This is necessarily a contentious issue, so I'm trying to be careful with how I word this response. John Morgan Tyler was certainly a racist according to generally agreed upon modern standards. The University of Alabama also would likely not exist in its current form were it not for his push for federal funding to rebuild the campus in 1882 after it was destroyed during the Civil War (a little more information is available on the University of Alabama campus map). In my opinion, Morgan deserves legitimate credit for his service to the University of Alabama, whatever the modern interpretations of his other actions. If nothing else, it is a great conversation starter for the U.S. History courses most college students are required take (and don't learn enough from, usually).
This is not an isolated case, either. Benjamin Tillman is a figure who was, for example, instrumental in founding Clemson University, but his racist views have now garnered criticism and have spurred people to call for removing his name from buildings and his statues/plaques from government buildings. Robert E. Lee served as the president of Washington College after the Civil War, and they added his name to the institution, now Washington and Lee University. There were calls a few years ago to rename the university, which is also one of the best places to study the Civil War in the country. There are a bunch of other buildings and institutions with similar backgrounds available with a quick internet search.
We shouldn't shy away from talking about the historical backgrounds of these places. Indeed, we should embrace the discussion. However, as with most things, inflammatory language and polarizing arguments are not a good way to start one. Historical figures were people, people are complicated, and people are generally both good and bad. Removing these figures from historical places/buildings does an intellectual disservice to history by ignoring its ugly parts, a cultural disservice to Alabama by attempting to minimize someone who clearly impacted their state (for good or ill), and a societal disservice to people that may learn from engaging in hard-to-talk-about subjects.
I'd like you (the reader) to ask yourself a few brief questions: Did you know who John Tyler Morgan was before reading this article? Did you look him up after reading the article? Did you find out something you didn't know before? I anticipate a majority of people answered "No" to the first question, and if you did your due diligence and looked Morgan up, then you learned something new. This informs you not only in the sense of adding historical knowledge to your brain, but (especially for U.S. readers) adds nuance to your understanding of the cultural circumstances of the U.S. during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. One of the most contentious public issues of that time period was indeed institutional racism, segregation, and violence against minorities. John Morgan participated in this, as did many high ranking members of the state and federal governments. These things need to be talked about, attempted to be understood, and used to further modern social ideals su ch as diversity, inclusivity, and even "trendy" ideas such as "cultural mosaics."
Cultural memory is something everyone seems to have a vested interest in, or at least opinion on, in the U.S. and everywhere else. Germany, for example, has had a hell of a time dealing with WWII. They are attempting to meet the task head-on, but it's a difficult task because of the potentially explosive social issues associated with the particularly ugly parts of history.
One of the things I cover in my U.S. History class is the lynching of Jesse Washington, which happened in Waco, Texas on May 15, 1916. I encourage you to read this article by W.E.B. DuBois about Washington's lynching, which includes a couple of photographs, others are easily available through google. This lecture makes students uncomfortable, angry, sad, and otherwise emotional. It should; it's hard not to empathize with horrors that people have done and sometimes still do to each other. Look at the picture titled "the mob" in the DuBois article. On more than a few occasions, thousands of people attended and/or participated in lynchings. These people likely held views similar to John Morgan. What do we do with that information? Do we pass moral judgment on every single one of them? I don't see that as a productive use of history. It doesn't help us to write them off as violent racists and move on. I would argue a much better approach wou ld be to ask why these people felt the need to participate in such a pogrom. Morgan, based on his actions, seemed to have a great love for his state and education. He also seemed to hate black people (and likely other minorities). Why? The people in the mob at the lynching of Jesse Washington's were most likely regular members of their respective communities who went to church, worked hard at their job, and tried their best to take care of their family. They also hung, castrated, mutilated, burned, and dragged Washington's body through the middle of town before taking bits of his body as souvenirs. Again, why? "Because that's the way it was back then," is not only a lazy answer, it tries to stop any complexity that may arise from seriously discussing and learning about an incredibly important and formative period of U.S. History.
The students at the University of Alabama have an incredible opportunity to engage with the history of U.S. race relations, but the students mentioned in the article don't seem to want to. I hope the students take a U.S. History course that covers these topics, or read some good books that do, and I would hope their professors cover these topics. The students obviously care about social issues, but they need appropriate knowledge to tackle exceedingly complex issues.
MLK, Jr. recognized this early on, writing in his own student paper at Morehouse College in 1947 that "Education must also train one for quick, resolute and effective thinking. To think incisively and to think for one's self is very difficult. We are prone to let our mental life become invaded by legions of half truths, prejudices, and propaganda. At this point, I often wonder whether or not education is fulfilling its purpose. A great majority of the so-called educated people do not think logically and scientifically. Even the press, the classroom, the platform, and the pulpit in many instances do not give us objective and unbiased truths. To save man from the morass of propaganda, in my opinion, is one of the chief aims of education. Education must enable one to sift and weigh evidence, to discern the true from the false, the real from the unreal, and the facts from the fiction."
Those of you who made it through this whole thing, thanks for sticking around. Those of you who are offended in some way, I hope we can have a conversation sometime.
This entry passed through the Full-Text RSS service - if this is your content and you're reading it on someone else's site, please read the FAQ at http://ift.tt/jcXqJW.
http://ift.tt/eA8V8J Petition calls to change U. of Alabama building name to honor Harper Lee instead of KKK leader via top scoring links : news http://ift.tt/1L6YXc4
Put the internet to work for you.
No comments:
Post a Comment