New York City to remove Thomas Jefferson statue from legislative chamber by year's end

[jojoju1998]

So why is this such a big deal ?

[LAB-LIB]

I get that that people don't like Thomas Jefferson because he owned slaves, but if we're going to talk about statues, a statue of Thomas Jefferson is very different from a statue of a Confederate General. The statues of Confederate generals were put up by people who were commemorating the Confederacy while the statues of Thomas Jefferson were put up by people who were commemorating the American Revolution, and regardless of Thomas Jefferson's flaws, that makes a pretty big difference to me. Can't we just worry about tackling the pandemic, lowering unemployment, and expanding access to healthcare instead?

[jojoju1998]

I get that that people don't like Thomas Jefferson because he owned slaves, but if we're going to talk about statues, a statue of Thomas Jefferson is very different from a statue of a Confederate General. The statues of Confederate generals were put up by people who were commemorating the Confederacy while the statues of Thomas Jefferson were put up by people who were commemorating the American Revolution, and regardless of Thomas Jefferson's flaws, that makes a pretty big difference to me. Can't we just worry about tackling the pandemic, lowering unemployment, and expanding access to healthcare instead?

Ding. Ding. Ding.

Expanding Medicare will help more blacks and POC than removing a statue.

[DrScholl]

Most of the founders would not at all moral and that should be acknowledged. I don't think statues to political leaders are a good idea as it is because they border on idol worship.

[Absolution9]

I think there's a difference between statues of slave owners who earned a sh-t ton of money and had a statue put up as 'local boy done good' but had no real effect on anything (which you find a lot of in the UK) and the statue of someone like Jefferson.

I think it makes sense to place a plaque noting his slave ownership and...'use' of his property....but then again when I think about the implications of this act, just because it's Thomas Jefferson, how much do we celebrate a man who not only owned slaves, but raped Sally Hemmings?

This is a conversation the USA cannot properly have, because it's not one that 'white America' should be leading.

You do realize it isn’t anywhere near a settled fact that Jefferson had a sexual relationship with Sally Hemings or fathered any of her children, right?  The DNA evidence supports that Jefferson or someone closely related to him did father her children (Jefferson’s actual genetic material wasn’t tested), but there are legitimately 3-4+ other candidates.  The near universal MSM acceptance that it was Jefferson over the past 30 years is a product of the modern cultural biases just like the near universal derision of this theory in the prior 150 years is a product of past cultural biases.  In reality the probability that it was Jefferson based on genetic and historical evidence is probably somewhere between 20-50%.

[Omega21]

https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/19/us/thomas-jefferson-statue-new-york-city/index.html

“Barron said a statue of Jefferson, an American founding father and slave owner, was inappropriate in a room where New Yorkers gathered to govern.
"We're not being revisionist, we're not waging war on history," Barron said. "We're saying that we want to make sure that the total story is told."”

“‘Thomas Jefferson was a slaveholder who owned over 600 human beings," Councilmember Adrienne Adams, co-chair of the Black, Latino and Asian Caucus, said in a presentation before the commission. "It makes me deeply uncomfortable knowing that we sit in the presence of a statue that pays homage to a slaveholder who fundamentally believed that people who look like me were inherently inferior, lacked intelligence, and were not worthy of freedom or rights.’”

This is factually incorrect.

but whatever be their degree of talent it is no measure of their rights. Because Sir Isaac Newton was superior to others in understanding, he was not therefore lord of the person or property of others. On this subject they are gaining daily in the opinions of nations, and hopeful advances are making towards their re-establishment on an equal footing with the other colors of the human family.[153][154]

Basically, Jefersson indeed thought "the Blacks are inferior to the Whites", but also seemed to believe they deserve freedom and equal rights.

He also did usually comment that his opinions regarding this "inferiority" are just that, and should be taken with a pinch of salt.

[It’s so Joever]

As a partisan Federalist, I support this move.

[LtNOWIS]

Remind me what Jefferson's contribution was to the New York City Council?

I really don't care about this, since the New York City Council existed in some form for long before Jefferson and as far as I know, he only would have had limited to no impact on how it functioned, correct me if I'm wrong. I also get annoyed when we name things here in Washington after people who never came here or, in some cases, even knew this area existed. That's probably just me who's annoyed at that, and Jefferson at least visited New York, but the same idea holds. People on display in the New York City Council chambers should probably have some connection to the local history of New York City.

