Celebrating Racists & Other Great Leaders

We live in the greatest time in the history of human civilization. We are lucky to live now, our problems were infinitely greater yesterday as they as they are today. That being said, we’re not problem-free. We have not perfected civilization. We don’t even understand how to properly identify with our horrible, adventurous, racist, beautiful & murderous past — without offending a once quieted minority and through empathy and knowledge, hopefully offending the majority as well.

Whether we’re speaking of the confederate flag, Andrew Jackson on the $20 (or his new bill-mate Harriet Tubman), or in the case of Yale University, former Vice President and Yale alumnus, John C. Calhoun.

Calhoun is an interesting point of contention. In modern day, his views on slavery would be abhorrent — but while his contemporaries in the North would have disagreed, his views were not unusual in the South where he resided and more importantly, represented.

Calhoun was not a founding father, national libraries do not bear his name, but he was an influential figure in the first century of the United States’ existence. A senator, a Secretary of War & State and a Vice President. That’s an impressive resume for an alumnus of any school, including Yale. And while he was sitting Vice President during the passing of the Indian Removal Act (which I’m sure he supported), he was not a part of the Trail of Tears that Andrew Jackson & Martin Van Buren lay credit to. And Jackson got himself on the $20.

All of the founding fathers and early representatives of the United States deserve an asterisk next to their names, but we don’t need to demonize them.

“Arbeit Macht Frei” still stands over the entrance to Auschwitz. It tells a story that needs to be retold, and retold correctly.

That being said there is a limit. And while that limit may not be well defined, it’s important to determine intent and consequence on when something is acceptable or not.

Jefferson Davis & Robert E Lee were two ‘great’ leaders in American history. However, we have been unable to successfully move past the effects of the Civil War 150 years later. Their names written in textbooks is a necessity to correctly recite history, but the memorialization of them is beyond necessary and only incites racism, counterfactual history and are rarely used solely for historical accuracy.

So why is the pro-slavery, anti-Indian Calhoun better (or more acceptable) than a rebel General & President?

Intent & consequence. Davis & Lee are societal representations of division, slavery and in general white superiority (whether or not they specifically intended for that to be case). Calhoun is someone the majority of Americans have never heard of. Calhoun is a potential doorway to discussing how our country evolved from a racist republic to a modern democracy that doesn’t know how to talk about its history as a racist republic.