City of Victoria to remove statue of John A. Macdonald from the steps of City Hall

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Fine, I'll go back to "erasing history" then, since that is a more accurate way to describe what is happening to they who shall not be named.

No, it's just as dumb as the white washing terminology.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

No, it's just as dumb as the white washing terminology.

Believe me, if you're disagreeing with me, then I know I'm on the right track.

I'll see you again the next time we erase something in the name of "reconciliation".

[Matata]

Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14

It's related in a sense of context. Removing a statue of a historical figure for transgressions of over 100 years ago based on our current views of acceptable is ridiculous.

History class in the future is going to be tricky:

"The [redacted] were very [redacted] due to [12 pages of blacked out words] and that's why we celebrate [redacted]"

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Why does a statue need to be removed in order to add a plaque?

It doesn’t. Nobody is arguing that. I don’t even care about removing the statue or not, I’m just fascinated why so many people are this invested over it NOT being removed.

Especially the history angle. Again: how does a statue better represent history than a plaque? What part of it is erased when you trade a statue for a plaque?

[Flash Walken]

A bronze statue of a prime minister, cast and erected in 1982, has ZERO historical value.

This thread is bananas.

[RichKlit]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

It doesn’t. Nobody is arguing that. I don’t even care about removing the statue or not, I’m just fascinated why so many people are this invested over it NOT being removed.

Especially the history angle. Again: how does a statue better represent history than a plaque? What part of it is erased when you trade a statue for a plaque?

For someone that doesn’t care your doing a days labour worth of arguing?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by RichKlit

For someone that doesn’t care your doing a days labour worth of arguing?

I don’t care about the statue, but I am fascinated in trying to understand the arguments against it beyond Scroopy’s “I don’t really care, but I’m not a big fan of endless tax dollars going towards this stuff”

That at least makes a lot of sense.

[Matata]

I wonder how much this whole song and dance adds up to?: the cost of the original decision that they want the statue, making the statue, installing the statue, then funding the committee that decides to remove the statue, the city deciding to remove the statue, physically removing and storing the statue, figuring what to do with the statue, dealing with the media kerfuffle, then transporting and re installing the statue. Factor in gov't efficiency, adjust for inflation and I'd guess the ballpark is $50-100k.

[RichKlit]

Come on you just like arguing. I suppose that could come across wrong meant with green text.

[PaperBagger'14]

Originally Posted by Matata

History class in the future is going to be tricky:

"The [redacted] were very [redacted] due to [12 pages of blacked out words] and that's why we celebrate [redacted]"

Feel free to teach history in the future, maybe dont erase it though as Victoria wants to do.

[Matata]

Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14

Feel free to teach history in the future, maybe dont erase it though as Victoria wants to do.

I'd just put on conspiracy podcasts, sneak out to smoke weed in the parking lot then incoherently ramble about global bankers and how they've all been bought and sold for 20 minutes.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

It doesn’t. Nobody is arguing that. I don’t even care about removing the statue or not, I’m just fascinated why so many people are this invested over it NOT being removed.

Especially the history angle. Again: how does a statue better represent history than a plaque? What part of it is erased when you trade a statue for a plaque?

Well when you see a statue you tend to look at it, see if you recognize the person, then go read the plaque to see if your right.

I think there’s the bigger question which people on either side of the statue issue don’t really want to consider.

Is Is John A MacDonald a Canadian figure worth celebrating?

I’m goimg to argue yes. His role in building the rail road and establishing this country is worth celebrating despite the fact that he felt the indigenous people were Savages. He acted in what he believed was in the best interests of their children. He was wrong. These facts about John A Macdonald should always be included in anything celebrating him.

If you are arguing No what historical figures in Canada or in the rest of history should be celebrated? I’m not creating a slippery slope argument here but approaching it from the other direction of what should be the criteria to erect a statue of a Canadian Histoical figure and who in Canadian History qualify for that.

I don’t think anyone pre World War II would qualify under any standard that eliminates Macdonald. Every person associated with the founding of Canada was associated with residential schools.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

A bronze statue of a prime minister, cast and erected in 1982, has ZERO historical value.

This thread is bananas.

Maybe I’ve missed those posts, but maybe you can point out the people who feel this is the destruction of a historical artifact, instead of resorting to a random unsubstantiated drive by. We’re not talking about knocking down the statue of David here and I think everyone knows that.

People seem to be discussions the repercussions of taking down a statue of a historical figure, not a historically significant statue. I’m not sure where you got the impression people thing the statue is a protected heritage site.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Which people do you classify as great and which ones do you classify as not so great?

greatest as in the greatest number of people, not the greatest people.

Maybe not the best word I guess.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

A bronze statue of a prime minister, cast and erected in 1982, has ZERO historical value.

This thread is bananas.

A statue of the first prime minister of Canada has no historical value? Really?

