The worldwide Statue War has begun..... - Page 5 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Those who do not remember the past are condemned to relive it. Note: nostalgia *is* allowed.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14837183
pugsville wrote:Why are you opposed to having a accurate plaque.

Are we condemned to adopt the whites only view of history forever?


The plaque is contextually and subjectively accurate in consideration of the common western cultural ancestry of most Australians(including most immigrants, even those from India and China). We need better historical education in this country, not "edits" to it so the uneducated lunatics can be appeased.

The Cooks Cottage educational website uses the same subjectively accurate language as the plaque.
#14837195
colliric wrote:The SJW idiots think his image insults Aboriginal Australians because "Aborigines discovered Australia + White man abused them".....

It's an extension of the "Invasion Day" protest, and Black Lives Matter(which is an Aboriginal version of the American group).


So, do Aboriginal people living in Australia think Cook was a colonialist who had a significant negative impact on their communities?
#14837197
colliric wrote:The plaque is contextually and subjectively accurate in consideration of the common western cultural ancestry of most Australians(including most immigrants, even those from India and China). We need better historical education in this country, not "edits" to it so the uneducated lunatics can be appeased.

The Cooks Cottage educational website uses the same subjectively accurate language as the plaque.


so history is cultural relativism construct?

subjectively accurate.

how is that anything other than just wrong.
#14837204
One Degree wrote:At least to me, altering the original seems dishonest. Putting other versions next to it would give continuity to changing views. Future historians would probably appreciate it. I don't believe we should be ashamed of what earlier people did. Learn from it, add next to it, but don't change it. It was what it was.



I agree. The plaque represents what the British colonists thought at the time. White-washing that view of history is just the same as ignoring Aboriginal perspectives or indeed Irish convict perspectives.

I should point out though that the plaque implies the British were the first Europeans to discover Australia, which isn't true. The Dutch are recorded as the first Europeans to start mapping the Australian coast. Tasmania (our southern most state and an island) is named after Abel Tasman. Prior to 1856 it was known as Van Diemen's Land, after a Dutch governor of the Dutch East Indies (today called Indonesia).

Though I am not aware of any Portuguese records about discovering Australia, there is archaeological evidence in the form of ship wrecks and artifacts like swivel guns (black powder mini cannon usually employed on ships). However neither the Dutch nor Portuguese saw any value in Australia as there were no riches to exploit. They were more interested in dominating the lucrative spice trade in the East Indies.

Possibly, in the interests of completeness, we could erect yet another state in Hyde Park to present the Dutch preselected. So we need a statue of Van Diemen or Tasman with a plaque bearing the inscription "This place sux, we're out'ta here!".
#14837224
pugsville wrote:
so history is cultural relativism construct?

subjectively accurate.

how is that anything other than just wrong.

Monuments were never supposed to give an accurate account of history. However, their existence can help us understand history better, which is exactly why they shouldn't be altered to reflect current sensibilities. I assume that Australians know that there was an indigenous population in Australia before the British arrived. The claim that the statue must change in the name of accuracy rings quite hollow to me.
#14837227
If you want to be absolutely accurate as to which overseas nation state "Discovered Australia"(but then decided not to try and come back here for some reason)....

It was most likely the damn Chinese....

http://www.gavinmenzies.net/Evidence/10 ... est-coast/

But until the effects of modern immigration began to be felt in the early part of the 20th century(and late 19th century), they have had zero impact on the western direction of Australian Culture.
#14837230
What exactly is being proposed about the Cook statue?

As far as I can tell from the article in the OP, there are no plans right now to do anything to it. There is, at most, a discussion emerging about whether or not something should be done. The one Aboriginal person they interviewed does not want it removed.
#14837250
Kaiserschmarrn wrote:Monuments were never supposed to give an accurate account of history. However, their existence can help us understand history better, which is exactly why they shouldn't be altered to reflect current sensibilities. I assume that Australians know that there was an indigenous population in Australia before the British arrived. The claim that the statue must change in the name of accuracy rings quite hollow to me.


So you don't want history to be accurate?
#14837255
Pants-of-dog wrote:What exactly is being proposed about the Cook statue?

As far as I can tell from the article in the OP, there are no plans right now to do anything to it. There is, at most, a discussion emerging about whether or not something should be done. The one Aboriginal person they interviewed does not want it removed.



