Author Topic: DCPS board to reconsider schools named after Andrew Jackson, Jean Ribault  (Read 3511 times)

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31590
    • Modern Cities
Quote
The Duval County School Board will launch the process to consider renaming three additional schools, the namesakes of which are tied to the marginalization of Native Americans.

At Tuesday's School Board meeting, Ashley Smith-Juarez introduced a bill to consider renaming Andrew Jackson High School, Jean Ribault High School and Jean Ribault Middle School.

"We began with six schools named for Confederate officers. We should continue with schools that are named for people responsible for systematically marginalizing and killing Indigenous people," Smith-Juarez said.

https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/education/2020/08/04/duval-school-board-consider-renaming-additional-schools/3295027001/
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

Steve

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3636
Admittedly, I'm having a hard time with this one.....if we decide that Andrew Jackson needs to be renamed, I do feel like there isn't much difference between the High School and the city.

itsfantastic1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 151
Admittedly, I'm having a hard time with this one.....if we decide that Andrew Jackson needs to be renamed, I do feel like there isn't much difference between the High School and the city.

Keep in mind the school board and the city council are different entities. Just because the school board decides schools should change their names, doesn't mean that the city will be forced to change its name. Also, this particular motion doesn't mean the names will even change; just that a process will begin to look into it. Jackson (and many Americans) and Ribault (and many European explorers) who helped shaped our nation into what it is today; often come with questionable actions framed in modern context. This is definitely a discussion worth having.

The above though, should not be mixed with the Confederates. They chose to rebel against the US for the purpose of continuing slavery and shouldn't be honored at all in the country they rebelled against, especially in a county that is 30% African American. Their legacy should be relegated to museums and the history books.

Side note; below is where you can donate to help offset the cost of changing the confederate-named schools:

https://interland3.donorperfect.net/weblink/WebLink.aspx?name=E344655&id=28



marcuscnelson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 850
  • Gen Z - Tired of the status quo
Keep in mind the school board and the city council are different entities. Just because the school board decides schools should change their names, doesn't mean that the city will be forced to change its name. Also, this particular motion doesn't mean the names will even change; just that a process will begin to look into it. Jackson (and many Americans) and Ribault (and many European explorers) who helped shaped our nation into what it is today; often come with questionable actions framed in modern context. This is definitely a discussion worth having.

I mean, their actions were questionable in the context of their own time. Jackson effectively ignored the Supreme Court's ruling in Worcester v. Georgia.
So, to the young people fighting in this movement for change, here is my charge: march in the streets, protest, run for school committee or city council or the state legislature. And win. - Ed Markey

Steve

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3636
The above though, should not be mixed with the Confederates. They chose to rebel against the US for the purpose of continuing slavery and shouldn't be honored at all in the country they rebelled against, especially in a county that is 30% African American. Their legacy should be relegated to museums and the history books.

I think this take makes sense.

I mean literally anyone in history is on record doing things openly that today we'd consider deplorable. I mean, in the 1990's Congress passed and Clinton signed Don't Ask Don't Tell. Could anyone imagine any elected official even proposing to put that back into place?

I just think that overall if we're looking for the perfect person we're going to struggle to find anyone. All four Presidents on Mount Rushmore would be forced to resign from office (if not jailed) for things they did that were perfectly legal at the time. Under this logic where does removal and renaming end? Renaming of the Capital?

I do agree that the Confederacy is very different in that they sought to split our country over slavery. Add to that the reasons many of the monuments were erected (Jim Crow), and I'm on board with the removal of the monuments (NOTE: NOT Civil War markers that denote things that happened in a neutral and factual manner. I'm not on board with this)

Bill Hoff

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1118
Slippery, slippery, slippery slope.

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 31590
    • Modern Cities
Still waiting for this city to get past the superficial name changing stuff and put its money and policies where its mouth has been the last few months, when it comes to addressing systemic racism and public investment. One could also argue that its a dishonor to both JWJ and veterans to have their names associated with this dated looking, dead public space. Don't just name it....put some money into these things.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

vicupstate

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3460
Quote
I mean literally anyone in history is on record doing things openly that today we'd consider deplorable. I mean, in the 1990's Congress passed and Clinton signed Don't Ask Don't Tell. Could anyone imagine any elected official even proposing to put that back into place?

Actually, the policy BEFORE 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' was 1) no gays allowed in the military 2) actively try to ferret out any gays that were already in 3) coerce said victims of #2 to expose others 4) give dishonorable discharges to those caught by #2 & #3.  The results of the later often destroying lives in the process.  DADT was quite unpopular. Clinton had just been elected and paid a heavy political price in the process as Democrats took a massive beating in the next midterm.   
"The problem with quotes on the internet is you can never be certain they're authentic." - Abraham Lincoln

BridgeTroll

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13542
  • The average person thinks he isnt
    • London Bridge Pub
Quote
I mean literally anyone in history is on record doing things openly that today we'd consider deplorable. I mean, in the 1990's Congress passed and Clinton signed Don't Ask Don't Tell. Could anyone imagine any elected official even proposing to put that back into place?

