Captain Cook statue

[Hesi]

What a slur on NZ

People airing believed historical grievances by wantonly vandalising community property.

After events that happened 250 years ago, how can anyone even closely accurately say what did or did not occur.

What we do know, is that James Cook was a man of substantial fortitude, and one of the most accomplished seafarers the world has ever seen.  A brilliant navigator and cartographer, without the assistance of today's electronic apps and devices.

A man, many times that of the anonymous cowards that deface his statue, with of all things, swastikas.

I'm offended by these cowards(can someone take them away and put them in storage somewhere), but I suppose that does not count in this agenda driven world

[Maximus]

...Quite right, Hesi ...and Cook was revered by most of the Polynesia chiefs.

 

 

[Maximus]

Here's a very good piece I saw today about the statue of Te Rauparaha in Otaki ...

This monument in Otaki commemorates a man who participated in slavery, torture and even cannibalism of the Maori people. His name was Te Rauparaha, and he was a Maori chief.

Why should such a monument (and the street that is named after him) be allowed to remain standing in modern New Zealand?

Because Te Rauparaha was a man of his times, and like all historical figures, he was a complex character shaped by the prevailing norms of his era.

Even though this monument might evoke images and memories of his evil deeds, it does not exist to celebrate or normalise those deeds. It exists to mark a man who - like it or not - played a noteworthy role in shaping the complex history of our nation.

The only time we should be removing monuments is when their existence celebrates or perpetuates evil. If they simply stand as testaments to morally complicated historical figures, the reasoned response is to learn that history so we can avoid the mistake of repeating it.

 

[Hesi]

1 hour ago, Maximus said:

Here's a very good piece I saw today about the statue of Te Rauparaha in Otaki ...

This monument in Otaki commemorates a man who participated in slavery, torture and even cannibalism of the Maori people. His name was Te Rauparaha, and he was a Maori chief.

Why should such a monument (and the street that is named after him) be allowed to remain standing in modern New Zealand?

Because Te Rauparaha was a man of his times, and like all historical figures, he was a complex character shaped by the prevailing norms of his era.

Even though this monument might evoke images and memories of his evil deeds, it does not exist to celebrate or normalise those deeds. It exists to mark a man who - like it or not - played a noteworthy role in shaping the complex history of our nation.

The only time we should be removing monuments is when their existence celebrates or perpetuates evil. If they simply stand as testaments to morally complicated historical figures, the reasoned response is to learn that history so we can avoid the mistake of repeating it.

 

Good article

Salient point, being like James Cook, he was a man of his times, even though those times may be abhorrent to us now, it was the acceptable norm then

[Freda]

Absolutely.

Slavery  was an integral part of many societies since,  forever....including earlier Maori [ as alluded ]  and also, not often considered, black African tribes which cheerfully captured and on-sold members of rival or defeated tribes to slavers - Arab, and European.

It's a bloody long stretch to claim that only white men dealt in slavery.