CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
 Calgary Flames


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 3438
PostPosted: Wed Jul 21, 2021 3:24 pm
 


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/toronto-renaming-dundas-street-1.6103260

What the fucking hell. Mayor John Tory is behind this fucking mess. Shocking :roll:

The untold millions it's going to cost to do this notwithstanding, this is cancel culture at it's finest, and a fucking limp dick coward for a Mayor being an enabler. I'm getting sick and fucking tired of cancel culture!!!

:evil: :evil: :evil:

-J.


Last edited by CDN_PATRIOT on Wed Jul 21, 2021 5:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 21610
PostPosted: Wed Jul 21, 2021 4:38 pm
 


dundas never even visited canada

why are you crying


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 32503
PostPosted: Wed Jul 21, 2021 5:03 pm
 


Any statue of him that they can take down at the same time?


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Calgary Flames
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 31415
PostPosted: Wed Jul 21, 2021 5:17 pm
 


$1:
Dundas, an influential Scottish politician, was opposed to ending the British Empire's participation in the transatlantic slave trade when the proposal was brought forth near the end of the 18th century.

His opposition served to stall its abolition, which kept hundreds of thousands of people, many of them Black, in bondage and allowed many more to be enslaved.


Not posthumously honouring slavers seems like a no-brainer. A better question would be as to why it took until now to get around to it. Just because we're finally noticing that it's incredibly difficult to find actual heroes to honour doesn't make it OK to acknowledge some obvious villains due to our collective lack of imagination & creativity. :|


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
 Calgary Flames


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 3438
PostPosted: Wed Jul 21, 2021 5:35 pm
 


Erasing history and pretending it never happened is NOT the answer. Learning from it, letting people make up their own minds, and making sure we never repeat the mistakes that were made is how you do it.

-J.


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20363
PostPosted: Wed Jul 21, 2021 7:26 pm
 


That didn't answer PD question. Dundas has as much to do with Canada as Yi Jianlian.

Besides which, if the people that live there voted to have the name change who are you to get your knickers in a knot?


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Toronto Maple Leafs


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 12229
PostPosted: Wed Jul 21, 2021 7:30 pm
 


So what now....

Woke Street

Histerase Lane

J Tory Blvd


Online
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 17832
PostPosted: Wed Jul 21, 2021 7:31 pm
 


CDN_PATRIOT CDN_PATRIOT:
Erasing history and pretending it never happened is NOT the answer. Learning from it, letting people make up their own minds, and making sure we never repeat the mistakes that were made is how you do it.

-J.


They’re not erasing history or pretending it didn’t happen. They’re just going to stop honouring a guy who was keen on slavery by taking his name off a street.

This is erasing history.
https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_60f50cf6e4b01f11895b2dc3?05e


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 20363
PostPosted: Wed Jul 21, 2021 7:32 pm
 


Whatever they want AFAIK, I just can't stand all this pearl clutching over 'History' when it was all a white wash to begin with.


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
Profile
Posts: 2593
PostPosted: Wed Jul 21, 2021 8:15 pm
 


Thanos Thanos:
$1:
Dundas, an influential Scottish politician, was opposed to ending the British Empire's participation in the transatlantic slave trade when the proposal was brought forth near the end of the 18th century.

His opposition served to stall its abolition, which kept hundreds of thousands of people, many of them Black, in bondage and allowed many more to be enslaved.


Not posthumously honouring slavers seems like a no-brainer. A better question would be as to why it took until now to get around to it. Just because we're finally noticing that it's incredibly difficult to find actual heroes to honour doesn't make it OK to acknowledge some obvious villains due to our collective lack of imagination & creativity. :|

A slaver huh? Henry Dundas never owned a slave in his life. In 1776 Mr. Dundas was a lawyer in Scotland. Mr. Dundas represented Mr. Joseph Knight. Mr. Knight was purchased as a slave in Jamaica, and brought to Scotland. Mr. Dundas argued Mr. Knight's case before the highest court in Scotland, and won. Not only did Mr. Dumas win emancipation for Mr. Knight, but all African slaves in Scotland as well. The ruling put an end to serfdom as well. How many slaves have these whiny cancel culture dipships freed?

In 1792 a motion was put before the British House of Commons to end the slave trade. The same motion was brought up the year before in 1791. That motion was defeated by a 163-88 vote. It did not look like anything was going to be different this time. Mr. Dundas stated for the record that he had always been against the slave trade. Mr. Dundas added the word gradual to the motion being proposed. By arguing for a gradual rather than sudden end to the slave trade, Mr. Dundas was able to turn the 163-88 loss from the previous year into a 230-85 victory. Its called compromise (something that is sorely lacking in todays politics). Mr. Dundas's amendment resulted in Parliament voting to end the slave trade for the first time. Nowadays the cancel culture crowd wants to blame all the delays on Mr. Dundas. That would be like a Canadian politician proposing a compromise amendment so Canada could procure some ships for her navy. 50 years go by without procuring a single ship, and the guy that made the proposal for the amendment gets all the blame. Yeah its all his fault. He died 40 years ago, but what the hell. Sound familiar? Everyone is always looking for a scapegoat when it comes to shitty government.

