Slashdot Mirror
US Treasury To Feature Harriet Tubman On $20 Bill (reuters.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Harriet Tubman will become the first African-American woman to be featured on the face of U.S. paper currency in more than a century. Tubman was born a slave and went on to become an anti-slavery crusader. Ironically, she will be replacing Andrew Jackson, the seventh President of the U.S. and a slave owner. According to Wikipedia, "Jackson held as many as 44 [slaves] by 1820, and later held up to 150 slaves, making him among planter elite. Throughout his lifetime Jackson may have owned as many as 300 slaves." The decision to feature a woman on a bill started in part from a young girl's letter to President Obama about the lack of women on U.S. currency. A social media campaign "Women on 20s" then began pushing for a woman to replace Jackson on the currency early last year. Originally, the department announced it would feature a woman on the $10 bill instead of Alexander Hamilton. Now it's being reported Hamilton will stay on the front of the bill with a group of women on the back of it. Civil rights era leaders will reportedly be depicted in the new $5 bill.
While this is a cool idea -- there are no women and no people of color featured on any US bills right now, and that doesn't accurately reflect the demographics of the country -- I can see it causing some confusion. On balance, it's probably a good decision, but this is a pretty major change.
Facts have a liberal bias.
Who really cares though? Does anyone have such a connection to Jackson or Hamilton to care about their ouster? As an aside, I've always found it somewhat ironic for Jackson to be featured on the $20 given his positions on the American central banking system that he removed while in office, which was only later reestablished as the Federal Reserve under Wilson. Jackson didn't appear on the $20 until after that time, perhaps as some kind of cruel jape, but I don't know.
Talking about demographics and limiting it to skin color seems to miss the point. America was a country founded on the ideas of freedom and liberty for all, even though it took quite a while to attain that in fact, and in some ways still isn't there. A strive for equality before the law seems to be an embodiment of American values and something that should constitute large majority demographically. Thinking that I (or anyone else) can't identify with someone like Tubman or the leaders of the civil rights movements because of sex or skin color seems rather misguided. You wouldn't tell a little black girl that she couldn't look up to Ben Franklin because he was an old white dude and doesn't reflect her demographics would you?
I wouldn't mind mixing a few other bills up as well. I'm of the opinion that we could boot Grant from the $50 for Teddy Roosevelt who in addition to being a general badass also exhibited many other traits or characteristics that I feel symbolize the idea of America and the values for which we as a country should strive.
Really the only reason to care is that a person is more concerned with the people doing this for the wrong reason (i.e. so that they can act like they're so great because diversity, etc.) instead of because Tubman and others (Dr. King obviously comes to mind) epitomize some of the ideals on which this country was founded and that make it great. Opposing a reasonable solution just because the people pushing for it are doing so for the wrong reasons doesn't make anyone a better person and smacks of being a moral crusade of its own.
If we are going to put rulers on the money, we are no better than those we fought to get away from, where the money is propaganda for the ruling class. We might as well have the Queen on our money. There were objections when presidents were used on the bills because it was too England-like to have the government head represented. We should have no presidents on the money. Ben Franklin is a good start. I want to see Edison and Tesla on bills, the fanboys for each would be interesting.
Learn to love Alaska
Jackson was a decisive and forceful leader. He had lots of good attributes but he was a serious asshole as well. Aside from his position on slavery which was not really an issue at the time there was the way he treated the Native Americans. In particular the horrible way the Cherokee in Georgia were ripped from their land and sent on the Trail of Tears where so many perished. These people were guilty of no violent acts and in fact were in some ways more civilized than their white neighbors. The Cherokee nation had it's own written language and printed newspapers and interacted well with their white neighbors. At least until gold was discovered on their lands. For this and some other actions Jackson is reviled by Native Americans. Every time I drive by the State Capital in Atlanta and see that gold on the dome I feel ashamed.
Setting aside her race and gender, I like this choice for the fact that for once we're acknowledging the importance of someone who wasn't in a leadership position. We have this tendency to celebrate the person in charge and ignore the grunts, especially when it comes to presidents, and I'm glad to see someone else on a bill.
(Yes, Ben Franklin was never technically a president but only because he was too old. He might as well have been one.)
That's a cop out answer. So do I. But, answer the question. Say you and I are having a conversation about a common acquaintance named Jason Jones. And, suppose that we have two friends named Jason Jones, one of whom is what I would refer to as "black."
If you said, "Hey, I saw Jason at the theater", meaning the "black" Jason.
And, I said, "Oh yeah? Which Jason."
What would you say?
sig: sauer
You can see a great image of her holding a pistol, and an actual pistol she owned (and probably shot several people with I imagine), here.
I personally think she is a great choice, she is kind of canonical American - a little bit wild, independent, and she made things happen rather than just letting a bad system break her.
I kind of like a motto for the second amendment of "Tubman knew what guns were for, you should too".
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Jack Lew may not be able to sign his own name in a form that's recognizable, but he did make a good choice. Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every once in a while.
Harriet Tubman is a perfect choice. She was a tough, God-fearing woman who was determined to do the right thing at any cost. We need more people like her.
I do believe if she were alive today, she'd kick Hillary Clinton's ass in any election.
It's stuff the upperclass wants us to fight over to keep us from doing anything about the upper class. This stuff started happening during the Occupy protests, it was clearly political sabotage.
We've had years of teaching our kids that labeling people is bad and it's what is on the inside that counts. That's not good enough for these people.
Wow. Just wow.
Speaking as a non-American I used to believe that "America is fucked therefore Americans are fucked."
Reading this thread however I'm now convinced that "Americans are fucked therefore America is fucked."