Columbus Day; Indigenous Peoples Day

Today I am celebrating Columbus Day.  It is a Federal holiday.  It celebrates the courageous feat of a daring and persistent explorer Christopher Columbus who, with his 3 small ships the Pinta, the Niña, and the Santa Maria, discovered or rediscovered the land we now call America.  He found this place that the people of Europe did not know existed.

His discovery was enormous and something to be lauded in the same way that we laud the manned moon landing.  The consequences of this discovery were not all positive, and those people who were living here already, their ancestors having discovered it much earlier, suffered many negative consequences as the result of European exploration that one can argue would not have occurred but for Columbus’s journey.

But that does not diminish Columbus’s feat itself.  And, I celebrate his courage and ability to seek beyond what is known and to fearlessly go where he believed no one had previously been.  

Most every action has both foreseen and unforeseen consequences.  I do not believe that many of the negative consequences experienced by Native Americans were  foreseen or intended by Columbus.  For example, how would he have known that people living in this country would contract smallpox?  How is he responsible for the actions of Spaniards 100 or more years after his journey?

My state, like some others, has replaced Columbus Day with Indigenous Peoples Day.  The intent is to celebrate those peoples that we refer to as Native Americans who believe that Columbus’s journey resulted in a variety of negative consequences for them.  I have no problem with the concept behind this.  I believe that Native Americans can and should express their perceptions of and feelings about Columbus and his consequences and should educate those of us who are not Native American about those views.

But, why do we have to blot out Columbus Day in favor of Indigenous Peoples Day?  Why not have both?  We can celebrate and learn about the feat of a great explorer on one day, and on another day we can celebrate and learn about the people who were living here before Christopher Columbus.  Both are a part of our country’s history.  And history is important not only as a way to understand the past, but to understand why the past unveiled itself as it did and what effects that past still has on us in the present.  And history can also help us to make more thoughtful and better decisions in the future.

Moreover, I think that the use of the word Indigenous is erroneous.  In my state we have several Pueblo Peoples as well as other Indian Reservations, all inhabited by people whose ancestors were in this country before Columbus, but who, it is believed, originally came to this country from elsewhere – mostly from Asia across the land bridge that once existed during the Ice Age. 

Indigenous means something that occurs naturally in a given place or environment.  Merriam Webster clarifies the difference between the terms NATIVE, INDIGENOUS, ENDEMIC, ABORIGINAL, all of which refer in one way to something or someone belonging to a locality. NATIVE implies birth or origin in a place or region and may suggest compatibility with it.  INDIGENOUS applies to that which is not only native but which, as far as can be determined, has never been introduced or brought from elsewhere.  ENDEMIC implies being peculiar to a region.  ABORIGINAL implies having no known others preceding in occupancy of a particular region.   

I would argue that the Native Americans whom the Indigenous Peoples Day is intended to honor, are not indigenous since they originally migrated to this country from elsewhere.  The better term would be Native or Aboriginal.  I think that this misnomer does not cloud the current understanding of the purpose of the day.  But, it does blot out another key fact of history – the fact that while the Native Americans were likely the first to settle in this country, they are not indigenous but simply arrived well before any others.

Many years ago, when I was in elementary school, I learned about Columbus and his great voyage of discovery.  I learned about the negative impact that his discovery had on many native peoples.  I learned about the Asian origins of our Native American populations.  I learned about the positive and the negative consequences of European settlement of this country.  But, this fuller version of history is no longer acceptable.  Instead we seem to want good guys and bad guys and no grey area in between.  We blot out those whom we have determined to be “bad” (in this case Columbus, making him the representative for every perceived evil of European exploration and conquest in this country).  We ignore facts that don’t fully fit our purposes or our narrative (for example,  that Native Americans are ultimately not indigenous, having migrated here from Asia centuries ago). 

History, like life, is complicated.  We can celebrate Columbus, his exploratory feat and the fact that without his introduction of this part of the world we likely would not have the United States of America, probably the greatest country ever and a shining beacon of democracy for the rest of the world.  And, we can understand that other consequences of Columbus's journey brought great pain to those people already living here; we can listen to their stories and try to understand their feelings and why they may not want to rejoice in Columbus and his “discovery.” 

But, that is the beauty of America.  We allow and are tolerant of many viewpoints.  We can have Columbus Day and we are free to celebrate or not.  We can also have Indigenous Peoples Day as a time to celebrate and understand those who lived here first.  We can have both.  America does not blot out one view, one piece of history, in favor of another.  It accepts all.  And we should too.  So, while I am not opposed to Indigenous Peoples Day, I am opposed to it replacing Columbus Day.  Both Columbus and our indigenous or native peoples are a part of our history to be both celebrated and understood.  Our feelings or judgments about one should not and cannot eradicate the other.

