Removing and Renaming Confederate Statues, Schools, Streets, etc: Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:President Lyndon Johnson expended considerable political capital to pass the most significant civil rights legislation in almost a century, which even today is considered a towering achievement. Yet White House tapes of LBJ’s phone conversations show that he sometimes used the n-word in conversations with some of his former Southern colleagues in the Senate. Should LBJ be cancelled? History is messy.

Racism is system of structural privilege that is distinct from being a bigot. It's possible to not be bigoted but still support racism. Or, as in Johnson's case, it's possible to be anti-racist in your actions but bigoted in your personal views. Or it could be that he just played the role of a bigot to put others at ease.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t have an issue with confederate names going away. I do have an issue with them writing over presidents names. Who are we going to cancel next? MLK was a womanizer and he gets a whole holiday. I think we should understand the past not rewrite it.

And Justice high school sounds like a juvenile detention center.

Because sleeping around is the same as owning other people...

Uh, seems like it wasn’t just “sleeping around.”

You are equating slavery of millions to...sex?

The allegation was that he witnessed a rape and did nothing, not just that he was a serial adulterer. It may have been a fabricated claim, but it is documented in files in the National Archives.

So maybe no schools should be named after individuals, given their flaws.

Seems extreme to equate one personal mistake to...killing 600k Americans because you want to enslave 4 million people.


But I'm OK naming schools without reference to people or (in Virginia) plantations. Number system would be fine.

Sounds like plenty more than “one personal mistake” there.

I’m sorry. Are you still trying to equate anything shady MLK may have done with killing 600k Americans to keep 4 million people enslaved?

Of course not. But Woodrow Wilson shouldnt be equated with that either. And yet his name has been stripped from what is supposed to be DC’s best high school.

Wilson segregated the federal workforce. He was a bigot.

The high school was built in an area that had been called Reno City. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reno_(Washington%2C_D.C.) . After the Civil War it was a Black community, but it was "cleared" by the federal government and the Black residents were ejected in 1929. The high school was built 13 years after Wilson left office, the memory of what he had done was still very fresh, he was as recent as George W. Bush is today. Naming the school for Wilson was a deliberate provocation to the Black community that had been removed.

Imagine if a Muslim neighborhood were cleared and then a school was built there and named for George W. Bush.

History is more complicated than you write. Wilson grew up in the segregated South and he was prejudiced, as were most white Americans if his time. But his actions to strengthen segregation in the federal civil service were the result of a deal with Southern conservatives to pass progressive legislation. I never voted for George W. Bush but I recall that one of his - and America’s finest moments - was when right after 9/11 Bush visited a mosque to emphasize that bigotry and retaliation against Muslims is iin-American.

So it's somehow better that his embrace of segregation was just political expedience?

Wilson was chosen as the namesake for the high school because of what he represented to Black and white Washingtonians. Whether that represented his true inner feelings is irrelevant, he was chosen to send a message. In 2021 that message is unacceptable. I have no idea what GW Bush feels in his true heart, but I know what he symbolizes, he's the same kind of polarizing figure as Wilson was.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:President Lyndon Johnson expended considerable political capital to pass the most significant civil rights legislation in almost a century, which even today is considered a towering achievement. Yet White House tapes of LBJ’s phone conversations show that he sometimes used the n-word in conversations with some of his former Southern colleagues in the Senate. Should LBJ be cancelled? History is messy.

Racism is system of structural privilege that is distinct from being a bigot. It's possible to not be bigoted but still support racism. Or, as in Johnson's case, it's possible to be anti-racist in your actions but bigoted in your personal views. Or it could be that he just played the role of a bigot to put others at ease.

"it's possible to be anti-racist in your actions but bigoted in your personal views"
Exactly.

Actions have more powerful consequences than words. We can look at the actions taken by Johnson, Wilson, and Lee and look at the impacts. Who actually helped people and who actually hurt/killed people.

Something for the people clinging to their "historical idols" to think about. Maybe you could look past your own personal views and take the right actions for your community.

[Anonymous]

If you're extremely concerned about the names of schools and streets and which statues are what, honestly you have way too much time on your hands. No one cares. It means nothing to anyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you're extremely concerned about the names of schools and streets and which statues are what, honestly you have way too much time on your hands. No one cares. It means nothing to anyone.

People obviously care enough to remove statues and rename streets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t have an issue with confederate names going away. I do have an issue with them writing over presidents names. Who are we going to cancel next? MLK was a womanizer and he gets a whole holiday. I think we should understand the past not rewrite it.

And Justice high school sounds like a juvenile detention center.

Because sleeping around is the same as owning other people...

Uh, seems like it wasn’t just “sleeping around.”

You are equating slavery of millions to...sex?

The allegation was that he witnessed a rape and did nothing, not just that he was a serial adulterer. It may have been a fabricated claim, but it is documented in files in the National Archives.

