Removing statues doesn't remove our history, just stops celebrating them in the present.
This was done legally too, so what is there to object to?
London is owned by all Londoners, this statue - worthy or not - is part of our collective patrimony. This spectacle of a mayor taking it upon himself to tear down statues overnight because some people object, and doing it without democratic consultation, without a vote, a debate, or any discussion at all, is detestable. And disturbing.
There are foreigners on Twitter looking upon this with amazement - and horror.
You think most Londoners wanted that statue to stay?
I doubt 1% knew who he was.
But it is part of London's intricate and contentious history. If it it to be removed, Londoners need to be asked how we feel. Probably most would agree it should be removed to a museum?
You don't do it this way. In the blink of an eye, like a municipal book burning.
It was right in front of a museum, the Museum of London Docklands. That, err, goes into huge detail about slavery and references the statue outside. And it's been moved before. And it's in West India Quay, in the heart of Canary Wharf.
I worked there for years: the only people who walk past it there are bankers going to Browns or Burger & Lobster from Credit Suisse and HSBC.
It's a hugely irrelevant distraction and strikes me as just shameless electioneering by Khan.
You think it will be popular then?
It will placate his activist base and get them out on the streets.
PB tories appear to have reached peak statue derangement.
Sorry? There are statues being vandalised, defaced, pulled down - or petitioned to be removed all over the country - seemingly with no discrimination, and you think *we're* the deranged ones?
It's views like yours which historians in 50 years time will look back and think..
WTF?
Maybe in 50 years time it will be different but historians today are roundly mocking the 'statues need to stay up otherwise we will forget history" argument.
Indeed. We can learn from history without celebrating it.
I'd be curious to find an era in British history where statues weren't taken down anyway, there's nothing unique about statues coming down so all these mock horror is preposterous. That a statue that laid in storage for 50 years has gone back into storage [presumably] is not shocking or horrific.
And as for @Casino_Royale suggesting listing petitioning the removal of statues as something to be suggested as deranged - how else do you want people to legally show they want something gone? A petition is the opposite of mob rule.
Funny how yesterday we had people complaining about "the mob" illegally pulling down a statue in a protest saying it was wrong because it was illegal and should have been done within the law . . . then today some of the same people are complaining that a directly elected Mayor with the authority to remove statues is exercising his democratic mandate to remove them entirely within the law.
Its almost as if all the complaints about "oh but do it within the law" were just excuses and the real issue is they don't want these statues of slave traders being removed in the first place?
Yes, this is quite puzzling.
Can someone clarify under what circumstances statutes can be removed? Some form of national plebiscite perhaps, or by unanimous consent of every UN member state?
It snot that puzzling and you are too intelligent to pretend you think this is a logic impase.
The first was against the law , the second was within the law . Both can be objected to without any need to be sneered at . Do you agree with all laws that are made?
The irony with complaining about all these (two so far?) Victorian-erected statues being hauled down is that the Victorians were some of the worst architectural vandals in British history. Whole medieval town centres were demolished to make way for Victorian buildings.
That's a very interesting statement, which ones? This isn't me disagreeing with you, I'm interested. I know the Victorians could be ruthless, but they were also famously very sentimental about the medieval period particularly.
They Victorians rewrote medieval history. Its only in the last 30 years or so that we have managed to shed all the absolute cock that they invented.
The awful cycle of life. I spent the first thirty odd years rolling my eyes whilst listening to people from the East End/Essex droning on, hoping to bask in reflected glory about some tenuous link they had to The Krays, and how "they were lovely to their mums", "only killed their own" etc etc, then finally when that rubbish dies down, it is replaced by the same shit from progressive, woke student types about BAME criminals.
To be fair though, whilst he quite rightly got the book thrown at him for holding the pregnant woman at gunpoint, the prison sentences for possession do look harsh. If prisons are colleges of crime n all. His full record (as opposed to just the first mentioned crime) gives me greater sympathy.
I think the worst example I've ever experienced of expunging someone from blame because his guilt didn't suit the media narrative was the father of that poor, poor baby that washed up on the beach. I did some research and I'm wholly convinced he not only was a trafficker, but intended to do away with his wife and young child.
