A New Trail of Tears?

I came across a two-year-old editorial written by Michael Coard from The Philadelphia Tribune a few days ago.  It strikes me as being relevant and timely in today’s environment of white supremacy in the U.S.  Donald Trump has cleared a wide path for those who believe that somehow having pale skin, having ancestors that hail from Europe, makes one better than those who are from other places and have darker skin.  What our government is doing to immigrants along the US-Mexico border is abominable, is inhumane. Trump’s inane rants against four congresswomen can only be called cruel ignorance. But, this attitude has roots that go way back.  At the founding of this nation, African-Americans were considered to be only 2/3 of a person.  And then, there was this …

Trail of Tears: White America’s ‘Indian’ Holocaust

Michael Coard May 27, 2017

trail-of-tearsOn May 28, 1830, the “Trail of Tears” began when President Andrew Jackson signed Senate Bill 102, i.e., the Indian Removal Act (IRA). That legislation forced primarily five Southeastern indigenous nations, including the Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Creek, and Seminole, as well as the Fox, Kickapoo, Lenape, Miami, Omaha, Ottawa, Potawatomie, Sauk, Shawnee, and Wyandot (along with a few other smaller ones), to trek up to 2,200 miles- on foot!- from as far as Florida to what’s now known as Oklahoma where the government’s newly created so-called Indian Territory was established.

These native people were brutally compelled to vacate their homeland on a continent where their ancestors had lived for approximately 14,000 years. That’s 12,508 years before Columbus and his murderous gang of white invaders arrived in 1492.

As renowned historian Dr. Howard Zinn declared in his seminal A People’s History of the United States 1492-Present, President Jackson was “the most aggressive enemy of the (so-called) Indians in early American history.” The learned Oxford Companion to United States History described the president’s actions following passage of the IRA as “the most complete genocide in U.S. history.”

And in his revealing Don’t Know Much About History, lecturer and New York Times best selling author Kenneth C. Davis proclaimed, “From the outset, superior weapons, force of numbers, and treachery had been the Euro-American strategy for dealing with the Indians in manufacturing ‘a genocidal tragedy that surely ranks as one of the cruelest episodes in man’s history.’” Davis went on to note, “The killing, enslavement, and land theft had begun with the arrival of the Europeans. But it may have reached its nadir when it became federal policy under President Jackson.”

The IRA led to what came to be called the “Trail of Tears,” which actually began six years before the 1836 date that most of this country’s history books erroneously cite as the year of its commencement. Although the actual numbers will never be known because, as Winston Churchill so accurately stated, “History is written by the victors,” it has been estimated that from May 1830 (when the IRA became law) until March 1839 (when the last Red person, actually a Cherokee, was savagely shoved into Oklahoma), approximately 100,000 of our Red brothers and sisters suffered the trail’s tortuous tribulations and possibly as many as 30 percent of them were killed on the way as a result of shootings, beatings, starvation, dysentery, whooping cough, cholera in the summer, pneumonia in the winter, and exposure to extreme weather conditions.

Also, this genocidal legislation robbed this land’s aborigines of more than 25 million acres of fertile farmland in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Mississippi, Tennessee, and elsewhere.

As horrific as this hell on earth was, the “Trail of Tears” didn’t result in just physical genocide and land theft. It also resulted in cultural genocide. As a History.com documentary entitled Andrew Jackson’s Controversial Decisions, featuring such scholarly historians as museum director Thomas Y. Cartwright and author Professor Harry L. Watson, pointed out, and as did the aforementioned Oxford book, the so-called Indians were forced at gunpoint to convert to Christianity, to cut their hair, to speak only English, to send their children to distant brainwashing and self-hating boarding schools like the Richard Pratt Industrial School here in Pennsylvania, and also to adopt European-style economic practices including and especially private ownership of property- in other words, capitalism.

The documentary continued by pointing out that many had to endure the excruciatingly long haul while being “bound in chains, marching double-file.”

