Activists want a new name for Lake Calhoun claim racism (Minneapolis: fit in, buying)

[Thedosius]

Originally Posted by Mason3000

It's the intolerance of far left, who believe they are the perfect generation & the alone are righteous, therefore they must right everyone elses's wrongs instead of contributing to society in a meaningful way. Same mentality as them trying to limit free speech on University campuses, on the internet, in the media, etc.

Loads of BS here.

The problem is, as I have pointed out that their hypocrisy stinks to high heaven, as usual. They need to clean up their own yard first, but instead the tell everyone else to. Seriously, start by taking outrage with the Democratic Party and it's long history of racism. Then move onto the Progressive movement, which was also founded on racist, elitist ideals that have caused uncounted damage to people over the years they could lead by example, but of course they're not interested in living up to their own standards, they just want everyone else to.

Most of this is quite false.

Included in the history of the Progressive Movement and the Democratic Party was the defacto exclusion of the "Dixiecrats" at the beginning of the civil rights era, facilitated in large part by our own Hubert H Humphrey and Walter Mondale. The Democratic Party is an ongoing entity- the name is not defined solely by 100 or even 50 years ago. The last 50 years are part of its definition as the name was still in use. The Democratic Party consciously alienated the generally white, southern racist base which became part of the Republican coalition from then until the present day and beyond. Nixon, Atwater and Johnson all were quite aware of what they were doing and said as much.

If we are going to take the name Democratic Party as a symbol of racism, then we ought to take St. Augustine as a symbol of sin. Clearly we would not do the latter, though Augustine started as a sinner what he came to become known for was transformation and repudiation of sin and developing Christian thought. We don't take an early period of his story and declare him the symbol of it, and likewise we should take the Democratic Party's repudiation of its racist base in the 50's and 60's into account. Your argument, though repeated and sustained with zeal, has no merit. Taking Robert Byrd as a symbol of the KKK is an ideologically blinkered idiocy.

John Calhoun never reformed and to the extent he was known was as a pro-slavery extremist who differed from other pro-slavery forces by objecting to their calling it a 'necessary evil' and insisting it was a 'positive good'. There's no redemption or repudiation in his story or in his definition.

For me, the reason not to change the name of Lake Calhoun is because the symbol has no impact. Catholic cathedrals used statues and stained glass to communicate Christian beliefs to illiterate masses, but you could readily look at the artwork and understand its meaning because it was communicated visually. The Confederate Flag is vile because it is a broadly and immediately recognized symbol of racism by a large segment of the population. It is a recognizable symbol and has impact because people know it for something.

Lake Calhoun, on the other hand, does not visually communicate a political belief. The name Calhoun is not broadly known by the general population. It's has no symbolic power and its associations are more towards pleasant summer evenings than a quasi-known historical figure. Changing its name is a waste of time, but revisiting symbology in many circumstances is in general neither petty, nor PC, nor a waste of time.

[Glenfield]

Originally Posted by StanleyVegas

I think that was my post, and I wasn't trying to claim there were more Republicans than Democrats opposing the Civil Rights Act. The Democrats dominated the South by tradition, and the opposition was regional. I'm also not denying that the Democrats had a long history of racism and support of slavery, but I think a distinction needs to be made between the modern party and the mostly ultra-conservative Southern Democrats who were trying to keep segregationist laws in place, as well as the members of BOTH parties who passed the act.

I don't really think renaming Lake Calhoun is warranted either, but there should be a sense of the history, if only for understanding's sake.

Democrats dominated the south because the Republicans defeated them in the Civil War. The Democratic candidate for President in 1864, George McClellan, campaigned on a platform of Armistice with the Confederacy. In the end, Lincoln won in a landslide, carrying 22 of 25 states.

I'll agree that the Democrats have moved a long way from those days and those positions, but I reject any suggestion, as has been made here, that somehow the two parties have switched places on the issue of race.

Renaming Lake Calhoun is a really dumb idea and serves as a distraction from the real issues of our time. Instead of talking about how there are more slaves in the world today than in any previous time Human Trafficking Facts and Statistics | Modern Day Slavery Statistics , or how people are actively and openly discriminated against in the university admissions process Why are so many Asian Americans missing out on Ivy League schools? | US news | The Guardian , we talk about a meaningless gesture that is legally not feasible anyway.

Activists? Useless distractions is more like it.

[Haakon]

Clearly every city, town, park, school, street, lake, river, mountain etc should be named for it's GPS coordinates. Oh wait, that was invented by 3 white guys so someone will claim that's racist and discriminates towards non whites.