Actually, the policy BEFORE 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' was 1) no gays allowed in the military 2) actively try to ferret out any gays that were already in 3) coerce said victims of #2 to expose others 4) give dishonorable discharges to those caught by #2 & #3.  The results of the later often destroying lives in the process.  DADT was quite unpopular. Clinton had just been elected and paid a heavy political price in the process as Democrats took a massive beating in the next midterm.   
Not to mention lying under oath about affairs with interns... and not offering to pay a dry cleaning bill...
In a boat at sea one of the men began to bore a hole in the bottom of the boat. On being remonstrating with, he answered, "I am only boring under my own seat." "Yes," said his companions, "but when the sea rushes in we shall all be drowned with you."

vicupstate

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3460
Quote
I mean literally anyone in history is on record doing things openly that today we'd consider deplorable. I mean, in the 1990's Congress passed and Clinton signed Don't Ask Don't Tell. Could anyone imagine any elected official even proposing to put that back into place?

Actually, the policy BEFORE 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' was 1) no gays allowed in the military 2) actively try to ferret out any gays that were already in 3) coerce said victims of #2 to expose others 4) give dishonorable discharges to those caught by #2 & #3.  The results of the later often destroying lives in the process.  DADT was quite unpopular. Clinton had just been elected and paid a heavy political price in the process as Democrats took a massive beating in the next midterm.   
Not to mention lying under oath about affairs with interns... and not offering to pay a dry cleaning bill...

That was AFTER the 1994 midterms. The hypocrites that prosecuted that hit-job bullshit were having affairs themselves.
"The problem with quotes on the internet is you can never be certain they're authentic." - Abraham Lincoln

BridgeTroll

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13542
  • The average person thinks he isnt
    • London Bridge Pub
Quote
I mean literally anyone in history is on record doing things openly that today we'd consider deplorable. I mean, in the 1990's Congress passed and Clinton signed Don't Ask Don't Tell. Could anyone imagine any elected official even proposing to put that back into place?

Actually, the policy BEFORE 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' was 1) no gays allowed in the military 2) actively try to ferret out any gays that were already in 3) coerce said victims of #2 to expose others 4) give dishonorable discharges to those caught by #2 & #3.  The results of the later often destroying lives in the process.  DADT was quite unpopular. Clinton had just been elected and paid a heavy political price in the process as Democrats took a massive beating in the next midterm.   
Not to mention lying under oath about affairs with interns... and not offering to pay a dry cleaning bill...

That was AFTER the 1994 midterms. The hypocrites that prosecuted that hit-job bullshit were having affairs themselves.

After the midterms??  So what??  We are talking about why there will not likely be a Bill Clinton middle school or high school... I suppose in his defense that all happened before what we all now know would be a completely unacceptable office relationship between CEO and an intern...lol
In a boat at sea one of the men began to bore a hole in the bottom of the boat. On being remonstrating with, he answered, "I am only boring under my own seat." "Yes," said his companions, "but when the sea rushes in we shall all be drowned with you."

vicupstate

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3460
Quote
I mean literally anyone in history is on record doing things openly that today we'd consider deplorable. I mean, in the 1990's Congress passed and Clinton signed Don't Ask Don't Tell. Could anyone imagine any elected official even proposing to put that back into place?

Actually, the policy BEFORE 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' was 1) no gays allowed in the military 2) actively try to ferret out any gays that were already in 3) coerce said victims of #2 to expose others 4) give dishonorable discharges to those caught by #2 & #3.  The results of the later often destroying lives in the process.  DADT was quite unpopular. Clinton had just been elected and paid a heavy political price in the process as Democrats took a massive beating in the next midterm.   
Not to mention lying under oath about affairs with interns... and not offering to pay a dry cleaning bill...

That was AFTER the 1994 midterms. The hypocrites that prosecuted that hit-job bullshit were having affairs themselves.

After the midterms??  So what??  ... I suppose in his defense that all happened before what we all now know would be a completely unacceptable office relationship between CEO and an intern...lol

You missed my point entirely.


I was commenting on the POLICY of Don't Ask. Don't Tell. I was not in any way commenting on the idea of naming or renaming anything for anyone.

Steve's comment implied that DADT was bad, even immoral policy. He made no other reference to anything associated with Clinton. He implied it was a mark against Clinton.

I proceeded to comment that DADT was, in fact, a very substantial improvement over the prior policy.  I further stated Clinton paid dearly for doing so. In other words, DADT was a significant accomplishment for Clinton, not something he should be criticized for.   

You then made reference to the Lewisky affair.  I took that to mean that YOU were saying that the political price Clinton paid in '94 was related to THAT,  as opposed to pushback from DADT. Ergo, I stated that was not possible as the midterms occurred before the Lewisky affair was known of.

As to your point, if Clinton is to be held to account for the affair, so should the hypocrites who were running a hatchet job about things they themselves were doing.   