None of that mattered to President Jackson because he viewed these noble people as subhuman. That’s why, in 1833, he said “(T)hose tribes… have neither the intelligence… (nor) the moral habits… which are essential to any favorable change in their condition. Established in the midst of… a superior race, and without appreciating the causes of their inferiority…, they must necessarily yield to the force of circumstances and… long disappear.”

As an aside, I should explain that the Red people ain’t no damn Indians. Columbus called them that in 1492 because he was an incompetent sailor who thought he had traveled east to India when he actually had traveled west to the so-called Americas. The correct (albeit general) name of the indigenous people from the 500 nations here on this continent is Onkwehonwe. And this land wasn’t called America either. It was Turtle Island.

You might wonder why I previously referred to these First Nations people as our brothers and sisters. Here’s why: At least one of these aboriginal groups, e.g., the Seminoles (and others throughout the country), had many Black members who had escaped slavery. And as documented by the Princeton Public Library’s African-American and Native American History Department, as many as one-third of the Cherokee, Chickasaw, and Choctaw, just like the aforesaid Seminole, was Black. Moreover, the department’s researchers mentioned that the U.S. Army in 1802 listed 512 Blacks as living amongst the Choctaw.

By the way, President Jackson hated Blacks as much as he hated Reds. Even the Andrew Jackson Foundation had to concede that “Slavery was the source of… (his) wealth” and that he enslaved more than 150 Black folks, including children, on his 1,000 acre Hermitage cotton plantation in Nashville, Tennessee,

Many white (and sadly Black) Americans today might argue that as evil as the IRA and the “Trail of Tears” were, they at least ultimately brought “civilization” and progress to this technologically advanced country. However, Oglala Lakota Chief Luther Standing Bear wrote in his 1933 autobiography, From the Land of the Spirit Eagle, “True, the white man brought great change. But the varied fruits of his civilization, though highly… inviting, are sickening and deadening. And if it be the part of civilization to maim… (and) rob… then what is progress?” Good question, Brother Standing Bear. Very good question.

The white supremacy we are seeing today is a resurgence of the very attitude that led to slavery, that led to the Trail of Tears, that led to Jim Crow and more.  Donald Trump says he will “make America great again”, but what he really means is he is attempting to make America a bigoted, narrow-minded, racist nation.  He must be stopped, for if he succeeds, his success will be our ruination.

A SLAP In The Face …

In April 2016 the U.S. Treasury Department announced that Harriet Tubman would replace Andrew Jackson on the center of a new $20 bill.  The change was to have occurred next year to mark the 100th anniversary of women’s suffrage in the United States.  Why?  Because there have been only a few women on U.S. currency, and those were on the $1 coins. We thought it was about time.  There has also never been an African-American of either gender on U.S. currency. We thought that in honour of our winning the battle 100 years ago to convince men that we had a brain that functioned well enough to do something other than birth babies, cook and keep the house tidy, it would be nice to recognize a woman who had made notable contributions during her lifetime.

Harriet-Tubman.jpgI was excited to think of a woman finally appearing on a bill, and especially excited to see that woman be Harriet Tubman.  I used to teach a Black History class every February for Black History Month, and while there were many men and women who fought the fight against slavery, and then later to gain civil rights, Ms. Tubman was always one of my favourites.  Her courage and dedication were exceeded by none.  Not only did she devote her life to racial equality, she fought for women’s rights alongside the nation’s leading suffragists.

Andrew-JacksonSo, she was to replace Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill.  Let me tell you just a little bit about Andrew Jackson.  He was a slaveowner, known for his cruel treatment of slaves. At one point, he owned as many as 161 slaves and was well-known for brutally whipping them in public and putting them in chains.  He was also the man who was responsible for the forced removal of Native Americans from their ancestral lands.  Jackson’s Indian Removal Act resulted in the forced displacement of nearly 50,000 Native Americans and opened up 25 million acres of Native American land to white settlement.  Tens of thousands died during forced removals like the Trail of Tears in what is now Oklahoma.

