Skip to main content

Portland Protesters Topple Statues of Lincoln and Roosevelt.

To note that our nation is seething with anger – although deeply disturbing – is certainly not Breaking News, except on CNN where Breaking News flashes even when they are breaking for a commercial.  It is not that the nation is angry over a handful of controversial issues; we are angry over every issue.  Indeed, part of my dismay and fascination is how even a trivial event or utterance can provoke rage.  A few decades ago, if a person provoked or insulted someone, an argument might ensue.  Today the same provocation can have a fatal outcome. 

Let me offer a very bold pronouncement.  I do so under my own name and stand ready to accept a searing rebuke.  Ready? 

Humans are not perfect.

Yet, when we judge current political leaders, historical figures, athletes, law enforcement personnel, writers, musicians, educators and the rest of us, any flaw discovered may generate outrage.  The paradigm is not to consider any surrounding circumstances or the context of the time that might distract us from our search and destroy missions.   Ready! Fire! Aim!

Here’s an interesting twist that the search & destroy folks routinely employ.  A flaw found in one of their allies is overlooked while the same flaw in an adversary is magnified to gigantic proportions.  There is a very fancy term for this – hypocrisy.

This past week, protesters in Portland, Oregon toppled statues of Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt over charges of racism and unjust actions against Native Americans.  I am not a historian who can judge these men, but I do know that our nation was considerably less enlightened and tolerant during their times than we are today.  Slavery during Lincoln’s presidency – while immoral and abhorrent – was lawful.  And Roosevelt served during the Jim Crow era.  They were both great men and great leaders who deserve to be honored.  I completely accept and encourage that their flaws and immoral thoughts and actions be scrutinized and studied. Give the context and judge accordingly.  But we should not allow our current sensibilities and anger to view their flaws through a modern lens as we diminish their accomplishments to justify current outrage.  We must reject this revisionism.   Isn't this how we would hope the next generation will judge us?

Should we dynamite Mount Rushmore?  In addition to taking out Roosevelt and Lincoln, we could also cleanse the landscape of two additional flawed figures, Thomas Jefferson and George Washington.


Should we blow it up and use the granite to make some woke statues?


With a demand for 100% purity, which has a very elastic definition, what statue will be left standing?

Many of the famed suffragettes whom we celebrate were racists.  Margaret Sanger, a pioneer and champion of women’s rights, had a permissive view on eugenics.  Many of our colleges and universities practiced racism and anti-Semitism.  Several universities had direct ties to slavery.  Yes, they are making amends in recent years, but why did it take them a century or so to come clean? 

We are imperfect people in a flawed nation in a defective world.  Blotting out, redacting and destroying recklessly won’t improve us.  Conversely, it will widen the gaping divide.  Surely, decent and tolerant people can forge alternative pathways to address raw disputes.

Who will be left standing after the statue police clear our parks and public squares? Would Gandhi, Mother Theresa or even the Almighty make the cut?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Becoming a Part-Time Physician

Next month my schedule will change.  I will henceforth be off on Fridays with my work week truncated to Monday through Thursday.   I am excited to be enjoying a long weekend every weekend.  And while the schedule change is relatively minor, this event does feel like an important career moment for me.  It is the first step on a journey that will ultimately lead beyond my professional career.  It is this recognition that makes this modest schedule modification more significant than one would think it deserves.  As some readers know,   my current employed position has been a dream job for me.   Prior to this, I was in a small private practice, which I loved, but was much more challenging professionally and personally.   My partner and I ran the business.   Working nights, weekends and holidays were routine for decades.   On an on-call night, if I slept  through until morning, I felt as if I had won the lottery.   And w...

When Should Doctors Retire?

I am asked with some regularity whether I am aiming to retire in the near term.  Years ago, I never received such inquiries.  Why now?   Might it be because my coiffure and goatee – although finely-manicured – has long entered the gray area?  Could it be because many other even younger physicians have given up their stethoscopes for lives of leisure? (Hopefully, my inquiring patients are not suspecting me of professional performance lapses!) Interestingly, a nurse in my office recently approached me and asked me sotto voce that she heard I was retiring.    “Interesting,” I remarked.   Since I was unaware of this retirement news, I asked her when would be my last day at work.   I have no idea where this erroneous rumor originated from.   I requested that my nurse-friend contact her flawed intel source and set him or her straight.   Retirement might seem tempting to me as I have so many other interests.   Indeed, reading and ...

Will Smarter Lawyers End Frivolous Lawsuits?

How do you know if a lawyer is any good?  Of course, they've all passed the bar, but now their profession is lowering it.  While most of us strive for excellence, and raise our children to value this virtue, prominent legal educators are establishing a new quality intitiative for their profession.  Who says that lawyers can't reform themselves?  Perhaps, we physicians can follow their bold example and raise the credentials of our pre-medical students.  I’ll present the facts. You be the judge. I have written a dozen posts on tort reform on this blog, which always generate spirited and adversarial retorts from attorneys and their supporters. They accuse me and other tort reform advocates of carrying water for insurance companies. They repeatedly point out that I know nothing about the legal system and are unqualified to opine on its flaws. They deride me when I argue that effective tort reform would reduce the practice of defensive medicine, despite the re...