All very reminiscent of the festival of erecting statues of Confederates across the South, and then again in the 1950s and Sixties.
The bas relief of the three Confederate leaders on Stone Mountain Georgia (bigger than Mount Rushmore) was finished in 1972. When I was at school in Georgia, this was the State Flag, raised everyday, below the Stars and Stripes.
It was only adopted in 1956 ffs.
But it's simply wrong. The statue was first placed there in 1813. So it quite a survival and a part of London's ancient tapestry, the things that make London such a rich city (albeit controversial!)
I'm sure Mr Floyd was far from an angel. And the police deserve our respect for dealing with the dangerous and the mentally ill and the drugged up on a daily basis. It cannot be easy remaining calm under constant provocation, and then subduing the psychotic.
We need to give them some slack.
But there also comes a point when one has to draw the line. The police are in the apprehension business, not the judging and punishing business. They get to use as much force as they need to do that part of their job. And yes, we need to be aware of the pressures they are under, but we also need to remember that they too are subject to the law.
Beyond the point where he poses no danger to the officers, he gets to be restrained, and that's it. That's why police get handcuffs.
Honestly, not too sure about this one. Step too far, IMHO.
You helped unleash the beast,
How?
If you defend partisan mobs that remove statues outside the law, and accuse those who object of being racist, then you're fuelling that mob with their own rhetoric.
You have no grounds for objecting to where this ends up now.
None.
Get a grip for God's sake!
How many statues have actually been removed by these 'partisan mobs'?
One. So far. Many others have been heavily vandalised and defaced.
And it was the lack of action by the authorities and shameless acquiescence of so many that has now led to a nationwide bloodthirst for stripping them out.
I'm not the one that needs to get a grip. I'm one of the ones that has one.
Well, you sound like you're losing it to me... 'nationwide bloodthirst'? Statues don't bleed.
Both sides of this argument have merit imo. Damaging statues because you disagree with what they stand for is not acceptable, nor is it legal. But public statues need to be acceptable to the broad sweep of the population and it's clear that Colston's had little merit and even less local support.
Except that Bristol residents wanted to keep him before with a plaque and the left-wing Labour council and left-wing BAME mayor thought the best solution was to keep him in the public eye to raise awareness of Bristol's past and encourage debate and discussion about it but, yeah, other than that .. spot on.
Yes, I stood corrected on that point by @ydoethur earlier. My mistake on the views of the local population.
I am still not going to be wetting my pants or losing much sleep over the statue's toppling though.
If our civilisation survived intact the 1981 riots, the Poll Tax riots, the 2011 riots and numerous others over the years - well, call me a starry-eyed optimist, but I think we'll get through this.
The irony with complaining about all these (two so far?) Victorian-erected statues being hauled down is that the Victorians were some of the worst architectural vandals in British history. Whole medieval town centres were demolished to make way for Victorian buildings.
The statue of Millligan dates back to Georgian times. So, for that reason alone, artistically and historically valuable (however contentious the subject)
Mildly amusing that he was a Jamaican immigrant to Britain who made a success of his time here
PB tories appear to have reached peak statue derangement.
Sorry? There are statues being vandalised, defaced, pulled down - or petitioned to be removed all over the country - seemingly with no discrimination, and you think *we're* the deranged ones?
It's views like yours which historians in 50 years time will look back and think..
WTF?
Maybe in 50 years time it will be different but historians today are roundly mocking the 'statues need to stay up otherwise we will forget history" argument.
Is this all historians or the ones (out of a big population) who agree with your point of view? If one group of people are less likely to all share the same point of view i would suggest its historians
"Anti-Black racism" Starmer shows that Asians are no longer considered worthy.
I'm now of the belief that if you gave Starmer enough wine he'd start explaining how racism against Asians isn't as bad as racism against black people.
It's actually quite a shocking statement for all Asians in the UK that we're not considered worth protesting for by the Labour leader. I hope Patel, Javid and Sunak pick up on this.
???
PLEASE reflect on this post.
You're projecting exactly what you have been so eloquently bemoaning.