Trail-of-Tears

Trail of Tears

And now, let me tell you a bit about Harriet Tubman.  Harriet Tubman was born into slavery in 1822. Early in life, she suffered a traumatic head wound when in a fit of temper, her owner threw a heavy metal weight intending to hit another slave but hit her instead.  In 1849, following a bout of illness and the death of her owner, Harriet Tubman decided to escape slavery in Maryland for Philadelphia. Rather than remaining in the safety of the North, Tubman made it her mission to rescue her family and others living in slavery via the Underground Railroad.  

Harriet-Tubman-3Altogether it is believed that she made some thirteen trips to guide a total of approximately 70 slaves to freedom via the Underground Railroad, and then came the Civil War.  Harriet Tubman remained active during the Civil War. Working for the Union Army as a cook and nurse, Tubman quickly became an armed scout and spy. The first woman to lead an armed expedition in the war, she guided the Combahee River Raid, which liberated more than 700 slaves in South Carolina.

Harriet-Tubman-4Compare these two people.  Andrew Jackson’s face is on the $20 bill, and Harriet Tubman’s was scheduled to be as of next year, but those plans have been nixed until 2028.  Why???  Because Treasury Secretary and bootlicker Steve Mnuchin does not wish to upset Donald Trump, whose hero is the abhorrent Andrew Jackson, that’s why!

See, Trump was on the campaign trail when the decision to put Ms. Tubman’s image on the currency was announced, and he expressed his displeasure, calling it “pure political correctness” …

“Well, Andrew Jackson had a great history, and I think it’s very rough when you take somebody off the bill. I think Harriet Tubman is fantastic, but I would love to leave Andrew Jackson or see if we can maybe come up with another denomination.”

He then suggested that perhaps Tubman could grace the $2 bill … a denomination that is no longer being printed.  In this writer’s opinion, Trump’s statement was a slap in the face, not only to Harriet Tubman, but to women, and particularly African-American women, throughout the nation.

mnuchin-4

Steve Mnuchin

Steven Mnuchin’s attempt to justify the postponement was laughable b.s., something pertaining, he said to ‘security’ and ‘counterfeiting issues’.  The reality, however, was reported in the New York Times on Wednesday …

Mr. Mnuchin, concerned that the president might create an uproar by canceling the new bill altogether, was eager to delay its redesign until Mr. Trump was out of office, some senior Treasury Department officials have said.

And there you have it, folks.  A great woman, a courageous woman who saved many lives, cannot be honoured because it might upset the idiot-in-chief who is a fan of a misogynistic racist.  It is said that Trump has called Jackson a populist hero who reminds him of himself.  He even has a portrait of Jackson hanging in the Oval Office.  If you ever doubted that Donald Trump is a racist and denigrator of women, wonder no more … this is the proof.

Don’t Know Much About History …

history bookGranted, they probably don’t focus much on History at Wharton Business School, from which Donald Trump allegedly graduated in 1968, but surely he attended high school?  Surely he has read … oh wait … I forgot … he doesn’t read.  Well, folks, let me tell you a little secret.  Donald Trump is illiterate about the history of the nation he purports to lead.  The evidence has been mounting ever since before he even took office, but yesterday … yesterday he made himself look like the most ignorant person on the North American continent.

In the past, he has made a number of faux pas when speaking of historical events, and I’m really surprised that his staff have not reined him in and admonished him not to speak of history, but perhaps they are no more enlightened than he.  I mean, think of Kellyanne … do you really think she knows what D-Day was?  Or that she could name five leaders of the Civil Rights movement?

In February 2017, for example, during a televised speech in honour of Black History Month, he spoke of Frederick Douglass, who died in 1895, as if he were still alive today.  He referred to Douglass as, “… an example of somebody who has done an amazing job and is being recognized more and more, I notice.”

During his campaign rallies in 2016, Trump claimed that during the Moro rebellion in the Philippines between 1901 and 1913, U.S. Gen. John Pershing executed Muslim insurgents with bullets dipped in pig’s blood. Trump’s retelling of the myth has changed each time, but no matter, for the story is untrue to begin with.  Yet last August, after a terrorist attack in Barcelona, he revived the myth, suggesting that Islamic terrorists should be executed with bullets soaked in pig’s blood.