The statue wasn't foisted on NYC by some outsider. It was gifted to the city by Uriah Levy, who was a big admirer of Jefferson, and a big real estate investor and philanthropist in New York City. Levy was also one of the first Jews to serve as officers in the US Navy, where he ended 50 years of service as a commodore.

What Levy liked most about Jefferson was his commitment to religious liberty, since he himself faced anti-semitism during his lifetime. Given that New York is one of the most religiously diverse cities in America, it is one of the biggest beneficiaries of the transition away from state churches and towards a separated church and state. A transition that was largely started by Jefferson. 

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

I think the best way to look at most of the founding fathers at this point is as people with great ideals, but also were highly flawed individuals that sometimes contradicted their own ideals

We desperately need to stop judging historical figures by whether or not we would want to be best friends with them if they behaved the way they did 250 years ago in the year 2021. We recognize them because they founded the country and had great ideals. Were they highly flawed? By the standards of their time, actually not so much for most of them. But yeah, nobody's perfect. That should go without saying, but most progressives these days don't see it that way.

We need to stop treating historical figures as (civic) religious icons. Their words are neither holy writ nor magic spells. Their goals - freedom and civil rights, democracy, and what can broadly be called "good government" - are noble and praiseworthy (even when they were themselves hypocrites). They are also ongoing processes that need to be maintained in the mind and actions of people, lest they be lost. And they will be lost if we confuse the end with their suggested means.

No amount of reverence for Thomas Jefferson is going to amount to very much if our nation falls to those who want tyrannical rule by men (or one maniacal orange man). You want to respect Thomas Jefferson? Reject utterly the party that embraces bigoted, xenophobic tyranny.

[jojoju1998]

I think the best way to look at most of the founding fathers at this point is as people with great ideals, but also were highly flawed individuals that sometimes contradicted their own ideals

We desperately need to stop judging historical figures by whether or not we would want to be best friends with them if they behaved the way they did 250 years ago in the year 2021. We recognize them because they founded the country and had great ideals. Were they highly flawed? By the standards of their time, actually not so much for most of them. But yeah, nobody's perfect. That should go without saying, but most progressives these days don't see it that way.

We need to stop treating historical figures as (civic) religious icons. Their words are neither holy writ nor magic spells. Their goals - freedom and civil rights, democracy, and what can broadly be called "good government" - are noble and praiseworthy (even when they were themselves hypocrites). They are also ongoing processes that need to be maintained in the mind and actions of people, lest they be lost. And they will be lost if we confuse the end with their suggested means.

No amount of reverence for Thomas Jefferson is going to amount to very much if our nation falls to those who want tyrannical rule by men (or one maniacal orange man). You want to respect Thomas Jefferson? Reject utterly the party that embraces bigoted, xenophobic tyranny.

In their attempt to preserve " Liberty ", the Republican party has destroyed American democracy in the process.

[beaver2.0]

I think the best way to look at most of the founding fathers at this point is as people with great ideals, but also were highly flawed individuals that sometimes contradicted their own ideals

We desperately need to stop judging historical figures by whether or not we would want to be best friends with them if they behaved the way they did 250 years ago in the year 2021. We recognize them because they founded the country and had great ideals. Were they highly flawed? By the standards of their time, actually not so much for most of them. But yeah, nobody's perfect. That should go without saying, but most progressives these days don't see it that way.

We need to stop treating historical figures as (civic) religious icons. Their words are neither holy writ nor magic spells. Their goals - freedom and civil rights, democracy, and what can broadly be called "good government" - are noble and praiseworthy (even when they were themselves hypocrites). They are also ongoing processes that need to be maintained in the mind and actions of people, lest they be lost. And they will be lost if we confuse the end with their suggested means.

No amount of reverence for Thomas Jefferson is going to amount to very much if our nation falls to those who want tyrannical rule by men (or one maniacal orange man). You want to respect Thomas Jefferson? Reject utterly the party that embraces bigoted, xenophobic tyranny.

I genuinely do not understand how the last paragraph has anything to do with this statue.  I firmly oppose the actions of the Republican Party and recognize that Jefferson is not perfect but want the statue up.  I can pretty easily support both of those things.

[Shaula🏳️‍⚧️]

Jefferson was a terrible person. A racist pedophile. But his legacy is being a founding father and the statue should not have been removed

[DaleCooper]

I think the best way to look at most of the founding fathers at this point is as people with great ideals, but also were highly flawed individuals that sometimes contradicted their own ideals

We desperately need to stop judging historical figures by whether or not we would want to be best friends with them if they behaved the way they did 250 years ago in the year 2021. We recognize them because they founded the country and had great ideals. Were they highly flawed? By the standards of their time, actually not so much for most of them. But yeah, nobody's perfect. That should go without saying, but most progressives these days don't see it that way.

