Replies

“Could you explain how this humiliates white men?”

Well, that’s the problem: if I have to explain it, you wouldn’t get it.

Still, let me have a bash.

Theodore Dalrymple wrote, “Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.” (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1702684/posts)

“There are undoubtedly people of all colors who did more than Tubman.”

Then it is an obvious lie to say that she belongs on our money, much less that she should displace Old Hickory.

“And more than Andy Jackson”

Tubman did more for the United States of America than President Jackson? I don’t buy that.

“The point is to honor specific people who did do something worthwhile and exemplary”

Not at all. The point is to honor the very best. Theodore Roosevelt did immensely more for the United States than did Tubman. Where’s his bill?

“and I see no problem with honoring someone who women and blacks can identify with”

Well, you should. It’s pretty basic. The obvious lie in that is that women and blacks have done things significant enough that they should be on our money.

This isn’t about Tubman. This is about showing white men that they can engage in the most egregious political correctness with impunity. “We can put her on your money because of her genitals and skin color, and there’s nothing you can do about it.”

“especially when that someone is a Republican woman”

That’s awfully thin. The GOP was the party of abolition. Aside from that plank, I very much doubt that she had any idea what it meant to be a Republican.

“who exercised her 2nd amendment rights.”

Andrew Jackson fought for the United States in three wars. Fought, as in combat. Three wars. Served as president. He’s a significant figure in our history. Tubman is not.

Theodore Dalrymple wrote

That's fine, but while you may fairly argue that Tubman is not worthy of being portrayed on US currency, there is no lie in saying that she was a courageous woman of faith who helped many others escape human slavery. You're of course entitled to your opinion, but there's nothing fair about impugning the opinions of others and decreeing that they do not truly esteem Tubman and are simply using her in order to humiliate white men.

Not at all. The point is to honor the very best.

There is no set of established guidelines to qualify a person for portrayal on US currency, and obviously, an escaped slave would not have the same opportunity to shape the world that a privileged, educated politician would. But what Tubman did was remarkable - she delivered dozens of human beings from bondage, placing herself in harms way without any military requirement or duty - an unqualified good. Others have had the opportunity to do more than this small, uneducated woman, and did so. But by the standard of human decency and courage, and the use of those qualities to help others, I believe Tubman stands among those most worthy of honor.

That’s awfully thin. The GOP was the party of abolition. Aside from that plank, I very much doubt that she had any idea what it meant to be a Republican.

Your second sentence is right - the Republican Party in Tubman's time - the time of it's founding - was indeed the party of abolition. That was the primary reason for it's creation. And as such, I believe Tubman had a perfect idea of what it then meant to be a Republican.