And then you claim the thread's bananas because you think when the statue was built has any relevance to anything? lol

[SebC]

Originally Posted by GGG

If you are arguing No what historical figures in Canada or in the rest of history should be celebrated? I’m not creating a slippery slope argument here but approaching it from the other direction of what should be the criteria to erect a statue of a Canadian Histoical figure and who in Canadian History qualify for that.

Only victims can be commemorated now. If you won a war, you're an oppressor.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Maybe I’ve missed those posts, but maybe you can point out the people who feel this is the destruction of a historical artifact, instead of resorting to a random unsubstantiated drive by. We’re not talking about knocking down the statue of David here and I think everyone knows that.

People seem to be discussions the repercussions of taking down a statue of a historical figure, not a historically significant statue. I’m not sure where you got the impression people thing the statue is a protected heritage site.

Because prior to this who even knew there was a statue of john a macdonald outside victoria city hall? How, in any way, is this impacting the historical significance of john a macdonald?

Temporarily replacing the statue with a plague that provides people with more information and context about the individual the statue represents is providing MORE history, not less.

Victoria city hall stood for nearly 100 years before the statue was added. It received it's canadian historical designations before the statue was erected.

It's a-historical to leave the statue in place, as is, in my opinion, because it is not terribly representative of the individual it's supposed to represent.

It's entirely possible the statue will be returned to it's location or moved to a better location with an accompanying educational and contextualisation that will improve the historical understanding of Canada's first Prime Minister.

Without looking it up, does anyone even know why there is a statue of him outside of Victoria city hall? it's because he represented victoria as an MP. A real historical monument should be educational in that regard, and I would think anyone concerned with appropriately recognising important figures in Canadian history would be in favour of a more accurate and substantial monument.

Here's what the chair of the UVic history department thinks:

Meanwhile, John Lutz, chair of the University of Victoria's history department, said the statue should be displayed someplace where people can learn the full history of Macdonald. He'd like to see a new sign plate, with a more complete story.

"The story that John A. Macdonald tells is multiple stories," Lutz said. "There's a story about the founder of Canada, who could be celebrated, there's a story about the Member of Parliament from Victoria, who should be remembered, and then there's the story about the man who helped formulate the Indian Act and was part of the colonial process in Canada that we have to remember and not celebrate."

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Because prior to this who even knew there was a statue of john a macdonald outside victoria city hall? How, in any way, is this impacting the historical significance of john a macdonald?

Temporarily replacing the statue with a plague that provides people with more information and context about the individual the statue represents is providing MORE history, not less.

Victoria city hall stood for nearly 100 years before the statue was added. It received it's canadian historical designations before the statue was erected.

It's a-historical to leave the statue in place, as is, in my opinion, because it is not terribly representative of the individual it's supposed to represent.

It's entirely possible the statue will be returned to it's location or moved to a better location with an accompanying educational and contextualisation that will improve the historical understanding of Canada's first Prime Minister.

Without looking it up, does anyone even know why there is a statue of him outside of Victoria city hall? it's because he represented victoria as an MP. A real historical monument should be educational in that regard, and I would think anyone concerned with appropriately recognising important figures in Canadian history would be in favour of a more accurate and substantial monument.

Here's what the chair of the UVic history department thinks:

Meanwhile, John Lutz, chair of the University of Victoria's history department, said the statue should be displayed someplace where people can learn the full history of Macdonald. He'd like to see a new sign plate, with a more complete story.

"The story that John A. Macdonald tells is multiple stories," Lutz said. "There's a story about the founder of Canada, who could be celebrated, there's a story about the Member of Parliament from Victoria, who should be remembered, and then there's the story about the man who helped formulate the Indian Act and was part of the colonial process in Canada that we have to remember and not celebrate."

that makes about a thousand times more sense as to what you were getting at which is why drive by posts aren't all that useful to communicate what you mean.

[station]

TIL some people really, really like statues.

A municipal gov’t is meeting with indigenous families to discuss its Truth and Reconciliation program. The families mention that passing by the MacDonald statue in that context feels “contradictory”. The gov’t says sure no problem, that’s a pretty small concession, we’ll put up a plaque instead.

But to some of you guys it’s General Custer’s Last Stand. You guys are acting like an angry mob destroyed the statue with clubs, took the mayor hostage, and demanded that MacDonald be forever erased from history. The reaction to a minor issue is absolutely astonishing to me.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by station

TIL some people really, really like statues.

A municipal gov’t is meeting with indigenous families to discuss its Truth and Reconciliation program. The families mention that passing by the MacDonald statue in that context feels “contradictory”. The gov’t says sure no problem, that’s a pretty small concession, we’ll put up a plaque instead.

But to some of you guys it’s General Custer’s Last Stand. You guys are acting like an angry mob destroyed the statue with clubs, took the mayor hostage, and demanded that MacDonald be forever erased from history. The reaction to a minor issue is absolutely astonishing to me.

Who is acting like that? Quote them.