As Anti-Jefferson Rhetoric Swells, Ryan Stands Silent

by James A. Bacon

Here is what passes for logic at The Cavalier Daily, the student newspaper of the University of Virginia, a university once reputed for the excellence of its education:

We reject how the University’s physical environment — one that glorifies racists, slaveholders and eugenicists with statues and buildings named in their honor — upholds an enduring culture of white supremacy. There is a reason why Charlottesville’s local Klu Klux Klan Chapter hosted its inauguration ceremony at Jefferson’s Monticello tomb. There is a reason why white supremacists gathered with torches around Jefferson’s statue on the north side of the Rotunda. There is a reason why they felt comfortable marching through Grounds. Our physical environment — from statues to building names to Jefferson’s overwhelming presence — exalts people who held the same beliefs as the repugnant white supremacists in attendance at the “Unite the Right” rally. These buildings must be renamed and memorials removed.

Follow the syllogism: White supremacists rallied at Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello tomb. White supremacists are evil. (Unstated but necessary to complete the syllogism): Ergo, Jefferson is evil. Therefore, buildings and memorials to him and other White supremacists must be removed.

The CD editorial writers use the rhetorical device of guilt by association to tar Jefferson. Notably, this particular circumlocution holds Jefferson guilty by virtue of association with the Ku Klux Klan, which did not exist in Jefferson’s time, for activities undertaken some 200 years after he lived! The mystic chords of White supremacy, it seems, transcend space, time and causality.

Ordinarily, such incoherent thinking in a college publication would not warrant commentary in a blog about Virginia public policy. But the irrational animus against Jefferson exhibited by the CD editorialists is by no means limited to the student newspaper. Hatred of Jefferson is widespread in the university he founded, and the Ryan administration has permitted the virus to spread uncontested.

This intense loathing first came to the attention of UVa alumni a couple of years ago when a resident of the Lawn posted her infamous “F— UVA” sign on her door and subsequently referred to Jefferson as a “slave-holding rapist.” As shocking as alumni found that sentiment, we were dismayed to find that it was not an outlier. A significant body of thought at UVa, we discovered, postulated that the sin of being a slaveholder was so egregious as to obliterate all other considerations.

This view became institutionalized by the Commission on the History of Slavery and the University, which began as a commendable effort to broaden and enrich the university’s history by exploring the role of African Americans, but quickly hardened into a leftist orthodoxy that drew a straight line from the institution of slavery, Thomas Jefferson, Jim Crow-era segregation, eugenics, and massive resistance to modern-day White supremacy, omitting much along the way. The UVa-as-a-White-supremacist-institution then propagated through various courses, seminars and other channels such as the university student guides who give tours of the Lawn and Rotunda as adjuncts of the Admissions Department.

The Commission was launched during the tenure of former President Teresa Sullivan; thus it would not be fair to lay the entire blame for the current state of affairs upon the administration of President Jim Ryan. However, it can be said that Ryan and his entourage have been remarkably detached in the face of the upwelling of anti-Jeffersonian rhetoric and uncooperative with those who would defend the university’s founding.

One is tempted to conclude one of two things. Either President Ryan is largely in accord with the anti-Jefferson radicals and seeks for pragmatic reasons to hide his sympathies — perhaps to avoid offending alumni and donors — or he is simply unwilling to bring down the wrath of powerful internal constituencies by uttering a full-throated defense of the university’s founder.

As a member of The Jefferson Council, an alumni association organized to uphold the Jefferson legacy, I find myself increasingly leaning toward the former view: that Ryan and his coterie harbor negative views of Jefferson but do not state their beliefs openly for fear of alienating alumni and compromising the flow of donations.

Two recent incidents reinforce my conviction that this is so. First, The Jefferson Council sought to place an ad in Virginia, the UVa alumni magazine, reminding readers of Jefferson’s great accomplishments as well as his record of opposition to the slave trade, the geographic expansion of slavery, and, despite his status as a slaver-holder, to the institution itself. The ad also alluded briefly to the fact that Jefferson’s paternity of his slave Sally Hemings’ children was contested by reputable scholars. The alumni association turned down the ad. When we tried to appeal to the Board of Managers, we were obstructed at every turn and denied a hearing.