Max mate I am the only Brown man in the PB village. It's not a shocking statement to me . All Asians were not offended by it I know coz I was elected to speak for all brown people. Hello all, long time lurker my third ever post. I am a 58 year old Gujerati Hindu born in East Africa who identifies as British Asian. (try explaining that to passport control at JFK 8 weeks after 9/11...I ended up spending 7 hours in the interview room). Max are you being a bit of a snowflake with a chip on you shoulder?. Only yesterday you were saying how you just got on with it. Why take offense ?. Do you think that Starmer approves of Brown racism ?. Love to buy you a pint or if you're like most Indians a scotch. Give me a shout if you are ever around North West London.
The irony with complaining about all these (two so far?) Victorian-erected statues being hauled down is that the Victorians were some of the worst architectural vandals in British history. Whole medieval town centres were demolished to make way for Victorian buildings.
That's a very interesting statement, which ones? This isn't me disagreeing with you, I'm interested. I know the Victorians could be ruthless, but they were also famously very sentimental about the medieval period particularly.
PB tories appear to have reached peak statue derangement.
Sorry? There are statues being vandalised, defaced, pulled down - or petitioned to be removed all over the country - seemingly with no discrimination, and you think *we're* the deranged ones?
It's views like yours which historians in 50 years time will look back and think..
WTF?
Maybe in 50 years time it will be different but historians today are roundly mocking the 'statues need to stay up otherwise we will forget history" argument.
Indeed. We can learn from history without celebrating it.
I'd be curious to find an era in British history where statues weren't taken down anyway, there's nothing unique about statues coming down so all these mock horror is preposterous. That a statue that laid in storage for 50 years has gone back into storage [presumably] is not shocking or horrific.
And as for @Casino_Royale suggesting listing petitioning the removal of statues as something to be suggested as deranged - how else do you want people to legally show they want something gone? A petition is the opposite of mob rule.
I think petitioning for removal of Gladstone, Churchill, Cromwell and other statues is deranged. I think the fever whipped up in less than 48 hours for listing them all nationwide after Colston is deranged and I think some of those campaigning for that are deranged.
I'd be interested in hearing where you'd draw the line on statues and which of those you'd keep.
I'm sure Mr Floyd was far from an angel. And the police deserve our respect for dealing with the dangerous and the mentally ill and the drugged up on a daily basis. It cannot be easy remaining calm under constant provocation, and then subduing the psychotic.
We need to give them some slack.
But there also comes a point when one has to draw the line. The police are in the apprehension business, not the judging and punishing business. They get to use as much force as they need to do that part of their job. And yes, we need to be aware of the pressures they are under, but we also need to remember that they too are subject to the law.
Beyond the point where he poses no danger to the officers, he gets to be restrained, and that's it. That's why police get handcuffs.
The awful cycle of life. I spent the first thirty odd years rolling my eyes whilst listening to people from the East End/Essex droning on, hoping to bask in reflected glory about some tenuous link they had to The Krays, and how "they were lovely to their mums", "only killed their own" etc etc, then finally when that rubbish dies down, it is replaced by the same shit from progressive, woke student types about BAME criminals.
Hardly the same - the Krays didn't harm a single statue.
PB tories appear to have reached peak statue derangement.
Sorry? There are statues being vandalised, defaced, pulled down - or petitioned to be removed all over the country - seemingly with no discrimination, and you think *we're* the deranged ones?
It's views like yours which historians in 50 years time will look back and think..
WTF?
Maybe in 50 years time it will be different but historians today are roundly mocking the 'statues need to stay up otherwise we will forget history" argument.
"Instead a number of new memorials in the capital have been pledged by Mr Khan, including ones for Stephen Lawrence, the Windrush generation, a National Slavery Museum or memorial and a National Sikh War Memorial."
I thought there already was a national Sikh war memorial in Brighton.
There is also a memorial in Huddersfield.
I never knew that! Where is it?
Greenhead Park. Only went up last year.
Thanks. I hadn’t heard. When I can travel freely again I shall go and see it.
The Indian soldiers who fought and very often died should be far more widely known and commemorated than they are, as should the African soldiers. Very important in Britain’s survival, yet given very little for it. It genuinely is an area that shows race relations in this country in an unflattering light.