So maybe no schools should be named after individuals, given their flaws.

Seems extreme to equate one personal mistake to...killing 600k Americans because you want to enslave 4 million people.


But I'm OK naming schools without reference to people or (in Virginia) plantations. Number system would be fine.

Sounds like plenty more than “one personal mistake” there.

I’m sorry. Are you still trying to equate anything shady MLK may have done with killing 600k Americans to keep 4 million people enslaved?

Of course not. But Woodrow Wilson shouldnt be equated with that either. And yet his name has been stripped from what is supposed to be DC’s best high school.

Wilson segregated the federal workforce. He was a bigot.

The high school was built in an area that had been called Reno City. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reno_(Washington%2C_D.C.) . After the Civil War it was a Black community, but it was "cleared" by the federal government and the Black residents were ejected in 1929. The high school was built 13 years after Wilson left office, the memory of what he had done was still very fresh, he was as recent as George W. Bush is today. Naming the school for Wilson was a deliberate provocation to the Black community that had been removed.

Imagine if a Muslim neighborhood were cleared and then a school was built there and named for George W. Bush.

History is more complicated than you write. Wilson grew up in the segregated South and he was prejudiced, as were most white Americans if his time. But his actions to strengthen segregation in the federal civil service were the result of a deal with Southern conservatives to pass progressive legislation. I never voted for George W. Bush but I recall that one of his - and America’s finest moments - was when right after 9/11 Bush visited a mosque to emphasize that bigotry and retaliation against Muslims is iin-American.

He also intensified segregation throughout DC as the Federal City. If you’re suggesting that this was just peachy because “progressive “ legislation— presumably useful to random white people — was passed, my four long-deceased grandparents, who all lived in DC around that time, would like a word with you.
I’m reading this as :political expediency is justified— even if it hurts individuals and cripples communities, ‘cause: “complicated”.
I’d welcome a clarification if my take on this is incorrect.
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is shameful we ever had statues to those treasonous traitors. The reckoning is long overdue.

They weren't treasonous traitors. Stick to facts.

I don't mind taking down the statues but there's a lot of recent revisionist history from both sides.

Developing your own army and fighting against your country’s army, and saying you’re no longer an American, isn’t treasonous?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you're extremely concerned about the names of schools and streets and which statues are what, honestly you have way too much time on your hands. No one cares. It means nothing to anyone.

People obviously care enough to remove statues and rename streets.

Though they don't care enough to actually read history books...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you're extremely concerned about the names of schools and streets and which statues are what, honestly you have way too much time on your hands. No one cares. It means nothing to anyone.

People obviously care enough to remove statues and rename streets.

Though they don't care enough to actually read history books...

They did read the history books. And beyond.

That's how we all know Lee is traitor trash.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is shameful we ever had statues to those treasonous traitors. The reckoning is long overdue.

They weren't treasonous traitors. Stick to facts.

I don't mind taking down the statues but there's a lot of recent revisionist history from both sides.

Developing your own army and fighting against your country’s army, and saying you’re no longer an American, isn’t treasonous?

Yup - doesn't get more treasonous or traitorous than that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is shameful we ever had statues to those treasonous traitors. The reckoning is long overdue.

They weren't treasonous traitors. Stick to facts.

I don't mind taking down the statues but there's a lot of recent revisionist history from both sides.

Developing your own army and fighting against your country’s army, and saying you’re no longer an American, isn’t treasonous?

America first didn't exist back then. States were more like countries and states being subservient to the federal gov had not been established.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you're extremely concerned about the names of schools and streets and which statues are what, honestly you have way too much time on your hands. No one cares. It means nothing to anyone.

Or it means that you’re happy with things as they are. Bully for you PP.

[Anonymous]

OP, don’t listen to these hypocrites. They would never ever say anything about renaming everything associated with Washington or Jefferson, nor will they ever advocate for renaming Fairfax County, named after Lord Fairfax, a prominent slave owner. They think they can pick and choose everything to their liking, just like the constitution they so desperately want to abolish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is shameful we ever had statues to those treasonous traitors. The reckoning is long overdue.

They weren't treasonous traitors. Stick to facts.

I don't mind taking down the statues but there's a lot of recent revisionist history from both sides.

Developing your own army and fighting against your country’s army, and saying you’re no longer an American, isn’t treasonous?

America first didn't exist back then. States were more like countries and states being subservient to the federal gov had not been established.

That’s not what “America First” meant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, don’t listen to these hypocrites. They would never ever say anything about renaming everything associated with Washington or Jefferson, nor will they ever advocate for renaming Fairfax County, named after Lord Fairfax, a prominent slave owner. They think they can pick and choose everything to their liking, just like the constitution they so desperately want to abolish.

When exactly did Washington fight against our country? When did he kill 620,000 Americans to keep 4 million people enslaved?

Sit TF down, fool.