Petition to change the name of Mt Washington

[NH2112]

The abolisionist movement was active in the US for 100 years before the founding of the country. Slavery was outlawed for the first time in the US in 1780. The idea of owning slaves being immoral wasn't novel during the time of Washington. He owned hundreds of slaves for his entire life. They weren't granted freedom until 2 years after his death when Martha freed the ones she inherited from him against his wishes (he stipulated their freedom upon Martha's death, how convenient.)

It might have been immoral, but it was an economic necessity at the time. So was child labor 150 years ago, most families didn‘t have the luxury of sending their kids to school. In 2-300 years who knows what people will think of us for practices we see as necessary or normal today.

 

[rocket21]

It might have been immoral, but it was an economic necessity at the time. So was child labor 150 years ago, most families didn‘t have the luxury of sending their kids to school. In 2-300 years who knows what people will think of us for practices we see as necessary or normal today.

Ironic that some of the folks who want "Washington" removed due to slavery are posting via their iPhone that may have been made with slave labor.

 

[peakbagger]

Time to lock the thread as it seems to have degraded into territory outside of hiking circles. If new info appears maybe it will come alive again some day.

 

[peakbagger]

I guess this is new info and therefore, I have reopened the thread.

NH Commissioners Oppose Name Changes for Mount Washington, Baker River - InDepthNH.org

Eight commissioners for the state and the executive director of Fish and Game have all drafted letters of opposition to changing the name of Mount Washington and the Baker River.

indepthnh.org

Let try to keep the thread on track

 

[sierra]

I don't think using McKinley is an apples-to-apples comparison. McKinley is hard to get to and only visited by climbers, Mt. Washington is visited by millions of tourists from around the world. A group of smart men have come to not only to a logical conclusion, but a practical one.

 

[KRooney]

IRRC, the Washington in Colorado is actually Lady Washington. Nice hike with a great view of the Diamond on Longs east face across the valley.

 

[maineguy]

I don't think using McKinley is an apples-to-apples comparison. McKinley is hard to get to and only visited by climbers, Mt. Washington is visited by millions of tourists from around the world. A group of smart men have come to not only to a logical conclusion, but a practical one.

Yes, it is hardly an apples to apples comparison. If you read up on the history of changing the name of McKinley to Denali you will find that the Alaska state legislature wanted to change the name back in the 70s and had wide support from Alaskans. In the case of Mt Washington, we have one person, someone who was arrested for protesting Northern Pass, petitioning for the change. Hardly a groundswell of support.

 

[TEO]

A group of smart men . . .

No. "Men and women" or "people."

And I don't know how smart they all are, either. Scott R. Mason's historical knowledge and reasoning abilities are suspect at the very least.

 

[TEO]

Leave it as it is and let individuals call it what they want. I've been calling it Agiocochook to myself for years since I learned her native name. I also call it Wash, Washington, the Rockpile and maybe the occasional well placed curse word to boot...

And isn't it just a wee bit hypocritical to condemn historical slavery while presently purchasing goods made in China with slave labor? Unless everyone is willing to give up their modern day slave labor built devices, we should all just keep it zipped on the whole slavery issue. Just my 2¢

Forced labor is not the same as the chattel slavery that existed in this country. The notion that we shouldn't discuss and reassess our country's past—and current—failings, including the failings of our celebrated "founding fathers" because other forms of oppression exist is ludicrous.

 

[TEO]

It might have been immoral, but it was an economic necessity at the time. So was child labor 150 years ago, most families didn‘t have the luxury of sending their kids to school. In 2-300 years who knows what people will think of us for practices we see as necessary or normal today.

This is a profound misunderstanding/misinterpretation of history.

 

[rocket21]

The notion that we shouldn't discuss and reassess our country's past—and current—failings, including the failings of our celebrated "founding fathers" because other forms of opression exist is ludicrous.

There is a difference between discussing/learning from history and destroying it. Fortunately cooler heads prevailed in this instance and are preserving the country's history. Mt. Washington it is.

 

[Shoe]

Forced labor is not the same as the chattel slavery that existed in this country. The notion that we shouldn't discuss and reassess our country's past—and current—failings, including the failings of our celebrated "founding fathers" because other forms of opression exist is ludicrous.

Forced labor is not the same as the chattel slavery that existed in this country. The notion that we shouldn't discuss and reassess our country's past—and current—failings, including the failings of our celebrated "founding fathers" because other forms of opression exist is ludicrous.

It's ludicrous that we are still oppressing indigenous people on reservations but changing names to assuage the guilt brought on by how offensive this country's history is to some.

And it's also ludicrous to demean the value of current living humans over vocabulary. Just because living conditions have improved over the last 200 years doesn't make forced labor not slavery. Semantics.

The copious amounts of your replies to every individual on here, lends me to believe you would like the thread closed again.

 

[Andrew]

I think it is good to try to look through a historical lens to realize none of us are probably perfect through human history when we assess the actions of others. If not for the valor and commitment to the great experiment exercised by Benedict Arnold, we might not have a United States today. Instead his name has a direct association to the exact opposite due to his other actions. Will none of us have any standing in future history if it is discovered that we once burned fossil fuels in the pursuit of personal enjoyment, maybe Chris P. herself?