The next time you are in Ypres have a look at the names on the Menin Gate. I’ve been there a few times on school trips and point out the Indian regiments to the students, many of whom are of Indian or Pakistani heritage.
Most of our really big World War One memorials (and hundreds of small ones as well; you can trace the lines of battle on the ground in many ways) are not in the UK at all, but in Northern France and Western Belgium. Some are sombrely imposing. Others are heartbreakingly beautiful; there is on on the ramparts of Ypres with a breathtaking view.
The irony with complaining about all these (two so far?) Victorian-erected statues being hauled down is that the Victorians were some of the worst architectural vandals in British history. Whole medieval town centres were demolished to make way for Victorian buildings.
That's a very interesting statement, which ones? This isn't me disagreeing with you, I'm interested. I know the Victorians could be ruthless, but they were also famously very sentimental about the medieval period particularly.
My own town of Windsor springs to mind. It's obviously ancient, but you'll struggle to find any of the original medieval buildings - all cleared away when they turned it into showcase of Imperial glory.
Funny how yesterday we had people complaining about "the mob" illegally pulling down a statue in a protest saying it was wrong because it was illegal and should have been done within the law . . . then today some of the same people are complaining that a directly elected Mayor with the authority to remove statues is exercising his democratic mandate to remove them entirely within the law.
Its almost as if all the complaints about "oh but do it within the law" were just excuses and the real issue is they don't want these statues of slave traders being removed in the first place?
So it has a history of being in that exact place of 200 years
"Following his death in May 1809, the Company commissioned a commemorative statue from sculptor Richard Westmacott. The statue did not idealise Milligan's portly figure. The statue stood in front of the Museum of London Docklands on West India Quay, where it was originally erected (1813–1875) before being relocated to the nearby Main Gate (1875–1943), held in storage and later re-erected at the London Docks. It was re-erected at West India Quay in February 1997 by the London Docklands Development Corporation."
George Floyd's 4.5 hour funeral is ending in Houston. It was carried on all cable news and terrestrial networks.
When do his statues start going up?
There are memes going round saying Floyd had a criminal record as long as your arm etc etc... I am sceptical that they are accurate, does anyone know the truth?
My understanding is that it is true. Imprisoned 5 times. Worst case being a violent robbery, where they broke into a home looking to steal guns and drugs, and he threatened to shoot the unborn of a pregnant woman.
And despite the narrative that he moved to Minneapolis and had gone totally straight, lets not forget he was smashed out of his head on meth and fentanyl on the day of his arrest.
The thing is thought that none of that matters.
It doesn't matter how evil he was, it is not the job of the police to kill him through an act of spite or negligence. And the point is that all that you have just said - no matter how true the bare facts might be - IS being used as an attempt to excuse or belittle the fact that the police murdered a man who was no threat to them.
The irony with complaining about all these (two so far?) Victorian-erected statues being hauled down is that the Victorians were some of the worst architectural vandals in British history. Whole medieval town centres were demolished to make way for Victorian buildings.
That's a very interesting statement, which ones? This isn't me disagreeing with you, I'm interested. I know the Victorians could be ruthless, but they were also famously very sentimental about the medieval period particularly.
My own town of Windsor springs to mind. It's obviously ancient, but you'll struggle to find any of the original medieval buildings - all cleared away when they turned it into showcase of Imperial glory.
A little romantic, I'd say.
Most medieval buildings were not fit for purpose - or are you living in a wattle and daub hut with a reed strewn floor, and a midden outside?
Some preservation - but most needs to be fit for modern purpose.
Funny how yesterday we had people complaining about "the mob" illegally pulling down a statue in a protest saying it was wrong because it was illegal and should have been done within the law . . . then today some of the same people are complaining that a directly elected Mayor with the authority to remove statues is exercising his democratic mandate to remove them entirely within the law.
Its almost as if all the complaints about "oh but do it within the law" were just excuses and the real issue is they don't want these statues of slave traders being removed in the first place?
Yes, this is quite puzzling.
Can someone clarify under what circumstances statutes can be removed? Some form of national plebiscite perhaps, or by unanimous consent of every UN member state?
It snot that puzzling and you are too intelligent to pretend you think this is a logic impase.
