Rhode Island and Providence Plantations...still

[Extollager]

Rhode Island Name Change Amendment, Question 1 (2010) - Ballotpedia

Lovevcraft would be pleased, I'm sure.

 

[j d worthington]

I hadn't been able to keep up with this one, and I must expect that I was more than half expecting them to finally change the name. I am, however, glad they did not. This is one of the few instances where the name still bears an intensely strong connection to our history, and by its very existence reminds us of those connections in ways that the popular conception of either the North, the South, or slavery (or our agricultural basis, for the matter of that) do not. I would hate to have this one changed for reasons of political correctness. I'd much rather it be kept as a reminder of what we were and how much things have changed, not only regarding slavery itself, but a way of life which did have much to offer.

 

[Wiglaf]

I hadn't been able to keep up with this one, and I must expect that I was more than half expecting them to finally change the name. I am, however, glad they did not. This is one of the few instances where the name still bears an intensely strong connection to our history, and by its very existence reminds us of those connections in ways that the popular conception of either the North, the South, or slavery (or our agricultural basis, for the matter of that) do not. I would hate to have this one changed for reasons of political correctness. I'd much rather it be kept as a reminder of what we were and how much things have changed, not only regarding slavery itself, but a way of life which did have much to offer.

You realize that the founding of Providence Plantation in 1636 had nothing to do with slavery. However, they did pass a law against slavery in 1652. Plantation meant settlement or colony. Only much later did slavery come to be associated with the other meaning of a large cultivated area of land.

 

[j d worthington]

You realize that the founding of Providence Plantation in 1636 had nothing to do with slavery. However, they did pass a law against slavery in 1652. Plantation meant settlement or colony. Only much later did slavery come to be associated with the other meaning of a large cultivated area of land.

The founding did not, no; but slavery did play a part in Rhode Island's history in various ways. However, the association for most between the word and the practice is strong enough to make this an issue, however ill-founded.

In any event, the two (Rhode Island and slavery) did have a complicated relationship, as even when such laws were passed, money from the practice still was a part of Rhode Island's economy; yet it was also among the first to support anti-slavery movements in general.

Be that as it may, I have objections to such a change in name brought about by recent -- and historically short-sighted -- political agendas. It is much more important we re-learn how complex such issues are, especially historically, and how and why the names of the various states were chosen -- to get back in touch with our history before attempting to rewrite it in such a fashion.