Are you holding your head and groaning yet?  But wait … the best is yet to come.

In March 2017, on a tour of Andrew Jackson’s home in Nashville, Tennessee:  “I mean, had Andrew Jackson been a little later, you wouldn’t have had the civil war. He was a very tough person, but he had a big heart. He was really angry that he saw what was happening with regard to the civil war. He said, ‘There’s no reason for this.’”  Did Jackson, who died in 1845, speak from beyond the grave, then?  And perhaps Trump forgets that Jackson himself was a slave-owner and firmly believed in the institution of slavery?

Alright … proof enough that he’s no history buff, right?  But this week took the prize.

history for dummiesTrump was having a phone conversation with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau regarding the ridiculous tariffs that Trump had implemented against Canada, Mexico and the EU last week.  The conversation was not going well, from all indications, and Trudeau was trying to explain to Trump that the tariffs were not a good idea.  Trump replied that it was “necessary for national security”.  Well, Trudeau reminded Trump that Canada and the U.S. had a familial relationship and how did he figure that Canada was a threat to the national security of the U.S.?

Trump’s response … wait for it, folks … he said … “Didn’t you guys burn down the White House?” referring to the War of 1812 when the BRITS … the British troops … burned down the White House!!!Trudeau laugh.jpgAnd as I was drifting off to sleep last night, in the back of my mind I could almost hear him saying this one:

When Louis XVI won the popular vote in France, his wife, Marie Antoinette, threw a big bash … a party … with lots of fine food, and she stood up and said to everyone, “Let them eat cake!!!”

Granted, nobody gets everything right all the time, but wouldn’t you think he would accidentally get something right once in a while?  Wouldn’t you think his advisors, some of whom surely studied or read history at some point, would coach him, give him a script to follow?

Trump’s ignorance of history is certainly not the most serious of all his actions, but it points to the fact that he is not a thinker, doesn’t care if what he says is right or wrong, as long as he says something.  It is embarrassing and reflects poorly on his administration … on this nation.

Alternative History???

Well … well, well, well.  One never runs out of something to write about here in 2017.  And I suppose I ought to thank Donald Trump for providing so much fodder for the grist mill here on Filosofa’s Word.

Yesterday, Sean Spicer walked out of the morning press briefing without saying a word or taking a single question.  I had wondered how the poor bumbler was going to handle the most recent situations created by his boss, what spin he could possibly put on them, and now I know.  There is … nothing he can say to explain.  Sometimes it is just better to say nothing, however, this is the press and they have a right to some answers … We The People have a right to some answers.  So what am I rambling about?  Read on …

To brag about the nothingness of his first 100 days, which he argued was a “ridiculous” marker (it is, but Trump was the one who made a YUGE deal out of what he had ‘accomplished’ within those 100 days), he went on the interview circuit, giving a series of long interviews to a variety of news outlets. It was the interview with Salena Zito of the Washington Examiner, a conservative website/weekly magazine, that set off the madness that Spicer couldn’t put a spin on.

andrew-jackson

Andrew Jackson

Back in March, Trump flew to Nashville, Tennessee, where he visited the Hermitage, Andrew Jackson’s home, and placed a wreath at his tomb. Trump apparently really admires Jackson, as within his first week in office, he hung a portrait of the late president.  So, during the aforementioned interview, Ms. Zito asked Trump about his visit to Hermitage.  And the conversation went like this:

TRUMP: [Jackson] was a swashbuckler. But when his wife died, did you know he visited her grave every day? I visited her grave actually, because I was in Tennessee.

ZITO: Oh, that’s right. You were in Tennessee.

TRUMP: And it was amazing. The people of Tennessee are amazing people. They love Andrew Jackson. They love Andrew Jackson in Tennessee.

ZITO: Yeah, he’s a fascinating…

TRUMP: I mean, had Andrew Jackson been a little later, you wouldn’t have had the Civil War. He was a very tough person, but he had a big heart. And he was really angry that — he saw what was happening with regard to the Civil War. He said, “There’s no reason for this.” People don’t realize, you know, the Civil War — if you think about it, why? People don’t ask that question, but why was there the Civil War? Why could that one not have been worked out?