So, happy Columbus Day and happy Indigenous Peoples Day.  May you celebrate one or both or neither as you choose, but may you learn about the people and the history of both.

The Elitism of Historical Enlightenment

There are those today who would judge every historical event by today’s standards. This is an unfortunate form of elitism.

Societies, including ours, evolve.  As they evolve they gain both scientific and social understanding that may prove that previous beliefs or actions were incorrect.  People once thought the world was flat or that the sun and stars moved around the earth.  Science later proved these beliefs to be wrong.  Yet we do not judge as stupid those who appropriately held those beliefs at the time they were considered to be accurate views of the physical world.

Similarly, as we evolve sociologically we learn that some of the beliefs that we had about the capabilities of women or other cultures or races were incorrect.  As we evolve sociologically we learn to be sensitive to diverse views and cultures.  We learn that behaviors that once were accepted actually were cruel or hurtful to others.  Yet, that behavior was at one time accepted as valid, justifiable, and expected. 

Just as it is not fair to judge the ancestor who believed the earth to be flat, it is not fair to condemn historical social behavior based on today’s sociological and moral understandings. To do so is a form of elitism – the attitude that those doing the condemning are somehow morally superior.  It is a form of snobbery which, in the case of historical enlightenment, is unjust.

With that in mind, let us consider the yearbook photo on Gov. Ralph Northam’s yearbook page that he initially admitted but now claims is not of him.  The photo shows a person in blackface standing with a person dressed as a member of the KKK.  The yearbook is from 1984.  That is 35 years ago.

By today’s standards the photo is at a minimum culturally insensitive, and by most standards is racist and perhaps worse.   By today’s standards the behavior and the photo are unacceptable.  But, what were the standards in 1984?  As I recall that time it was not uncommon to hear comedians recite jokes that made fun of and caricatured races and cultures.  I don’t know what time of year the photo was taken, but I can assure you that if this were perhaps Halloween, few would raise their eyebrows at such costumes.  Indeed, Halloween was a time of all sorts of culturally offensive costuming, most of which has now been banned as we as a culture come to realize how offensive cultural appropriation and cultural humor can be.

I would like to think that Gov. Northam, in either wearing one of the costumes or in simply choosing to put the photo in his yearbook felt some sort of discomfort about his choice.  But I would also not be surprised if he did not, given the different atmosphere and racial understanding or lack thereof that prevailed 35 years ago.  

I cringe when I see this photo.  And if Gov. Northam put it before our eyes today, I would be the first to call for his resignation.  But to condemn him for an act that was in all likelihood not worthy of condemnation 35 years ago and also likely not done with malice in the atmosphere of 1984 seems to me to be unjust and an act of elitist superiority based on some sort of historical enlightenment.

Such elitism can be very dangerous.  If we are only going to live by the values of today, then I expect that we all are candidates for condemnation based on our acts of the past.  And, as history and cultures move forward, those elitist moral police of today may very likely be subjects of condemnation tomorrow.

It would be nice to think that we would all be prescient enough to understand the science and the sociological mores of the future.  The historical enlightenment elitists apparently expect us to have that capability and hence to have every statement and every action of today live up to what we will know and believe years into the future.

That is simply ridiculous.  Let us expect people to acknowledge the things they have done in the past that may have been accepted then but now are unacceptable.  Let us learn from those past actions.  Let people not do those things today, or, if they do, let them suffer the appropriate consequences.  But let us not condemn them for doing or saying things that were not considered unacceptable at the time they were done.

And let us not use this elitism of this moment in time to score political points.  Gov. Northam currently supports policies, including those on abortion, that are strongly opposed by others.  It is easy for the opposition to use this 35 year old event to call for his resignation.  Personally, because of some of his current policies I would be happy to see him gone.  But, I will not call for his resignation because of this 35 year old photo. 

And, on the other side of the aisle, there are those who generally support the Governor’s policies but are now calling for his resignation because of the photo.  I can’t help but wonder if this is simply their own self-promotion – a way to show their supporters that they, by condemning this action regardless of when it occurred, makes them somehow morally superior. 

While the current news story of Gov. Northam’s yearbook photo has been my example here, this is not an attempt to defend the Governor.  Rather, he is simply my example of the way in which many currently judge history by today’s standards, without context or any attempt to understand the context of historical times.  Perhaps this should not be surprising as so many in our society seem to want to live only in the moment, to erase, ignore or deny history. 

But that snobbery, that belief that now we know everything and are justified in condemning everything and everyone who is not us today is a very dangerous approach.  We are our history.  To condemn everything that is not us today is to condemn our very selves and to set the precedent that tomorrow’s selves can condemn, destroy, and deny all that we are today.  We become a people with no past and no future, just a hopeless and fleetingly elitist present.

What Does the Time Matter?

