Should Nelson be removed from Trafalgar Sqr?

[mercalia]

Seems like this Guardian writer thinks he should as it seems Nelson was very much pro-slavery

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/22/toppling-statues-nelsons-column-should-be-next-slavery?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+main+NEW+H+categories&utm_term=240557&subid=7646217&CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2

He alludes to what is happening in the US with statues of the confedracy becoming shrines for white supremicist

Well this doesnt happen in the UK? Not with Nelson anyway. And there isnt a public safety issue?

Anyway Trafalgar sqr and Nelson being there was very much about the saving of the British State at the time from Napoleon and not just lauding Nelson? The Guardian writer's views ignore that he was a man of his time with various aspects to his character?

What about Cecil Rhodes though? I understand in Sth Africa his statue was taken down from a university there - a bit rich since it seems he donated the land for the university, maybe the university should give the land back to the Rhodes estate to remain pure?

I think people like the Guardian writer are damaging our understanding of the past and human nature however uncomfortable that maybe - Nelson and Rhodes did so some good things?

[Ben@Forest]

Seems like this Guardian writer thinks he should as it seems Nelson was very much pro-slavery...

You do like Guardian clickbait... though I guess I am biting by responding at all...

[661-Pete]

You do like Guardian clickbait... though I guess I am biting by responding at all...

I guess it's more a matter of making his own - but no matter....

I read somewhere, that Nelson's (apocryphal?) dying words were not "Kiss me, Hardy" but "Kismet, Hardy". Perhaps if the column were to lose its figurehead, it would be a case of Nelson finally meeting his ultimate 'Kismet'.

But who looks at statues, anyway? Tourists probably take piccies of the column itself without being too bothered about who's perched atop. And Trafalgar Sq famously boasts four plinths at its corners, the fourth of which is (even more famously) normally vacant. I'll bet few on here can (without looking up) name the occupants of the other three plinths....

[AlaninWales]

Interesting that the G is following the line of Trump and the excusers of the neo-Nazis with such 'whataboutery'.

[irc]

If it comes to the UK start with Karl Marx. After all communism was responsible for more 20thC deaths than Hitler.

[Bonefishblues]

Replaced with John Noakes, perhaps?

[Spinners]

Or Bruce Forsyth?

[Bonefishblues]

No, national treasure and all that, just no.

[Ben@Forest]

You do like Guardian clickbait... though I guess I am biting by responding at all...

I guess it's more a matter of making his own - but no matter....

I find the subject a complex one. There was the furore over Colston Hall in Bristol. However Colston had got his wealth (legally at the time) if he'd built a concert hall then it should continue to be named for him. When I found out that the venue had been built a century after his death and simply named after him I have no problem with Bristol City Council re-naming it.

I think we have to be careful about judging people (or their statues) by the standards of a different age. Otherwise, in a century's time, when as a society we decide all forms of terrorism were abhorrent, there could be a call to remove statues of Nelson Mandela - who in his own words described himself as the leader of a 'nascent guerrilla army'.

Sadly I don't expect that terrorism will be a thing of the past in 100 years time.

[Psamathe]

.....
I think we have to be careful about judging people (or their statues) by the standards of a different age. Otherwise, in a century's time, when as a society we decide all forms of terrorism were abhorrent......

I agree and it's far broader then terrorism. When future generations are struggling with the environmental damage we are causing, when they are being devastated by the climate havoc we have caused, how many of those statues and honours will have been to/for people who "made their millions" destroying the environment (and leaving future generations to bear the consequences). Or surveillance laws or even damaging political decision. Just look at the controversy and issues around a statue/bust honouring "Our Margaret"; and does anybody think the statue honouring Sir Nigel Farange will be any less controversial in 15 years when the UK is just another struggling country whilst the EU has forged ahead ...

Ian

[Psamathe]

Seems like this Guardian writer thinks he should as it seems Nelson was very much pro-slavery

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/22/toppling-statues-nelsons-column-should-be-next-slavery?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+main+NEW+H+categories&utm_term=240557&subid=7646217&CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2
......

They had the author of that article on C4 news the other night (discussing this issue) and although I was not paying 100% attention, she seemed very half hearted about it and seemed far more like dramatic headlines more to get attention as she felt there should be "more discussion about the real lives of those we honour" - I guess she missed the Colston Hall debates and the Oxford Cecil Rhodes debates, etc. which is typical of so much Guardian content these days.

Ian

[blackbike]

Why bother with a debate?

If some 'liberal' and 'progressive' social justice warriors decide it should be removed they'll pull it down without asking the rest of us for any input to the discussion.

They don't do democracy or debate because they know what is best for everyone.

[Tangled Metal]

Be careful replacing Nelson and ppl from his era with ppl from celebrity in the 70s. You really can't be sure what will come out after their death! I mean at one time Noakes could have been Saville if we'd had this conversation decade or so ago.

Seriously, the USA has problems with race above and beyond the issues the UK has with race. Their slavery issues became part and parcel of their cultural identity in some parts of the union. Civil war didn't clear out the differences only created an almost blood feud. These civil war heroes for some are complete monsters to others. If you can find one black Brit who see Nelson as a monster I'd be very surprised.

Another point is General Lee had strong and well known views on slavery. How many ppl actually knew before this came up that he was pro-slavery? It's not as well known. That's one distinction that places the two sets of statues on different settings. Nelson is certainly a more accepted historical figure in the UK across the British nations.

Then let us look to today's public figures and apply the perspective that might exist in the future to them. Kardashian characters might offend due to their image. As would models of the catwalk variety. Indeed anyone objectifying the human body. I.am sure you could see online imagery of famous ppl today that could become the Nelson statues of tomorrow.

Learn and accept history is my view. Then move on to n the better future.

[Audax67]

Confederate statues were mostly put up in the 1890s at the same time as the Jim Crow laws began to appear, and in the same spirit. They weren't put up as memorials to great men but as gestures of defiance to the federal government. They really are statements of support for "Southern Rights", which included the right to hold slaves. As such, removing them is justified.

Nelson etc. are celebrated purely as heroes of their nation, without any hidden motives. There is no reason to remove them.

FWIW Lee, Jackson & C° were great men and heroes of their nation. Lee considered that his country was Virginia; when offered command of the Federal armies he told Lincoln that taking up arms against it would be treason. He and the other celebrated Confederates would probably be horrified by the baggage now attached to their memory.

FWIW', Lincoln had no great opinion of black people. Had there not been political and to some extent tactical advantage to be gained by Emancipation he probably wouldn't have bothered.

[iandriver]

Not so much the statues we do have, more the statues we don't have that give things context.

Where are the status to the ordinary working class folk, who were commonly treated like a dog living in slums in the days when Britain was supposedly a world leader.