Never mind that Andrew Jackson (March 15, 1767 – June 8, 1845) had been dead for some 16 years by the start of the Civil War.  And never mind that hundreds of books have been written about the Civil War, proving that yes, people have questioned, studied, and researched the war, the causes and issues.  I cannot decide whether to hang my head in shame that our president is so utterly uneducated and ignorant, or whether to laugh.  Perhaps a bit of both.

In his Gettysburg Address on 19 November 1863, Abraham Lincoln said, “The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here.” Well ….

civil-war-2

But that is not all …

In another interview the same day, this one with John Dickerson of Face the Nation, Dickerson asked Trump whether he stood by his totally and completely unproven claim that then President Obama had wiretapped Trump Tower during the 2016 election.  His response?

“I don’t stand by anything. I just– you can take it the way you want. I think our side’s been proven very strongly. And everybody’s talking about it. And frankly it should be discussed. I think that is a very big surveillance of our citizens. I think it’s a very big topic. And it’s a topic that should be number one. And we should find out what the hell is going on.”

I don’t stand by anything.  Pretty much sums up the character of Donald Trump, don’t you think?

Last Friday, in an interview with Reuters, Trump said:

“There is no reason there’s not peace between Israel and the Palestinians — none whatsoever.”

I have shelves full of history books, including a whole shelf on the Middle East … perhaps I should send a few to the White House? But then again, he has said he doesn’t read much, so perhaps he wouldn’t be able to read them anyway.  Perhaps he could just watch the Ken Burns series on PBS … but oh wait, he is de-funding PBS! This whole thing is giving me ideas for writing an alternative history book … hmmmmm ….

So back to Tuesday morning’s press briefing.  After Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly and White House budget director Mick Mulvaney spoke about the bi-partisan budget agreement, they left the room, and so did Sean Spicer, even though journalists were calling to him that they had questions.  Not a single word.  One could speculate that he just decided he had had enough and went back to his office to write his letter of resignation.  Or, one could think that perhaps he needed another 24 hours to think up something good.  Whatever the reason, it does nothing but further infringe on the freedom of the press and our right, as citizens, to have answers.  I wonder what this morning’s press briefing will bring?  Perhaps it will be canceled?  Stay tuned!

Campaigns 2016 … Where is the Dignity?

It is quickly becoming apparent to me that this election war is not going to be fought on the battlefields of policy, the trenches of qualifications, nor the foxholes of experience, but in the murky fields of sleaze and scandal.  I and a handful of others stand at Gettysburg, Shiloh, and Fort Sumter, muskets loaded, awaiting the arrival of our counterparts, but they are off wallowing in the pig sties of filth, slop, and lies.  What gives?

I admit that I am quick to bash Trump on a variety of issues, such as his lies, his lack of government experience, and his racist ideology, if one can call it an ideology. However, I have mostly left alone his personal past, believing instead that our choice of a leader should be predicated on knowledge and understanding of the job at hand, the qualifications of the candidate, and on the direction the nation is going and needs to go.  But I am beginning to feel very much alone on this train.  The rest of the nation, it seems, would rather focus on Trump’s relationship with women and Clinton’s husband’s affairs.  I would rather know what the candidates see as our role in the Middle East than what they see as their role in the bedroom. I would prefer to know their level of commitment toward environmental issues than the size of their … hands.

mud2Perhaps, looking back, this circus that we are calling an election season has been coming to town for a long time now.  In 1796, Alexander Hamilton, writing under the pen name “Phocion,” attacked Thomas Jefferson on the pages in Gazette of the United States, a federalist paper in Philadelphia, claiming that Jefferson was having an affair with one of his slaves (which, of course, turned out to be true). In the same election, Adams supporters also claimed that Jefferson’s election would result in a civil war, that he would free the slaves, and that he was an atheist. GASP!!! In response, Jefferson referred to Adams as “old, querulous, bald, blind, crippled, toothless Adams.” Tsk, tsk … such maturity.

