The not so Great Racism in Canada Thread

[Corndogger]

John Oliver mocking Trump in 2017 over Trump suggesting that statues of Washington and Jefferson would be the next to fall. Trump was right, it didn't stop with Confederate leaders.

https://twitter.com/Yanky_Pollak/status/1274550602304028674

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

John Oliver mocking Trump in 2017 over Trump suggesting that statues of Washington and Jefferson would be the next to fall. Trump was right, it didn't stop with Confederate leaders.

https://twitter.com/Yanky_Pollak/status/1274550602304028674

Both owned (and more in Jefferson's case!) slaves (Ulysses S. Grant demonstrates that even having been gifted one whom you subsequently freed is enough at the moment). Personally, I'd put statues glorifying The Shame of the Confederacy in a special category awaiting removal, but it's their country.

[MonctonRad]

Even Churchill isn't safe. They've had to box his statue outside Westminster to keep it from being vandalized.

I know Churchill was an old time imperialist, and some people question his decisions in India, but is any political figure absolutely beyond reproach? I fully expect in the current sociopolitical climate to see calls for removal of all the statues on Parliament Hill (maybe not the Queen, but you never know, perhaps she accidentally kicked one of her Corgis once - that would be enough for the animal rights activists).

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Even Churchill isn't safe. They've had to box his statue outside Westminster to keep it from being vandalized.

I know Churchill was an old time imperialist, and some people question his decisions in India, but is any political figure absolutely beyond reproach? I fully expect in the current sociopolitical climate to see calls for removal of all the statues on Parliament Hill (maybe not the Queen, but you never know, perhaps she accidentally kicked one of her Corgis once - that would be enough for the animal rights activists).

Off topic, but the only Monarch that belongs on Parliament Hill is Victoria, imo. EII had her equestrian statue moved last year over to the roundabout in front of Rideau Hall/24 Sussex and it looks magnificent there. Unfortunately, I think it's intended to be temporary, while Parliament is rebuilt.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I think when most people allege the CBC is biased, they are talking about the radio network.

It has no ads and it has good ratings. Its morning shows are generally no. 1 in most major markets.

It would have to include CBC News including the TV and web sides. Locally in Winnipeg the CBC is easily the number one promoter of stories with what we might call a "SJW" slant.

[MonctonRad]

The only CBC I pay attention to these days are:

1) - CBC Moncton Radio Morning as I get ready for work, and during the morning commute. It is a good resource for local news, but increasingly has an SJW slant. I tolerate it because there is no viable alternative. None of the other 12 local radio stations is particularly palatable.
2) - CBC Radio 2 for classical music in the mornings as I work. The radio goes off at 2 PM when they start playing banal modern music.
3) - I used to watch the CBC regional Atlantic Canada newscast at 11 PM, just to flesh out the news from Atlantic Canada, but since the pandemic started, the regional newscast has been replaced with a second dose of the national news. If I didn't watch the CBC National News the first time around, why would I watch it the second time? My main source of news is CTV Atlantic Live at 5 and CTV News at 6.

That's it. I don't watch any CBC news coverage otherwise. I pay no attention to CBC entertainment programs. I mostly listen to satellite radio, including the BBC World Service. My TV entertainment is increasingly from streaming services. I do however have a soft spot for CBS Sunday Morning - a good general interest soft news and infotainment program.

CBC is increasingly irrelevant to me.

[esquire]

I like the CBC a lot, for all the griping about them their product is of a higher quality than what any of the private broadcasters do. Their news services are generally pretty good. The issue I have with them is when they keep pushing certain narratives.

Since the George Floyd incident they have been giving top billing to any incidents of alleged police brutality in Winnipeg, but they constantly downplay what led up to whatever happened... and they are always giving it to the police for not mentioning the names of the people involved. It's pretty clear they're hoping there's an obviously indigenous name involved to push that angle.

Maybe it isn't so much a CBC issue as it is one of Canadian news media generally which so loves to import US issues and turn them into domestic ones.

