T.C. Williams suit.
- Thread starter AnnapSpider
- Start date
As I watch these idiotic school presidents try to support the
students backing the slaughter of Jews, has there been any progress
in Mr. Smith’s suit of our idiot and the University?
students backing the slaughter of Jews, has there been any progress
in Mr. Smith’s suit of our idiot and the University?
Because he doesn't deserve a cent? Because the gift TC Williams made was not contingent on us naming the school after him?
For someone who professes to love the U of R you sure seem to want some pretty serious harm done here.
Because the University of Richmond has swallowed the poison of political correctness. Free thought and the competition of ideas is lost.
After his family gave the school millions of dollars and never knew there would be foolish people that would
try to change history, and be allowed to use the example of the schools name to symbolize mistakes of the
past, along comes someone who thinks that by removing the name will matter to students 5 years from now.
I want harm to the school? No, I want logic to become normal thinking among the alumni. (Probably fantasy on
my part)
I want my money back for all the dumb purchases I made in my life, for all the gifts I bought my ex-girlfriend, for all the baseball lessons I took that didn't end up resulting in me making the major leagues. Who can I sue??
That's irrelevant though. They didn't give money on the condition that the school be named for him and then never changed for any reason.
The board could decide tomorrow to change the name of the university to the Kanye West School of Instagram Studies, and it wouldn't void the endowment. People are free to disagree with the reason behind the name change, but unless you made a contribution contingent upon the name never changing, too bad. Change is part of life.
The board could decide tomorrow to change the name of the university to the Kanye West School of Instagram Studies, and it wouldn't void the endowment. People are free to disagree with the reason behind the name change, but unless you made a contribution contingent upon the name never changing, too bad. Change is part of life.
if they claim the gift was subject to such conditions I would like to read the agreement firsthand.
Like you Eight Legger. You add so much to the board, but on this one seems like a small view to me.
Don't know how much the Williams gave to the school or anything with respect to naming rights considerations, if any. Pretty sure the family has given a lot more than you and me combined.
Not the point. This renaming ruckus is ridiculous.
I would never dream of judging you now by the contemporary social standards accepted in the era of your grandfather or great grandfather.
Don't know how much the Williams gave to the school or anything with respect to naming rights considerations, if any. Pretty sure the family has given a lot more than you and me combined.
Not the point. This renaming ruckus is ridiculous.
I would never dream of judging you now by the contemporary social standards accepted in the era of your grandfather or great grandfather.
Appreciate that, and I would say the same about you! And I get it. I'm not wild about changing the names of everything, and I understand the fact that people have a wide range of opinions on this (and many things, of course). But in this case, the line was drawn at "Did you own slaves? Yes or no" and the school apparently is willing to live with the decision to strip the names of everyone who did.
At that point it just becomes a free market situation. Either the majority of people hate the decision, stop giving and the school goes bankrupt, or the majority support it and life goes on.
At that point it just becomes a free market situation. Either the majority of people hate the decision, stop giving and the school goes bankrupt, or the majority support it and life goes on.
Approach taken by UR was intellectually shallow despite being replete with "study groups". "Feel good" presentism. Unfortunately, they apparently don't understand, let alone appreciate, what "presentism" means. (worth looking up)
The name change line drawn by UR was a sop to current social media and Wokeness, not to serious intellectual considerations. School desperately wanted to be part of the "in crowd" in higher ed so we would show well in the inside beauty shows (ratings), a cottage industry in and of itself. Had to show our bonafides and not our (fill in the blank), but I'm thinking gonads which we apparently no longer possess.
The threat to Higher Ed (possibly an oxymoron) is not a lack of DEI, but a grifting to monoculturalism where views outside of the current prescribed meme are vilified and censored.
We send our young to college to have their often comfortable views challenged, not to be indoctrinated by the latest craze. Was hoping UR understood that, but not what i am seeing with the name changes and in a host of other less obvious areas.
The name change line drawn by UR was a sop to current social media and Wokeness, not to serious intellectual considerations. School desperately wanted to be part of the "in crowd" in higher ed so we would show well in the inside beauty shows (ratings), a cottage industry in and of itself. Had to show our bonafides and not our (fill in the blank), but I'm thinking gonads which we apparently no longer possess.
The threat to Higher Ed (possibly an oxymoron) is not a lack of DEI, but a grifting to monoculturalism where views outside of the current prescribed meme are vilified and censored.
We send our young to college to have their often comfortable views challenged, not to be indoctrinated by the latest craze. Was hoping UR understood that, but not what i am seeing with the name changes and in a host of other less obvious areas.
I agree that things r not named in perpetuity but KE Spider makes some valid points. U of R did it for the woke pr purposes - and perhaps in risk assessment that was enough reason - but it wasn’t based on a true intellectual approach (ironic when trying so hard to be part of the academic elite) or some strong moral ground.
Let’s remember the initial decision was no change to the names. Also 8 Legger I don’t think the line was owning slaves yes or no but simply supporting slavery or segregation.
