It’s become fashionable in some quarters to label people indiscriminately.  The whole issue of statues has inflamed passions of many people.  I urge consideration of context, history and some clear thinking on the subject.  Most of the emotion seems to surround Civil War figures.  And that engages racists, bigots and the ignorant.  I simply can’t help but point out how often ignore and rant seem to apply to the ignorant.  It is a well established fact that the Civil War began to preserve the union of the United States of America.  Southerners wanted to secede from the Union.  Why?  Because they did not want to give up their slaves.  The question of state’s rights was also a factor, but it boiled down to slavery.  And slavery was a major economic factor with southern plantation owners but it was also a question of racial equality.

Today, we can all agree that slavery is morally wrong.  In Western countries, we now see that treating women as subordinate to men is also morally wrong.  We have child labor laws to protect children though throughout history, children have been part of the work force.  We have come to realize that no one race is intrinsically superior to any other race in intelligence, strength, morality, industry, creativity, athletic ability or by any other measure.  In the United States, we treasure our freedoms, our independence and self determination.  But none of these things are historical constants.  We cannot judge people in the past and in different cultures and situations by the standards of today in America.

So let’s go back to the question of statues and memorials.  Pointing out that some of the men and women of the past are memorialized by statues or other public displays did not measure up to the moral and social sensitivities of today is foolish and dishonest. Yes, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and many others of our celebrated leaders had slaves.  Had they lived in today’s society, doubtless, they would have condemned it as we do now.  But in their time, it was an accepted practice supported by at least 4,000 years of history.  It’s always been morally wrong, but socially accepted worldwide.  At last the world became aware of the injustice of slavery and began to turn from the practice.  It took many years and even today there is a large international trade is sex slavery to our shame.  And there are those who still believe that their race is superior to others today. Let’s not forget the Holocaust, the genocides in Armenia, Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia, Darfur, Native Americans, Rohingya, and many others. So we still have not fully cast off racial prejudice.

We should point to historical figures and acknowledge their failure to conform to our present state of moral awareness.  That is fair and beneficial.  However, we judge them in terms of the historical and cultural period in which they lived. We also need to acknowledge the good they did.  Our founding fathers were products of their time.  They acted in accordance to the accepted practices and knowledge of the period.  No man, woman or child except Jesus is perfect.  To make specious and sophomoric arguments about their character is nonsense when they were speaking and acting in accordance with the moral and ethical standards of their day.

Now let’s turn to the Civil War Confederate memorials.  True, Jefferson Davis wrestles with the issue of slavery but finally chose treason against the United States of America rather than follow his conscience on the slavery question.  Robert E. Lee and other leaders of the Confederacy were likewise traitors.  What was cloaked as a states rights question was baldly and irrefutably about slavery.  Sometimes people must follow their conscience even to the point of treason, but if they risk forfeiting their cause if they lose the argument.  They don’t deserve statues and memorials.  That was understood in the wake of the Civil War.  The statues honoring Confederate “heroes” were erected under Jim Crow as racist statements.

Now let’s examine labels. Unfortunately, terms like antisemite, homophobe, misogynist are used sometimes in an effort to discredit a person..  A person who makes a statement or takes a position that a Jew, homosexual or woman doesn’t like doesn’t mean that such person is automatically antisemitic, homophobic or a woman hater.  The definitions are much more specific.  Let’s look at some dictionary definitions:

Notice that the terms involve hostility, prejudice and/or dislike.  If a person says, “There are a lot of Jews in the entertainment industry.”, that in itself is not antisemitic.  It’s a true statement.  The statement, “Jews are Christ-killers.”, that IS antisemitic since it’s obviously untrue and furthermore ignores the broad diversity among all people of Jewish heritage.  If a person says, “Gays are child molesters!”, that’s homophobic. If a person says, “I’m against gay marriage.”, that’s not necessarily homophobic.  Their position may be based upon ignorance, false premises or some closely held belief, but it does not make them homophobic.  “Women (or Asians) are poor drivers.” Is a broad generalization that can’t be supported by facts.  Is it misogynistic or anti-Asian?  Not necessarily.  If you say, “Look, you are a pussy.” or  “Grab ’em by the pussy.”, those statements are misogynistic.  A person can disapprove of a behavior or a statement, but when it becomes a generalization indicating disrespect toward an entire group of people, then it’s prejudice.

So how is prejudice defined?

In the light of the definitions above, it is easy to see that those aforementioned labels most often fall into the category of prejudice. To take a single statement allegedly made by a particular person without the benefit of context or circumstance does not justify a label.  One must look for patterns of behavior and incidences of written and verbal statements to determine of a person is acting out of prejudice before applying a label.

The arguments in support of keeping the Civil War Confederate statues and memorials fail the tests of reason and context.  Words are important, but deeds are even weightier.  Lay aside the emotion and look to the tests that I have described above.

Below is a timeline and a brief summary of slavery in history.  That too is instructive.

Slavery

  How were slaves obtained?

History

Virtually all ancient civilizations captured slaves through war

Before 2,500 BC  Sumeria, Amorites, Assyria, Egypt and others

1800 BC  Babylon

Jewish patriarchs.

Ancient Israel

700 BC Athens

200 BC Rome

1st Century. Christians

7th Century. Muhammad

Throughout the 15th Century. he Mediterranean area

10 Century. Germany & Russia

15th Century. Portuguese began slave trade

18th Century. Slave traders

188 – 1808. Abolutionist Movement

1770 Massachusetts outlaws slavery

1770+. Other northern states follow suit

1774 Quakers in Britain expel any members involved in slave trade

1774 Quakers set up the first abolitionist society

1776 Quakers in Pennsylvania free their own slaves

1787 Society for the Abolition of Slavery formed in London

1807 Parliament in Britain prohibits carrying slaves in any British ship and the import of slaves in any British colony

1787. US Continental Congress makes slavery illegal but provides that no antislavery law will be passed in southern states for 20 years

1863 Emancipation Proclamation ends slavery in the US but it was years before it was fully enacted and the arguments of white supremacy persist and the battle for racial equality has not yet been won.