Federal President Frank-Walter Steinmeier wanted to solemnly inaugurate a bust of Carl Schurz at the Bellevue Palace in Berlin, his official residence. According to the author of the article,
Kein Held ist perfekt (No Hereo Is Perfect)
Dirk Kurbjuweit, Carl is one of the four "forgotten "revolutionaries of 1848/49, together
with heroes such as Friedrich Hecker,
Gustav Struve, and
Franz Sigel. Following the abortion of their revolution for democracy and freedom in
Germany, all those Forty-Eighters emigrated to the States and fought slavery
(what else?) in the Civil War.
Last Monday evening, our president had the inauguration appointment canceled with these words: "Allegations have come to light against Carl Schurz, relating in particular to his term as Secretary of the Interior of the United States from 1877 to 1881 and concerning the removal of Native American children to boarding schools."
Coincidence had it that the big story in BuzzFeed News on May 13 was:
The remains of more than 500 children were discovered at burial sites across the U.S. as part of a wide-ranging investigation into the Indian boarding school system that systematically erased Indigenous culture from the early 1800s to around 1970. The real number of children whose bodies were dumped in the mass graves is expected to be much higher.
Advocates have been cataloging atrocities on their own for decades and have long called for official federal recognition and documentation. Last year, Interior Secretary Deb Haaland, a citizen of the Pueblo of Laguna whose grandparents survived boarding schools, ordered a formal investigation to "uncover the truth about the loss of human life and the lasting consequences.
The investigation explained that in 1803, President Thomas Jefferson told Congress that he wanted to create policies to separate Indian tribes from their land. Children were 'coerced, induced, or compelled to enter the schools, many without their parents' consent.
And again, on Friday, May 13, Jerry Coyne wrote a blog:
As I've said several times during this time of cancellation, renaming, and statue-toppling, I would only favor this kind of "erasure" (usually not by straight erasure, but by giving "context") when the person at issue fails to fulfill two criteria:
a. Are they being honored for their positive accomplishments? and
b. On balance, did their life and accomplishments make the world a better place?
If "yes," let them stay. If "no," erasure might be considered, though I favor the retention of history with, perhaps, an explanatory note.
Now, these are my own criteria, and others differ, but I'd say, for instance, that removing a Jefferson or Theodore Roosevelt statue because they were imperfect humans violates the two criteria above. Both men are "yes" in a. and b.
Slavery is an exception to what I just said. Even in times of slavery, there were many who opposed it, and so it has to be counted as a severe moral deficit in anyone connected to the slave trade or to have had slaves. And this brings up the matter of two of our most famous Presidents, both of whom were enslavers: George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. This issue is part of what led Caleb Francois, a senior at George Washington University in the District of Columbia, to write in the Washington Post:
Last Monday evening, our president had the inauguration appointment canceled with these words: "Allegations have come to light against Carl Schurz, relating in particular to his term as Secretary of the Interior of the United States from 1877 to 1881 and concerning the removal of Native American children to boarding schools."
Coincidence had it that the big story in BuzzFeed News on May 13 was:
The U.S. has confirmed hundreds of deaths occurred
at Native American boarding schools.
at Native American boarding schools.
The remains of more than 500 children were discovered at burial sites across the U.S. as part of a wide-ranging investigation into the Indian boarding school system that systematically erased Indigenous culture from the early 1800s to around 1970. The real number of children whose bodies were dumped in the mass graves is expected to be much higher.
Advocates have been cataloging atrocities on their own for decades and have long called for official federal recognition and documentation. Last year, Interior Secretary Deb Haaland, a citizen of the Pueblo of Laguna whose grandparents survived boarding schools, ordered a formal investigation to "uncover the truth about the loss of human life and the lasting consequences.
The investigation explained that in 1803, President Thomas Jefferson told Congress that he wanted to create policies to separate Indian tribes from their land. Children were 'coerced, induced, or compelled to enter the schools, many without their parents' consent.
And again, on Friday, May 13, Jerry Coyne wrote a blog:
As I've said several times during this time of cancellation, renaming, and statue-toppling, I would only favor this kind of "erasure" (usually not by straight erasure, but by giving "context") when the person at issue fails to fulfill two criteria:
a. Are they being honored for their positive accomplishments? and
b. On balance, did their life and accomplishments make the world a better place?
If "yes," let them stay. If "no," erasure might be considered, though I favor the retention of history with, perhaps, an explanatory note.
Now, these are my own criteria, and others differ, but I'd say, for instance, that removing a Jefferson or Theodore Roosevelt statue because they were imperfect humans violates the two criteria above. Both men are "yes" in a. and b.
Slavery is an exception to what I just said. Even in times of slavery, there were many who opposed it, and so it has to be counted as a severe moral deficit in anyone connected to the slave trade or to have had slaves. And this brings up the matter of two of our most famous Presidents, both of whom were enslavers: George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. This issue is part of what led Caleb Francois, a senior at George Washington University in the District of Columbia, to write in the Washington Post:
Coming back to Carl Schurz. U.S. President
Rutherford B. Hayes
made Schurz Secretary of the Interior in 1877. He was thus responsible
for the indigenous peoples, who were mainly defeated and, to a large
extent, living in dire conditions on reservations.
New findings of Schurz's actions as U.S. Secretary of the Interior came to light thanks to his current successor, Deb Haaland, who belongs to the Laguna Pueblo people. She had an investigation conducted into how Schurz and others treated indigenous peoples. Some of the results are startling.
Schurz's actions were controversial during his time as Secretary of the Interior. From the point of view of many whites, he treated indigenous people too leniently. It was even rumored that out of respect for Schurz, many Native Americans have been given the first name Carl.
Now Haaland's Federal Boarding School Initiative, which is having research done on how indigenous children fared when they were taken from their families and placed in special boarding schools, delivers a scathing verdict: "In the establishment of these brutal assimilation institutions, as well as in the forced sellout of the remaining reservations, Schurz, as Secretary of the Interior from 1877 to 1881, played a prominent, if not a decisive, role."
During his time, Schurz said about his fosterlings, "The wild look of the Indian boys and girls quickly gives way to a well-groomed appearance. A new intelligence that lights up their faces transforms their expressions." He continued, "Let justice be done to them, and if they cannot be made as civilized and useful citizens as the whites, then let them become as civilized and useful as possible."
Kurbjuweit notices sheer racism in these sentences, although Schurz possibly saw himself on a humanitarian path, assuming these people would be better off if they lived like whites.
We, the white people in Europe and the U.S., are the best, and we know what is best for everyone: to become and live like us. Is it right not to grant Carl Schurz a place in Bellevue Palace? Should he be canceled?
Judge yourself by applying Jerry's a and b criteria.
No comments:
Post a Comment