Hacker News Reader

Comment by yardie | Hacker News Reader

[flagged]

If we remove every racist from American history we won't have very many people to choose from. Andrew Jackson was not a great man, but his impact on the economic policy that shaped the country is undeniable, and is probably what earned him a place on the $20. Unfortunately history is full of terrible people who do great things, and great people who are less noteworthy.

This is such a weird argument to me. The vast, vast majority of historical figures do not show up on currency or monuments. That doesn't mean they've been "erased" from history, it just means we don't celebrate and memorialize them. Likewise, choosing to remove monuments or figures from currency does not in any way equate to removing them from the history books. You're still welcome to read all about Andrew Jackson, teach courses on him, whatever you'd like.

I think the argument to remove public mention of historical figures is weird. I think UVA students trying to get a statue of the founder of the university removed because he was a slave owner is weird. I don't really care one way or the other who's on my money, but the need to replace the historical figures we do portray with ones that are considered politically correct in "current year" seems weird to me.

Ah yes, freedom from slavery, the politically correct flavor of the moment.

Was it weird when Eastern Bloc nations removed Marxist relics from the Soviet era?

I'm from an eastern bloc nation, and there are plenty of Marxist relics to look at. If the US had statues of Jackson in every square and photos of "insert racist slave owner terrible person here" in every building, I would think it was weird too.

Who said anything about removing him from history? This is the disinginious argument the right makes. Equating removing thestatues and monuments of less than ideal figures with complete erasure from historical records. In reality there has been real people erased from the records and they always turn out to be people of color and women.

I think societal norms regarding virtues and vices also change over time. If nothing else, what's considered a minor vice in one century might be considered an unforgivable character flaw in another century.

Given that, I'm a little skeptical of claims that a historically significant figure should have never appeared on money, in a statue, etc.

Well actually Lincoln is on the $5 bill and he might have been the most important figure in american history in terms of the ending of slavery, so there's that.

If you mean the $20 bill where Andrew Jackson is figured I'd postulate that most non-racist/non race baiting people don't give a flying fuck who's on their currency so long as it works - and that's because they're simply going about their lives and not thinking about how they can inject race into every single topic ever - which is an inherently non-racist way of going about your life.

Andrew Jackson is on the $20 bill.

Andrew Jackson

People back then were horrified when he got into the oval office. Nothing new under the sun, really.

$20. Also, not sure if you're aware, but the Trump admin just decided to keep the genocidal white guy instead of the heroic black woman...

https://thehill.com/policy/finance/445004-mnuchin-harriet-tu...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com