Basicly, not a lot is being proposed. Events in America have caught the headlines and, given the opinion forming classes have the attention span of a goldfish, Stan Grant is using the issue they currently have on their minds to raise the profile of his agenda. The treaty movement has been around for ages. It is one of a number of issues conservative white Australians don't want to hear about. Some more issues mentioned below.


As Colloric mentioned, Australia Day is the most common occasion to raise awareness of the status of Aboriginal Australians. The event chosen to celebrate Australian nationalism was the date Cook landed in Australia. Some are proposing changing the date. Really though, you'd think the best date for Australia Day would be the date the nation was founded. The problem here is that date was January 1st, 1901. So the significance would be shared with New Year's Day. And people would lose an excuse for a national holiday. At present we use invasion day to celebrate Australia. I guess it should stay that way for some time yet as it does serve to raise awareness of Aboriginal status in a backward sort of way.

There is also a debate about changing the flag to get rid of the Union Jack on it, and also to make Australia a republic by removing the Queen of England as the head of state. Personally, I think the number one issue should be changing the name of the country as most Australians can't pronounce 'Australia' correctly. Rather they say 'Straya'. We should have a name for our country that Australians might be able to articulate. Umm, or alternatively we might endeavour to improve the education system...
#14837258
pugsville wrote:
So you don't want history to be accurate?

Your question makes no sense in response to what I wrote.

The statue was erected in the late 19th century and it therefore is part of the historical record of that time. Ironically, by changing it, it would be you who'd rewrite history, as the inscription would not be the one Australians back then had actually chosen. As you profess to care for historical accuracy, it's odd that you would think this is a good idea.
#14837283
SolarCross wrote:Who is the "local community"?


The democratically elected representatives of the area and their constituents, as defined by the local, state, and federal government.

If you disagree with this, that's completely fine. I myself would rather see soviets set up, the representatives of bourgeois government executed, and people's trials put up to rid the proletarian state of its enemies.

But, as of now, the local community is represented by the their local government. Unless you want to overthrow three constitutions.

It seems pretty clear the Mayor was looking to create an incident by having the cops fail to seperate them from the counter protesters and then physically push the Alt-Right groups into the waiting mob of counter protesters. This is where the scandal arises. Now like a swarm all the SJW religionists are using this as an excuse to go after innumerable other peices of public art, even Washington and Jefferson, and now apparently the international element is going after Cook and Nelson too. This may have begun with a "local community" which is apparently a euphemism for a mischevious mayor, it is well beyond that now.


I'd be more impressed by this conspiracy theory if you had a shred of proof for it. You backed off by saying this was some kind of mass hysteria, but now you imply there was some kind of plan. Please expand upon this.

For you this might be fun pay back for the fall of the USSR but for the rest of us it is less funny.


More than anything, the rampant hypocracy to justify your feelings is hillarious.

You can't say, "to the victor goes the spoils," because the Confederacy lost.

You can't say that we just have to leave up old political statues, because then we need to start putting up Nazi and Soviet statues.

You just have to plead about what a victim you pretend you are and how you need your special feelings placated with no logic or consistency attached to it at all :lol:

You are hair splitting, even now there is no chance of a confederate lead re-run of the civil war, the confederacy is dead. Certain people might like to amuse themselves by saying the "south will rise again" and waving old flags but no I guess there is no chance of that, really. That doesn't mean certain unhinged people aren't trying to provoke these nostalgics as a publicity stunt... cleary they are but nothing substantial will come of it. California and perhaps Texas are nearer to that.


So now there is no worry about, "kicking a sleeping dog," as the threat no longer exists by this post. It's hard for me to keep up on what you imagine a threat is and not!

It's like Welsh nationalism or something, should people go into Wales and rub the Welsh's noses in their defeat hundreds of years ago, piss on their flag just because there is no chance at all of them ever leaving the United Kingdom? Or isn't it better to leave them be to enjoy their nostalgia and cultural idiosyncracies without insult?


Wales is a nationalist interest, for what it's worth. The Confederacy defined itself as an ideological interest:

James Stephens, VP of the Confederacy"The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution African slavery as it exists amongst us the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the “rock upon which the old Union would split.” He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time. The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the “storm came and the wind blew.”

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.

