5 ms·

'Those who control the present, control the past and those who control the past control the future.' - George Orwell We need to have a serious think about the

'Those who control the present, control the past and those who control the past control the future.' - George Orwell We need to have a serious think about the value of erasing historical figures based on their actions in a very different past. I know people who were bigots in the past but have substantially changed their perspective, and I also know people who have become more rigid and bigoted in their views over time. One of those people is gay fwiw. Why is it that perceived character flaws based on current social mores result in historical people being cancelled in our current climate? Rinsing out perceived offensive behaviors from history will surely lead to a future featuring a bland lack of knowledge and no real world behavioral social frameworks

matzab 5y ago
Refraining from honoring someone is not the same as erasing them.
- runjake 5y ago
  When you're quite literally erasing James Webb from the name, that seems like erasing and supports olivermark's point entirely.
  - ineedasername 5y ago
    History isn't about who has their names on objects, that's just window dressing. Taking his name off an object when it was put there to honor him is clearly not that same as erasing his history.
  - sp332 5y ago
    Asking people to forget his bigotry would be erasing everything but his name. Removing his name from the project is a potential result of a more complete knowledge of history, pending this investigation.
polytely 5y ago
There is a big difference between erasing someone from history and not naming something in someone's honor. It isn't like nasa is now going to scrub all the history books of the name James Webb or outlaw mentioning his name. I would think there are enough people worth naming a telescope after after.
- whatshisface 5y ago
  The suggestion mentioned in the article, Harriet Tubman, might not be the most appropriate name for a space telescope, and if that's really what's being suggested it sounds a little pandering, almost to the point of being constructed.
  - polytely 5y ago
    Aye, it would be better to name it after an astronomer, even if you would want a women there are enough names to choose from. for example: https://youtu.be/damkjiFNn5E https://youtu.be/damkjiFNn5E Caroline Herschel Telescope would be cool, she mapped the skies so it feels appropriate
    - belorn 5y ago
      I wonder, if one dig through her private journals or songs, could a person find an view or opinion that in modern standards would not be acceptable to have? If so, should we then erase her name from the telescope and try again with a new candidate?
      - polytely 5y ago
        Sure, if you want to spend your time/effort on that and are able to mobilize and convince enough people to get it changed then you can do that. Im convinced there are enough good candidates that ~didn't actively participate in rooting out queer people from NASA~ [not accurate, read thread], which is kind of a low bar. Nobody (I think) is saying that everyone that gets something named after them must have been perfectly 'woke' by todays standards, but when you are naming something and you have the entirety of history to choose from, maybe don't pick James Webb.
gelert 5y ago
There is a difference between not celebrating and erasing. I agree with some of what you say here but I think asserting that not naming a telescope after somebody is erasing them from history is an unsupported leap - most people don't get their names on space telescopes and we don't think of them as having been erased.
- whatshisface 5y ago
  >most people don't get their names on space telescopes and we don't think of them as having been erased. Erasing is when there's something written somewhere, and then it's erased. So if you started with your name on something and ended without your name on something, that'd be an example of erasing your name.
  - goodpoint 5y ago
    No. The incorrect statement was about erasing people from history books, not from a telescope.
hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
While I agree with your comment, the decision to rename the telescope would make sense, since it was not named after an actual scientist like Hubble but after a former NASA manager.
awb 5y ago
> We need to have a serious think about the value of erasing historical figures based on their actions in a very different past. It’s like we assume that whatever they died believing they’d still believe today. I’m highly skeptical of that. Culture changes over time and people along with it. Except these people don’t have that opportunity to clarify or revisit their views because they’re dead.
- olivermarks 5y ago
  Exactly. I wrote the parent comment and recall a pretty senior Australian medical specialist friend of my wife visiting us in San Francisco at the height of the aids crisis. He was embarrassingly, virulently anti homosexual. Today the same guy has totally different views as society has evolved and probably doesn't even remember his former perspective. He's alive and when he dies will have his reputation intact. Had he died while being negative about gay people by current social mores he would have his views frozen for all time. Separately, also never underestimate people's life experiences shaping their views. We can all learn from events in other people's lives that shaped their perspective. Not healthy to rinse that away.
fay59 5y ago
Given the extremely short supply of telescopes deserving naming, it’s absurd to think that anyone who doesn’t have a telescope named after themselves has been erased from history. What you’re defending is James Webb’s immaculate memory. Please think long and hard about whether it’s worth defending the immaculate memory of anyone.
- whatshisface 5y ago
  I think there is one group of people who are assuming that because it's a diversity thing it's justified, and another group that thinks that because it's a diversity thing it's unjustified, whereas it may be that NASA is right and that it depends on some old documents that they have to get out of the files, none of which we have seen.
  - ravi-delia 5y ago
    You're probably right on that mark, but on the other hand it is weird that it's not named after an astronomer. Of course, Harriet Tubman isn't much better on that score.
echelon 5y ago
Maybe we should stop using people names altogether and forget them when they die? It's not like they're relevant anymore. A Soylent Green fate for everyone -- into the memory hole! I'm LGBT and I'm not impacted by whether or not James Webb had straight Christian biases. Everyone of that era did. Galileo and Newton would have been pretty trash by today's standards. I'd even bet Einstein might've harbored prejudices despite going through what he did. It was the zeitgeist. Apollo and the old gods were pretty devious. Orion, who we're still naming things after, was a rapist in some stories. Where's the outrage for these cartoon characters? If we keep doing this, we need to rename America itself. Because Amerigo Vespucci isn't clean. And then where does it stop? History is fucked up. 20,000 years ago we all ate one another, and I'm not going to cry about it. Looking at the animal kingdom, we've come a long way. I'd hate to be game for a lion on the savannah. Or a Neanderthal snack. Past mistakes and evolution made us stronger, and there are too many problems on the horizon to fixate on trying to clean up and play pretend. Forgetting our past also weakens the muscles we had to develop in the first place. Are we going to strip George Washington from all the monuments, too? I think the better idea is to teach the history so that we're kinder and more mindful. This project has been known as James Webb since its inception, and it's busywork and posturing to change it. I'm LGBT, and frankly, I'm mad at this. I overwhelmingly get the sense that a group of people that I don't relate to very well are looking for targets to blame that conflict with their identity. I increasingly find myself less and less tied to a shared identity with these people and compelled to strong sense of individualism. James Webb doesn't exist anymore. The language token embeddings of his name call back history and the role he had in early NASA. I'm not going to blame him for anything. In fact, now I want to know more about him to enrich my understanding. I'm usually pretty liberal. I know my opinion on this issue isn't popular, but this is something that directly touches me. I'm an individual and I'm interested more in history than empty placating. I'm sure whatever LGBT person we rename the telescope after will be culturally significant. Maybe my problem is just that _I_ want to be the LGBT person that people in the future look up to for my hopefully future merits and accomplishments. I don't need to be told to look up to some dug up idol. I'm too busy looking forward instead of behind.
goodpoint 5y ago
> the value of erasing historical figures based on their actions in a very different past You are trying to conflate not glorifying someone with erasing them from history. They two completely different things. If anything, glorification of individuals blurs the lines between objective historical memory and moral judgement.
ryandrake 5y ago
> Why is it that perceived character flaws based on current social mores result in historical people being cancelled in our current climate? Additionally, think of some currently-benign things you regularly do today, that will be taboo in 30 years (hint: There's no way to know). All a future canceler has to do is trawl through your history and find all the things that you did or said today that are considered offensive in 2041.

