Thomas Jefferson: A Man of His Time? (Berkeley school laments school name, Jefferson a slave holder)

Thomas Jefferson was a slave holder. Allowing a Berkeley school to remain named for him is a tacit, but, powerful statement that owning more than 150 slaves was a minor or excusable part of his legacy. Citing selected pieces of his writing to characterize him as an opponent of slavery goes against the common sense notion that “actions speak louder than words.” To minimize the fact that he bought, sold and worked other human beings for his personal profit is disrespectful to the memory of those for whom slavery was not a concept to be pondered, but a life that was lived. It is equally disrespectful to the memory of the many white Americans of Jefferson’s era who actively resisted the institution of American slavery.

Thomas Jefferson has a prominent place in American history books and has schools named for him because he owned slaves, not in spite of that fact. Slave labor was the source of his wealth; and so, also the source of his political power and his prominent place in American history books. The argument that Jefferson was “a man of his time and place” cannot be supported by history which considers the lives and actions of individuals beyond the most wealthy and powerful to which the average school textbooks are limited. Research reveals many men and women (perhaps less prominent and wealthy) of Jefferson’s time who were possessed of a morality which led them to resist, rather than personally profit from, the abomination of African-American slavery. With that information, we do not need to rely on contemporary ethics and morality to find Jefferson lacking in the integrity and courage which generally define a hero.

Jefferson’s neighbor and friend, Edward Coles, made the bold decision to sell his plantation and move to Illinois so that he could free his slaves. Once in that free state, he gave each former slave family 160 acres of land. As the second governor of Illinois, he worked to keep Illinois a free state. His support of that cause lost him a great deal of popularity, and pretty much ended his political career. His former slaves and the state of Illinois, however, remained free because of his efforts.

In 1794, the Society of Friends (Quakers) declared that it was wrong “to live in ease and plenty by the toil of those whom fraud and violence has put in (one’s) power.” More important than their words, brave Quakers living in Jefferson’s time had already begun the practical effort of helping slaves escape via the “Underground Railroad.” In 1786, George Washington complained that “a society of Quakers, formed for such purposes, have attempted to liberate” one of his slaves. These Americans not only declined the personal gain associated with slavery, but in many cases risked their own safety to oppose it.

The actions of many other lesser known men and women give evidence that Thomas Jefferson was only one kind of “man of his time and place.” He was the kind of man who elicited forced labor from other individuals with the use and threat of physical violence. When one of his slaves escaped, he advertised a bounty for that man or woman’s capture and return. If the slave was caught, Jefferson ordered a severe punishment—flogging or being sold away from their family. This was an example meant to discourage other men and women from attempting to gain their freedom. Jefferson, just as all other slave holders, relied on the threat of physical violence to keep his plantation profitable. African-American slaves simply did not give up their freedom willingly to do Jefferson’s work for him. To be a slave holder, one is required to be a tyrant.

Thomas Jefferson “talked the talk.” He did it beautifully and quotably. At no point in his life, however, did he “walk the walk.” There were many other Americans living in his era who not only knew what was right, but did what was right. They were not only “men and women of their time and place,” they were the true—if unsung—heroes of their time and place.

It is not easy to give up long-held, sentimental misconceptions about our nation’s history and “heroes.” I believe, though, that as responsible citizens: When we have the opportunity to know the truth, we must hear it. When we have the opportunity to tell the truth, we must speak it. When we have the opportunity to respect and honor the humanity of others, we must do so expressly and openly. When we have the opportunity to exercise our own humanity, we must embrace it. These opportunities are presented to the Jefferson School community as we reconsider what kind of statement we would like to make with our school name.

Here are some detailsfrom the latest PTA meeting on the Jefferson School name change proposal. For those Freepers who may live in Berkeley in hopes they can at least make the proponents sweat a bit for thier cultural cleansing.

School Name Change Process
Once the petition to go ahead with a voting process for selecting a name for our school has been ratified, an oversight committee that is being formed now will have the responsibility for developing the ground rules for selecting names to be on the ballot. For the final vote, in order to win, a name must win a majority in each of the constituent groups: staff, parents and students. If no new name garners that support, the name is not changed.

