue up to that person now?" and, then, "why not?". If it's because their achievements have been forgotten, fine. If it's because they were butchers or slavers then we shouldn't simply leave those monuments around just because they've always been there. Leave the plinths for genuine heroes, the removed statues can be sited in a museum where their context can be explained in greater detail.

People like Churchill are more difficult because he clearly did some awful things but for British people this is balanced by his genuine inspiring leadership. Someone using the profits of their slave business to build some fine buildings in Bristol does not compare - the awful is not outweighed by the good. Fortunately in a lot of these cases the situation is pretty clear cut.

So, you're no longer buying tea, coffee, sugar, clothes etc.No more Gin & Tonic....?

What about Liverpool uni renaming a building because it bears Gladstone's name?

Quote ="IR80"Indeed, I have been saying for a long time that, if we were to retrospectively apply today's "standards" then most of the archives would be empty. Taking Little Britain as a case in point, it is satirical, nothing more. Are they deleting The Two Ronnies, they 'blacked up' and cross-dressed for sketches. Morecambe and Wise featured frequent innuendo and sexism, is it/should it just be about 'white oppression', will Russia be taking down statues of Lenin, Stalin, Germany removing the Khaiser statues. Are we going to close the V&A, and all other history museums (largely built by monies that can be traced back to The Empire and oppression in India) is The Empire State building to be renamed... where does it stop? Why is it we celebrate London is "multi cultural"but people want to remove markers to the history that contributed to that? (surely things that happened 2,3,4,500 years ago should be remembered, the good and the bad). Racism and Intolerance isn't purely directed by white people at black people, Indians hate Pakistani's (at least in their 'own' countries they do), Canadians are far from fond of Americans, Australia and America were largely built by the oppression of the indigenous peoples. Attitudes and society have changed, in the case of the snowflakes and milennials a lot of that change hasn't been positive. Will people be happy when BAME becomes WAME, which in some parts of some cities in the UK is already happening....?'" To some extent I agree. However, I think there’s a difference between remembering and celebrating. De-Stalinization started under Khrushchev with, for example, Stalingrad (formerly Tsaritsyn) being renamed Volgograd. St Petersburg later reverted to that name from Leningrad. Removal of statues was common after the fall of the Soviet Union. https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/ch ... 92856.html There wasn’t much complaint about that statue of Sadaam Hussein being pulled down in Baghdad or talk of criminal damage. Apart from about the brief and slightly clumsy use of a US flag, making it look more conquest than liberation. He was undoubtedly an important historical figure there. These images can be powerful because, like three word slogans, they have a visceral impact. The US mission in Iraq was mightily, probably fatally set back by those images of Charles Grainer and Lynndie England abusing prisoners in Abu Ghraib. This all feels reminiscent of that to me, in terms of shifting public opinion.

Quote ="IR80"Indeed, I have been saying for a long time that, if we were to retrospectively apply today's "standards" then most of the archives would be empty. Taking Little Britain as a case in point, it is satirical, nothing more. Are they deleting The Two Ronnies, they 'blacked up' and cross-dressed for sketches. Morecambe and Wise featured frequent innuendo and sexism, is it/should it just be about 'white oppression', will Russia be taking down statues of Lenin, Stalin, Germany removing the Khaiser statues. Are we going to close the V&A, and all other history museums (largely built by monies that can be traced back to The Empire and oppression in India) is The Empire State building to be renamed... where does it stop? Why is it we celebrate London is "multi cultural"but people want to remove markers to the history that contributed to that? (surely things that happened 2,3,4,500 years ago should be remembered, the good and the bad). Racism and Intolerance isn't purely directed by white people at black people, Indians hate Pakistani's (at least in their 'own' countries they do), Canadians are far from fond of Americans, Australia and America were largely built by the oppression of the indigenous peoples. Attitudes and society have changed, in the case of the snowflakes and milennials a lot of that change hasn't been positive. Will people be happy when BAME becomes WAME, which in some parts of some cities in the UK is already happening....?'" To some extent I agree. However, I think there’s a difference between remembering and celebrating. De-Stalinization started under Khrushchev with, for example, Stalingrad (formerly Tsaritsyn) being renamed Volgograd. St Petersburg later reverted to that name from Leningrad. Removal of statues was common after the fall of the Soviet Union. https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/ch ... 92856.html There wasn’t much complaint about that statue of Sadaam Hussein being pulled down in Baghdad or talk of criminal damage. Apart from about the brief and slightly clumsy use of a US flag, making it look more conquest than liberation. He was undoubtedly an important historical figure there. These images can be powerful because, like three word slogans, they have a visceral impact. The US mission in Iraq was mightily, probably fatally set back by those images of Charles Grainer and Lynndie England abusing prisoners in Abu Ghraib. This all feels reminiscent of that to me, in terms of shifting public opinion.

