"Good-bye, Columbus"

Here in BP, we have a few historical markers.  I'm talking about identifiers that contain the names of people who were considered to have been important to the Village.

The most prominent of these markers is the conspicuous (enough) sign at the northwest corner of our recreation facility and park, and which indicates the name of the installation: Ed Burke Park.  Ed Burke was a long-time BP resident who was mayor for a stretch of time.  Burke is known (to me) for a few things.  First, that the recreation area is named for him.  Second, that he was mayor for a while.  (And Dan Keys thinks Burke was a wonderful mentor to him.)  Third, I'm told that he ran such authoritative Commission meetings that Village residents didn't bother to come to them.  They just knew that "Mayor Burke" would handle things.  (This is something I was told.  If it's not correct, someone should say so.)  Fourth, that Burke was sort of a one-man Village government, and he would hand out permits informally to people he was satisfied to please.  I'm told (again, please correct me, if this is not true) that it was Burke, more than anyone, who accounts for the existence of front yard walls and other fixtures which are not permitted by our codes.  But, between one thing and another, someone some time decided to name our recreation facility for him.

The other markers are on buildings.  They're at the front door of the recreation center, the east door of the renovated log cabin, and the front/east door of the administration building.  These brass wall markers include the names of whoever was on the Commission when the projects were done.  In full disclosure, as they say, I take this somewhat personally.  My name is on the plaques on the log cabin and the administration building.  Those two projects happened at the same time, and I was on the Commission then.  For what it's worth, I approved of both projects, and I objected to my name being on a plaque.  I thought the projects were worthy and properly done (and necessary).  A majority of the Commission thought that.  But not all Commissioners thought it.  But all five names are there.  By looking at the plaques, you couldn't distinguish a driving force from someone whose single-minded intent was to obstruct.  They're just all there, together, the same.

I voted with the majority to accomplish these projects.  But I didn't pay for them myself.  I was the same as any other BP resident.  And these projects weren't about me.  They were about the Village.  So I asked that my name not be on a plaque.  But the then manager told me there was no way to exclude my name.  I forgot if she said the plaques already existed by the time I requested not to have my name included, of if she gave me some other explanation.  But the answer was no.

In my opinion, no one's name should be given to the recreation facility, or molded into a plaque on a building here.  We don't have to "honor" anyone like that.  If I thought we should, I would think we should honor Roxy and Chuck Ross, who have given an unbelievable amount of themselves, and their time, and their exceptional expertise, and their money, to make the Village better.  I wasn't here in the Mayor Richard Ederr years, but from what I hear, maybe I would think someone should honor him that way.  But really, I think it would be best if we didn't honor anyone.   The Village is not a tribute to certain individuals.  It's a tribute to the residents and taxpayers.  I don't even approve of "Griffing Boulevard."  Arthur Griffing was a real estate speculator.  He made plenty of money by buying and selling BP land.  His name doesn't need to be on our one named street.

Which brings me to the main point of this post.  Right now in this country, there's a debate, or a battle, about memorialized people.  The big commotion is about memorialized people who mistreated other people, or who fought for the system that mistreated other people.  There's been now ongoing sturm und drang about southern/Confederate monuments, and now, the argument is about people like Christopher Columbus.  Advocates of keeping these memorials spin them so that the argument is that they're historically important.  The proposal is that we should own, if not frankly treasure, our history.  And we should do it by keeping statuary.  We should of course keep in mind that the argument is not about photographs of historical figures.  It's about honorary statues.  And names on various things.

We're not the only ones who have some theoretically embarrassing memorials.  When the Soviet Union dissolved, statues of Lenin and Stalin were destroyed.  And few people -- and no Americans -- complained about the disrespect for history.  The same was true after Saddam Hussein was overthrown.  Statues were torn down, and people -- and Americans -- rejoiced.  "Mr Gorbachev," Ronald Reagen challenged, "tear down that [Berlin] wall."  And down it came.  Yay.  A piece of it is on the downtown Miami MDC campus.  One of the third rails of American politics is the prohibition against saying anything positive about Fidel Castro, no matter what he did to help some disadvantaged Cubans.   I don't know if there were ever statues of Hitler, but if there were, there aren't any more.  (Crickets)

I doubt many Russians wish they had the Soviet Union back.  Interestingly, many Iraqis said that Iraq under Hussein was much more orderly and safer before he was overthrown (and not by them).  I don't know if anyone regrets the loss of those statues.  I haven't heard of anyone in the world who wishes the Berlin wall was still there.  The difference here is that we're genuinely not at all on the same page about the Civil War.  There are many Americans who still feel they lost something, and they resent the loss.  For them, Robert E. Lee was and still is a true hero.  And they persist in being racist.  But they're wrong.  And they lost.  And the memorials have to go away.

And I still want my name removed from any plaques in BP.  (Actually, I want the plaques removed.)