Scandal Tom Wills - not a good guy?

Sep 9, 2015
21,180
21,260
AFL Club
Carlton
Well a large part of the issue is precisely this. As a nation, we’re far more interested in scrubbing the history books and trying to forget than we are acknowledging the victims and trying to give them the identity they deserve. Left and right are both guilty of this. Pulling down Wills’ statue is only worth something if we put a statue up to honour the massacred.

We're not scrubbing it, people just don't care.

Google and you can find anything on any subject if you want to learn about it. There's no suppression of information.
 
Jul 5, 2012
24,743
40,159
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Kidding, right?
We're not scrubbing it, people just don't care.

Google and you can find anything on any subject if you want to learn about it. There's no suppression of information.
But that information isn't necessarily engraved on the plinth of a statue.

It's great that the internet has put so much information only a keystroke away from all of us (the coming to light of this Chicago Tribune article about Tom Wills being a perfect example) but there is still a hierarchy of permanence.

Why should the tangible, concrete, public memorialisation of someone be an ongoing whitewash? (I'm referring more to the William Crowther statue in the Guardian article I linked on the previous page. The Tom Wills revelation is still in the realm of conjecture. William Crowther's macabre deeds are well documented, and in answer to people that would say "the past was a different world" I'd say quite apart from any questions of racism and Aboriginal oppression, why would we want to continue memorialising a corpse mutilator?)
 

Ron The Bear

Up yer arse, AFL
30k Posts 10k Posts
Jul 4, 2006
35,845
36,723
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
William Crowther's macabre deeds are well documented, and in answer to people that would say "the past was a different world"

It's true, though. I've had numerous discussions where revisionists cannot or will not comprehend that blacks were not seen as equals or even as human in many cases, even after being presented with proof. In the letter that sparked this thread, the writer compares Aboriginals to native animals and opines that the country is better for their gradual disappearance.

By today's standards it's scarcely believable that people once received the death penalty for stealing a load of bread (often commuted to transportation); what was a deadly serious crime then barely rates a slap on the wrist now. Yet some insist that other behaviours of the era be viewed through the prism of today and ignore contemporary standards. The reason for this is obvious to anyone who's aware of the prevailing narrative, but those agitating shouldn't expect to have their perspective automatically accepted.

"Things were different then" is often a cop-out, but it's also true.
 
Sep 9, 2015
21,180
21,260
AFL Club
Carlton
But that information isn't necessarily engraved on the plinth of a statue.

It's great that the internet has put so much information only a keystroke away from all of us (the coming to light of this Chicago Tribune article about Tom Wills being a perfect example) but there is still a hierarchy of permanence.

Why should the tangible, concrete, public memorialisation of someone be an ongoing whitewash? (I'm referring more to the William Crowther statue in the Guardian article I linked on the previous page. The Tom Wills revelation is still in the realm of conjecture. William Crowther's macabre deeds are well documented, and in answer to people that would say "the past was a different world" I'd say quite apart from any questions of racism and Aboriginal oppression, why would we want to continue memorialising a corpse mutilator?)

More people can access it online than on a plinth. Birds sit and s**t on statues is how I view them. Plaques are probably a better option. Easier to tell a story on them.

I'd say the Australian history of 1788 gets spoken about far more than any other war or conflict that happened in that year.

Type in google "wars of 1788".

The first thing that comes up is about Australia. No mention of the Anglo-French war that started in 1788. Or any of the other wars/conflicts that were occurring around the planet in that same year.

It all just ends up being ridiculous however because if it was about symbols of bad things being present we should be banning a great many national flags then for what they have represented.
 

Lip Gallagher

Club Legend
Nov 11, 2020
1,498
1,680
AFL Club
Collingwood
Ahh, that would explain why I didn't see it when I had a look

It must be particularly rancid in there cos it was bad enough some of the stuff in the available threads
It’s next level, the only thing they love more than Neanderball is their hatred of the AFL.
 

deanc

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 13, 2014
5,808
7,535
Waverley
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Tasmania
But that information isn't necessarily engraved on the plinth of a statue.

It's great that the internet has put so much information only a keystroke away from all of us (the coming to light of this Chicago Tribune article about Tom Wills being a perfect example) but there is still a hierarchy of permanence.

Why should the tangible, concrete, public memorialisation of someone be an ongoing whitewash? (I'm referring more to the William Crowther statue in the Guardian article I linked on the previous page. The Tom Wills revelation is still in the realm of conjecture. William Crowther's macabre deeds are well documented, and in answer to people that would say "the past was a different world" I'd say quite apart from any questions of racism and Aboriginal oppression, why would we want to continue memorialising a corpse mutilator?)

I actually have some personal knowledge/history here.

