Renaming buildings and institutions

[Billy Hoyle]

Hoping to keep this more philosophical than political (good luck with that, right...)

this article came in a daily email I get for work regarding athletic facilities that are named after people with "questionable" pasts as it relates to race relations:
https://www.bsu.edu/news/press-center/archives/2020/7/project-examines-collegiate-sports-facilities

Among the facilities are Phog Allen Fieldhouse and Rupp Arena. In my city, Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Grant, and Franklin high schools are being targeted (so far Grover Cleveland HS has escaped the wrath). I'm also wondering if our alma mater may be targeted if it's claimed Father Marquette acted inappropriately with the Native Americans he came across ("inappropriate" being subjective, of course). Confederate statues, bases, names on buildings, they have to go, but Lincoln and Grant?

The authors of the article say: "using critical race theory and systemic racism theory as interpretative lenses, that naming buildings after racists legitimizes their legacies, rationalizes systemic racism, and continues to unjustly enrich this particular group. Meanwhile, on a recent show Bill Maher said (I'm paraphrasing) we can't apply 2020 values to people in the past. Where is the line?

[Babybluejeans]

If they were wrong by even conventional moral judgment at the time, it’s reasonable to remove honors (because really, they never should have been honored in the first place). For instance, Adolph Rupp resisted integration well into the 20th century, and even during the height of the civil rights movement. He deserves nothing, especially not simply because he also helped his team win basketball games. The confederate generals who fought to preserve enslaving humans...that’s just crazy.

Not sure I get the logic behind Lincoln and Grant.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

Hell no on Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Grant, and Franklin high schools.  Nothing questionable about them.  I hate applying the past through today's prism.  Plus the magnitude of the positive they did outweighs any character flaw.  Humans are not perfect and why all of a sudden do statues have to be of "perfect people".
Confederate statues all should come down.  They are traitors.  I'm ok with leaving generic memorials to Confederate war dead.  We all have to mourn.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

We are reaping what we sew. If we would have dealt with the Confederate statues and names, and had serious discussions about racial issues as a society, we wouldn’t have these discussions about people like Washington.

Continuing to ignore racial issues and placating people who can’t let go of the past, has allowed this to fester and explode.

[warriorchick]

Everything I have read about Father Marquette suggests he was beloved by the Native Americans he came in contact with.

I highly recommend "Jacques Marquette" by Joseph O'Donnell, S.J.  Even though his goal was to spread Christianity, Father Marquette did so while respecting Native American customs and traditions.  He also helped protect peaceful tribes from the violent ones.  Ironically, he probably would have been horrified that a university bearing his name had "Warriors" as its nickname.

Also, if someone had some racist dirt on Father Marquette, I am sure we would have heard about it by now.

[mu_hilltopper]

Everyone posting in this thread is reasonable. 

The problem is, as likely has always been, the extremists. 

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

The problem is, as likely has always been, the extremists.

I think there is another way to cut this. 

There have always been extremists.  It is up to the 'reasonable' as you put it to agree on something and drive consensus and action.

Somehow instead the minority platform has been elevated and amplified while we all are 'letting' it happen or worse are paralyzed and do nothing.

[Pakuni]

I saw this elsewhere and it seems a reasonable way to judge these things:

1. Was the person retrograde on a clear moral principle at the time.
2. Is the renaming/removal being done in a thoughtful, deliberative and lawful way?
3. Was the statue/institution created in an act of spite (like many of the Confederate statues/memorials in the South) rather than commemoration or celebration?

[reinko]

No statues or monuments for things that had shorter life spans than the tv show Saved by the Bell.

[Pakuni]

No statues or monuments for things that had shorter life spans than the tv show Saved by the Bell.

Original or College Years?

[vogue65]

Everything I have read about Father Marquette suggests he was beloved by the Native Americans he came in contact with.

I highly recommend "Jacques Marquette" by Joseph O'Donnell, S.J.  Even though his goal was to spread Christianity, Father Marquette did so while respecting Native American customs and traditions.  He also helped protect peaceful tribes from the violent ones.  Ironically, he probably would have been horrified that a university bearing his name had "Warriors" as its nickname.

Also, if someone had some racist dirt on Father Marquette, I am sure we would have heard about it by now.

I have been reading about the Jesuits in Brazil, (great being retired).
Also in Oklahoma and Missouri they did what they always did.
They documented, codified, the native languages and approached evangelism in the native languages.

Everyone seems to have strongly held opinions and beliefs these days, most of the opinions are uninformed.