...With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place. He, by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system. The architect, in the construction of buildings, lays the foundation with the proper material-the granite; then comes the brick or the marble. The substratum of our society is made of the material fitted by nature for it, and by experience we know that it is best, not only for the superior, but for the inferior race, that it should be so. [/quote]

Unlike Wales, again, the Confederacy sought to force us all to accept its will:

[quote="Stephens, Ibid wrote:
The process of disintegration in the old Union may be expected to go on with almost absolute certainty if we pursue the right course. We are now the nucleus of a growing power which, if we are true to ourselves, our destiny, and high mission, will become the controlling power on this continent. To what extent accessions will go on in the process of time, or where it will end, the future will determine. So far as it concerns States of the old Union, this process will be upon no such principles of reconstruction as now spoken of, but upon reorganization and new assimilation. Such are some of the glimpses of the future as I catch them.


Perhaps we can just move the statues for these traitors and race slavers into your local communities because the local communities that have them don't want them; and you sympathize so much with the whining out-of-Townes, you can start your own movement to enslave everyone upon a racial hierarchy and force the locals to accept it as heroic. Good luck with that.
#14837297
Yes, the first thing I do when seeing a monument is think, "How does this offend me?" :knife:
If I bother paying attention at all, it is because something about it caught my interest. I can appreciate it's beauty, atrociousness, hilarity, historical significance, oddity, or any number of other things. There is nothing forcing people to be offended. That is their choice. Their choice should not deny others the right to enjoy it differently. Majority opinion of the community is fine, but it is not something that should be decided by special interests, simply because there are more interests than theirs.
#14837302
One Degree wrote:Yes, the first thing I do when seeing a monument is think, "How does this offend me?" :knife:
If I bother paying attention at all, it is because something about it caught my interest. I can appreciate it's beauty, atrociousness, hilarity, historical significance, oddity, or any number of other things. There is nothing forcing people to be offended. That is their choice. Their choice should not deny others the right to enjoy it differently. Majority opinion of the community is fine, but it is not something that should be decided by special interests, simply because there are more interests than theirs.


The key question is whether all groups can put up their own statues, of John Brown or various leaders of slave revolts in Southern cities, say? As to destroying them, I am a great believer of the American policy in Iraq, which they should apply at home to those who set up the concentration-camp in Guantanamo - and if no statues yet exist, demolish the originals!
#14837306
Ned Lud wrote:The key question is whether all groups can put up their own statues, of John Brown or various leaders of slave revolts in Southern cities, say? As to destroying them, I am a great believer of the American policy in Iraq, which they should apply at home to those who set up the concentration-camp in Guantanamo - and if no statues yet exist, demolish the originals!


All I can say is I have no objections. We have a house made out of ashtrays, an artist's home where everything is made from junk. There is all kinds of weird stuff in the US. I enjoy it. If it makes you happy, then go for it. I just see no reason to deny others the same freedom.

Edit: There is a monument in a small bar in a small town in Texas honoring a man who accomplished nothing in his life except drinking at the bar. I loved it!
#14837366
The Immortal Goon wrote:As I'm not part of the community that democratically decided to remove the statue, I'm not exactly sure.

My guess would be:

1. Denographic and electoral changes following a trend for a while

2. A heightened awareness of the issues, starting from the Civil Rights period and continuing until today

3. Campus communities are, as constituted today in the US, dependent upon as much enrollment as possible. It is possible that the extra push to get it done had to do with attracting Northern and minority students that would refuse to go to a place that celebrated traiters, white supremacists, and slavers.

Because money is always a bigger motivating factor than a giant conspiracy.


Democratic process cannot explain this Fad, you are mentioning that one particular instance. Like why now all of a sudden, what has changed? I don't think you can offer quantitative information or facts to say that people have learned more history on civil wars and slavery. In fact the majority of learning in this country is controlled by liberal minds and so if the liberals have always been offended then why now why did they wait so long ? .

I agree the Silicon Valley mafia which consists of the largest social media companies is pushing this fad headed up by a virtual mob which is Twitter and Facebook. They now control what the liberal media reports. It is about money, hate to find your business at the wrong end of this mob.
#14837371
Pants-of-dog wrote:There is no fad.

No one is trying to take down or change the Cook statue. Some people are just gettting offended because a discussion is happening about what might be done with it.


Oh c'mon. Do you really believe it is a coincidence?
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 9
Russia-Ukraine War 2022

Here's a good paper/article on the "privilege[…]

@Pants-of-dog No one has ever said anything abou[…]

Left vs right, masculine vs feminine

Honestly I think you should give up on hoping to […]

I don't think a multiracial society can function[…]