matzab 5y ago

Refraining from honoring someone is not the same as erasing them.

runjake 5y ago
When you're quite literally erasing James Webb from the name, that seems like erasing and supports olivermark's point entirely.
- ineedasername 5y ago
  History isn't about who has their names on objects, that's just window dressing. Taking his name off an object when it was put there to honor him is clearly not that same as erasing his history.
- sp332 5y ago
  Asking people to forget his bigotry would be erasing everything but his name. Removing his name from the project is a potential result of a more complete knowledge of history, pending this investigation.

polytely 5y ago

There is a big difference between erasing someone from history and not naming something in someone's honor. It isn't like nasa is now going to scrub all the history books of the name James Webb or outlaw mentioning his name. I would think there are enough people worth naming a telescope after after.

whatshisface 5y ago
The suggestion mentioned in the article, Harriet Tubman, might not be the most appropriate name for a space telescope, and if that's really what's being suggested it sounds a little pandering, almost to the point of being constructed.
- polytely 5y ago
  Aye, it would be better to name it after an astronomer, even if you would want a women there are enough names to choose from. for example: https://youtu.be/damkjiFNn5E https://youtu.be/damkjiFNn5E Caroline Herschel Telescope would be cool, she mapped the skies so it feels appropriate
  - belorn 5y ago
    I wonder, if one dig through her private journals or songs, could a person find an view or opinion that in modern standards would not be acceptable to have? If so, should we then erase her name from the telescope and try again with a new candidate?
    - polytely 5y ago
      Sure, if you want to spend your time/effort on that and are able to mobilize and convince enough people to get it changed then you can do that. Im convinced there are enough good candidates that ~didn't actively participate in rooting out queer people from NASA~ [not accurate, read thread], which is kind of a low bar. Nobody (I think) is saying that everyone that gets something named after them must have been perfectly 'woke' by todays standards, but when you are naming something and you have the entirety of history to choose from, maybe don't pick James Webb.

gelert 5y ago

There is a difference between not celebrating and erasing. I agree with some of what you say here but I think asserting that not naming a telescope after somebody is erasing them from history is an unsupported leap - most people don't get their names on space telescopes and we don't think of them as having been erased.