Now, the alumni association is independent from the university on paper (even though it works hand-in-glove with the Ryan administration on numerous matters). But Virginia Sports Properties is not independent. When The Jefferson Council tried to run a full-page ad in the fall football guide, our request was turned down flat… without explanation, and without even an answer to the question of who, up the chain of command from the ad salesman, made the decision.

Whatever the thinking of President Ryan, the practical effect of his administration is to give free reign to scholars and students eager to trash Jefferson’s historical reputation and erase his memory while blocking any effort by The Jefferson Council to defend him. Thus, the original offense of failing to respond to the calumnies against Jefferson has been compounded by another: the silencing of those who would contest the emerging orthodoxy.

UVa today would be unrecognizable to Thomas Jefferson, the champion of free speech and open inquiry. Apparently, that’s just fine to the people in power.

Full disclosure: The author is vice president-communications of The Jefferson Council.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

63 responses to “As Anti-Jefferson Rhetoric Swells, Ryan Stands Silent”

  1. Thomas Jefferson should have thought of all this before he founded the university…

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      He should have had the good sense to pen his “official” Legends of Thomas Jefferson.

      1. James McCarthy Avatar
        James McCarthy

        That project is tasked to the Jefferson Council and the members of that fan club.

      2. DJRippert Avatar
        DJRippert

        He tried an abbreviated version with his epitaph. He apparently missed the importance of the Louisiana Purchase in his “official” legends of Thomas Jefferson summary.

  2. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
    James Wyatt Whitehead

    If an employer hire one of these editors from UVA, BEWARE! Starting the first day on the job there will be a nonstop demand for change within the company. Probably try on quiet quitting too.

  3. DJRippert Avatar
    DJRippert

    If you want to understand Jim Ryan’s perspectives, read his books. Especially, “Five Miles Away, A World Apart: One City, Two Schools, and the Story of Educational Opportunity in Modern America”. It’s about the integration (or lack thereof) in the Richmond area public schools. While I haven’t read the book, I’ve read summaries and reviews. As best I can tell, Ryan believes that the City of Richmond will only have decent public schools after those schools are integrated with students from Henrico County.

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      “If you want to understand Jim Ryan’s perspectives, read his books. ”

      “While I haven’t read the book, I’ve read summaries and reviews.”

      Which, of course, just demands we ask, “How many of his books — as opposed to reviews of — have you actually read?” This is a proctored exam; He is watching.

      1. DJRippert Avatar
        DJRippert

        He’s written two. I discovered that today. One is a short expansion of a commencement speech he gave at Harvard. No interest. The other is the book I described in my comment. I would like to get the book and read it. In the meantime, the summary and comments by those who have read the book are the best I can do. Given Jim (and the Jefferson Council’s) fascination with Ryan, I thought I should pass along the info.

      2. DJRippert Avatar
        DJRippert

        He’s written two. I discovered that today. One is a short expansion of a commencement speech he gave at Harvard. No interest. The other is the book I described in my comment. I would like to get the book and read it. In the meantime, the summary and comments by those who have read the book are the best I can do. Given Jim (and the Jefferson Council’s) fascination with Ryan, I thought I should pass along the info.

  4. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Either that, or white supremacists are “willfully ignorant” (just in case the censor algorithm is watching).

    Legend v. History

  5. Shouldn’t the University Democrats — the founders of the KKK — be denied a presence on campus?

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      They aren’t? When was the last time Forrest Kelly, Forrest Tucker, or whatever his name was, came on campus?

    2. I wonder how long you all can keep pretending the Southern Strategy never happened.

      1. DJRippert Avatar
        DJRippert

        For as long as you can keep pretending that people like Robert Byrd (who Joe Biden eulogized at his funeral in 2010) didn’t recruit 150 of his friends and associates to create a new chapter of the Ku Klux Klan in Sophia, West Virginia.

        Robert Byrd was a Democrat in good standing until the day of his death.

  6. M. Purdy Avatar

    “The ad also alluded briefly to the fact that Jefferson’s paternity of his slave Sally Hemings’ children was contested by reputable scholars.” This is where things probably fell apart. It’s not clear to me to whom you’re referring, but based on other “reputable” scholars featured on this site (ahem, Ann McLean), my thought is that “reputable” might mean different things to different folks…

    1. walter smith Avatar
      walter smith

      Thank you for the casual sliming of Ann McLean. Why don’t you debate the statements that you deem not “reputable.” What were those statements if you can even repeat them, and then tell why they were beyond the pale.
      I’m betting you can’t. And I sincerely doubt Michael Paul Williams could either. It’s much easier to slime somebody.