The facts of the matter are that Mr. Dundas DID actually free slaves. Mr. Dundas organised an amendment to pass a motion, a motion that dramatically failed the year before. Mr. Dundas is responsible for Parliament voting to end the British slave trade for the first time. All those whiny culture canceling libtards living in their parents basements can bitch all they want to, but those are the facts.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Calgary Flames
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 31415
PostPosted: Wed Jul 21, 2021 9:47 pm
 


1) gradualism in the face of atrocity is not morally defensible; ask those left in slavery or brought into slavery, all entirely due to Dundas' delaying tactics, while the politicians and slave owners in the British Parliament hemmed and hawed over it for another full generation what they would think of the "gradual" approach

2) the British abolitionists who wanted the slave trade gotten rid of immediately accurately blamed Dundas for dragging the agony for the slaves out for another fifty years; as it was his efforts caused the British trade not to be abolished until 1807 and full freedom for slaves in all the British colonies to not occur until 1833

3) Dundas also copped out by wanting the colonial legislatures, comprised entirely of plantation landlords and slave-owners to "come around" and give their approval first; oddly enough this is the exact opposite of what the Parliament did that triggered the American Revolution when they didn't give the colonial authorities any input at all on things that such as tax & trade policy or even on the colonists even having the basic rights of Englishmen in Britain; so the Parliament was willing to give lots of wiggle time in extending the life of a profitable trade like slavery in order for it's practitioners to make as much money as possible before it's "someday" abolition but was also more than willing to drop the hammer down as hard as possible on their fellow white men in America in order to keep them in line - how convenient for Dundas and all the others favouring gradualism, eh?


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
Profile
Posts: 2593
PostPosted: Wed Jul 21, 2021 11:38 pm
 


Thanos Thanos:
1) gradualism in the face of atrocity is not morally defensible; ask those left in slavery or brought into slavery, all entirely due to Dundas' delaying tactics, while the politicians and slave owners in the British Parliament hemmed and hawed over it for another full generation what they would think of the "gradual" approach

2) the British abolitionists who wanted the slave trade gotten rid of immediately accurately blamed Dundas for dragging the agony for the slaves out for another fifty years; as it was his efforts caused the British trade not to be abolished until 1807 and full freedom for slaves in all the British colonies to not occur until 1833

3) Dundas also copped out by wanting the colonial legislatures, comprised entirely of plantation landlords and slave-owners to "come around" and give their approval first; oddly enough this is the exact opposite of what the Parliament did that triggered the American Revolution when they didn't give the colonial authorities any input at all on things that such as tax & trade policy or even on the colonists even having the basic rights of Englishmen in Britain; so the Parliament was willing to give lots of wiggle time in extending the life of a profitable trade like slavery in order for it's practitioners to make as much money as possible before it's "someday" abolition but was also more than willing to drop the hammer down as hard as possible on their fellow white men in America in order to keep them in line - how convenient for Dundas and all the others favouring gradualism, eh?

I see that you got off of your ass and did a little research before posting this time. That is something that you should have done before blindly calling Dundas a slaver, don't you think?

Its real easy for you to sit and pass judgement on people from hundreds of years ago. Nice jingoisms like: "gradualism in the face of atrocity is not morally defensible". People that the world is not expecting anything from have the luxury of saying shit like that. In the perfect world I would agree that gradualism in the face of atrocity is not morally defensible. We don't live in a perfect world. Sometimes you have to fight the battles that you can win. Sometimes small victories are better than no victories at all. Kind of like Mr. Schindler saving Jews from concentration camps in WW2. He did not get to save them all. He did not have the luxury of taking an "all or nothing" approach. He did what he could. He saved the ones that he could, when he could. He had to work with gradualism. His work is the very definition of gradualism. You tell me to ask the people left in slavery what they think of the gradual approach. I ask you to ask the Holocaust survivors that Schindler saved what they think about the "all or nothing" approach. I think that they would be perfectly fine with gradualism.

You claim that the British abolitionists that wanted the slave trade gotten rid of immediately accurately blamed Dundas for dragging slavery out. I call total bullshit!!! If the abolitionists had the votes to suddenly end slavery than they would have done so. They did NOT have the votes to do so. The voting record proves that. Dundas was one man. One man, one vote. I see 558 members of Parliament in 1792. So one man is totally controlling 558 members of Parliament? If King George 3 thought that any one man had that kind of power over Parliament, he would have made that person disappear. King George 3 was pro slave trade. When the cancel culture crowd starts wanting to remove the names of Royal family members from streets, bridges, buildings, parks, currency, etc., etc., are you going to be OK with that?

I totally agree with you on the point of Dundas wanting colonial legislatures to sign off on slavery. It was a dick move. I have no idea what his motive was. I see nothing that points to Dundas having any investments or ties to the slave trade. I do not see him profiting from the slave trade in any fashion. I do know that Dundas worked to end slavery in Scotland. He succeeded. He worked to pass the law ending the British slave trade. Trying to blame one man who had zero ties to the slave trade for its continuance (when the King himself is pro slave trade) is total bullshit.