whatshisface 5y ago
>most people don't get their names on space telescopes and we don't think of them as having been erased. Erasing is when there's something written somewhere, and then it's erased. So if you started with your name on something and ended without your name on something, that'd be an example of erasing your name.
- goodpoint 5y ago
  No. The incorrect statement was about erasing people from history books, not from a telescope.

hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago

While I agree with your comment, the decision to rename the telescope would make sense, since it was not named after an actual scientist like Hubble but after a former NASA manager.

awb 5y ago

> We need to have a serious think about the value of erasing historical figures based on their actions in a very different past. It’s like we assume that whatever they died believing they’d still believe today. I’m highly skeptical of that. Culture changes over time and people along with it. Except these people don’t have that opportunity to clarify or revisit their views because they’re dead.

olivermarks 5y ago
Exactly. I wrote the parent comment and recall a pretty senior Australian medical specialist friend of my wife visiting us in San Francisco at the height of the aids crisis. He was embarrassingly, virulently anti homosexual. Today the same guy has totally different views as society has evolved and probably doesn't even remember his former perspective. He's alive and when he dies will have his reputation intact. Had he died while being negative about gay people by current social mores he would have his views frozen for all time. Separately, also never underestimate people's life experiences shaping their views. We can all learn from events in other people's lives that shaped their perspective. Not healthy to rinse that away.

fay59 5y ago

Given the extremely short supply of telescopes deserving naming, it’s absurd to think that anyone who doesn’t have a telescope named after themselves has been erased from history. What you’re defending is James Webb’s immaculate memory. Please think long and hard about whether it’s worth defending the immaculate memory of anyone.

whatshisface 5y ago
I think there is one group of people who are assuming that because it's a diversity thing it's justified, and another group that thinks that because it's a diversity thing it's unjustified, whereas it may be that NASA is right and that it depends on some old documents that they have to get out of the files, none of which we have seen.
- ravi-delia 5y ago
  You're probably right on that mark, but on the other hand it is weird that it's not named after an astronomer. Of course, Harriet Tubman isn't much better on that score.

echelon 5y ago

Maybe we should stop using people names altogether and forget them when they die? It's not like they're relevant anymore. A Soylent Green fate for everyone -- into the memory hole! I'm LGBT and I'm not impacted by whether or not James Webb had straight Christian biases. Everyone of that era did. Galileo and Newton would have been pretty trash by today's standards. I'd even bet Einstein might've harbored prejudices despite going through what he did. It was the zeitgeist. Apollo and the old gods were pretty devious. Orion, who we're still naming things after, was a rapist in some stories. Where's the outrage for these cartoon characters? If we keep doing this, we need to rename America itself. Because Amerigo Vespucci isn't clean. And then where does it stop? History is fucked up. 20,000 years ago we all ate one another, and I'm not going to cry about it. Looking at the animal kingdom, we've come a long way. I'd hate to be game for a lion on the savannah. Or a Neanderthal snack. Past mistakes and evolution made us stronger, and there are too many problems on the horizon to fixate on trying to clean up and play pretend. Forgetting our past also weakens the muscles we had to develop in the first place. Are we going to strip George Washington from all the monuments, too? I think the better idea is to teach the history so that we're kinder and more mindful. This project has been known as James Webb since its inception, and it's busywork and posturing to change it. I'm LGBT, and frankly, I'm mad at this. I overwhelmingly get the sense that a group of people that I don't relate to very well are looking for targets to blame that conflict with their identity. I increasingly find myself less and less tied to a shared identity with these people and compelled to strong sense of individualism. James Webb doesn't exist anymore. The language token embeddings of his name call back history and the role he had in early NASA. I'm not going to blame him for anything. In fact, now I want to know more about him to enrich my understanding. I'm usually pretty liberal. I know my opinion on this issue isn't popular, but this is something that directly touches me. I'm an individual and I'm interested more in history than empty placating. I'm sure whatever LGBT person we rename the telescope after will be culturally significant. Maybe my problem is just that _I_ want to be the LGBT person that people in the future look up to for my hopefully future merits and accomplishments. I don't need to be told to look up to some dug up idol. I'm too busy looking forward instead of behind.

goodpoint 5y ago

> the value of erasing historical figures based on their actions in a very different past You are trying to conflate not glorifying someone with erasing them from history. They two completely different things. If anything, glorification of individuals blurs the lines between objective historical memory and moral judgement.

ryandrake 5y ago

> Why is it that perceived character flaws based on current social mores result in historical people being cancelled in our current climate? Additionally, think of some currently-benign things you regularly do today, that will be taboo in 30 years (hint: There's no way to know). All a future canceler has to do is trawl through your history and find all the things that you did or said today that are considered offensive in 2041.