Quote:
Originally Posted by Nyah
I think judging historical figures while taking into context the time period they were in is important. But the reality is, should we have monuments or statues in public places of those who thought our First Nations people were savages and treated them as such? To me the answer is no. I don't see him as a monster, as you said he was a product of the time, but I'm not First Nations. Their perspective is really what's important here.
|
I see your point, but I'm in principle hesitant to give control over things like "what can be displayed in what place" to the offended solely
because they're offended. On the one hand, it's a statue... who cares. We'll barely notice its absence. On the other hand, it seems to me that you could probably make the same argument about, say, a book. Moreover, it seems likely to me that this same righteous impulse is what leads people to try to ban books. Like I said earlier in the thread, moral orthodoxy, even where it's applied in fairly inconsequential cases, makes me uneasy.
That's the source of my lingering anxiety here, even though like I said, I think they probably should just move the thing.