     
"The problem with quotes on the internet is you can never be certain they're authentic." - Abraham Lincoln

BridgeTroll

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13542
  • The average person thinks he isnt
    • London Bridge Pub
Quote
I mean literally anyone in history is on record doing things openly that today we'd consider deplorable. I mean, in the 1990's Congress passed and Clinton signed Don't Ask Don't Tell. Could anyone imagine any elected official even proposing to put that back into place?

Actually, the policy BEFORE 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' was 1) no gays allowed in the military 2) actively try to ferret out any gays that were already in 3) coerce said victims of #2 to expose others 4) give dishonorable discharges to those caught by #2 & #3.  The results of the later often destroying lives in the process.  DADT was quite unpopular. Clinton had just been elected and paid a heavy political price in the process as Democrats took a massive beating in the next midterm.   
Not to mention lying under oath about affairs with interns... and not offering to pay a dry cleaning bill...

That was AFTER the 1994 midterms. The hypocrites that prosecuted that hit-job bullshit were having affairs themselves.

After the midterms??  So what??  ... I suppose in his defense that all happened before what we all now know would be a completely unacceptable office relationship between CEO and an intern...lol

You missed my point entirely.


I was commenting on the POLICY of Don't Ask. Don't Tell. I was not in any way commenting on the idea of naming or renaming anything for anyone.

Steve's comment implied that DADT was bad, even immoral policy. He made no other reference to anything associated with Clinton. He implied it was a mark against Clinton.

I proceeded to comment that DADT was, in fact, a very substantial improvement over the prior policy.  I further stated Clinton paid dearly for doing so. In other words, DADT was a significant accomplishment for Clinton, not something he should be criticized for.   

You then made reference to the Lewisky affair.  I took that to mean that YOU were saying that the political price Clinton paid in '94 was related to THAT,  as opposed to pushback from DADT. Ergo, I stated that was not possible as the midterms occurred before the Lewisky affair was known of.

As to your point, if Clinton is to be held to account for the affair, so should the hypocrites who were running a hatchet job about things they themselves were doing.   

     
Ok Vic... back to the topic of holding people of long past era's to today's standards of morality.  Apparently you are ok with many things as long as other people are doing it too... got it...
In a boat at sea one of the men began to bore a hole in the bottom of the boat. On being remonstrating with, he answered, "I am only boring under my own seat." "Yes," said his companions, "but when the sea rushes in we shall all be drowned with you."

vicupstate

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3460
Quote
I mean literally anyone in history is on record doing things openly that today we'd consider deplorable. I mean, in the 1990's Congress passed and Clinton signed Don't Ask Don't Tell. Could anyone imagine any elected official even proposing to put that back into place?

Actually, the policy BEFORE 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' was 1) no gays allowed in the military 2) actively try to ferret out any gays that were already in 3) coerce said victims of #2 to expose others 4) give dishonorable discharges to those caught by #2 & #3.  The results of the later often destroying lives in the process.  DADT was quite unpopular. Clinton had just been elected and paid a heavy political price in the process as Democrats took a massive beating in the next midterm.   
Not to mention lying under oath about affairs with interns... and not offering to pay a dry cleaning bill...

That was AFTER the 1994 midterms. The hypocrites that prosecuted that hit-job bullshit were having affairs themselves.

After the midterms??  So what??  ... I suppose in his defense that all happened before what we all now know would be a completely unacceptable office relationship between CEO and an intern...lol

You missed my point entirely.


I was commenting on the POLICY of Don't Ask. Don't Tell. I was not in any way commenting on the idea of naming or renaming anything for anyone.

Steve's comment implied that DADT was bad, even immoral policy. He made no other reference to anything associated with Clinton. He implied it was a mark against Clinton.

I proceeded to comment that DADT was, in fact, a very substantial improvement over the prior policy.  I further stated Clinton paid dearly for doing so. In other words, DADT was a significant accomplishment for Clinton, not something he should be criticized for.   

You then made reference to the Lewisky affair.  I took that to mean that YOU were saying that the political price Clinton paid in '94 was related to THAT,  as opposed to pushback from DADT. Ergo, I stated that was not possible as the midterms occurred before the Lewisky affair was known of.

As to your point, if Clinton is to be held to account for the affair, so should the hypocrites who were running a hatchet job about things they themselves were doing.   

     
Ok Vic... back to the topic of holding people of long past era's to today's standards of morality.  Apparently you are ok with many things as long as other people are doing it too... got it...

Sorry that I didn't let you get your totally off-topic Breibart hit go unanswered.

I never even brought up Clinton's affair. That was your doing. Nor did I condone what he did.  I added critical context to another poster's version of events involving a Clinton policy initiative, that they raised into the thread.       

Take your Clinton  hate over to Red State.         
"The problem with quotes on the internet is you can never be certain they're authentic." - Abraham Lincoln

Tacachale

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7854
Enough.
Do you believe that when the blue jay or another bird sings and the body is trembling, that is a signal that people are coming or something important is about to happen?