The removal of William Crowther's statue probably should of taken place about 20 years ago when Allan Mansell first lobbied for this. The local media (Mercury/Examiner) also supported his stance and created what appeared to be a ground swell of local public support, which prompted authorities of the day to address the issue. The media also sponsored a campaign of behalf of the activists with people handing out leaflets at local malls and shopping centers demanding the statue be removed.

My former brother-in-law worked at the Hobart City Council (HCC) and sat on a committee directed by the government of the time to determine the statue's fate.

The HCC then sent out a survey to the greater community simply asking; 'retain' or 'remove'? From their pre-determination they only required 1% of Hobart's general population (around 1600 people at the time) to tick the remove box to formalize and initiate this action.

However, after 90 days only around 10,000 bothered to respond - and not only did they not achieve the 1%, but most respondents replied without ticking either box, but asked in the comments section: Who is he, where is the statue, what cost to the taxpayer? I recall my older sister being absolutely livid with the general apathy of her fellow Hobartians...

Moral of the story - just another example of the media's portrayal of public support vs reality...
 
Last edited:
Jul 5, 2012
24,743
40,159
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Kidding, right?
More people can access it online than on a plinth. Birds sit and sh*t on statues is how I view them. Plaques are probably a better option. Easier to tell a story on them.

I'd say the Australian history of 1788 gets spoken about far more than any other war or conflict that happened in that year.

Type in google "wars of 1788".

The first thing that comes up is about Australia. No mention of the Anglo-French war that started in 1788. Or any of the other wars/conflicts that were occurring around the planet in that same year.

It all just ends up being ridiculous however because if it was about symbols of bad things being present we should be banning a great many national flags then for what they have represented.
Well we can argue back and forth about the relative penetration of different forms of memorialisation and public record, but the fact is, a statue is not without some significance.

And, if it actually is entirely without significance any more, well in the case of William Crowther, tear the damn thing down.

Why should Tasmanian aboriginals ever have to walk past a statue of a man who sawed the face off the corpse of the second-last surviving full blood aboriginal?

What sort of civilised society would not go "Jesus, the guy desecrated a corpse. Just pull the bloody thing down and get rid of it."
 
Last edited:
Sep 9, 2015
21,180
21,260
AFL Club
Carlton
Well we can argue back and forth about the relative penetration of different forms of memorialisation and public record, but the fact is, a statue is not without some significance.

And, if it actually is entirely without significance any more, well in the case of William Crowther, tear the damn thing down.

Why should Tasmanian aboriginals ever have to walk past a statue of a man who sawed the face off the second-last surviving full blood aboriginal?

What sort of civilised society would not go "Jesus, the guy desecrated a corpse. Just pull the bloody thing down and get rid of it."

Next to nobody cares about the statue is probably why.

All it probably is today is a piece of art in a park to the vast majority who walk past it.
 
Jul 5, 2012
24,743
40,159
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Kidding, right?
Next to nobody cares about the statue is probably why.

All it probably is today is a piece of art in a park to the vast majority who walk past it.
Yea I get that but once you’re enlightened as to the realities of what it represents, I think any decent person would say phukck that for a joke , get rid of it.

But maybe I’m a bit old-fashioned, believing we probably shouldn’t honour corpse desecrators if we like to think we’re a civilised bunch.
 
Aug 14, 2011
44,794
16,853
Trafalgar
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Mclaren Mercedes F1
Yea I get that but once you’re enlightened as to the realities of what it represents, I think any decent person would say phukck that for a joke , get rid of it.

But maybe I’m a bit old-fashioned, believing we probably shouldn’t honour corpse desecrators if we like to think we’re a civilised bunch.

So what did Wills or Crowther have to do with Aussie Rules footy ? Is that worthy of recognition?
 

Tim Evans Beard

Cancelled
East Side Hawks - Sweet F.A. Chess Club Member
Apr 9, 2016
1,825
3,173
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
It's true, though. I've had numerous discussions where revisionists cannot or will not comprehend that blacks were not seen as equals or even as human in many cases, even after being presented with proof. In the letter that sparked this thread, the writer compares Aboriginals to native animals and opines that the country is better for their gradual disappearance.

By today's standards it's scarcely believable that people once received the death penalty for stealing a load of bread (often commuted to transportation); what was a deadly serious crime then barely rates a slap on the wrist now. Yet some insist that other behaviours of the era be viewed through the prism of today and ignore contemporary standards. The reason for this is obvious to anyone who's aware of the prevailing narrative, but those agitating shouldn't expect to have their perspective automatically accepted.

"Things were different then" is often a cop-out, but it's also true.

I think another adage put forward is ‘when we know better, we should do better’.

In this instance there may having been killings on both sides, however only one has a statue. Does the Wills contribution to the game outweigh misdeeds out of the game? In this I think the premise is wrong - I don’t think there is a ledger of deeds where multiple small acts of love and generosity balance a large evil deed, and vice versa. I don’t think anyone perpetuating an Australian massacre should have statue celebrating their life.

