In San Francisco, Virus is Contained but Schools Are Still Closed

[David Lockmiller]

(11-12-2020 10:47 AM)Rob Wick Wrote:  

Quote: Gene wrote: "It's not just Lincoln's reputation.

It's about standing up for what is right and worthwhile."

History is the serious attempt to tell what happened in a community or society using primary and secondary resources and attempting to tell the story without bias or prejudice. If you respect anything in this, it's the last part. Obviously, people have differing opinions on whether that happens or doesn't (hence David's obsession with the 1619 Project), but as long as one side puts out the information in good faith, they have a right to bring it out for discussion. No one, that I know of, believes that the 1619 Project should have never been published, but they question the conclusions it reaches. Also, rescinding the Pulitzer Prize that the series won will not magically make it disappear from public consciousness, although it would actually have to appear in public consciousness for that to even be possible.

I fail to see how any group who petitions a council or board to remove a statue is somehow showing disrespect for the people, community, or the law.

As for the tearing down of statues, vandalism is indeed against the law, but it's not on the same level as robbery, burglary, rape, or murder. It's generally a misdemeanor, and it is punished based on how a statute is written. What people fail to realize is that if someone's voice doesn't receive a respectful hearing by those in power, many times some will scream in order to be heard. While there are numerous ways to scream that fall within the boundaries of the law, when you don't believe the law protects you, one cannot be surprised that some will bypass that. Does it make it right? No, but it can be understood.

How many Lincoln statues have been torn down? As far as I can see, just one. Some will argue that this is one too many, but I don't see a huge wave of destruction where Lincoln is concerned. A community has the right to determine what its collective values are and present petitions to its civic leaders for attention. If a community wants to remove a statue of Lincoln, or whomever, and they can garner enough support to make that happen, then it will. If the people who oppose such a removal are able to mount an election challenge that removes those who made the decision, then it will have been proven to be the wrong move and those responsible are turned out of office.

Isn't that the textbook definition of democracy?

Best
Rob

This post to which I am responding has been pared down, with my interjections added as identified by the brackets.

History is the serious attempt to tell what happened . . . without bias or prejudice. If you respect anything in this, it's the last part. . . . No one, that I know of, believes that the 1619 Project should have never been published.

[I don’t think that 1619 Project should ever have been published and you know me. And, you also must know that many of this nation’s eminent historians and Lincoln scholars expressed their opinions beforehand that the 1619 Project should not have been published as is and specifically identified correctable problems with the text; they stated their opinion as a unanimous group. And, you must also know that most recently 21 members of the Society of Scholars, in a letter to the Pulitzer Prize Board, called for the 2020 Pulitzer Prize for Commentary to be rescinded for cause, and that cause being for serious factual history errors in the 1619 Project itself.]

Also, rescinding the Pulitzer Prize that the series won will not magically make it disappear from public consciousness . . . .

[I don’t want the Pulitzer Prize for the 1619 Project Commentary to disappear from public consciousness. I want the public to know exactly the reasons that it will be disappearing from accepted history because it is an untruthful history.]

I fail to see how any group who petitions a council or board to remove a statue is somehow showing disrespect for the people, community, or the law.

[These are the same members of this San Francisco Board of Education who wanted to whitewash (destroy) the Washington High School murals, as previously discussed on this forum, at a cost of $8 million, as I recall. And, many members of the public who had not been part of the Board’s decision-making process rose up in objection to the Board’s proposed action and forced the Board to reconsider its decision. If these members of the public had waited for an election to express their opposition, the murals would have been destroyed – a fait accompli.]

[This is the same San Francisco Board of Education that now wants to rename Abraham Lincoln High School for just cause. The evidence justifying this action has been researched by a committee of the Board and thereafter the evidence was evaluated by the full Board. The decision to make the change has been made already by the Board. The Board will vote for final approval of its decision in December, as I recall the situation.]

[In the Richmond district of San Francisco in which I live, a local newspaper titled the Richmond Review is published for free once a month. The paper contains a monthly commentary by a man named Quentin Kopp, who is a former San Francisco supervisor, state senator, member of the San Francisco Ethics Commission and retired judge. He wrote regarding the Board of Education’s decision to rename several San Francisco schools in the November 2020 issue as follows:

“Appalling is the word best descriptive of the Board of Education which, confronting a multi-million dollar deficit and virus impediments to classroom instruction, plans to change the names of 44 San Francisco public schools, including Washington, Lincoln, Lowell, Mission, Balboa, Presidio, Alamo, Clarendon, Commodore Sloat, Ulloa, Sutro, Sheridan, Sherman, Feinstein, Lakeshore, Jefferson, Noriega, and Garfield (don’t forget El Dorado!). A committee including one non-resident and four Native Americans has so recommended. The estimated renaming cost is $10 million.”]

[It would surprise me greatly to learn that any of the four Native Americans on the evaluation committee of the Board are aware of all, or even a major portion, of the information that I have posted on this thread regarding President Abraham Lincoln, the “Dakota 38,” and related issues.]

How many Lincoln statues have been torn down? As far as I can see, just one. Some will argue that this is one too many [I am in that group, no question.], but I don't see a huge wave of destruction where Lincoln is concerned. A community has the right to determine what its collective values are and present petitions to its civic leaders for attention. If a community [or, a Board of Education] wants to remove a statue of Lincoln [or, rename a school named in honor of President Abraham Lincoln], or whomever, and they can garner enough support to make that happen, then it will. If the people who oppose such a removal are able to mount an election challenge that removes those who made the decision, then it will have been proven to be the wrong move and those responsible are turned out of office.

Isn't that the textbook definition of democracy?

[No, this is not the textbook “definition of democracy.” President Abraham Lincoln defined democracy in his Gettysburg Address as that “government of the people, by the people, for the people.” There is no doubt that some of our elected or appointed government officials can get completely out of hand. And, even after an extremely important recent election in this democracy, at least one formerly-elected government official now refuses to be “turned out of office.” He probably hasn’t read your textbook on democracy. Maybe you should mail a copy to him. Good Luck!]