Austin city report recommends Austin change its name as Steven F Austin owned slaves - Is Washington, DC and state next?

Why stop there? What about all the states and cities whose names are sick mutilations of native American words? I propose we rename all localities using a random number generator.

They should rename all cities in America after Japanese runners. Imagine instead of Austin, Texas it would be name Toshihiko Seko and Washington D.C should be changed to YUKI MF KAWUACHI.

Oh Washington actively campaigned against anti-slavery movements? I wasn't aware....

And you wonder why people think you might be racist....

Let's just pretend it was named after the real Steve Austin instead

https://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-you-can-talk-about-your-psalms-and-your-john-3-16-well-austin-3-16-says-i-just-whooped-stone-cold-steve-austin-59-17-06.jpg

And all along I thought it was named after

http://www.syfy.com/sites/syfy/files/wire/legacy/styles/blog_post_media/public/images/sixmilliondollarman.jpg?itok=AOjcXADz

I've never understood why we are only obsessed with race. My person take is all of these dudes lived in an era when women couldn't vote. So if you are going to rename stuff, shouldn't we also strip all names of sexist dudes as well?

rojo wrote:

It appears that Washington DC, Washington state, the University of Washington, WSU , etc. will all need a new name. Any one have any ideas?

Who would have thought Washington would change before the Redskins

It's still WWF to me wrote:

Let's just pretend it was named after the real Steve Austin instead

I thought it was?

rojo wrote:

I've never understood why we are only obsessed with race. My person take is all of these dudes lived in an era when women couldn't vote. So if you are going to rename stuff, shouldn't we also strip all names of sexist dudes as well?

I am going to say this kindly. This is a very ignorant statement. The history of this nation, before and after it's formation, was based on racial segregation and the belief that white people are superior and other races are less than. While slavery was banned with the 13th Amendement in 1865, a system of racial segregation was embedded in law until the 1960s. Many people still alive today were subject to this system. We are obsessed with race because the history of the nation until the 1960s was legally divided based on race and the effects still linger today.

That said, renaming stuff is stupid and does nothing to solve current problems.

Let’s rename it Rossiville.

rojo wrote:

I've never understood why we are only obsessed with race. My person take is all of these dudes lived in an era when women couldn't vote. So if you are going to rename stuff, shouldn't we also strip all names of sexist dudes as well?

might be because of a little something called slavery? Or as you Texans like to call it ...'states rights'

Washington was ahead of his times on slavery, Austin was an active campaigner FOR slavery. Only a moran would struggle to understand the difference.

I'm not saying the city needs to change it's name, but it's an entirely different discussion than changing things named after Washington.

Making the comparison looks a lot like a race-baiting instigation.......but this is rojo, ... so of course not.

If it wasn't worth renaming things , then there would probably be a lot more Nazi era names in Germany. I agree it can, and usually does, go too far. That doesn't mean it's not worthwhile. In the end, no one is a saint, but that doesn't mean we have to respect the devils with monuments and schools. Place names are powerful form of politics and shouldn't be taken too lightly.

The same people complaining about changing the names of places are probably the same one who were chowing down on 'Freedom' fries not that long ago.

We can’t change history. There were and still are horrible things in our country. I just don’t think renaming everything makes sense. When are women’s rights groups going to come out and say we need to rename everything Kennedy, MLK, Clinton, etc because they were screwing around on their wives? Yes, I know that slavery is way way worse than having a mistress but where is the line drawn? Someone agreed w slavery, someone had slaves, someone fought for slavery? All are wrong.

There's a zero percent chance that Austin will be renamed so getting excited about what cities could be next is a waste of time.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

There's a zero percent chance that Austin will be renamed so getting excited about what cities could be next is a waste of time.

So your sayingjust get excited about the first city to change?

rojo wrote:

I've never understood why we are only obsessed with race. My person take is all of these dudes lived in an era when women couldn't vote. So if you are going to rename stuff, shouldn't we also strip all names of sexist dudes as well?

Are you really this ignorant???

only the first sub 4 mile has value wrote:

[quote]SDSU Aztec wrote:

There's a zero percent chance that Austin will be renamed so getting excited about what cities could be next is a waste of time.

So your sayingjust get excited about the first city to change?[/quote

Get excited only after Austin, or a similar city, is renamed. It would require approval in a statewide vote in Texas which isn't going to happen. Probably over 90% of Americans don't know who Austin is named after so it's not comparable to Stalingrad being renamed.

I don’t know what’s more ignorant, the comment, or thinking there is even a 1% chance that Austin will be renamed.

well one thing wrote:

Washington was ahead of his times on slavery, Austin was an active campaigner FOR slavery. Only a moran would struggle to understand the difference.

straw man. The impetus is to remove slaveholders, not merely the most egregious slaveholders.

And the existence of worse slaveholders than others is no excuse for letting the others off the hook. That's especially important regarding the northern states, as few people are aware they were almost all slave states too when the country first formed. And if they had fewer slaves, they were still every bit as racist as the south was, and racism is the real target of the purge.

Ben Franklin, noted early abolitionist, was a slaveholder. Who knows that?