We need to stop treating historical figures as (civic) religious icons. Their words are neither holy writ nor magic spells. Their goals - freedom and civil rights, democracy, and what can broadly be called "good government" - are noble and praiseworthy (even when they were themselves hypocrites). They are also ongoing processes that need to be maintained in the mind and actions of people, lest they be lost. And they will be lost if we confuse the end with their suggested means.

No amount of reverence for Thomas Jefferson is going to amount to very much if our nation falls to those who want tyrannical rule by men (or one maniacal orange man). You want to respect Thomas Jefferson? Reject utterly the party that embraces bigoted, xenophobic tyranny.

No one other than a handful of mentally ill conservatives will tell you that the founding fathers are worthy of anything resembling religious praise. It's the left-wingers that are taking a religious attitude towards history. Even the Democrats willing to defend the founders' place in history almost universally have to start their statements with, "I know these men were disgraceful sinners, and far below the perfect standards one must have in order to warrant a statue, however . . ."

Everyone with a little maturity can comprehend that history took place in the past and people in the past did things differently than we do things today. It isn't that hard to figure out. Even most fifth-grade history students can wrap their minds around it. The destruction of all these monuments and the relentless attempts to rewrite history to remove problematic people from key points of progress in American history is basically just iconoclasm. It stems beyond even their anti-historical point of view and into mundane subjects like entertainment, where you have every progressive writer on the web hysterical over how essential it is to remake every iconic film or TV show with a woman in the lead, even though they have no interest in actually watching it. It's all iconoclasm. Again, to carry on the religious comparison, it feels to me like the left-wingers want to destroy what they see as the "old gods" and replace them with idols of their own. If you view all of their "cultural critiques" (lol) from that perspective then it all makes a lot more sense. The sooner the left realizes that Americans don't hate America, the sooner they'll be able to win outside of big-city school board elections.

[GP270watch]

I think there's a difference between statues of slave owners who earned a sh-t ton of money and had a statue put up as 'local boy done good' but had no real effect on anything (which you find a lot of in the UK) and the statue of someone like Jefferson.

I think it makes sense to place a plaque noting his slave ownership and...'use' of his property....but then again when I think about the implications of this act, just because it's Thomas Jefferson, how much do we celebrate a man who not only owned slaves, but raped Sally Hemmings?

This is a conversation the USA cannot properly have, because it's not one that 'white America' should be leading.

You do realize it isn’t anywhere near a settled fact that Jefferson had a sexual relationship with Sally Hemings or fathered any of her children, right?  The DNA evidence supports that Jefferson or someone closely related to him did father her children (Jefferson’s actual genetic material wasn’t tested), but there are legitimately 3-4+ other candidates.  The near universal MSM acceptance that it was Jefferson over the past 30 years is a product of the modern cultural biases just like the near universal derision of this theory in the prior 150 years is a product of past cultural biases.  In reality the probability that it was Jefferson based on genetic and historical evidence is probably somewhere between 20-50%.

 
https://www.monticello.org/sallyhemings/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jefferson%E2%80%93Hemings_controversy


In 2000, a consensus, generated by the DNA study titled "Jefferson Fathered Slave's Last Child," emerged among historians. In the majority view, the DNA evidence is consistent with Jefferson being the father of Eston Hemings, plus the historical evidence favors Jefferson's paternity for all of Hemings' children. The Monticello Foundation commissioned its study, which in 2001 concluded Jefferson was likely the father of Eston Hemings and the other children. Since then the organization has reflected this change in its exhibits, as well as publications about Jefferson and his times. The revelations have stimulated works by a variety of scholars, who have used the consensus as a basis for studies into Jefferson, the Hemings family, and interracial American society. In June 2018, the Thomas Jefferson Foundation, with introduction of the new exhibit on Sally Hemings, asserted the relationship is "settled historical matter".

 Mind you the oral history of Hemings descendants has never waivered. It was only because of DNA that Jefferson's White descendants conceded that a Jefferson fathered these children, then they named a bunch of people whose historical travel and timeline does not match like Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemmings who timelines match all her pregnancies.

[jojoju1998]

I think the best way to look at most of the founding fathers at this point is as people with great ideals, but also were highly flawed individuals that sometimes contradicted their own ideals

We desperately need to stop judging historical figures by whether or not we would want to be best friends with them if they behaved the way they did 250 years ago in the year 2021. We recognize them because they founded the country and had great ideals. Were they highly flawed? By the standards of their time, actually not so much for most of them. But yeah, nobody's perfect. That should go without saying, but most progressives these days don't see it that way.