The University of Richmond used slave labor. Part of campus is former plantation & slave burial ground, correct? Richmond heavily involved in slave trade. It is arguably the most racist U.S. city ever being the former Capital of the Confederacy. But we use that name with pride. As if only an individual person can support slavery. Richmond had 1000 times bigger role than some dude named Jeter or Puryear. Where is the outcry to change Richmond? Maybe it’s coming.
If Yale was on a dorm name and not the namesake of the University it would have been gone. Instead it survives and so does Thomas Jefferson all over UVA even tho he likely raped a slave.
I’m not advocating for any of that of course but I roll my eyes at the hypocrisy esp from the so called academic elite. TC Williams family doesn’t have a case imo but on some level they have still been defamed. They have to pay for the much worse sins of others. Take it out on the little guy. U of Kentucky cheating? Uh oh time to come down hard on Morehead St. & teach them a lesson.
Let’s remember the initial decision was no change to the names. Also 8 Legger I don’t think the line was owning slaves yes or no but simply supporting slavery or segregation.
The University of Richmond used slave labor. Part of campus is former plantation & slave burial ground, correct? Richmond heavily involved in slave trade. It is arguably the most racist U.S. city ever being the former Capital of the Confederacy. But we use that name with pride. As if only an individual person can support slavery. Richmond had 1000 times bigger role than some dude named Jeter or Puryear. Where is the outcry to change Richmond? Maybe it’s coming.
If Yale was on a dorm name and not the namesake of the University it would have been gone. Instead it survives and so does Thomas Jefferson all over UVA even tho he likely raped a slave.
I’m not advocating for any of that of course but I roll my eyes at the hypocrisy esp from the so called academic elite. TC Williams family doesn’t have a case imo but on some level they have still been defamed. They have to pay for the much worse sins of others. Take it out on the little guy. U of Kentucky cheating? Uh oh time to come down hard on Morehead St. & teach them a lesson.
Of course, there's tons of hypocrisy to go around when you consider that 13 presidents owned slaves, and as you said, several did a lot worse than just own them.
I'd say names of towns are different from names of people, at least in this sense, (except when they are one and the same). If there was a guy named Fred Richmond who did a bunch of awful things, then you'd probably have some movements to change the name. Since there wasn't, it's a more nebulous thing.
And yep, UR definitely has its own reckoning to go through, for sure. This is part of it and probably the fact that the school recognized its own racist history contributed to wanting to shed as many connections to that past as possible.
Except of course the #1 connection by far - Richmond. The capital of the confederacy, the capital of supporting slavery. If u r looking for disassociation that’s staring the school right in the face. That’s why it was arguably just a check the box exercise as mentioned by KE Spider.
Let's put this in perspective. A quote which may offend some, but a historical fact.
Who said this?
"I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races—that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermingling with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which will ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together, there must be the position of superior. I am as much as any other man in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."
It is a direct quote by Abraham Lincoln in 1858 Senatorial debate with Stephen Douglas.
We renamed campus buildings for less than this. Should we raze the Lincoln Memorial?
Who said this?
"I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races—that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermingling with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which will ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together, there must be the position of superior. I am as much as any other man in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."
It is a direct quote by Abraham Lincoln in 1858 Senatorial debate with Stephen Douglas.
We renamed campus buildings for less than this. Should we raze the Lincoln Memorial?
Last edited:
Wood, have to plead ignorance here. When I Google RWSM, get Regional Watershed Spreadsheet Model. Somehow, just know that was not the dig you intended.
Response really minimized rather than addressed the issue of double standards. It is illogical to vilify one side while giving the other a pass for holding basically the same mistaken and racist views.
But not going too far down this road. Unlikely anyone will have a change of heart so it would just be more cultural war noise. There is more than I like already.
Last edited:
Right-wing screech machine.
To my knowledge, Lincoln did not own slaves. And his position on Blacks changed considerably from 1858 until his death in 1865, as proven by his Emancipation Proclamation, working with the House on the 13th amendment and other bills passed by his administration.
And unlike former Confederate generals and government officials, Lincoln was held in high regard by Blacks following the Civil War.
So why would we ever want to raze the Lincoln Memorial?
To my knowledge, Lincoln did not own slaves. And his position on Blacks changed considerably from 1858 until his death in 1865, as proven by his Emancipation Proclamation, working with the House on the 13th amendment and other bills passed by his administration.
And unlike former Confederate generals and government officials, Lincoln was held in high regard by Blacks following the Civil War.
So why would we ever want to raze the Lincoln Memorial?
Several memorials to Lincoln were torn down subsequent to the BLM race riots in 2020. There were some in Portland, Boston, and Chicago, and more. Lincoln opened up the west for expansion (the Homestead Act), killed American Indians ( the Pacific Railway Act) and relocated former slaves to Liberia. Lincoln's record of intolerance against minorities was atrocious by today's standards, all for the dream of Manifest Destiny.
Thanks for the clarification. Don't know a soul who has ever known me that would characterize me in that manner, but ok.
Lincoln never owned slaves, correct, but his wife came from a Kentucky family that did. Somehow, it wasn't high enough of a issue to preclude him from wedding her. Seemed to get along just fine with his in laws.
