Common Sense

Come a bit late for the Brexit thread.

We'll soon be at it again, unfortunately.

gloswhite wrote:Rightly or wrongly, Coulston was a man of his time. Like yourself, I don't like how he got his money. However, once he had it, he started many institutions, etc, and financed much of the building of Bristol. He cannot be written out of history by the pulling down of a statue, or renaming of a building or two. Jimmy Saville was a known law breaker, whereas Coulston was not.
However, on the point of statues and their uses, I shall agree to disagree with you.

Very important not to write anyone out of history, need to learn from mistakes. 

No need to celebrate these people with statues though. 

Coulston's off to a museum i think, which is a sensible resolution in my mind.

Empty space in Bristol. Why not put Captain Tom there. God forbid there are any skeletons in his historical cupboard.

T.R.O.Y. wrote:

Very important not to write anyone out of history, need to learn from mistakes. 

No need to celebrate these people with statues though. 

Coulston's off to a museum i think, which is a sensible resolution in my mind.

I agree.
Good to see you back.

gloswhite wrote:We'll soon be at it again, unfortunately.

I am not biting.

Not yet.

Bit of a conundrum I've yet to resolve, would welcome views.

It's this, if you've done some good things and some bad things in your life, is it right that you are judged principally on the bad things?

Ok, there's level's of good and bad of course, Hitler helping an old granny across the road doesn't balance out his holocaust obviously but speaking about Saville he did raise millions for charity most notably Stoke Mandeville for spinal injury victims.

Same with Colston, if anyone has a spare 20 minutes or so then this is worth a read -

http://www.bris.ac.uk/Depts/History/bristolrecordsociety/publications/bha096.pdf

We all know about Colston the slave trader but how much do we know what Colston did for the poor and needy?

It's worth noting that his trustees still to the current day benefit the those in need of educational support - irrespective of their racial background!  

This is THREE HUNDRED YEARS after his death!

So where do you draw the line, how do you weigh up good against bad?  

Are there shades of grey or is everything simply black or white?

Sluffy wrote:Bit of a conundrum I've yet to resolve, would welcome views.

It's this, if you've done some good things and some bad things in your life, is it right that you are judged principally on the bad things?

Ok, there's level's of good and bad of course, Hitler helping an old granny across the road doesn't balance out his holocaust obviously but speaking about Saville he did raise millions for charity most notably Stoke Mandeville for spinal injury victims.

Same with Colston, if anyone has a spare 20 minutes or so then this is worth a read -

http://www.bris.ac.uk/Depts/History/bristolrecordsociety/publications/bha096.pdf

We all know about Colston the slave trader but how much do we know what Colston did for the poor and needy?

It's worth noting that his trustees still to the current day benefit the those in need of educational support - irrespective of their racial background!  

This is THREE HUNDRED YEARS after his death!

So where do you draw the line, how do you weigh up good against bad?  

Are there shades of grey or is everything simply black or white?

The money he raised for charity was purely a cover for his repellant habits.  A lot of his obnoxious practices were carried out in hospital situations. I know from personal conversations through a Spinal Injuries Association  forum that his presence at Stoke Mandeville was feared by many of the patients, but as long as the money kept rolling in eyes were closed. He had this great reputation for helping to raise cash and through that he won over a lot of people who believed in him.  He advised Prince Charles on many things and often spent time with Mrs Thatcher at Chequers.

I had the option to do my rehabilitation at Stoke Mandeville back in the 1967, but chose Pinderfields in Wakefield instead or I might well have met the National Creep.

I'm alway amazed that he didn't end up in a shallow grave in the Yorkshire Dales after being tracked down by an avenging parent. It's what he deserved.

Sorry to ramble on , but he makes my blood boil.

Interesting. But I don't think good deeds outweigh the bad. Try it in a court of law.

'My client has given millions to charity, saved several babies from drowning, and been knighted for his service to the human race.
Surely this court can give him a pass for murdering his wife'?

boltonbonce wrote:Interesting. But I don't think good deeds outweigh the bad. Try it in a court of law.

'My client has given millions to charity, saved several babies from drowning, and been knighted for his service to the human race.
Surely this court can give him a pass for murdering his wife'?

Well the courts bestow a finite limit on the crime which implies that guilt is not 100% of someone's life - apart of course if you sentenced to death.

Even if you are imprisoned for such a length of time that when you are still finally released you are no longer a risk to society, implying that whatever you did didn't void the rest of your existence and a chance to atone.

You also even get time off against your sentence in prison for 'good' behaviour too!

Colston and Saville might well as done the good stuff as a sort of cover/regret/atonement/whatever for the bad they perceived they did, I don't know but is someone inherently evil - has no one no good in their soul - and if so at what point does the bad wipe away whatever good they have done in their lives?

Are we including Barry Knight in this?

boltonbonce wrote:Are we including Barry Knight in this?

 That bald bastard should have been hung, drawn and quartered 

Norpig wrote:
 That bald bastard should have been hung, drawn and quartered 

Don't get me started.