The petition has been completed for 2 of the 3 constituent groups. It needed more than 20% of the staff, parent and student population signatures. It received 40% of the staff population and 32% of the parent population (one vote per family). Betty has asked the School Board to waive the requirement for getting the student constituent part of the petition and is expecting their decision in the next week or two. She made the request because the issue as to why the name change petition was brought forth and the necessary understanding of all the factors for considering the petition seem to be too advanced for the entire student population of an elementary school. Betty’s request to the School came as a surprise to the PTA members because this wasn’t communicated before. It was also confusing as to what would happen if the School Board denied the request and the petition had to be ratified by 20% of student population. How would this petition be worded and discussed with the children? Would the entire student population be petitioned or only certain grades? Would each student get one vote or one per family like the parent group? Why are we moving forward with the oversight committee before we find out if the student group has to be petitioned and if it does before we know if it passes? Who makes these decisions? The parents wanted to have a part in this decision since the topic is advanced for young children and we would need to somehow provide information to them to be able to weigh the petition’s merits.

In addition many of the attendees at the meeting were surprised to learn the petition had already been passed for 2 of the 3 constituent groups. The concern expressed was that this process wasn’t well communicated and no one appears to know what happened and what is about to happen. As one parent said, “I feel as if there was a shift from asking us if we should consider changing the name of our school to now asking what we should change the name to and I don’t understand how that shift occurred.”

Betty and Marguerite explained that there has been no breach of the process requirements for changing the name of a Berkeley public school as set forth in the District’s guidelines and that the process has been discussed in the Principal’s Newsletters. They further agreed to provide copies of the District policy to anyone who requests it and said they have been already doing this.

The Oversight committee will be comprised of representatives from the Staff, PTA, School Site Council and the group that brought forth the petition. The responsibility of this committee is to develop the ground rules for selecting the names that go on the ballot. They also have to decide how to handle the existing name of the school. - does it automatically get included or must someone submit it just like the other names will be? What are the requirements and guidelines for submitting a name? What is the criteria for acceptable name submissions?

If the petition is ratified, there will then be an open community meeting which will be the forum for discussion of the petition and name selection for the school. So far the plans for this include having a UC Berkeley professor of American history speak about Thomas Jefferson. This forum is going to be sponsored by the League of Women Voters. There is no date of further details worked out yet. Presumably the oversight committee would be able to decide how this meeting will be conducted and when it will be.

After the public forum, the voting process begins. There will be a series of votes to pare down the choices and get to a final 3 names that will be considered for the school. For the final vote, in order to win, a name must win a majority in each of the 3 constituent groups: staff, parents and students. If no new name garners this support, then the name doesn’t change. The details of the voting process were not discussed but should definitely be made very clear to everyone should the petition be ratified.

The overwhelming concern expressed is that moving ahead we must have much clearer and complete communications on this process and the steps that are happening and that will happen next. Plus we need to be able to have a chance to discuss the reasons for considering changing the name that is open to all. In addition, the whole issue about involving the students is still very uncertain and must involve the parents before any further decisions are made about how to involve them and what gets communicated. Parents expressed that they want their kids to be given the facts on both sides and they want to be able to have a chance to discuss it with them if and when the time arises.

We discussed needing to put information in the January newsletter to explain to everyone what is going on and why this is all being done.

Motion: Further discuss the name change process at next month’s PTA meeting and make sure the communication channel is wide open.

Motion passed - we needed to curtail the discussion and leave it to the next meeting or we never would have gotten home that night.
Thanked Steve Weaver and Walter Rockholt for making the basement shelving happen!

I suppose the writer would rather that Jefferson never penned the Declaration of Independence. Then he'd be just another slave owner nobody ever heard of, there'd never have been any hypocrisy.

It be so much easier for Jefferson's legacy, I take it, if the nation he helped make was not built upon the idea that all men are created equal.

The writer and all her kind of revisionists don't know Jefferson. It'd too hurt the brain to know he wrote things such as this, from Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XVIII:

And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep for ever; that considering numbers, nature and natural means only, a revolution of the wheel of fortune, an exchange of situation, is among possible events; that it may be come probable by supernatural interference! The Almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in such a contest. But it is impossible to be temperate and to pursue this subject through the various considerations of policy, of morals, of history natural and civil. We must be contented to hope they will force their way into every one’s mind. I think a change already perceptible, since the origin of the present revolution. The spirit of the master is abating, that of the slave rising from the dust, his condition mollifying, the way I hope preparing, under the auspices of heaven, for a total emancipation, and that this is disposed, in the order of events, to be with the consent of the masters, rather than by their extirpation.

Nicollo unmasked: Bromleyisms here

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.