We need to stop treating historical figures as (civic) religious icons. Their words are neither holy writ nor magic spells. Their goals - freedom and civil rights, democracy, and what can broadly be called "good government" - are noble and praiseworthy (even when they were themselves hypocrites). They are also ongoing processes that need to be maintained in the mind and actions of people, lest they be lost. And they will be lost if we confuse the end with their suggested means.

No amount of reverence for Thomas Jefferson is going to amount to very much if our nation falls to those who want tyrannical rule by men (or one maniacal orange man). You want to respect Thomas Jefferson? Reject utterly the party that embraces bigoted, xenophobic tyranny.

No one other than a handful of mentally ill conservatives will tell you that the founding fathers are worthy of anything resembling religious praise. It's the left-wingers that are taking a religious attitude towards history. Even the Democrats willing to defend the founders' place in history almost universally have to start their statements with, "I know these men were disgraceful sinners, and far below the perfect standards one must have in order to warrant a statue, however . . ."

Everyone with a little maturity can comprehend that history took place in the past and people in the past did things differently than we do things today. It isn't that hard to figure out. Even most fifth-grade history students can wrap their minds around it. The destruction of all these monuments and the relentless attempts to rewrite history to remove problematic people from key points of progress in American history is basically just iconoclasm. It stems beyond even their anti-historical point of view and into mundane subjects like entertainment, where you have every progressive writer on the web hysterical over how essential it is to remake every iconic film or TV show with a woman in the lead, even though they have no interest in actually watching it. It's all iconoclasm. Again, to carry on the religious comparison, it feels to me like the left-wingers want to destroy what they see as the "old gods" and replace them with idols of their own. If you view all of their "cultural critiques" (lol) from that perspective then it all makes a lot more sense. The sooner the left realizes that Americans don't hate America, the sooner they'll be able to win outside of big-city school board elections.

Hating America huh ?

Oh boy, well at least the Left didnt try to overturn the results of a free and fair election......

[GP270watch]

Ding. Ding. Ding.

Expanding Medicare will help more blacks and POC than removing a statue.

 Why do you think America's application of social programs and public policy has always been so racist towards Black people?

[DaleCooper]

I think the best way to look at most of the founding fathers at this point is as people with great ideals, but also were highly flawed individuals that sometimes contradicted their own ideals

We desperately need to stop judging historical figures by whether or not we would want to be best friends with them if they behaved the way they did 250 years ago in the year 2021. We recognize them because they founded the country and had great ideals. Were they highly flawed? By the standards of their time, actually not so much for most of them. But yeah, nobody's perfect. That should go without saying, but most progressives these days don't see it that way.

We need to stop treating historical figures as (civic) religious icons. Their words are neither holy writ nor magic spells. Their goals - freedom and civil rights, democracy, and what can broadly be called "good government" - are noble and praiseworthy (even when they were themselves hypocrites). They are also ongoing processes that need to be maintained in the mind and actions of people, lest they be lost. And they will be lost if we confuse the end with their suggested means.

No amount of reverence for Thomas Jefferson is going to amount to very much if our nation falls to those who want tyrannical rule by men (or one maniacal orange man). You want to respect Thomas Jefferson? Reject utterly the party that embraces bigoted, xenophobic tyranny.

No one other than a handful of mentally ill conservatives will tell you that the founding fathers are worthy of anything resembling religious praise. It's the left-wingers that are taking a religious attitude towards history. Even the Democrats willing to defend the founders' place in history almost universally have to start their statements with, "I know these men were disgraceful sinners, and far below the perfect standards one must have in order to warrant a statue, however . . ."

Everyone with a little maturity can comprehend that history took place in the past and people in the past did things differently than we do things today. It isn't that hard to figure out. Even most fifth-grade history students can wrap their minds around it. The destruction of all these monuments and the relentless attempts to rewrite history to remove problematic people from key points of progress in American history is basically just iconoclasm. It stems beyond even their anti-historical point of view and into mundane subjects like entertainment, where you have every progressive writer on the web hysterical over how essential it is to remake every iconic film or TV show with a woman in the lead, even though they have no interest in actually watching it. It's all iconoclasm. Again, to carry on the religious comparison, it feels to me like the left-wingers want to destroy what they see as the "old gods" and replace them with idols of their own. If you view all of their "cultural critiques" (lol) from that perspective then it all makes a lot more sense. The sooner the left realizes that Americans don't hate America, the sooner they'll be able to win outside of big-city school board elections.