As an aside you raise the punishment of petty theft as death or transportation without recognising this was a ‘settlement’ strategy rather than a ‘law and order’ platform. The colonies need skilled labor quickly and this was the cheapest way to build the settlement. Many ‘convicts’ were released from their labor when it was shown they would contribute well to the new colony. There is more within the supporting documentation for the ‘Australian Convict Trail’ UNESCO world heritage list nomination.
 

Ron The Bear

Up yer arse, AFL
30k Posts 10k Posts
Jul 4, 2006
35,845
36,723
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
As an aside you raise the punishment of petty theft as death or transportation without recognising this was a ‘settlement’ strategy rather than a ‘law and order’ platform.

Fair enough. Substitute instead the practice of duelling to settle disputes between successful men, which continued into the 1850's in Melbourne. Imagine e.g. Gerry Harvey and Ruslan Kogan finishing an argument with pistols at dawn...
 

deanc

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 13, 2014
5,808
7,535
Waverley
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Tasmania
Fair enough. Substitute instead the practice of duelling to settle disputes between successful men, which continued into the 1850's in Melbourne. Imagine e.g. Gerry Harvey and Ruslan Kogan finishing an argument with pistols at dawn...

Related - for those interested; the practice and protocol/code of settling a dispute by 'dueling', was not (as portrayed in most movies)
with the objective to kill or maim your opponent, which could occur, but was entirely related on preparing to risk such an outcome to defend or restore ones honour.

Once both dueler's had fairly expelled their pistols towards each other, irrespective of the outcome, they both simply mounted their horses and rode away - end of dispute!
And the main reason 10 paces was usually the distance stepped out by dueler's, was because from around 18 meters apart, standing side-on, you would be very unlucky to be struck in the exchange by a single-shot flintlock pistol...
 
Last edited:

NoobPie

Cancelled
Sep 21, 2016
7,356
5,255
AFL Club
Collingwood
Great response from Martin Flanagan re Tom Wills


The article really imputes the credibility and integrity of russell jackson and seemingly with good reason

Apart from one reference to "glaring errors" it completely avoids highlighting just how thoroughly wrong so much of the Chicago tribune account was was. Instead it includes large tracks of direct quote of Tom Wills that cannot possibly be accepted as credible.
 

Johnny Bananas

Premiership Player Hater
Sep 10, 2010
12,674
17,002
Next door
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
While the history has been somewhat rewritten, if you dig deep enough, the murder of indigenous Australians was just part of the culture of the times. Sadly you'd have to strike every Australian from the history books going down that path.
No one's asking for striking people from history books, only that we stop celebrating how great they were if they did horrible things.
 

Ron The Bear

Up yer arse, AFL
30k Posts 10k Posts
Jul 4, 2006
35,845
36,723
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
No one's asking for striking people from history books, only that we stop celebrating how great they were if they did horrible things.

From today's Flanagan article.
There are several ironies about the move from the Left to now “cancel” Wills. One is that if he’s cancelled it will remove the only link between the Aboriginal game called marngrook and the game now called AFL.
 

Johnny Bananas

Premiership Player Hater
Sep 10, 2010
12,674
17,002
Next door
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
From today's Flanagan article.
Flanagan is making a straw man argument. Even the BLM people have never called for records of slavery and slavers to be expunged from history books, they've just said statues should be taken down because they suggest a person is worthy of admiration, i.e. it's celebrating people who did horrible things.

I think Flanagan knows full well that by making things part of a culture war, he'll generate controversy and gain attention. Society has become so politically adversarial that things that should have nothing to do with left and right have become partisan issues. Not celebrating the life of murderers shouldn't be a controversial thing, but people will support it if they're told the other side of politics doesn't like it. Same with protecting the environment or being nice to other people. This isn't natural, the media has stoked this culture war at every opportunity to sell more papers and generate more clicks. Including pricks like Flanagan.
 

NoobPie

Cancelled
Sep 21, 2016
7,356
5,255
AFL Club
Collingwood
Flanagan is making a straw man argument. Even the BLM people have never called for records of slavery and slavers to be expunged from history books, they've just said statues should be taken down because they suggest a person is worthy of admiration, i.e. it's celebrating people who did horrible things.

I think Flanagan knows full well that by making things part of a culture war, he'll generate controversy and gain attention. Society has become so politically adversarial that things that should have nothing to do with left and right have become partisan issues. Not celebrating the life of murderers shouldn't be a controversial thing, but people will support it if they're told the other side of politics doesn't like it. Same with protecting the environment or being nice to other people. This isn't natural, the media has stoked this culture war at every opportunity to sell more papers and generate more clicks. Including pricks like Flanagan.

I think Flanagan is doing the opposite to what you say he has done.

Also, you may be the first person ever to call Martin Flanagan a prick
 
Back