Posted on 02/04/2021 7:39:21 PM PST by dynachrome
The US Navy should rename warships and other assets that have racist connotations, as part of a modernization drive to promote diversity, the task force that shapes navy policy has recommended. "Certain Navy ship names have been highlighted by Congress and in the media for connections to confederate or white supremacist ideologies," Task Force One Navy said in its report, published on Wednesday.
The 141-page report called for a review to "identify assets honoring those associated with the Confederacy and identify assets named after racist, derogatory or culturally insensitive persons, events or language."
It also recommends changing the wording for grooming standards by removing subjective language, which may result in the perception of racial bias.
A similar move was taken by the US Army last week, which announced it was relaxing its uniform policy, in the name of "equity, inclusion and diversity."
Its new rules mean that female soldiers will be allowed to sport earrings and lipstick, while service personnel of both genders will be allowed to paint their nails.
(Excerpt) Read more at rt.com ...
The cancel culture has already hit one historic military ship. The one I served on, Coast Guard Cutter Taney, was saved from the scrap yard and went on exhibit in Baltimore harbor. It was named after Roger B. Taney, the fifth Chief Justice of the United States, holding that office from 1836 until his death in 1864. He delivered the majority opinion in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), ruling that African Americans could not be considered citizens and that Congress could not prohibit slavery in the territories of the United States. The name was stripped from the ship and it is now referred to only by its designation, WHEC-37. See my home page for picture and info.
Looks like the USS Cesar Chavez garbage scow is going to be looking for a new name. Maybe the USS Cesar Romero.
John Stennis (D-MS) was Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee for a number of years and a powerful advocate for the US Navy, and strong military. Chairman from 1969-1981.
Chancellorsville is the name of a town/community in VA- home state to the US’s largest naval base also the largest naval base in the world— Naval Station Norfolk.
How about we just name every ship the SS Here’s Pat?
The leftists believe all white people are racist, don’t they? Gonna have to rename a lot of ships.
That would pretty much be all of them, at this point.
Thanks for that info. It sounds almost like an exorcism.
The USS McCain is not named for the late Senator (and former Navy pilot) but for his father (grandfather?), a Navy Admiral.
As an aside, the M cCaine was named for his grandfather who was Halseys fleet commander during WW2
These people have completely forgotten the essential purpose of a military. Kill people and break things, deter by will and capacity to do so.
Now it’s a jobs program.
Goodbye, Taiwan. I’m sorry.
That explains why the British Navy had so many French-named ships a couple hundred years ago. Captured them and didn’t rename.
Didn’t that guy Washington own slaves?
Mathew Fontaine Maury: A Naval officer and pioneer in the emerging field of oceanography, Matthew Fontaine Maury was nicknamed the “Pathfinder of the Seas.” Maury gave crucial support to Cyrus Field and the idea of a transatlantic cable by showing Field the route that a cable could take across the ocean.
Aye, aye!
Both sexes can wear fingernail polish. What the heck? No way will we win a war ever again. Although I guess the last time we won was 1941. I suppose we won panama only for jimmy to give it back. What a mess.
“the “Good Ship Lollipop” travels to a candy land. The “ship” referred to in the song is an aircraft.” per Goggle.
Just saying.
Stennis was honored in this way because as chairman of the Senate Armed Forces Committee he did more than any other single person to fund the building and maintaining of the U.S military over a couple of generations. At that time a strong military was viewed as a positive.
Remember: Abraham Lincoln was a segregationist, or at least a white supremacist.
USS Sheila Jackson Lee?
Oops, that won’t work.
5.56mm
You all do love dredging that nonsense up, don't you? But you overlook, as usual, a major difference.
Yes, by the standards of today Lincoln would be considered a racist, a white supremacist, a segregationist. But by the standards of his days his positions towards slavery and blacks were pretty advanced. Unlike your southern heroes, Lincoln opposed slavery. Unlike your southern heroes, Lincoln believed that black men and women were entitled to the same fundamental rights that white men were. Unlike your southern heroes, Lincoln promoted votes for some black men. Did he support unfettered integration of the races? No, because he also knew that the bulk of America wasn't ready for it. But compared to the day his beliefs were pretty liberal.
John Stennis, on the other hand, was by the standards of his times a racist and segregationist. He vigorously opposed the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Civil Rights Act of 1968; he signed the Southern Manifesto of 1956, supporting filibuster tactics to block or delay passage in all cases; he opposed the Martin Luther King holiday. So his is not a case where he is being judged by the standards of today.
Having said that, then about the only thing I find more ridiculous than your argument on Lincoln is this whole idea of purging uncomfortable aspects of our history. Was Stennis a bigot? Yes. Did he perform admirable acts for our country in other areas? Yes. Did he deserve to have an aircraft carrier named for him? Debatable, but one was named for him so leave it as it is. Same with the other ships. Same with the Army forts.
You all do love dredging that nonsense up, don't you? But you overlook, as usual, a major difference.
Yes, by the standards of today Lincoln would be considered a racist, a white supremacist, a segregationist. But by the standards of his days his positions towards slavery and blacks were pretty advanced. Unlike your southern heroes, Lincoln opposed slavery. Unlike your southern heroes, Lincoln believed that black men and women were entitled to the same fundamental rights that white men were. Unlike your southern heroes, Lincoln promoted votes for some black men. Did he support unfettered integration of the races? No, because he also knew that the bulk of America wasn't ready for it. But compared to the day his beliefs were pretty liberal.
John Stennis, on the other hand, was by the standards of his times a racist and segregationist. He vigorously opposed the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Civil Rights Act of 1968; he signed the Southern Manifesto of 1956, supporting filibuster tactics to block or delay passage in all cases; he opposed the Martin Luther King holiday. So his is not a case where he is being judged by the standards of today.
Having said that, then about the only thing I find more ridiculous than your argument on Lincoln is this whole idea of purging uncomfortable aspects of our history. Was Stennis a bigot? Yes. Did he perform admirable acts for our country in other areas? Yes. Did he deserve to have an aircraft carrier named for him? Debatable, but one was named for him so leave it as it is. Same with the other ships. Same with the Army forts.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.