The first was against the law , the second was within the law . Both can be objected to without any need to be sneered at . Do you agree with all laws that are made?
Following up the comments elsewhere on the thread that I can't find.
Removing a Grade I listed statue from a listed building constitutes unauthorised works on a listed building, unless listed building consent has been properly obtained beforehand.
IIRC It is a criminal offence potentially carrying 2 years in prison and an unlimited fine.
Has Sadiq Khan actually claimed responsibility for this?
I can't help thinking he is going to go down in history as Sad Dick, Mayor of London.
Comments
No-one else gives a shit.
I'd be curious to find an era in British history where statues weren't taken down anyway, there's nothing unique about statues coming down so all these mock horror is preposterous. That a statue that laid in storage for 50 years has gone back into storage [presumably] is not shocking or horrific.
And as for @Casino_Royale suggesting listing petitioning the removal of statues as something to be suggested as deranged - how else do you want people to legally show they want something gone? A petition is the opposite of mob rule.
I’m assuming it was in front of Museum of London Docklands?
That museum is very focused on the slave trade - and it isn’t supportive
The first was against the law , the second was within the law . Both can be objected to without any need to be sneered at . Do you agree with all laws that are made?
I think the worst example I've ever experienced of expunging someone from blame because his guilt didn't suit the media narrative was the father of that poor, poor baby that washed up on the beach. I did some research and I'm wholly convinced he not only was a trafficker, but intended to do away with his wife and young child.
It is back in storage now, and safe from vandalism.
We need to give them some slack.
But there also comes a point when one has to draw the line. The police are in the apprehension business, not the judging and punishing business. They get to use as much force as they need to do that part of their job. And yes, we need to be aware of the pressures they are under, but we also need to remember that they too are subject to the law.
Beyond the point where he poses no danger to the officers, he gets to be restrained, and that's it. That's why police get handcuffs.
I am still not going to be wetting my pants or losing much sleep over the statue's toppling though.
If our civilisation survived intact the 1981 riots, the Poll Tax riots, the 2011 riots and numerous others over the years - well, call me a starry-eyed optimist, but I think we'll get through this.
It's not a shocking statement to me . All Asians were not offended by it I know coz I was elected to speak for all brown people.
Hello all, long time lurker my third ever post. I am a 58 year old Gujerati Hindu
born in East Africa who identifies as British Asian. (try explaining that to passport control at JFK 8 weeks after 9/11...I ended up spending 7 hours in the interview room).
Max are you being a bit of a snowflake with a chip on you shoulder?. Only yesterday you were saying how you just got on with it. Why take offense ?. Do you think that Starmer approves of Brown racism ?. Love to buy you a pint or if you're like most Indians a scotch. Give me a shout if you are ever around North West London.
I'd be interested in hearing where you'd draw the line on statues and which of those you'd keep.
Check your historians.
Most of our really big World War One memorials (and hundreds of small ones as well; you can trace the lines of battle on the ground in many ways) are not in the UK at all, but in Northern France and Western Belgium. Some are sombrely imposing. Others are heartbreakingly beautiful; there is on on the ramparts of Ypres with a breathtaking view.
Not quite seeing the urgency of changing the law ‘tomorrow’ to accommodate your own fit of pique.
It doesn't matter how evil he was, it is not the job of the police to kill him through an act of spite or negligence. And the point is that all that you have just said - no matter how true the bare facts might be - IS being used as an attempt to excuse or belittle the fact that the police murdered a man who was no threat to them.
Most medieval buildings were not fit for purpose - or are you living in a wattle and daub hut with a reed strewn floor, and a midden outside?
Some preservation - but most needs to be fit for modern purpose.
Removing a Grade I listed statue from a listed building constitutes unauthorised works on a listed building, unless listed building consent has been properly obtained beforehand.
IIRC It is a criminal offence potentially carrying 2 years in prison and an unlimited fine.
Has Sadiq Khan actually claimed responsibility for this?
I can't help thinking he is going to go down in history as Sad Dick, Mayor of London.
"it's not that I like that statue, but pulling it down ILLEGALLY will lead to the end of civilization"
are now even more upset because statues are being legally removed.