Delete comment from: Boston 1775
I'm afraid I don't follow either the logic or the historical facts in this comment. To start with, it seems to demand that all public monuments be about positive things, but there is a long tradition of public recognition of losses. That’s why this project is called a "memorial."
Just as building a memorial for WW2 veterans doesn't entail taking down a memorial for WW1 veterans, memorializing the victims of the slave trade in an now-open space doesn't affect monuments to the Founders. How many examples of "bringing down their [Founders'] memorials" and "destroying the statues" can we name? (I wrote about one proposed destruction of a mural earlier this week, but that hasn't happened, and it would be good to see four or five before we treat it as a trend.)
This comment says, "I don't oppose any mention or reference to the history of slavery." But that's exactly what it's opposing—a memorial to what it acknowledges is the historical reality of slavery. This comment has a lot to say about how slavery was bad but then tries its hardest to disconnect that bad behavior from any "Founders"—even Peter Faneuil, who died decades before the Revolution began. We can't deny the facts that some of the real Founders kept slaves, kept many slaves, wrote the rules of the new republic to benefit themselves and other slaveholders, and so on. Pretending they didn't is creating false history.
The comment traces liberty to "Ancient Greece" and "the Christian tradition" and not to natural human desires. That writes off the yearning for liberty that the African people brought to Boston as slaves no doubt felt as strongly as people who arrived from Europe. In effect, this comment is saying their thwarted desires don't matter to the story of liberty in America.
Jul 14, 2019, 2:48:43 AM