Its probably a good thing that they are removing his name. Dundas is too good for Toronto. Toronto has turned into a big steaming pile of leftwing shit. Toronto SHOULD rename everything with people who more accurately reflect their viewpoints on life. People like Chairman Mao, Marx, Lenin, Castro, Che, Chavez, George Floyd, Omar Khadr, and others of that ilk seem to be Toronto's heros.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Calgary Flames
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 31415
PostPosted: Thu Jul 22, 2021 1:45 am
 


I gotta put you on block for a while. You're coming across like a mental case. You get far too wound-up and make this silliness too personal.


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 41176
PostPosted: Thu Jul 22, 2021 6:18 am
 


rickc rickc:
Thanos Thanos:
1) gradualism in the face of atrocity is not morally defensible; ask those left in slavery or brought into slavery, all entirely due to Dundas' delaying tactics, while the politicians and slave owners in the British Parliament hemmed and hawed over it for another full generation what they would think of the "gradual" approach

2) the British abolitionists who wanted the slave trade gotten rid of immediately accurately blamed Dundas for dragging the agony for the slaves out for another fifty years; as it was his efforts caused the British trade not to be abolished until 1807 and full freedom for slaves in all the British colonies to not occur until 1833

3) Dundas also copped out by wanting the colonial legislatures, comprised entirely of plantation landlords and slave-owners to "come around" and give their approval first; oddly enough this is the exact opposite of what the Parliament did that triggered the American Revolution when they didn't give the colonial authorities any input at all on things that such as tax & trade policy or even on the colonists even having the basic rights of Englishmen in Britain; so the Parliament was willing to give lots of wiggle time in extending the life of a profitable trade like slavery in order for it's practitioners to make as much money as possible before it's "someday" abolition but was also more than willing to drop the hammer down as hard as possible on their fellow white men in America in order to keep them in line - how convenient for Dundas and all the others favouring gradualism, eh?

I see that you got off of your ass and did a little research before posting this time. That is something that you should have done before blindly calling Dundas a slaver, don't you think?

Its real easy for you to sit and pass judgement on people from hundreds of years ago. Nice jingoisms like: "gradualism in the face of atrocity is not morally defensible". People that the world is not expecting anything from have the luxury of saying shit like that. In the perfect world I would agree that gradualism in the face of atrocity is not morally defensible. We don't live in a perfect world. Sometimes you have to fight the battles that you can win. Sometimes small victories are better than no victories at all. Kind of like Mr. Schindler saving Jews from concentration camps in WW2. He did not get to save them all. He did not have the luxury of taking an "all or nothing" approach. He did what he could. He saved the ones that he could, when he could. He had to work with gradualism. His work is the very definition of gradualism. You tell me to ask the people left in slavery what they think of the gradual approach. I ask you to ask the Holocaust survivors that Schindler saved what they think about the "all or nothing" approach. I think that they would be perfectly fine with gradualism.

You claim that the British abolitionists that wanted the slave trade gotten rid of immediately accurately blamed Dundas for dragging slavery out. I call total bullshit!!! If the abolitionists had the votes to suddenly end slavery than they would have done so. They did NOT have the votes to do so. The voting record proves that. Dundas was one man. One man, one vote. I see 558 members of Parliament in 1792. So one man is totally controlling 558 members of Parliament? If King George 3 thought that any one man had that kind of power over Parliament, he would have made that person disappear. King George 3 was pro slave trade. When the cancel culture crowd starts wanting to remove the names of Royal family members from streets, bridges, buildings, parks, currency, etc., etc., are you going to be OK with that?

I totally agree with you on the point of Dundas wanting colonial legislatures to sign off on slavery. It was a dick move. I have no idea what his motive was. I see nothing that points to Dundas having any investments or ties to the slave trade. I do not see him profiting from the slave trade in any fashion. I do know that Dundas worked to end slavery in Scotland. He succeeded. He worked to pass the law ending the British slave trade. Trying to blame one man who had zero ties to the slave trade for its continuance (when the King himself is pro slave trade) is total bullshit.

Its probably a good thing that they are removing his name. Dundas is too good for Toronto. Toronto has turned into a big steaming pile of leftwing shit. Toronto SHOULD rename everything with people who more accurately reflect their viewpoints on life. People like Chairman Mao, Marx, Lenin, Castro, Che, Chavez, George Floyd, Omar Khadr, and others of that ilk seem to be Toronto's heros.


So, two points here rick;

1) What about these comments makes you believe that Toronto should name important streets after the man?, and;

2) What the fuck does a child who was tortured by the US military have to do with the discussion?


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 25013
PostPosted: Thu Jul 22, 2021 7:50 am
 


Can someone explain to me how removing someone's name from a street = erasing history?


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 49 posts ]  1  2  3  4  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.