Comments by "Mat Broomfield" (@matbroomfield) on "The artist cutting off the head of a British colonialist - BBC News" video.

  1. "Singaporeans are too busy making money to think about history" or to put it another way, "Singaporeans are too busy living in the present to carry around a millstone of resentment for events that no longer affect them." I have no problem no longer glorifying colonisers, and I think if Singapore had any self pride, it WOULD take down the statue, but this insignificant action accomplishes almost nothing.
    17
  2.  @AlanWattResistance  Maybe they were HAPPY in the stone age? If that's where they were living. By your standard, I should be fine to conquor your house and impose whatever progressive lifestyle I deem better than your own right?
    2
  3.  ThatBadGuy  No, because he was a conqueror who humiliated their leader. Did you even WATCH the video before posting your self-pitying drivel?
    1
  4.  @WildwoodCastle  No, not exactly. It's not the right of nations to go around the world conquering other nations because they are not sufficiently advanced.
    1
  5.  goff0103  "You must be non English." What difference would that make? Right is right.
    1
  6.  ThatBadGuy  White people invaded their country, humiliated their leader, and took over the country. That's bad by any criteria that humans value. If you're feeling irritated about that, it can only be because for some reason, you feel that you are being attacked for the crimes of your distant ancestors. Bizarre.
    1
  7.  @WildwoodCastle  In what other situation is that the standard? If I come to your house, steal all your stuff and build a different cleaner house for you where your old house used to be, then you complain, would ANYONE be taken seriously if they said "What proof do you have thatwas 'HAPPY' and not oppressed by his neighbours?" You're reaching so hard you're gonna get a strain. "Do you believe that other nations should intervene where people are starving and children are dying from diseases because their rulers abuse them." You're creating a fictitious history for this nation in order to support your premise. But even if you are right, I have mixed feelings about whether other nations should intervene. Who the fuck are WE to impose our view of morality on people? Suppose we did that on the Amazonian rain forest tribes, they could rightly say "You're destroying the planet, who are YOU to tell me what to do?" Suppose we did it to North Korea, they'd be justified in saying "But your politics Britain and America are the joke of the planet." And so often (Syria, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Israel) our interventions leave these place worse than they were AND turn out to be about mineral wealth.
    1