I'm interested in people's thoughts on Princeton removing Wilson's name from the policy school.

While I'm pleased to see a racist's name taken down, I'm not 100% on the principle at work.

Since I think this is an interesting test case, hoping to learn from others.

1/12

In my view, the easiest cases for removal are where things are named after people, like Lee or Davis, who are venerated precisely bc of the bad things they did.

2/

It is beyond the pale to venerate someone because they fought to preserve slavery and destroy the union.

Take those names off and pull those statues down.

3/

More complicated are cases where things are named after people, like Jefferson or Washington or Wilson, who did terrible things and held terrible beliefs, even relative
to the times in which they lived, but who are venerated for other reasons.

4/

Jefferson and Washington were slave owners. Jefferson was a rapist.

This was abhorrent even for their times. Compare them to John Adams. Or fellow Virginian Robert Carter III.

Jefferson and Washington were, in an important sense, very bad human beings.

5/

But the bad things they did are not why they are venerated. They are venerated for their role in the founding, *despite* their terrible moral failings.

To me, this seems importantly different from Lee and Davis.

6/

This is the principle--that it is ok to venerate people for their achievements, despite their moral failings, but not ok to venerate people for their moral failings--that has, thus far, made me think we are on solid ground pulling down Confederates and leaving up Founders.

7/

To my mind, Wilson is more like Jefferson and Washington than he is like Lee or Davis.

8/

Wilson was a virulent racist even for early 20th century America. And he enacted that racism into policy as president.

But the reason he is venerated is because of the doctrine of self determination, not because of his racism.

9/

Now the doctrine of self determination does not stand with the Declaration of Independence as one of the great achievements of modern history. So there's arguably plenty of room between Wilson and Jefferson. (Indeed, many think Wilson's foreign policy proved a disaster.)

10/

Nonetheless, it seems plausible to me that the principle that says take down Wilson's name might also say take down Jefferson's. (Princeton certainly made the case all about his racism.)

11/

And maybe that is where we are headed. And maybe that is ok. I'm open to that.

But I'm interested in people's thoughts and reflections.

In the mean time, I'll enjoy watching Wilson get some much deserved comeuppance.

12/12