NationStates

The state of Washington was named after George Washington. I have heard some argue that because George Washington was a slave owner, racist, and a homophobe that he shouldn't be glorified and that the state of Washington should be renamed. This is especially true since Washington is a heavily liberal state.

I am undecided on this, but I can definitely understand the arguments for not glorifying George Washington anymore. What do you think?

Well if that's the case shouldn't the capital Washington DC also be under consideration for renaming? Just wondering.

People who want to rename Washington state for those reasons are dumb and should not be allowed near any office

That’s ridiculous. I suppose we should rename Washington D.C. now, huh?

Just going to cost a crazy amount to fix every name.

In fact, even if it was absolutely free, it’s still ridiculous. What’s that? One of the main people responsible for the birth of a functioning, liberal democracy in an age of imperialism and repression did something culturally-acceptable then but it isn’t now?

In 250 years, it might not be acceptable to wear any clothes that aren’t the color of your skin, for infringement on other races, or whatever. But if one of us invents teleportation, should we remove their name from things?

Thermodolia wrote:People who want to rename Washington state for those reasons are dumb and should not be allowed near any office

Why?

I think not. I'd be interested in seeing polling on this among Washingtonians.

The problem is that they do not see Washington and other historical personalities from a historical perspective, in their time being racist, slave owner and homophobe was normal.

Obviously such a person today would be frowned upon by society, the problem is that they criticize Washington from today's perspective.

I'm not defending him, I'm just saying that I really see no reason to change the name of the state, considering that, despite everything he was at that time, he was one of the fathers of the United States.

New Jeferopholletopia wrote:

Thermodolia wrote:People who want to rename Washington state for those reasons are dumb and should not be allowed near any office

Why?

Because it’s dumb. Judging people in the past on the morals of today is just stupid. Literally nobody was pro gay in the 1700s. Lincoln, the guy who freed the slaves, was a fucking racist who wanted to ship all the blacks to Africa.

Judging anyone in the past by today’s standards is a really stupid thing to do

Thermodolia wrote:

New Jeferopholletopia wrote:
Why?

Because it’s dumb. Judging people in the past on the morals of today is just stupid. Literally nobody was pro gay in the 1700s. Lincoln, the guy who freed the slaves, was a fucking racist who wanted to ship all the blacks to Africa.

Judging anyone in the past by today’s standards is a really stupid thing to do

I suppose you have a point.

Thermodolia wrote:

New Jeferopholletopia wrote:
Why?

Because it’s dumb. Judging people in the past on the morals of today is just stupid. Literally nobody was pro gay in the 1700s. Lincoln, the guy who freed the slaves, was a fucking racist who wanted to ship all the blacks to Africa.

Judging anyone in the past by today’s standards is a really stupid thing to do

That's what i'm trying to say

New Jeferopholletopia wrote:The state of Washington was named after George Washington. I have heard some argue that because George Washington was a slave owner, racist, and a homophobe that he shouldn't be glorified and that the state of Washington should be renamed. This is especially true since Washington is a heavily liberal state.

I am undecided on this, but I can definitely understand the arguments for not glorifying George Washington anymore. What do you think?

Not only no but hell no. You do know that he was the one that helped win the American Revolution. The only way that you can successfully rename a state is though Congress.

American Pere Housh wrote:

New Jeferopholletopia wrote:The state of Washington was named after George Washington. I have heard some argue that because George Washington was a slave owner, racist, and a homophobe that he shouldn't be glorified and that the state of Washington should be renamed. This is especially true since Washington is a heavily liberal state.

I am undecided on this, but I can definitely understand the arguments for not glorifying George Washington anymore. What do you think?

Not only no but hell no. You do know that he was the one that helped win the American Revolution. The only way that you can successfully rename a state is though Congress.

Some people argue that the American Revolution wasn't a good thing.

New Jeferopholletopia wrote:

American Pere Housh wrote:Not only no but hell no. You do know that he was the one that helped win the American Revolution. The only way that you can successfully rename a state is though Congress.

Some people argue that the American Revolution wasn't a good thing.

Who, the British or the Chinese?

New Jeferopholletopia wrote:

American Pere Housh wrote:Not only no but hell no. You do know that he was the one that helped win the American Revolution. The only way that you can successfully rename a state is though Congress.

Some people argue that the American Revolution wasn't a good thing.

Who would that be?

Minskiev wrote:

New Jeferopholletopia wrote:
Some people argue that the American Revolution wasn't a good thing.

Who, the British or the Chinese?

People at my university here in Texas.

New Jeferopholletopia wrote:

Minskiev wrote:
Who, the British or the Chinese?

People at my university here in Texas.

Ah. But are they culturally American?

We should call it Ethel

Ethel mermania wrote:We should call it Ethel

Capital: Mermania

No there is no reason for it. We should not apply todays standards to the past.

New Jeferopholletopia wrote:

Minskiev wrote:
Who, the British or the Chinese?

People at my university here in Texas.

That is their opinion. Great Britain was acting like a tyrant so we rebelled. When the French got involved, they eventually said fuck it and went home.

Minskiev wrote:

New Jeferopholletopia wrote:
People at my university here in Texas.

Ah. But are they culturally American?

What do you mean? Like Native American? I know that a couple are from the Cado tribe.

Minskiev wrote:

New Jeferopholletopia wrote:
People at my university here in Texas.

Ah. But are they culturally American?

Those people are probably leftists, not very smart

If there was a state called “Robert E. Lee” or “Andrew Jackson”, or even to some degree “James Madison”, then I’d want it renamed, but since Washington did so much to found this country, I’d say that we should keep the name.

American Pere Housh wrote:

New Jeferopholletopia wrote:
People at my university here in Texas.

That is their opinion. Great Britain was acting like a tyrant so we rebelled. When the French got involved, they eventually said fuck it and went home.

At my high school US history class, they said that it was just a tantrum over taxes.

Minskiev wrote:That’s ridiculous. I suppose we should rename Washington D.C. now, huh?

Just going to cost a crazy amount to fix every name.

In fact, even if it was absolutely free, it’s still ridiculous. What’s that? One of the main people responsible for the birth of a functioning, liberal democracy in an age of imperialism and repression did something culturally-acceptable then but it isn’t now?

In 250 years, it might not be acceptable to wear any clothes that aren’t the color of your skin, for infringement on other races, or whatever. But if one of us invents teleportation, should we remove their name from things?

Exactly.