- Joined
- Feb 25, 2022
- Messages
- 2,349
- Reaction score
- 1,643
- Location
- Anti-Populism, Pro-NATO
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
I just read some heated exchanges in regards to controversial statutes.
I am a firm believer that in order to measure the progress in a particular area -> you need a reference point.
A vocal group on the left says to remove that reference point and start fresh. An opposite group from the right wants them up as on day 1, there is no touching them, even though some are highly controversial.
Churchill is the latest example to be asked in some areas to be taken down.
As originally from Europe I find this outrageous, we would all be speaking German now if it wasn't for great men like Churchill. However, nobody can deny Churchill's flaws and there are many, from his imperialism which came with bigotry at the time.
So what is wrong with keeping the statues and marking them with the good and the bad?
A) "He helped defeat Nazi Germany"
B) "He expressed bigotry towards people from India".
I am a firm believer that in order to measure the progress in a particular area -> you need a reference point.
A vocal group on the left says to remove that reference point and start fresh. An opposite group from the right wants them up as on day 1, there is no touching them, even though some are highly controversial.
Churchill is the latest example to be asked in some areas to be taken down.
As originally from Europe I find this outrageous, we would all be speaking German now if it wasn't for great men like Churchill. However, nobody can deny Churchill's flaws and there are many, from his imperialism which came with bigotry at the time.
So what is wrong with keeping the statues and marking them with the good and the bad?
A) "He helped defeat Nazi Germany"
B) "He expressed bigotry towards people from India".