Horrors of slavery make distinction meaningless

I do not agree with Chris Churchill in his column “Philip Schuyler still stands two years later,” May 10. Churchill wrote, “Schuyler was honored in Albany despite his owning slaves, while the men of the Confederacy were honored because they never wanted slavery to end. Schuyler helped build a country that advanced the cause of freedom, however imperfectly, while those who fought for the Confederacy sought to divide it.”

So what? The horror and inhumanity of slavery make the distinction meaningless.

Yet, I am only in favor of targeted removals of monuments that exalt slaveholders. I was horrified when the Taliban blew up the Buddhas of Bamiyan and would be equally aghast if someone even proposed blowing up the Jefferson Memorial.

Two years ago, I wrote the mayor requesting the removal of the statue in Townsend Park because it honors a venture in imperial and colonial oppression. Given the logistics and costs of removal, I would now favor keeping it in place and adding a marker that contextualizes the event.

The arguments against removal of the Schuyler statue transform the history and freedom of one class of people into the history and freedom of all, which obviously it wasn’t, and suggest that the freedom of white males was worthy enough to overlook the crime of slavery.

To suggest that there’s much more to slave-owning patriots than slavery is like saying that slavery was just a minor blemish on an otherwise rosy cheek.

But, again, each case should be treated individually and the community should be heard.

In my case, I wonder if the mayor ever read my letter.

José E. Cruz, PH.D.

Albany University at Albany