Is Keir Starmer Really Going To Arrest...
News0 min ago
Why Is This Even A Subject For Discussion?
23 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I suppose because the demands of those who want to see Cecil Zimbab’s statue removed are so outrageous and hypocritical as to be laughable.
If the students who object to the statue’s presence are that principled all they need do is attend another university (preferably in another country). It is a fact that many large benefactors to this nation’s heritage made their money from activities which today would not be acceptable. That cannot be “airbrushed” by removing Rhodes’ statue. But make their money they did and without them doing so it is doubtful that places such as Oriel College would exist today.
If the students who object to the statue’s presence are that principled all they need do is attend another university (preferably in another country). It is a fact that many large benefactors to this nation’s heritage made their money from activities which today would not be acceptable. That cannot be “airbrushed” by removing Rhodes’ statue. But make their money they did and without them doing so it is doubtful that places such as Oriel College would exist today.
I think that removing the statue would defeat the object of the protest.
If students see the statue, they may investigate the history behind the subject, and make an informed and educated decision about history - which cannot be seen as a bad thing.
I doubt if an empty space would create such a spirit of enquiry.
History is what it is - good and bad. Removing symbols of events because they jar with modern thinking is a fascist attitude - utterly incompatible with a senior seat of learning in a democratic country.
If students see the statue, they may investigate the history behind the subject, and make an informed and educated decision about history - which cannot be seen as a bad thing.
I doubt if an empty space would create such a spirit of enquiry.
History is what it is - good and bad. Removing symbols of events because they jar with modern thinking is a fascist attitude - utterly incompatible with a senior seat of learning in a democratic country.
you mean you think they should take it down without discussing it ?
People take down statues for all sorts of reasons
( cue films of statues of Lenin and Stalin being toppled)
sometimes the crowds spontaneously rise up and tear them down
( cue article about the London mob tearing down statues stuck up the side of BMA house then Rhodesia House and no Zim House )
" The problems began in 1908 when his first major project, to decorate the front of the new British Medical Association Building on the Strand, provoked dismay among conservative critics. Newspapers overreacted, conducting a campaign against his design, and the resulting scandal damaged his reputation, discouraged potential employers, and threatened the very works themselves. It disrupted Epstein’s life, forcing the persona of provocateur on a man who preferred, as he claimed, to work in peace. "
and sometimes statues are covered and not removed
( cue pictures of Italian statues such as Neptune who's got a big hu-hu wearing a pair of jeans to spare the President of iran's blushes whose hu-hu is clearly erm smaller )
http://
and... what was the question ?
oh why are we discussing statues
considering it has never ever been considered before
cue the arteest who covered all the nudes in the sistine chapel
so as not to distract the Pope when celebrating Mass
" The Sistine Chapel covered by the artist Daniele da Volterra, whom history remembers by the derogatory nickname "Il Braghettone" ("the breeches-painter"). ..."
I mean yeah ..... why ARE we even discussing this
cant we get back to the staple of 'are we to be murdered in our beds by sundry moustachioed drugged assassins with kalshnikovs in their hands ? '
AOG where are you when you are needed ?
People take down statues for all sorts of reasons
( cue films of statues of Lenin and Stalin being toppled)
sometimes the crowds spontaneously rise up and tear them down
( cue article about the London mob tearing down statues stuck up the side of BMA house then Rhodesia House and no Zim House )
" The problems began in 1908 when his first major project, to decorate the front of the new British Medical Association Building on the Strand, provoked dismay among conservative critics. Newspapers overreacted, conducting a campaign against his design, and the resulting scandal damaged his reputation, discouraged potential employers, and threatened the very works themselves. It disrupted Epstein’s life, forcing the persona of provocateur on a man who preferred, as he claimed, to work in peace. "
and sometimes statues are covered and not removed
( cue pictures of Italian statues such as Neptune who's got a big hu-hu wearing a pair of jeans to spare the President of iran's blushes whose hu-hu is clearly erm smaller )
http://
and... what was the question ?
oh why are we discussing statues
considering it has never ever been considered before
cue the arteest who covered all the nudes in the sistine chapel
so as not to distract the Pope when celebrating Mass
" The Sistine Chapel covered by the artist Daniele da Volterra, whom history remembers by the derogatory nickname "Il Braghettone" ("the breeches-painter"). ..."
I mean yeah ..... why ARE we even discussing this
cant we get back to the staple of 'are we to be murdered in our beds by sundry moustachioed drugged assassins with kalshnikovs in their hands ? '
AOG where are you when you are needed ?
Latest Posts
News1 min ago
Crosswords2 mins ago
Crosswords3 mins ago
ChatterBank7 mins ago
News9 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.