mud4In the 1828 election between John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson, the mudslinging went to extremes.  One of Adams’s supporters, a Philadelphia printer named John Binns, produced a variety of handbills, known as the Coffin Handbills. One of the handbills accused Jackson of being a cannibal, saying that after massacring over 500 Indians one evening, “the bloodthirsty Jackson began again to show his cannibal propensities, by ordering his Bowman to dress a dozen of these Indian bodies for his breakfast, which he devoured without leaving even a fragment.” Another of Adams’ supporters, Charles Hammond, claimed that “General Jackson’s mother was a common prostitute brought to this country by British soldiers. She afterwards married a mulatto man, with whom she had several children, of which General Jackson is one!!!” Jackson’s followers, meanwhile, accused Adams of providing an American girl for the “services” of the Russian czar when Adams was ambassador to Russia. They branded Adams “Pimp to the Coalition”.

1844 Democrats backing James K. Polk claim that Henry Clay had sex with whores and, furthermore, broke all 10 of the commandments; in lieu of evidence, they declared simply that the details are “too disgusting to appear in public print.”  Today, I am certain, the details would appear in at least some publications.  In the 1912 contest between Theodore Roosevelt and William Taft, Roosevelt referred to Taft as a “fathead” and “puzzlewit”. Puzzlewit … I rather like that one!  And then, who can forget the Obama campaign accusing Mitt Romney of tying the family dog to the roof of a car?  And then there was the ‘birther’ issue that was trumped up by … well, you know.

mud3Okay, so all the wallowing amongst the pigs is nothing new to election campaigns, but is it productive?  If there is any benefit to this style of campaigning, I certainly cannot see what it is.  In 2012, CNN referred to the mudslinging campaigns of both Romney and Obama as similar to the familiar acronym ‘MAD’ … mutually assured destruction.  I think that pretty much sums it up.  There is more harm than good to come from these types of campaigns.  Who is to blame?  Certainly the candidates themselves, as they must approve all advertisements for their campaign, and more to the point, they are the very ones slinging the slop.  But there is plenty of blame to go around, and the media is deserving of their fair share.  I include both mainstream media, particularly Fox News and CNN, but also social media such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.  I am very close to abandoning my Facebook account for this very reason.  And lastly, We The People must bear our share, the lion’s portion, I believe, of the blame.  The public is all too quick to jump on the bandwagon at the slightest hint of a scandal while at the same time appearing bored by talk of foreign policy, economics, environment, and other serious issues that we need to be discussing. There is a saying in the media, “If it bleeds, it leads”.  It is our fascination with scandal and sensationalism that leads the media to focus on the irrelevant.  And it is the media’s focus that drives the candidates in their quest for more airtime, more free advertising.

The U.S. election process seems to be becoming more of a spectator sport or a reality program than a serious venue for the exchange of ideas to help us choose the most qualified of two candidates.  My take?  If you want drama and excitement, or you want to see people having sex or comparing body parts, yelling, ranting and raving, watch television.  My advice?  To the candidates, I say speak softly, intelligently, and refuse to lower yourselves to the level of a pig.  To the voters, I implore you to demand serious answers to serious questions and refuse to be swayed by the pure crap that has become ‘Election 2016.’

Harriet Tubman to Grace $20 Bill

tubman
U.S. currency may seem a small issue to write about … when I dig in my pocket, it certainly seems like a small thing … but today it is a BIG thing.  Today, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew announced that the image of Andrew Jackson on the front of the $20 will be replaced by none other than one of America’s most noble abolitionist heroes, Harriet Tubman!  This is big for two reasons:  it is the first time since 1900 (Martha Washington and Pocahontas both appeared briefly during the 1800s) that a woman has been on U.S. paper currency, and the first time ever that an African-American has graced the currency. I taught a Black History course for many years, and Harriet Tubman was always one of my favourite people to talk about. Frankly, I am glad she is going to be on the $20 where I may see her occasionally, rather than on the $100 where I would not.