[Stronghold]

Hoping to keep this more philosophical than political (good luck with that, right...)

this article came in a daily email I get for work regarding athletic facilities that are named after people with "questionable" pasts as it relates to race relations:
https://www.bsu.edu/news/press-center/archives/2020/7/project-examines-collegiate-sports-facilities

Among the facilities are Phog Allen Fieldhouse and Rupp Arena. In my city, Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Grant, and Franklin high schools are being targeted (so far Grover Cleveland HS has escaped the wrath). I'm also wondering if our alma mater may be targeted if it's claimed Father Marquette acted inappropriately with the Native Americans he came across ("inappropriate" being subjective, of course). Confederate statues, bases, names on buildings, they have to go, but Lincoln and Grant?

The authors of the article say: "using critical race theory and systemic racism theory as interpretative lenses, that naming buildings after racists legitimizes their legacies, rationalizes systemic racism, and continues to unjustly enrich this particular group. Meanwhile, on a recent show Bill Maher said (I'm paraphrasing) we can't apply 2020 values to people in the past. Where is the line?

Very interpretative at times.

[Billy Hoyle]

I have been reading about the Jesuits in Brazil, (great being retired).
Also in Oklahoma and Missouri they did what they always did.
They documented, codified, the native languages and approached evangelism in the native languages.

Everyone seems to have strongly held opinions and beliefs these days, most of the opinions are uninformed.

I'm waiting for the "he forced Christianity upon the Native population" or "he brought disease" argument for Marquette and other missionaries as we're seeing out west.

[warriorchick]

I'm waiting for the "he forced Christianity upon the Native population" or "he brought disease" argument for Marquette and other missionaries as we're seeing out west.

According to O'Donnell, Father Marquette was willing to compromise a little to blend the cultures.  If you already had two wives, for example, he was willing to look the other way.  He did say, however, that cannibalism was a non-starter.

[Pakuni]

 

According to O'Donnell, Father Marquette was willing to compromise a little to blend the cultures.  If you already had two wives, for example, he was willing to look the other way. He did say, however, that cannibalism was a non-starter.

Imposing his Western, Judeo-Christian values on the native population. Classic case of Cultural Imperialism.

[Billy Hoyle]

Imposing his Western, Judeo-Christian values on the native population. Classic case of Cultural Imperialism.

Well played, sir. Well played.

And thank you to the contributors to this thread for having an intellectually based discussion about this topic.

[dgies9156]

He did say, however, that cannibalism was a non-starter.

Drats!

Seriously, Chick and I went to a high school in Nashville named for a Confederate priest who described African-American folks as a fungus. He ministered to white Confederate soldiers who, by legal standards, committed treason. He sided with a people whose goal in life was to enslave and preserve a traditional way of life that violated the Great Commandment and the U.S. Constitution.

Despite all of this, Father Ryan High School alumni by and large are violently resisting changing the school's name. So much so that a Ryan Facebook site removed all comments about the debate regarding the legacy of Father Abram Ryan. The school said they were hiring a diversity consultant to deal with the issue.

If Father Marquette had enslaved the Native American population, then OK, become something else. But in this case, Father Ryan needs to become St. Elizabeth Seaton High School. The legacy of Father Ryan is both unChristian and unAmerican.

[warriorchick]

Drats!

Seriously, Chick and I went to a high school in Nashville named for a Confederate priest who described African-American folks as a fungus. He ministered to white Confederate soldiers who, by legal standards, committed treason. He sided with a people whose goal in life was to enslave and preserve a traditional way of life that violated the Great Commandment and the U.S. Constitution.

Despite all of this, Father Ryan High School alumni by and large are violently resisting changing the school's name. So much so that a Ryan Facebook site removed all comments about the debate regarding the legacy of Father Abram Ryan. The school said they were hiring a diversity consultant to deal with the issue.

If Father Marquette had enslaved the Native American population, then OK, become something else. But in this case, Father Ryan needs to become St. Elizabeth Seaton High School. The legacy of Father Ryan is both unChristian and unAmerican.

Yep.  He also changed his name from "Abraham" to "Abram" because he hated Abraham Lincoln so much.

[Lennys Tap]

Meanwhile, on a recent show Bill Maher said (I'm paraphrasing) we can't apply 2020 values to people in the past. Where is the line?

Bingo. People who don’t view history contextually are not just morons, they’re dangerous.

[Babybluejeans]

Bingo. People who don’t view history contextually are not just morons, they’re dangerous.

