Should We Keep Memorials of Racists?

With the recent increase in awareness on racism in the United States, activists have increasingly been calling for monuments and memorials of noted historical figures who would be considered racist by today’s standards to be taken down. That is completely understandable. This nation has a twisted and ugly history that certainly should not be celebrated. However, it is possible to honor the accomplishments of great figures in our history without commemorating their bigotry. To remove any remembrance of figures who could be argued as immoral would be irrational. No one is perfect, and morality is relative. It is possible to argue that any person memorialized by our society conducted themselves unethically in some way. To celebrate someone’s accomplishments is not to celebrate their faults, and that distinction must be made in discussing this issue.

A common example that is brought up with this issue is the memorialization of President Woodrow Wilson at Princeton University. Wilson, who was born in 1856, is clearly racist by today’s standards. However, Wilson was president of the United States from 1913 to 1921. During his time in the oval office, he endorsed the 19th Amendment, which allowed women to vote, led the nation through World War I and was instrumental in forming the League of Nations. Prior to being the president of the United States, Wilson served as the president of Princeton University and Governor of New Jersey. In his day, he was thought to be quite progressive and helped to push the nation towards change. To this day, he is largely remembered for his strong diplomatic skills. He accomplished many great things throughout his lifetime, and all of that hard work and strong leadership is separate from his immorality. In memorializing Wilson, Princeton is celebrating his dedication and great work, not the racism that was prevalent in the nation at the time.

Throughout history, a society’s moral or ethical codes have shifted with its values. The vast majority of people who built the world we live in today, and whose contributions to the world are undoubtedly enormous, could reasonably be argued as immoral. To remove all memorialization of these people would require that we rename states such as Washington, named after George Washington, the first president and a slave owner, and Virginia, named for Queen Elizabeth, who invested significant sums of money in the British slave trade. In fact, Amerigo Vespucci, the namesake of our country, took part in the culture of exploration that lead to the existence of the slave trade.

Martin Luther King Jr. himself was noted to be chauvinistic and Mahatma Gandhi is known to have physically abused his wife. Both undoubtedly changed the world we live in for the better. In memorializing them, we are not celebrating their sexism. We are honoring the enormous good they did to our world. It would be wrong to ignore the contributions that they made, even if some of their actions could undoubtedly be called immoral.

Humans are multi-faceted and flawed creatures. There is no such thing as an absolutely perfect person. Morality is relative, so it is impossible for any person to be totally “moral.” Racism should rightly be condemned by this nation and should certainly not be memorialized. However, in celebrating figures such as Woodrow Wilson, racism is not being honored. Rather, it is the arguably more impactful, positive actions that have been committed by those figures that are being rightfully commemorated. If we were to remove all monuments of people who have done something morally dubious throughout their lifetime, we would have no one left to whom we could pay tributes. Rather than ignoring the contributions that these figures have made, a greater effort should be made to mark the legacy of racism and other forms of bigotry in our nation. We must remember that our nation was built off of the subjugation of other people and understand the terrible effects of that culture of bigotry. Remembering the darker aspects of our culture is not mutually exclusive with celebrating our culture’s accomplishments, but the two actions are also not the same.