Originally Posted by Glenfield

It seems like the "activists" see race in everything. I think they're the racists.

They'd never admit it, but you're probably right. They certainly have no problem spending other peoples money to fund the changes they want to see.

[Atalanta]

Originally Posted by Thedosius

This is just plain idiotic and an ad hominem attack against people who disagree with you. I agree that we shouldn't rename the lake, but I don't need to cast aspersions on people on the other side.

I wasn't referring to any one here or people who disagree with me.

I was referring to activists.

[Thedosius]

Originally Posted by Atalanta

I wasn't referring to any one here or people who disagree with me.

I was referring to activists.

Yes, and an ad hominem attack is one that attacks the character of the person(s) you disagree with. It's a fundamental logical fallacy no matter who your target is.

[Lodestar]

Hide it all - every bit of the ugliness of human nature or any hint of ugliness. Then wait for history to repeat itself.

Or let all history stand, both positive and negative, to inform and serve as a constant reminder to us of why we are broken and what needs to be done to heal.

Haven't other generations sent this message to us repeatedly from the past?

[AmorphicDN]

Originally Posted by Lodestar

Hide it all - every bit of the ugliness of human nature or any hint of ugliness. Then wait for history to repeat itself.

Or let all history stand, both positive and negative, to inform and serve as a constant reminder to us of why we are broken and what needs to be done to heal.

Haven't other generations sent this message to us repeatedly from the past?

There's a huge difference between refusing to honor - and hiding. Presentation of history in all its detail is a very important function, as you suggest. Museums, books, documentary films, roadside and trail historical markers ... all are very worthy displays and teaching aids. Naming public facilities after racists, not so much.

[Lodestar]

Originally Posted by AmorphicDN

There's a huge difference between refusing to honor - and hiding. Presentation of history in all its detail is a very important function, as you suggest. Museums, books, documentary films, roadside and trail historical markers ... all are very worthy displays and teaching aids. Naming public facilities after racists, not so much.

Then the solution is simple and less expensive. Put up a plaque beside the lake with a short biography of Mr. Calhoun and the reason it was named for him at that particular time in history.

No need to prescribe honoring or dishonoring. No free people need or want that.

Hope nobody here thinking the lake needs renaming watches Woody Allen movies unless they promote pedophilia.

You see the issue?

[AmorphicDN]

Originally Posted by Lodestar

Then the solution is simple and less expensive. Put up a plaque beside the lake with a short biography of Mr. Calhoun and the reason it was named for him at that particular time in history.

No need to prescribe honoring or dishonoring. No free people need or want that.

Hope nobody here thinking the lake needs renaming watches Woody Allen movies unless they promote pedophilia.

You see the issue?

Interesting thought. Creative. Insufficient to my mind, but well intentioned.

Dont have any idea what you mean by "No need to prescribe honoring or dishonoring. No free people need or want that."

As for Woody Allen, he's been condemned in public opinion largely, but not wholly and there's certainly been no confession or proof in a court of law. I dont happen to be a fan, but I also don't participate in witch hunts.

Back to the lake issue. There have been numerous comments in this thread about how the time and money spent on this could be better spent on other civic problems. I would point out that is not the way nature or societies work. Prioritization follows character as well as needs. For example, parents demand certain standards of behavior for themselves and their children in the home. The importance of chores and homework being done is no more important than respectful behavior to parents, siblings, visitors. Its all part of the fabric of respect and common goals. I have no problem with social drinking or even light, occasional marijuana use in the world around me by responsible adults. But I won't tolerate my kids wearing weed or Budweiser t-shirts or anything else that glorifies controlled substance use, or condones violence or bigotry, etc. The standards for respectful living come first as all actions follow that standard.

Now, was there something in what I have written that makes you think I don't see the issue?

[northsub]

Originally Posted by AmorphicDN

Back to the lake issue. There have been numerous comments in this thread about how the time and money spent on this could be better spent on other civic problems. I would point out that is not the way nature or societies work. Prioritization follows character as well as needs. For example, parents demand certain standards of behavior for themselves and their children in the home. The importance of chores and homework being done is no more important than respectful behavior to parents, siblings, visitors. Its all part of the fabric of respect and common goals. I have no problem with social drinking or even light, occasional marijuana use in the world around me by responsible adults. But I won't tolerate my kids wearing weed or Budweiser t-shirts or anything else that glorifies controlled substance use, or condones violence or bigotry, etc. The standards for respectful living come first as all actions follow that standard.

It never occurred to me that some people actually think it is more important to talk the talk than to walk the walk. That might make many people's priorities make a lot more sense.