Washington and Lee

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if it changed the wording to your specifications you'll approve?

No, nothing to do with me or my specifications. Very simply, if the wording changed to denounce the man then it would mean W&L denounced Robert E. Lee, which would be a good thing. They very deftly but clearly DO NOT do that in what you posted.

If you can't see the difference it is because you don't want to.

Obviously the board has not denounced Lee outright, otherwise the university wouldn't still have his name. The school does own up to its history, which is what the response to the PP was about. If you don't like the specific phrasing, then oh well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about a Brown University, which was founded by actual slave traders?

Really, really bad example. Brown completely owns up to it’s history, and is repentant for it. I think if W&L removed the Lee statues and replaced it with he kind of slavery memorial Brown has on campus, that would go a long way.

So your example kind of proves the opposing point.

Does it? That memorial uses language that is much less strong than the language in the W&L resolution. It says, in very general terms, that the University benefitted from the slave trade in Rhode Island, but doesn’t even mention Mr. Brown himself. And they kept the Brown name, so by pp’s standard, they can’t have truly condemned his actions.

Still waiting on the condemnation of Dartmouth, Barnard, Johns Hopkins, & Rutgers.

[Anonymous]

Don’t go to W&L if you don’t like frat parties.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don’t go to W&L if you don’t like frat parties.

*1. And drinking. It starts up on Thursday night and doesn’t blow off until Monday morning z.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about a Brown University, which was founded by actual slave traders?

Really, really bad example. Brown completely owns up to it’s history, and is repentant for it. I think if W&L removed the Lee statues and replaced it with he kind of slavery memorial Brown has on campus, that would go a long way.

So your example kind of proves the opposing point.

Does it? That memorial uses language that is much less strong than the language in the W&L resolution. It says, in very general terms, that the University benefitted from the slave trade in Rhode Island, but doesn’t even mention Mr. Brown himself. And they kept the Brown name, so by pp’s standard, they can’t have truly condemned his actions.

Still waiting on the condemnation of Dartmouth, Barnard, Johns Hopkins, & Rutgers.

William & Mary created a whole project around this, including undergrad research
https://www.wm.edu/sites/lemonproject/

[Anonymous]

There’s an ongoing war about renovations to Lee’s Chsprl in the news today. I would avoid

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There’s an ongoing war about renovations to Lee’s Chsprl in the news today. I would avoid

Actually it shows that progress is being made.

Lee Chapel has already been named University chapel. There are a bunch of planned renovations being made that the old guard doesn't want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does it? That memorial uses language that is much less strong than the language in the W&L resolution.

No, it doesn't, not even close, and that was illustrated point by point in the deconstruction of your W&L article. NOt sure how you could make that claim with a straight face.

Plus, you are comparing a freaking web page to a permanent, expensive monument. Are you freaking serious? No, you aren't because this comparison is just beyond debate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s an ongoing war about renovations to Lee’s Chsprl in the news today. I would avoid

Actually it shows that progress is being made.

Lee Chapel has already been named University chapel. There are a bunch of planned renovations being made that the old guard doesn't want.

NO the news is that outsiders have signed a long petition to get W&L to stop rennovations

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s an ongoing war about renovations to Lee’s Chsprl in the news today. I would avoid

Actually it shows that progress is being made.

Lee Chapel has already been named University chapel. There are a bunch of planned renovations being made that the old guard doesn't want.

NO the news is that outsiders have signed a long petition to get W&L to stop rennovations

The old guard wants things the way it used to be - with Lee being more visible/ prominent in the "chapel."

Not happening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does it? That memorial uses language that is much less strong than the language in the W&L resolution.

No, it doesn't, not even close, and that was illustrated point by point in the deconstruction of your W&L article. NOt sure how you could make that claim with a straight face.

Plus, you are comparing a freaking web page to a permanent, expensive monument. Are you freaking serious? No, you aren't because this comparison is just beyond debate.

Did you read the text on the monument? Apparently you didn’t. Doesn’t even mention Mr. Brown, much less that he was a slaver. Looks more like an attempt to deflect from their founder to me. A quick Google search would have told you that Washington and Lee does have multiple memorials for the enslaved persons that worked at the college and various African American alumni, including a building dedicated to the first African American known to have completed their college education in the US.