Do you accept that there's a difference between viewing and understanding a dark part of history contextually and honoring it?

[Lennys Tap]

Do you accept that there's a difference between viewing and understanding a dark part of history contextually and honoring it?

Of course.

Do you accept that some attitudes considered dark today were once not only accepted but were considered “best science”? For example, homosexuality was deemed a mental illness by our most learned less than 50 years ago. Should any psychiatrist who agreed with that scientific consensus be “cancelled” because of what we know now?

Placing today’s standards  on people who lived in much different societies 50, 100, 200 or 2000 years ago misses the points that history should be explaining rather than demonizing.

If statues were erected in the south 50 or 100 years after the Civil War to intimidate the black community they should be removed from the public square. But the fact that Washington had slaves (while it should be noted by historians) does not disqualify him from being honored.

[brewcity77]

But the fact that Washington had slaves (while it should be noted by historians) does not disqualify him from being honored.

I recently heard Jelani Cobb on The Argument speaking about the idea of monuments honoring events rather than individuals. I agree with that and think it's less problematic long term because eventually, most everyone will have events in their past that are judged harshly by the passage of time.

That said, the above feels like a slippery slope. Washington owning slaves being the norm at the time isn't that far away from Robert E Lee fighting for the South being the norm for people where he lived at the time which isn't that far away from norms in 1940s Germany. That's why I'm more a proponent of honoring events than individuals. Contextualized events are more likely to hold up to the scrutiny of time passing and if the name of an event has to be relegated to the history books, I feel people are less likely to have the same level of emotional attachment.

[Pakuni]

Of course.

Do you accept that some attitudes considered dark today were once not only accepted but were considered “best science”? For example, homosexuality was deemed a mental illness by our most learned less than 50 years ago. Should any psychiatrist who agreed with that scientific consensus be “cancelled” because of what we know now?

Placing today’s standards  on people who lived in much different societies 50, 100, 200 or 2000 years ago misses the points that history should be explaining rather than demonizing.

If statues were erected in the south 50 or 100 years after the Civil War to intimidate the black community they should be removed from the public square. But the fact that Washington had slaves (while it should be noted by historians) does not disqualify him from being honored.

IMO, you're not entirely wrong, but you're not entirely right either.
Just because a belief or ideology or practice was commonplace some time ago doesn't mean we can't or shouldn't criticize the people who held them. Slavery may have been common, but it was never morally acceptable and there were plenty of people saying so well before America even existed (including the Catholic Church).

"Best science" is misleading, If you look at that science, it wasn't based on any actual science. There never was any science that said homosexuality is a mental disease or people with dark skin are inferior to people with white skin. There were only prejudiced scientists who invented that to justify their prejudice. People shouldn't be let off the hook because they created or embraced pseudoscience to rationalize their sh*tty views.

If you say we ought to judge people like Washington and Jefferson in their totality rather than just their flaws,  I agree. But let's not give them a pass on reprehensible behavior because of "context." Jefferson was a great statesman. He also was guilty of exceptional cruelty and morally reprehensible behavior. In any context. Just because he wasn't alone doesn't make his behavior any less abhorrent.

As for statues ... it's pretty simple. There should be no Confederate statues in public places and no one who fought for the Confederacy should be publicly memorialized or honored. These people were traitors who took up arms against their country - in many cases violating oaths - in the name of a morally repugnant and unjustifiable cause. Honoring them in any way is a national insult, regardless of when or why the memorial was created.

[Lennys Tap]

I recently heard Jelani Cobb on The Argument speaking about the idea of monuments honoring events rather than individuals. I agree with that and think it's less problematic long term because eventually, most everyone will have events in their past that are judged harshly by the passage of time.

That said, the above feels like a slippery slope. Washington owning slaves being the norm at the time isn't that far away from Robert E Lee fighting for the South being the norm for people where he lived at the time which isn't that far away from norms in 1940s Germany. That's why I'm more a proponent of honoring events than individuals. Contextualized events are more likely to hold up to the scrutiny of time passing and if the name of an event has to be relegated to the history books, I feel people are less likely to have the same level of emotional attachment.

I disagree. Regardless of imperfection, George Washington is an heroic figures when viewed in any reasonably fair context. Lots of others also fit that category. Anyone demanding perfection in his or her heroes doesn’t deserve to be taken seriously.

[Pakuni]

Anyone demanding perfection in his or her heroes doesn’t deserve to be taken seriously.

Is anyone doing this?
It seems to me that demanding one not be a cruel and incorrigible racist is not the same as demanding perfection.