Agiogochook is described to be defined as "the place of High Spirit", so could be seen as a specific religious reference that might be in itself offensive to other faiths?

I personally see no problem with having a discussion on the issue, where maybe the points in a discussion actually serve the best use, and the ultimate name merely symbolic. I like both names and have used both at times, and actually have found when I'm speaking of the mountain from a pre-colonial perspective, I am more comfortable using Agiogochook; but other conversations Washington.

 

[NH2112]

This is a profound misunderstanding/misinterpretation of history.

If so I await enlightenment on the issue from you. But in reality you’re just retroactively imposing your values from your position of comfort.

 

[skiguy]

Forced labor is not the same as the chattel slavery that existed in this country. The notion that we shouldn't discuss and reassess our country's past—and current—failings, including the failings of our celebrated "founding fathers" because other forms of oppression exist is ludicrous.

As I stated earlier in this thread this is a waste of Taxpayer Money and time. The original petitioner and the other signers should focus on issues presently in the lime light that may actually have an affect on their concerns. Virtue signaling to enhance and exacerbate their agenda with this petition is potentially hypocritical at best. I'm am glad to see minds of reason prevailing in this situation. How 'modern-day slavery' in the Congo powers the rechargeable battery economy

 

[sierra]

This thread should be locked again. The few that disagree with keeping the name, will never change their minds, what's the point going forward?

 

[griffin]

It's ludicrous that we are still oppressing indigenous people on reservations but changing names to assuage the guilt

This. I suspect my politics/views are closer in general to Teo's then some of the folks arguing on the other side, but unless and until I hear Indigenous communities and their representatives lobbying for changes like these, I'm not going to take them seriously. There's also a petition making the rounds to rename Cadillac in Acadia "to honor the Wabanaki people." Meanwhile, actual Wabanaki people have an actual agenda - and renaming mountains isn't on it.

Likewise, I don't think relabeling mountains, etc. that were named for people in spite of their moral shortcomings (as opposed to being honored FOR them, as happened with most Confederate-related monuments) does much to address the legacy of slavery in the US and it's continued impacts on our society.

 

[maineguy]

This thread should be locked again. The few that disagree with keeping the name, will never change their minds, what's the point going forward?

Why lock the thread? Everyone is behaving. I personally enjoy debating with people that have different opinions so long as things stay civilized. Granted, no one's mind is going to changed by this debate, but...I am always curious as to how some people come to the conclusions that they do.

Edit: On the ham radio forum where I post, the rule is that posters who do not behave are banned from that thread, but the thread is allowed to continue. Just a thought...

 

[peakbagger]

Moderator hat on.

I reopened the thread as various state and other entities made an official reply as to the why the name change was not appropriate at this point. The subsequent replies have not gone personal and at this point I tend to leave it open until folks start to mis behave.

 

[TEO]

It's ludicrous that we are still oppressing indigenous people on reservations but changing names to assuage the guilt brought on by how offensive this country's history is to some.

And it's also ludicrous to demean the value of current living humans over vocabulary. Just because living conditions have improved over the last 200 years doesn't make forced labor not slavery. Semantics.

The copious amounts of your replies to every individual on here, lends me to believe you would like the thread closed again.

On the contrary, I prefer less moderation. I only discovered today now how to quote multiple posts in the same post.

Drawing a distinction between forced labor occuring in places such as China and chattel slavery is not demeaning anyone, and it isn't just semantics. It is recognizing that they are different evils. And, slavery in the Colonies and the United States was different from previous historical instances of slavery.

There is a difference between discussing/learning from history and destroying it. Fortunately cooler heads prevailed in this instance and are preserving the country's history. Mt. Washington it is.

How is changing the name of a mountain destroying history?

The few that disagree with keeping the name, will never change their minds, what's the point going forward?

and

This. I suspect my politics/views are closer in general to Teo's then some of the folks arguing on the other side, but unless and until I hear Indigenous communities and their representatives lobbying for changes like these, I'm not going to take them seriously. There's also a petition making the rounds to rename Cadillac in Acadia "to honor the Wabanaki people." Meanwhile, actual Wabanaki people have an actual agenda - and renaming mountains isn't on it.

Likewise, I don't think relabeling mountains, etc. that were named for people in spite of their moral shortcomings (as opposed to being honored FOR them, as happened with most Confederate-related monuments) does much to address the legacy of slavery in the US and it's continued impacts on our society.

It may or may not surprise you that I do not support the name change of Mt. Washington either, at least at this time. What's objectionable are much of the reasoning and statements made here, and those of some of the commisson, and the unwillingness to reassess the legacies of our founding fathers.

While our founding fathers may have said, written, and done great things, they were also hypocritcal and had deep moral failings. These were moral failings recognized by at least some of their contemporaries. If we are afraid to recognize these contradictions and continue to unquestioningly deify them, then we have little hope of becoming "a more perfect Union." And we should be pissed at them, because we as a country, are still paying for their sins today. (Yes, it is possible to be both grateful for and pissed at the same persons/people.)