Reflections on Buttigieg’s Suggestion to Rethink Jefferson’s Honors

John Nichols, a seasoned political analyst, delves into the nuances surrounding the suggestion that we should reconsider how we honor Thomas Jefferson, a founding father and the third president of the United States. Nichols argues that judging historical figures by today's standards is not only unfair but also unparsimonious.

Applying Contemporary Values Unfairly

It is often a profound mistake to evaluate past leaders based on today's values, principles, and societal norms. Values, institutions, circumstances, and even ideas change significantly over time. The task of judging historical figures by contemporary standards is inherently flawed and does not provide a balanced perspective on their true legacy.

Jefferson: A Brilliant Hypocrite

Nichols honors Thomas Jefferson as a brilliant yet ultimately hypocritical figure. While Jefferson championed ideas promoting freedom and equality, he lacked the resolve to act on these ideals as strongly as they warranted. This duality in Jefferson's character adds layers of complexity to his legacy, making it crucial to examine his actions and words in the context of their time rather than through a modern lens.

Political Motivations Underlying Suggestion

Nichols suggests that Michael Bloomberg, a key figure in the discussion, may be making this suggestion due to his support in the Iowa caucuses. Bloomberg, a strong advocate for renaming events, is currently leading the polls but faces significant opposition among African-American voters, who support him at a mere 0%. To gain wider support and enhance his chances of winning the Democratic nomination, Bloomberg may be attempting to address concerns that resonate with a broader voter base.

Founders and Their Flaws

In addressing the suggestion to rename honors associated with Thomas Jefferson, Nichols argues that while there are flaws and inaccuracies in the actions of our founding fathers, no single figure was flawless. Founders like Jefferson and Andrew Jackson shared complex and contradictory histories, with neither man providing a model of perfect behavior. Nichols suggests that it is essential to weigh the contributions and harms of historical figures before deciding whether to honor them.

Honoring Blemishes vs. Erasing History

The argument against renaming every honor carried by our Founding Fathers is compelling. Nichols posits that removing all statues and monuments would create an even more obscure history. Instead, we must strive to be more nuanced and thoughtful in our deliberations. By using our brains to discern the true value of historical figures, we can inspire future generations and ensure that the actions of both our heroes and our flawed leaders contribute to a rich and reflective narrative of our nation's history.

Conclusion

Nichols concludes that we must discard the simplistic notion of judging historical figures purely for their blemishes or achievements. By engaging in thoughtful and balanced discussions, we can honor the good while acknowledging the bad, thus fostering a more informed and nuanced discussion about our nation's complex history.