[caltrane74]

Originally Posted by urbandreamer

My father's generation never referred to it as the Lost Cause; but his hatred for Yankees still persisted. When people criticized Trump, he just explained it: he's a typical Yank. Bush was a "carpet bagger." I wonder when the South will vote Democrat again?

Do you include Virginia, North Carolina, Maryland, Georgia, Florida or Texas in the South? Some may be turning blue in the near future due to demographics not really anything with changing hearts and minds of longtime white southerners.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Do you include Virginia, North Carolina, Maryland, Georgia, Florida or Texas in the South? Some may be turning blue in the near future due to demographics not really anything with changing hearts and minds of longtime white southerners.

The D.C. suburbs have already taken Virginia decidedly blue, no?

[Wigs]

History is written in books and displayed in museums.

I really don't understand why people are getting so butthurt over statues, most of which so poorly done they don't even look like the person they are representing.

We aren't talking Michaelangelo's David

The Confederate statues of traitor generals erected many decades post civil war were meant to show Blacks "we owned your asses once and it could happen again. You may be free today, but this will be a constant reminder of what was and could be again"

[Wigs]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Do you include Virginia, North Carolina, Maryland, Georgia, Florida or Texas in the South? Some may be turning blue in the near future due to demographics not really anything with changing hearts and minds of longtime white southerners.

The only reason these states are turning blue is the mass migration of Northerners to Southern States coupled with younger generation less likely to be GOP minded

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Wigs

I really don't understand why people are getting so butthurt over statues, most of which so poorly done they don't even look like the person they are representing.

We aren't talking Michaelangelo's David

The Confederate statues of traitor generals erected many decades post civil war were meant to show Blacks "we owned your asses once and it could happen again. You may be free today, but this will be a constant reminder of what was and could be again"

The artistic merit of the Gastown statue is debatable but people take pictures with it all the time so somebody must like it.

I don't think Canada has many statues of Confederate war heroes. That debate is not relevant to Canada.

The Cornwallis statue is another dubious example. Love him or hate him, the park where that statue was has a weird empty platform now and no focal point because the city had to make a snap decision to pull it down after it stood for 80-90 years largely without incident. The statue was being discussed by a committee but there was a legitimate concern the statue would be destroyed; their hand was forced by activists. If there were polls and committee work and the chosen outcome involved bringing the statue back with other statues and more interpretive material, I doubt that would be considered acceptable to the mob. Although it's possible they'll forget about the once-burning 90 year old issue and move on to something else.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by someone123

Although it's possible they'll forget about the once-burning 90 year old issue and move on to something else.

You mean the cause de jour...........

Which is another reason why I hate SJWs - its always something; the "work" is never done.............

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Which is another reason why I hate SJWs - its always something; the "work" is never done.............

How dare people be encouraged to better and change their society and refuse to accept the status quo.

Those first nations that lack drinking water? Nah we're good.
The income inequality in Canada? We're good.
The housing crisis? We're good.
Racism in Canada in general? Nah we're good guys.
The richest in Canada holding money overseas, holding monopolies on industries? It's cool.

As long as i've got it good it's fine. How depressing. There are always ways we can improve our society and better ourselves.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by JHikka

How dare people be encouraged to better and change their society and refuse to accept the status quo.

Those first nations that lack drinking water? Nah we're good.
The income inequality in Canada? We're good.
The housing crisis? We're good.
Racism in Canada in general? Nah we're good guys.
The richest in Canada holding money overseas, holding monopolies on industries? It's cool.

As long as i've got it good it's fine. How depressing. There are always ways we can improve our society and better ourselves.

I have respect for people who have a defined cause, and work diligently to make positive progressive change by building a following and making persuasive arguments that are impossible for entitled vested interests to ignore. Such people are frequently satisfied once they accomplish what they set out to do, and return to their previous lives.

I have no respect for professional agitators who organize street protests on a whim, and employ dirty tactics (like shaming, bullying and character assassination) to achieve their goals, and then move on to the next "cause". These people are illegitimate. They care less about the cause than they do about raging against the machine.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

I have respect for people who have a defined cause, and work diligently to make positive progressive change by building a following and making persuasive arguments that are impossible for entitled vested interests to ignore. Such people are frequently satisfied once they accomplish what they set out to do, and return to their previous lives.