As one justification for tearing down statues commemorating people associated with the Confederacy, much is being made of the time the statues were erected.  Apparently if you do not erect a statue immediately following a conflict, then the statue has some other, likely evil, ulterior motive. What does this mean for the World War Two memorial which opened in 2004?

As noted by an historian on the PBS news shortly after the Charlottesville and Durham incidents, often it is when soldiers age and begin to die off that their families seek to have their memories preserved and memorials are built.  He pointed to a group named Daughters of the Confederacy that worked to have memorials and monuments built to commemorate their fathers and brothers as those fathers and brothers reached old age and began to die off.  (I note this historian has not been invited back as the narrative is now that all monuments not erected immediately following the end of the war were done to insult and intimidate people of color.)

This does not mean that some statues may not have been constructed as some sort of in-your-face statement.  But, even if that is the case, so what?  In the words of Hillary Clinton, “what difference does it make?”  Isn’t the argument that these statues, regardless of when erected, are a discomforting reminder of racism in this country?

And, doesn’t taking them down have the likely potential of preserving the status quo?  That is, if we erase our history and all reminders of its dark and ugly parts, then we stop any dialog about that history.  And without dialog, how are we going to improve things or even reach any understanding that they should be improved?

The history of this country is complex.  It has many great and wonderful moments and it has some dark and ugly ones.  That history cannot be changed, and, like all histories it is multifaceted and nuanced.  We cannot erase that history or the emotions and views underlying and stemming from it by tearing down statues and pretending they and the history of which they are a part does not exist.

And, the question of where will it stop is a valid one.  Today Time Out New York reports that the city will begin removing or reworking subway station tiles that “resemble the Confederate flag.”  An MTA spokesperson states, “the tiles were not originally intended to represent the flag but rather the area's moniker as the Crossroads of the World”; nonetheless, they will be removed in order to "avoid absolutely any confusion." The mosaics were installed in 1917 and allegations that they had racist undertones “have largely been debunked.” Nonetheless, they will be torn down as the mayor calls for streets to be renamed and “all symbols of hate” on city property be removed.  These mosaics (a mostly blue X on a reddish background with no other similarity to the Confederate flag) are apparently “symbols of hate.”  If we look hard enough, we can find offense in almost any graphic we see.

History has many aspects, many moments, many reminders, and each and every moment or reminder is going to be offensive to someone.  George Washington and Thomas Jefferson did some amazing things in fighting for and shaping our democracy.  They also held slaves.  I cannot justify that.  I understand that this fact alone may make the thought of them so repugnant to some that they would like to see their images and their names removed from sight and from memory.  But, they are a part of our history; they lived their lives in a time very different from ours and those lives were far more complex and encompass far more than the fact that they held slaves, repugnant as that fact is.  If we erase them because they held slaves, do we also then erase all else they did, including writing the Declaration of Independence and their many acts in shaping our country and our Constitution?  Do we erase the Constitution?

History must be understood in context.  At one time, the law of some states did not allow women to become lawyers and women were not even allowed to serve on juries.  This stance is shocking and unacceptable today, but was fully accepted in the past.  Should we condemn the judges who enforced these rules which made sense in the context of their times, regardless of what other accomplishments these jurists had?  And suppose we erased them and the past treatment of women from our history:  how would that affect the conversation about women’s rights today?   

Does it matter when or why the memorials were erected? Not really.  Tearing them down is an attempt to cleanse us of the history that made us all who we are today.  Essentially it is an attempt to cleanse us of our country and ourselves.  And how is this much different from a conquering Taliban attempting to cleanse a region it has conquered from all signs of Christianity, something which it views as repulsive.  Does it make a difference if the church they destroy was erected to stand as protection from the Taliban or whether it was erected 500 years ago or yesterday?  The goal is to cleanse all thought and memory of these structures and what they represent, period.

Our history is complicated and difficult; we cannot erase it nor can we make it perfect.  Rather, we must preserve our memory of both the moments of greatness and those of darkness. It is those dark times, and our ability to deal with them, which make us stronger.  It is the lessons that we learn from the ugly times that make us grow, as people and as a nation.  Understanding the complexities of our history and the people involved in it help us to better understand ourselves and those with whom we live together within today’s world.  Erasing our history because parts of it are horrifically upsetting to some only leaves us without the ability to understand and learn from that history so as not to repeat it again in the future. 

Destroying all reminders of our past is essentially an effort to destroy who we are as a people and as a country.  I realize there are those who might think that is a good thing, but I, for one, would rather have us face our history, unpleasant as parts of it may be; rather than stopping any dialog with destruction and erasure I would have us face head on that which some wish to erase.  And if a monument was erected to intimidate, then let us not remove it in anger it in the middle of the night but let us face it in full sun-light and talk about what it is and what it means to everyone and what best to do with it.  Let us understand the complexities and the strengths and weaknesses of our history and let us grow together as a nation from that understanding.