Stonewall Jackson Area Council Changes Name

[RememberSchiff]

The council was named after Confederate General Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson in the late 1920s.

The new name, Virginia Headwaters Council, represents the fact that the James, York, Rappahannock, and Potomac Rivers all begin in the area covered by the council. 

Pete Fenlon, president of the executive council, said the connection to nature is fundamental to the scouting organization.

https://www.whsv.com/content/news/Local-scouting-council-changes-name-from-Stonewall-Jackson-Area-Council-to-Virginia-Headwaters-Council-565449041.html

[qwazse]

I guess the Sixteen Nineteen Council wasn't on the ballot. 

[SSScout]

Wonderful Idea.   I attended the last Jamboree held in Fort Ambrose Powell  Hill  .  Wonder when somebody will make the connection with his name and record? 

[JoeBob]

Hiding history doesn't change history. It just makes you ignorant. 

And political correctness hasn't done Scouting much good so far. 

[RememberSchiff]

With today's BSA,  it seems the following historical references are to be avoided?

    - Native Americans

    - historical figures and events after War of 1812 with exception of Lincoln

No Alvin York Council,  No Eisenhower Council,  No Neil Armstrong Council,  ... dullsville only please. 

My $0..02, 

[ParkMan]

That was my take too.  Sounds like a name chosen by a committee.  Bleh.

[ianwilkins]

28 minutes ago, RememberSchiff said:

    - historical figures and events after War of 1812

Presumably, depending on whether said figures/events were on the winning side or not.

[JoeBob]

It's hard to find a Founding Father who never owned a slave. 

[JoeBob]

Or never killed an Indian. 

[JoeBob]

Or sold something for a profit...

[Rick_in_CA]

3 hours ago, RememberSchiff said:

With today's BSA,  it seems the following historical references are to be avoided?

    - Native Americans

    - historical figures and events after War of 1812 with exception of Lincoln

No Alvin York Council,  No Eisenhower Council,  No Neil Armstrong Council,  ... dullsville only please. 

My $0..02, 

Seriously? No Neil Armstrong? No Eisenhower? Really? Things may be a bit over sensitive today, but it's not even close to that.

I am fine with renaming a council that was named after a traitor to our republic that was fighting to preserve slavery. (That should get things rolling... ).

[Rick_in_CA]

3 hours ago, JoeBob said:

Hiding history doesn't change history. It just makes you ignorant. 

I agree with you. It's all about context, and there is too much ignoring of context and the actual history around things. History is seldom black and white. Our historical heroes and villains were real people with all the complexity that brings, not cartoon characters. But context and nuance is hard, and cartoons are easy.

[mds3d]

Acknowledging history and honoring historical figures are different things.  There is no reason that anything should be named after the leader of a traitor army. Yes, the people themselves are always flawed, but if their well known deeds and legacy are honorable then it seems appropriate they be honored. 

[TAHAWK]

 

On 11/28/2019 at 11:45 AM, JoeBob said:

It's hard to find a Founding Father who never owned a slave. 

John Adams. is rare but pretty easy-to-identify exception.  John Jay of New York was an abolitionist as far back as 1874, but he owned slaves nevertheless.

Edited November 29, 2019 by TAHAWK

[yknot]

You've got to be careful here, because there are a lot of folks who are unhappy with anything named for such well known slaveholders as Washington and Jefferson. All of our historical founding fathers were cultural elitists. All of them also relegated women to second class status. Depending on circumstance, Lincoln himself made many racist pronouncements in contrast to his more revered and well known comments on emancipation. These people were products of their time. At the time of the Revolution, our founding fathers were considered traitors to King and country. They defied an Imperial power which had outlawed slavery on British soil in 1772 and then in its colonies in the early 1800s. History is complex, grey, and is best understood with all  of its glories and warts in place. There were no traitors after the Civil War in the eyes of the Union. All Confederate soldiers and leaders were paroled and none were jailed or executed for treason. The point of that was to unite the country and move it forward. Stonewall Jackson was probably one of the more colorful military figures in U.S. history and a well regarded military tactician. We study Greek generals, we study Roman generals, we don't scrub their names from history or from monuments. Our history here is so short and so sadly politicized, but in Europe or Asia where the formal histories of a region have much longer memories, there are plenty of place names and monuments to historical figures and events that would be their version of a Stonewall Jackson. And just to be clear, I find slavery reprehensible, I am not a Southern apologist or whatever the word would be, I just don't agree with this current fad of trying to erase history.