The clean drinking water goal is a good example. Improving drinking water is a constructive goal. I doubt that it would encounter significant opposition in Canada. I am not sure I've ever read or heard an opinion that expressed that some people shouldn't have clean drinking water.

Some causes like "solve inequality" or "solve racism, which may be systemic and hard to identify" are too vague to serve as fruitful goals. Income inequality is an example of a dubious goal. It is complicated and caused by many factors, the biggest ones being beyond our control (e.g. geography and natural resources). It is unclear that past interventions have been a net positive. The biggest force for equality in the world is technological development. It is very hard to craft interventionist social policies that don't backfire. It's doubtful that outrage mobs will converge on good policies.

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by Wigs

History is written in books and displayed in museums.

I really don't understand why people are getting so butthurt over statues, most of which so poorly done they don't even look like the person they are representing.

We aren't talking Michaelangelo's David

The Confederate statues of traitor generals erected many decades post civil war were meant to show Blacks "we owned your asses once and it could happen again. You may be free today, but this will be a constant reminder of what was and could be again"

1. What kind of society is this where public monuments get torn down by mobs (and by society I'm broadly including the Anglo-American world)? This isn't Iraq after the invasion. If we want to remove public monuments we should have a process to discuss the request and adjudicate it fairly and transparently. Not go around acting like hooligans and destroying monuments.

2. There's a big difference between erecting new monuments glorifying controversial historical figures and simply keeping what's already there. Even if it was erected during a period of racism with bad intent, that itself is an important period of history being represented.

3. Even if we start adjudicating public monument removal requests on a case-by-case basis, we will eventually end up coming up with principles, factors, rules of thumb, etc. to adjudicate future public monument removal requests. I think it's better to formulate some guidelines at the outset. And if we take that approach, I think we'll find quickly that this is a very difficult task. For example, the same people who want to tear down confederate statues because they think it is offensive to black people would probably be opposed to, for example, tearing down Islamic monuments in India that were erected with analogous intent because of highly Muslims rank in the left-wing list of groups they pity. What if Indigenous people say they are offended by all monuments glorifying any settler or their descendants or newcomers? What about people who have done both good things and bad? And so on.

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by MonctonRad

Even Churchill isn't safe. They've had to box his statue outside Westminster to keep it from being vandalized.

I know Churchill was an old time imperialist, and some people question his decisions in India, but is any political figure absolutely beyond reproach? I fully expect in the current sociopolitical climate to see calls for removal of all the statues on Parliament Hill (maybe not the Queen, but you never know, perhaps she accidentally kicked one of her Corgis once - that would be enough for the animal rights activists).

This is the point........ erasing history doesn't change anything and can actually be quite dangerous as, as the old saying goes, those who forget history are damned to repeat it. Yes, we should try to rid our society of racist or any bigotry against an identifiable group but you can't change history and you shouldn't ever ignore it. Our culture, in part, is formed by our history for both good and ill. The people who want to erase history forget that this same history has helped shape our current culture which has led to Canada's democracy and our respect of human rights.

This is why I have absolutely no patience for people who try to quell free speech on the grounds that it may be viewed as racist, sexist, homophobic etc. Being offensive is not illegal and this ability to offend is exactly what has led to the human rights and social gains we have seen since Confederation. It is this free speech and ability to offend is what gave rise to 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵, racial, ethnic, and religious rights. At one point all the original people and groups demanding these rights would have been considered offensive by the general culture but their freedom to offend people's views and make them question their values is what led to their hard won rights.

[saffronleaf]

Originally Posted by Wigs

History is written in books and displayed in museums.

I really don't understand why people are getting so butthurt over statues, most of which so poorly done they don't even look like the person they are representing.

Don't worry, they're coming after the history books, too. They always do. Look at the revisionist 1619 Project the NYT is putting out.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by saffronleaf

Don't worry, they're coming after the history books, too. They always do. Look at the revisionist 1619 Project the NYT is putting out.

History is subject to constant revision, no?