Quote ="Mild Rover"To some extent I agree. However, I think there’s a difference between remembering and celebrating. De-Stalinization started under Khrushchev with, for example, Stalingrad (formerly Tsaritsyn) being renamed Volgograd. St Petersburg later reverted to that name from Leningrad. Removal of statues was common after the fall of the Soviet Union. https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/ch ... 92856.html There wasn’t much complaint about that statue of Sadaam Hussein being pulled down in Baghdad or talk of criminal damage. Apart from about the brief and slightly clumsy use of a US flag, making it look more conquest than liberation. He was undoubtedly an important historical figure there. These images can be powerful because, like three word slogans, they have a visceral impact. The US mission in Iraq was mightily, probably fatally set back by those images of Charles Grainer and Lynndie England abusing prisoners in Abu Ghraib. This all feels reminiscent of that to me, in terms of shifting public opinion.'" Hussein murdered his own people, hardly comparable to historical figures that, in their time, where doing nothing out of the ordinary. Husseins statue was brought down with the support of popular opinion, not an angry mob jumping on a cause as a vehicle for anarchy. Even if pulling it down was justified, throwing it into the Marina was definitely unnecessary, someone will have to pay to pull it put etc. not the baying mob of violent protesters I imagine.

Quote ="Mild Rover"To some extent I agree. However, I think there’s a difference between remembering and celebrating. De-Stalinization started under Khrushchev with, for example, Stalingrad (formerly Tsaritsyn) being renamed Volgograd. St Petersburg later reverted to that name from Leningrad. Removal of statues was common after the fall of the Soviet Union. https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/ch ... 92856.html There wasn’t much complaint about that statue of Sadaam Hussein being pulled down in Baghdad or talk of criminal damage. Apart from about the brief and slightly clumsy use of a US flag, making it look more conquest than liberation. He was undoubtedly an important historical figure there. These images can be powerful because, like three word slogans, they have a visceral impact. The US mission in Iraq was mightily, probably fatally set back by those images of Charles Grainer and Lynndie England abusing prisoners in Abu Ghraib. This all feels reminiscent of that to me, in terms of shifting public opinion.'" Hussein murdered his own people, hardly comparable to historical figures that, in their time, where doing nothing out of the ordinary. Husseins statue was brought down with the support of popular opinion, not an angry mob jumping on a cause as a vehicle for anarchy. Even if pulling it down was justified, throwing it into the Marina was definitely unnecessary, someone will have to pay to pull it put etc. not the baying mob of violent protesters I imagine.

It's almost impossible to have a grown up conversation with you TBH. Straw manning everything surely gets tedious after a while?

Not straw manning (the late 90's wants it's out dated project management speak back, by the way), you are saying history should be exponged, we can't be selective, can we?

Let's start by destroying all the churches, we fought the crusades and murdered many thousands in the name of Christianity, plundured spices etc. from the near, middle and far east.

Interesting how Labpur are, again, turning this into a political issue...how errr, 'grown up'...!

Under slavery slaves were not regarded as humans but as property. When they picked up slaves in Africa they insured them for what they would be worth when they got to the America’s. When they arrived if any were sick or ill they would be sold at cut price costs hence slavers lost money. So what they used to do was when anyone was sick or injured at sea slavers used to throw them overboard and say they died. Then they used to claim the insurance on them. One ship threw 240 slaves overboard including 18 children and claimed the insurance. They were prosecuted not for MURDER but for fraud for claiming on property. That made coulson a lot of money in Bristol so no sympathy from me for his statue ending ending up in the sea.

Literally hundreds and thousands of live human beings were thrown into the seas because they were worth more dead than alive.

Ah right, so that makes wilful destruction of property, incitement etc. acceptable does it?

Can i go and shoot anyone German because of what they did in two worlds wars..., I best not go on holiday anywhere that used to be red on the map.