Comments by "Yerris" (@yerri5567) on "University of Hong Kong removes ‘Pillar of Shame’ sculpture marking Tiananmen crackdown" video.

Niight Hood Have you ever thought that maybe the statue was originally 2 parts?
6
@cheerwhiner7829 "SHAMEFUL and PATHETIC" How is that "shameful and pathetic"? Why should art thats paid to be put there not be removed when the organisation behind it has been disbanded? The university can earn more from putting other art pieces in replacement to that. Its their own property after all.
4
ijamber What country you from? Is there no such thing as hate speech in your country or verbal abuse in your country?
3
@Jezthedead Thats not how it works. The world works by "innocent until proven guilty". You need to prove that theyre "guilty".
3
@Spaghetsu 50c spotted
3
@Jezthedead "Neither having the statue split in two or having it as one big statue is innocent or guilty. You are trying to connect two unrelated things" Are you that thick in the head or something? Im talking about you accusing me of being wrong by you saying "its definitely not". Prove to me that "its definitely not". You literally have zero evidence yet youre making such a claim. "so u can stop acting clever bro. Its not working" Yes...dumb people wont understand the words of the smart... No need for one to "act" for that.
2
@Jezthedead From the beginning till now you have said NOTHING substantial in your comments. And here you are further accusing me of not understanding anything. Words of someone dumb indeed...
2
@cheerwhiner7829 "This is more than just making money for the gallery— it’s a way to control past events" Opinions. Removing a statue is a "way to control past events"? You know how many statues in this world are "removed"? Why dont you call them out for being "shameful and pathetic"? This is about space on a private property not being efficiently used. The owners of the property have every right to be removing something that theyre not getting paid for. Imagine renting out a piece of land that no longer pays you rent. Same thing. If they stop paying you rent, you remove them. Simple as that. Theres nothing "shameful" or "pathetic" about that. Its business.
2
Random Weeb from Mars What lies? The organisation behind this statue really has been disbanded.
2
@Jezthedead Evidence that its not?
1
@cheerwhiner7829 "How many statues about TS do YOU think will survive? My guess is, not very many" You know what? Youre right. Probably not many. But its not "shameful" nor "pathetic" for removing ANY statue of anysort. If people want to express their art, then they can do so in a private event or on private property. Artwork placed in a location not owned by you will be at risk for removal if not approved by the property owners.
1
@cheerwhiner7829 "Some art, because of its nature, must be preserved" Opinions. If one wants their art to be preserved, then the artist is to protect it and preserve it themselves, not put it somewhere where they have zero control over. Tell them to preserve it in their own private property. "this is about controlling the narrative of the past… denying the existence of some true event that took place" Removal is NOT denial. Thats your own opinion. And opinions can be wrong. For example, removal of guns from society is NOT denying that guns ever existed, nor denying historical events involving guns. Is that also "shameful" and "pathetic"? "Cowards" running from their past and "denying" it? Your logic is flawed. "Facing what one has done helps to keep it from being repeated" Again, opinions. You think students in China know nothing about about TS? Oh they know. They know more than you do. You need to know both side of the story before formulating any conclusions. My question is, do you know the other side of the story? Also again, private property, private rights. If one wants to preserve their artwork, they do so in their own private property or one that approves of their artwork being placed there. No one is changing any narrative.
1