Our View: Effort to change public names is troubling

We have no special regard for Braxton Bragg or Robert E. Lee, but we’re concerned over efforts to rename the city of Fort Bragg and two schools. Mainly, we wonder where this effort leads.

Few, if any, figures from history are perfect.

Our Bill of Rights provides the foundation of all our individual liberties, but the two men who wrote it – Virginians George Mason and James Madison – owned some 70 slaves between them. Both deplored slavery, even calling it poison, yet they profited by enslaving others.

Thomas Jefferson inspired Madison and Mason to enumerate those first 10 rights, then as president transformed a ragtag collection of states into a great nation. But he too owned slaves, infamously taking one as his mistress. Visit George Washington’s mansion in Virginia, and out back you’ll find slave quarters that are little more than sheds.

Keep going. Hiram Johnson is considered one of California’s greatest governors. A reformer, he curbed Leland Stanford’s railroad, created the voter initiative process, rules for recalling bad politicians and was Teddy Roosevelt’s Bull Moose Party running mate. But he also championed a law to keep Asian immigrants out of the country and another to keep those who were already here from owning property or voting.

How about Earl Warren, whose Supreme Court did so much to solidify individual rights? He worked hand-in-hand with the greatest president of the 20th century, Franklin D. Roosevelt, to unjustly imprison thousands of Japanese citizens during World War II. Then, as those innocent and legally defenseless citizens languished in the desert, Warren stood by as much of their land and possessions were taken by legal proceedings.

Yet, we still revere Warren, Washington, Madison, Mason, Johnson and Jefferson.

You could argue that without Lee, California might be part of Mexico. Before turning his back on the U.S. Army, Lee helped engineer the victory at Vera Cruz, Mexico, in 1847. Then – according to fellow officer Ulysses S. Grant – it was Lee who devised the winning strategy against a larger Mexican army at the battle of Cerro Gordo. Within months, the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo ceded California to the United States.

Perhaps another hero of that era can provide guidance. As it became clear the North would win the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln knew winning the peace would be even more important. More concerned with healing the nation than seeking retribution, he refused to punish those who had provoked the bloodiest war in American history. Yes, he had waged all-out, brutal war against open defiance and the scourge of slavery, but when Lee, Bragg and the rest laid down their arms he wanted them to be forgiven. Oh, and Lincoln had violated several of those individual liberties – the right to trial, free speech and redress – that the original patriots died to secure.

Just as we cannot change history, we shouldn’t try to expunge it. More pressing than purging names from public spaces is our ability to understand our past. Efforts to dumb down AP History standards or whitewash America’s transgressions against its own people are unacceptable.

The Confederate battle flag is an ugly, angry symbol of racism; its display by any state cannot be tolerated. But after 150 years, should we be arguing over those who eventually rejected that symbol or moving forward on matters of justice and shared prosperity?

You can’t alter history any more than you can change your family. Forcing name changes on Fort Bragg or the schools named for Lee will make some people happy and others angry. But it won’t change history. And we fear it won’t stop there.

This story was originally published July 26, 2015 at 10:06 AM with the headline "Our View: Effort to change public names is troubling."