The Emancipation Proclamation only freed slaves in Confederate held areas. For instance, in Virginia it would have freed slaves in Richmond, but not Alexandria. No slaves were freed in Union controlled areas of the 11 states comprising the Confederacy or in slave holding states that did not secede.
Beyond that it was done for two reasons: 1) encourage slave insurrections in those areas where it applied and more, importantly, 2) to discourage cotton hungry Great Britain and France from recognizing the CSA and providing military aid to the Confederacy.
Lincoln said, "If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that."
Could not be more clear he was driven by saving the Union. IMO, he gets a pass on many racial issues, but he was a man of his era as were the folks that had their names stripped from campus buildings.
Point of my original post was double standards are illogical. If that view makes me a RWSM, so be it. (And no, don't believe Lincoln Memorial should be razed.)
This whole scenario of "Your sin is greater than my sin" philosophy is the inherent arrogance. Douglas Southall Freeman was "scrubbed" for saying the "wrong" things or holding the "wrong" views. Drive down Three Chopt Road and you can pass the high school that bears his name. To date Henrico has remained more open minded than alma mater. This is a "zero sum game." Unless every human name is removed there will always be the names of "sinners" somewhere.
Lincoln's record against American Indians set Indian policy for a century after his demise. There is a reason the Cherokee and Osage raised several brigades to fight for the Confederacy. Their minority rights were protected in the South.
As with most Tribes, they owned many Black slaves. When the Southeastern Tribes were forced to relocate (ethnic cleansing) to Indian Territory (Oklahoma), the infamous Trail of Tears, they brought their slaves with them. The Native American Confederate brigades you mention were formed in and largely fought in Oklahoma. Some threw in on the Union side too.
The forced relocation happened long before Lincoln. Andrew Jackson was the heavy on this. Know nothing of Lincoln's policy toward Native Americans.
Henrico might be more "open minded" than UR, but they did change Byrd Middle to Quioccasin Middle and the Douglas Freeman Rebels are now the Mavericks.
Byrd Middle was named for the US Senator, Harry F. Byrd, Jr., who arranged funding for the school. Sen. Byrd was a Virginia Democrat, before becoming an Independent. Like many of us, Harry Byrd felt the Democrat Party left him, he didn't leave it.
Last edited:
Much as many feel now, they didn't leave the Republican party, the party left them.
Did you change their names? Maybe you could get your money back .
Foolish comparison
The plaintiff should simply just show the court the document stating, "In exchange for this donation the university agrees to name the law school in TC Williams honor."
Oh wait, no such document exists, because no such promise was ever made?
Oh wait, no such document exists, because no such promise was ever made?
it needs to go further, and will not change the name, but if they do they will return the donation with interest.
A gift is a gift once delivered the donee is free to use as they choose unless strict conditions are established.
I believe the use of the donor’s name changes things. Along with the fact that, at the time slavery was legal
and accepted in Virginia.
Putting up bronze plaques stating that the donor and his heirs have long sense regretted the past, but continue
to donate in a worthwhile endeavor, where discrimination is in no way acceptable.
How many African Americans, Asian Americans, Latin Americans have proudly graduated from T.C. Williams
School of Law? They have no school name thanks to Caucasian liberals.
Ok how far can we go to connect the dots of racism and cruelty. Let’s see connections to those who enslaved Irish
citizens conquered by Cromwell who were shipped to USA or descendants of African tribes who sold conquered tribes
to the Dutch who shipped and sold these slaves all over the place or every American citizen who was part of the extermination and incarceration of the many Native Indian tribes. There is so much that has happened in the past that
there are few if any families who have a totally clean slate in their lineages. I went to school and was in Boy Scouts with Bill Ryland who was the great grandson associated with Ryland Hall. My friend Bill was a kind and quiet leader. His great grandfather may have been of similar character, he just owned slaves. Do many know that Stonewall Jackson has a stained glass window of him teaching Bible Study to his slaves and others and it is in a AME church in Lynchburg and was put there by families of his former slaves. I am rarely on this site but my giving to my institution is about to come to an end as my connections to its past are being erased.
citizens conquered by Cromwell who were shipped to USA or descendants of African tribes who sold conquered tribes
to the Dutch who shipped and sold these slaves all over the place or every American citizen who was part of the extermination and incarceration of the many Native Indian tribes. There is so much that has happened in the past that
there are few if any families who have a totally clean slate in their lineages. I went to school and was in Boy Scouts with Bill Ryland who was the great grandson associated with Ryland Hall. My friend Bill was a kind and quiet leader. His great grandfather may have been of similar character, he just owned slaves. Do many know that Stonewall Jackson has a stained glass window of him teaching Bible Study to his slaves and others and it is in a AME church in Lynchburg and was put there by families of his former slaves. I am rarely on this site but my giving to my institution is about to come to an end as my connections to its past are being erased.
My grandmother had Ryland's nephew as a professor at UR. It is sad what they are doing to people.
I get what you are saying on one hand, but "he just owned slaves" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence.