Initially, the idea was to replace Alexander Hamilton on the $10 bill, but as a result of the euphoria surrounding the Broadway hit “Hamilton” last year, there was a public outcry when word got out that it was being considered. Not to mention that Hamilton was both a founding father and the first Treasury Secretary, thus it was decided to leave him on the currency.

jacksonDetractors have been lobbying to remove Andrew Jackson from the $20 for some time.  It is funny how time can alter  perceptions.  Jackson, the 7th president of the United States, was once hailed as a hero. No man (or woman) is all hero or all villain.  Jackson was known for a number of positive things, and is now denounced by some for the fact that he was a slave owner, and for being the president who signed the Indian Removal Act in 1830 that forced a number of southern Indian tribes from their ancestral homelands, leading to the infamous Trail of Tears.  I do not believe that the less glorious things should detract from the good he did.  While I abhor slavery, one must remember that Jackson died nearly 20 years before the Emancipation Proclamation, so in being a slave owner, he was no better nor worse than most other men of his time.  As a major-general in the War of 1812, he was hailed the greatest hero since George Washington. For a brief bio of Jackson, click here.

tubman4Harriet Tubman is also a subject of some controversy, and there are those who are less than thrilled with seeing her on the $20.  Ms. Tubman was arguably the most famous of the Underground Railroad conductors, having made 19 trips into the south during a ten-year period and rescued more than 300 slaves, escorting them safely to the north.  By 1856, there was a $40,000 reward on her head, approximately the equivalent of $1.2 million today!  The esteemed Frederick Douglass once said of her “Excepting John Brown — of sacred memory — I know of no one who has willingly encountered more perils and hardships to serve our enslaved people than [Harriet Tubman].”  Tubman served in the U.S. Army during the war, and even led an armed raid that freed hundreds of slaves.  For a brief bio of Ms. Tubman, click  here.

 

The announcement was met with good tidings by most, including President Obama, Hillary and Bernie, and most everyone else.  However, there are some who are not happy:

  • I absolutely HATE it that our coins and bills have transitioned to commemorations of personages of our past rather than representations of our national ideals. I really HATE it, but to remove important personages, like Andrew Jackson, the founder of one of our two modern political parties, for someone like Harriet Tubman, who was a truly minor figure in our history, is really absurd and constitutes racial and gender pandering of the most objectionable sort. (name withheld)
  • This country was founded on the idea that all white men are created equal and no one else. As such, Andrew Jackson—slave owner, seventh president of the United States and current face on the $20 bill—represents exactly the values and ethics upon which this country was founded. You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig—the pig in this case being a capitalist structure hell-bent on the expansion, maintenance and protection of white supremacy at any costs. (Savali, The Root).  The Root is an African-American publication
  • And even Dr. Ben Carson, former GOP candidate for president of the U.S., had an objection: “Well I think Andrew Jackson was a tremendous secretary. I mean a tremendous president. I mean, Andrew Jackson was the last president who actually balanced the federal budget*, where we had no national debt. I love Harriet Tubman; I love what she did. But we can find another way to honor her. Maybe a $2 bill.”**

 

As Jim Wright pointed out in his post, Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh and like-minded conservatives are likely to have a field day with this, and if so, I will be writing an update in a few days.  Meanwhile, there is one more tiny detail I may have forgotten to mention:  the new $20 with the visage of Harriet Tubman is unlikely to be in circulation until circa 2030, about 14 years from now, at which time it will be worth $16-$17 in terms of today’s currency.  Apparently major changes to U.S. currency requires a lengthy process “convened by the Advanced Counterfeit Deterrence steering committee, which includes representatives from the U.S. Secret Service, the Treasury, and the Federal Reserve.”

tubman 3


* (Note:  Jackson was not the last president to balance the budget. Bill Clinton balanced the budget in 1998 and recorded budget surpluses every year until he left office in 2001.)

** (Note:  the $2 was last issued in 2003. Thomas Jefferson currently resides on the $2 bill, which is seldom used in circulation. Carson didn’t discuss what should be done with the existing design of the $2 bill. )