Hating America huh ?

Oh boy, well at least the Left didnt try to overturn the results of a free and fair election......

Right-wingers despise everything America stands for, but at least they have the common sense to try and disguise it.

[jojoju1998]

Ding. Ding. Ding.

Expanding Medicare will help more blacks and POC than removing a statue.

 Why do you think America's application of social government and public policy has always been so racist towards Black people?

Because the Insitutions made it that way.. That being said, I am a now person. What can we do now ? To help improve the lives of POC now ? We have a bill in congress that might just fail because Manchin and Sinema are idiots.

I mean; I would not disagree with removing Thomas Jefferson from NY's Legislative chamber, but that is just superficial action.  We have voting rights to defend, Medicare to expand, Childcare to fix, Pre K to expand, All of this tangible stuff, and yes even reparations. Tangible results. That help us get to a more perfect union.
All of this news just inflames the culture wars at a time when we need solid economic action NOW. A rising tide lifts all boats, and with Biden's effort to focus these benefits on POC and minorities, it can help unscrew the barriers.

[beaver2.0]

Ding. Ding. Ding.

Expanding Medicare will help more blacks and POC than removing a statue.

 Why do you think America's application of social government and public policy has always been so racist towards Black people?

Because the Insitutions made it that way.. That being said, I am a now person. What can we do now ? To help improve the lives of POC now ? We have a bill in congress that might just fail because Manchin and Sinema are idiots.

I mean; I would not disagree with removing Thomas Jefferson from NY's Legislative chamber, but that is just superficial action.  We have voting rights to defend, Medicare to expand, Childcare to fix, Pre K to expand, All of this tangible stuff, and yes even reparations. Tangible results. That help us get to a more perfect union.
All of this news just inflames the culture wars at a time when we need solid economic action NOW. A rising tide lifts all boats, and with Biden's effort to focus these benefits on POC and minorities, it can help unscrew the barriers.

I suppose the cynical but perhaps not incorrect answer is that it's a lot easier to get rid of a statue than create and fund a school or end homelessness.  It's also a lot quicker of a process.  If your signature issue is getting rid of a statue you can post a video of it being torn down.  It's hard to get "clicks" or "views" on a social program that actually benefits people.  It seems we are in an era where symbolism and small, symbolic actions are favored over actual change.

[GP270watch]

 To me removing this statue is low priority or even a non-priority but the fact people don't understand why our current social policy is still so racist centuries later and how that is directly related to the founders and slavery shows we don't teach American history correctly. If removing the statue sheds light on what American history really was that is a good thing.

[jojoju1998]

To me removing this statue is low priority or even a non-priority but the fact people don't understand why our current social policy is still so racist centuries later and how that is directly related to the founders and slavery shows we don't teach American history correctly. If removing the statue sheds light on what American history really was that is a good thing.

Well then you have to start in the schools. The school boards. The textbooks. We vote in school officials right ? They buy the books.

Let's push for better education standards. Better teachers. Higher pay for more qualified educators. See where I'm going with this ?

We're even behind on math. Look at the math scores.

[GP270watch]

To me removing this statue is low priority or even a non-priority but the fact people don't understand why our current social policy is still so racist centuries later and how that is directly related to the founders and slavery shows we don't teach American history correctly. If removing the statue sheds light on what American history really was that is a good thing.

Well then you have to start in the schools. The school boards. The textbooks. We vote in school officials right ? They buy the books.

Let's push for better education standards. Better teachers. Higher pay for more qualified educators. See where I'm going with this ?

We're even behind on math. Look at the math scores.

 We're trying that and a bunch of racist morons are running around with their hair on fire over CRT.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I think the best way to look at most of the founding fathers at this point is as people with great ideals, but also were highly flawed individuals that sometimes contradicted their own ideals

We desperately need to stop judging historical figures by whether or not we would want to be best friends with them if they behaved the way they did 250 years ago in the year 2021. We recognize them because they founded the country and had great ideals. Were they highly flawed? By the standards of their time, actually not so much for most of them. But yeah, nobody's perfect. That should go without saying, but most progressives these days don't see it that way.

To be fair, Jefferson's personal dealings weren't considered acceptable even at the time, although they were rarely discussed or found out. It's not just that he was a slave owner.

Still trying to remove him from history and his contributions is not the way to go. He's not like Confederate leaders or some random local leader from 150 years ago who was also a slaveowner at some point.