And for those who are trying to claim that Lee is somehow “worse” than people who built the fortunes that they used to found the universities bearing their names by kidnapping Africans and forcing them across the middle passage in horrific and deadly conditions (resulting in an estimated 2 million dead): What? Just admit that you are excusing the Ivy League because you’ve bought into their whole aura of “prestige” (despite the fact that it was built on the blood of enslaved people).

This who discussion reminds me of an episode of “Finding Your Roots” with Kyra Sedgwick, who was all smug about her “progressive” New England ancestry, until Mr. Gates informed her that her ancestors were slave owners. Oops. There’s an entire history of slavery in the North East that has been conveniently memory-holed by their descendants.

FWIW, I have no connection to W&L, I just find the hypocrisy incredibly annoying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does it? That memorial uses language that is much less strong than the language in the W&L resolution.

No, it doesn't, not even close, and that was illustrated point by point in the deconstruction of your W&L article. NOt sure how you could make that claim with a straight face.

Plus, you are comparing a freaking web page to a permanent, expensive monument. Are you freaking serious? No, you aren't because this comparison is just beyond debate.

Did you read the text on the monument? Apparently you didn’t. Doesn’t even mention Mr. Brown, much less that he was a slaver. Looks more like an attempt to deflect from their founder to me. A quick Google search would have told you that Washington and Lee does have multiple memorials for the enslaved persons that worked at the college and various African American alumni, including a building dedicated to the first African American known to have completed their college education in the US.

And for those who are trying to claim that Lee is somehow “worse” than people who built the fortunes that they used to found the universities bearing their names by kidnapping Africans and forcing them across the middle passage in horrific and deadly conditions (resulting in an estimated 2 million dead): What? Just admit that you are excusing the Ivy League because you’ve bought into their whole aura of “prestige” (despite the fact that it was built on the blood of enslaved people).

This who discussion reminds me of an episode of “Finding Your Roots” with Kyra Sedgwick, who was all smug about her “progressive” New England ancestry, until Mr. Gates informed her that her ancestors were slave owners. Oops. There’s an entire history of slavery in the North East that has been conveniently memory-holed by their descendants.

FWIW, I have no connection to W&L, I just find the hypocrisy incredibly annoying.

+1

There are numerous predominantly white institutions that require a reckoning with it's past. For those PWIs that are acknowledging this, it's a step in the right direction. Georgetown University - a popular college in DCUM world and a T25 - has done so ( whether it's enough is up for debate). One may choose to send their DC there or not, but at least the university is working to make amends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does it? That memorial uses language that is much less strong than the language in the W&L resolution.

No, it doesn't, not even close, and that was illustrated point by point in the deconstruction of your W&L article. NOt sure how you could make that claim with a straight face.

Plus, you are comparing a freaking web page to a permanent, expensive monument. Are you freaking serious? No, you aren't because this comparison is just beyond debate.

Did you read the text on the monument? Apparently you didn’t. Doesn’t even mention Mr. Brown, much less that he was a slaver. Looks more like an attempt to deflect from their founder to me. A quick Google search would have told you that Washington and Lee does have multiple memorials for the enslaved persons that worked at the college and various African American alumni, including a building dedicated to the first African American known to have completed their college education in the US.

And for those who are trying to claim that Lee is somehow “worse” than people who built the fortunes that they used to found the universities bearing their names by kidnapping Africans and forcing them across the middle passage in horrific and deadly conditions (resulting in an estimated 2 million dead): What? Just admit that you are excusing the Ivy League because you’ve bought into their whole aura of “prestige” (despite the fact that it was built on the blood of enslaved people).

This who discussion reminds me of an episode of “Finding Your Roots” with Kyra Sedgwick, who was all smug about her “progressive” New England ancestry, until Mr. Gates informed her that her ancestors were slave owners. Oops. There’s an entire history of slavery in the North East that has been conveniently memory-holed by their descendants.

FWIW, I have no connection to W&L, I just find the hypocrisy incredibly annoying.

Sorry that you cannot see the truth. The Brown monument is a brutal and shameless admission of guilt. None of that is evident in The w&l webpage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Too Republican, southern and racist.

Retarded post

Seriously? It is 2022. Stop using that word.

[Anonymous]

I guess no one will want to go to Harvard now

/s

https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/26/us/harvard-slavery-legacy-fund/index.html