Rant #3,097: The Name Game

My worlds are intersecting today.

My work as a remote worker, and the storyline for this very blog, will be one and the same today, to a certain extent, a rarity that does not happen very often.

The reason that I am doing this is that I feel that the story I am about to cover here, and will later for work, is an important story as well as an interesting story, but one that is getting scant coverage in the mass media.

So here is the story … and it relates to a number of name changes that the Department of Defense is making to ensure that base names honor the right people.

Nine Army installations named for Confederate figures will soon be renamed after people who better exemplify U.S. military and national values.

The changes will have a significant effect on the affected installations, as these name changes not only impact what these bases will now be called, but can impact everything from stationery to web addresses as these new names are implemented.

The changes begin with Fort Pickett, Va., which will officially become Fort Barfoot tomorrow. The eight other name changes to Army installations will soon follow.

In addition to Fort Pickett, other name changes scheduled to occur through October — with dates subject to change —include the following bases:

April 10: Fort Rucker, Ala., to become Fort Novosel; April 27: Fort Lee, Va., to become Fort Gregg-Adams; May 9: Fort Hood, Texas, to become Fort Cavazos; May 11: Fort Benning, Ga., to become Fort Moore; June 2: Fort Bragg, N.C., to become Fort Liberty; June 13: Fort Polk to become Fort Johnson; Aug. 25: Fort A.P. Hill, Va., to become Fort Walker; and Oct. 15: Fort Gordon, Ga., to become Fort Eisenhower.

While Army bases are the most conspicuous examples of name changes that will be made, many installations have street names or buildings named after Confederates, and these will eventually need to be changed.

In addition, the Navy will rename the cruiser USS Chancellorsville — whose name commemorates a Confederate victory during the Civil War — and the USNS Maury — named after a U.S. Navy officer who resigned his commission to fight for the Confederate Navy during that conflict.

And at this point in time, there might be many other names that commemorate the Confederates that will need to be changed.

According to the Department of Defense, some Army bases, “established in the build-up and during World War I,” were named for Confederate officers “in an effort to court support from local populations in the South.”

Some of these base names existed during the height of the Jim Crow Laws in the South, “so there was no consideration for the feelings of African Americans who had to serve at bases named after men who fought to defend slavery.”

After a long period of study of the base naming subject, in early January, the government’s Naming Commission recommended that at least nine Army bases change their names from those commemorating Confederate Army names to those more inviting to all Americans.

I don’t know about you, but I find this all pretty interesting.

And it gets even more interesting when you take into account that the former Fort Lee base, now named Fort Gregg-Adams, has its operations in the city of Fort Lee, Va., a name which is not set to be changed any time soon.

So the base itself is now copacetic, but the city it exists on is not.

And how long will it take for these affected base populations to endear themselves to the new names?

These names have been in place seemingly forever … how quickly will those service members and their families say they live and/or work on Fort Liberty rather than on Fort Bragg?

It is a true “name game,” but this is the world we live in.

My thought is that these specific name changes are warranted, but we have to be very careful with the changing of names, and the eradication of history.

Some of our citizens would like to purge us of the names of Washington, Lincoln, Jackson and Columbus because they simply don’t like things that they supposedly did during their lifetimes.

These people have toppled statues, spray-painted away their names, and tried to rewrite history by doing so.

Even if a Way-Back machine existed, you cannot change history.

If we are going to change names, let’s do it for the right reasons, not because the opinion of some want things to be a certain way, and if these changes are not made, then these people will be distressed enough to take the law into their own hands.

That is not the way to enact change, and it will never work.

Admittedly, this is a very touchy subject … why are these name changes I spoke about valid but others aren’t?

You can’t change history, but you can make the future better for all of us.