      The report has been linked before. It is the Turner Scholars’ Commission report. The conclusion of 12 of the 13 scholars was that the Hemings allegations were almost certainly not true. The one dissent thought there was a possibility of truth.

      Further, I wouldn’t care if he did father children with her or not. The only reason this is done is to destroy the man. Many slaveowners had children with the slaves. Was it rape? Was it consensual? I don’t know. I wasn’t there. And if you argue consent was impossible due to the power dynamics, then please fire right now all professors who have relations with students. I won’t wait…
      Also, if you watch Henry Louis Gates’ Roots show, you will often find that that the black guest whose roots are being traced can be traced to a freed slave, and often because there was some white blood. Any child born was still a child created in the image of God. You Lefties only care about Hemings as a tool to destroy Jefferson, and the ancestors of Monticello slaves who are filled with hatred (courtesy of the UVA agitators) will be discarded by you as soon as TJ’s statue goes down.

      1. M. Purdy Avatar

        McLean smeared herself with her own crackpot statements. And calm down with the ‘you want to destroy Jefferson’ garbage. Jefferson is a great American, and I’m a great admirer. But I don’t need to believe in some mythology to admire him. He was deeply gifted and deeply flawed. And he was very likely the father of Sally’s children. I have not read Turner’s study–though I recall him as a bit of a reactionary at the law school– but this is where the weight of the evidence landed: “While there are some who disagree, the Foundation’s scholarly advisors and the larger community of academic historians who specialize in early American history have concurred for many years that the evidence is sufficiently strong to state that Thomas Jefferson fathered at least six children with Sally Hemings.”

        1. walter smith Avatar
          walter smith

          That doesn’t make it true. So, a cabal of Leftist scholars agree to defame him, and it can’t be attacked?
          And you can dismiss Turner as “reactionary.” Can I dismiss you as an ignorant fabulist?
          And thanks for the new slime on Ann McLean. Now she’s a crackpot. Please explain why her statements were crackpot.
          What does it take for you to just dismiss law professors? I dismiss Goluboff as a Marxist, because she is. I dismiss Doug Laycock as a religious expert because he is not an originalist. I dismiss the two professors on the free speech committee because the free speech statement was not true to Jeffersonian ideals and watered down pablum. Glad I took care of that!

          1. M. Purdy Avatar

            1. The U.S. Constitution was broken not when the South seceded, but “when Lincoln called up 75,000 troops to fight against secession.”
            2. Lincoln’s actions were akin to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
            3. “And of course we know slavery is not good, but I think … slavery would have been outlawed in the South within five or 10 years but they wanted to do it on their own time.”

            C-c-c-c-crack. Pot. Crackpot.

          2. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            Those were her opinions. So why are they crackpot? Try to explain as opposed to making a bald assertion. Would the outcome for slaves have been better if a peaceful end had happened? Would that have been better for all? Do you know how many freed slaves died after being “freed?”
            I think slavery would have come to an end within about 20 years. Another friend thinks by 1900. We can still talk, even though he is wrong! So tell me why she is a crackpot. What is your better evidence? You indicate you’re a lawyer. Make your case.

          3. M. Purdy Avatar

            You can read my post in the original Ann McLean thread explaining why each of those statements is looney tunes. Do your research; show me you’re a lawyer.

          4. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            Nope. You first. Wasted enough time with you. You think Goluboff is good. That’s disqualifying right there.

          5. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            The reason for 1 negates the possibility of 3. If left to their own devices, Virginia would have had slavery in 1950. Jim Crow is the proof.

            As for Heming’s descendants, there’s probably DNA left in a tooth. Dig him up! Not as sexy as “Lock her up”, but it would be fruitful.

          6. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            What I like about item #3 is the notion that the South would commit its lifeblood to the preservation of slavery and its economic benefits only to eliminate it by choice. It is the equivalent of saying had Britain only capitulated after Dunkirk, there would have been no Holocaust. Does anyone honestly believe had Churchill surrendered that there would be a Jew left in Europe?

          7. M. Purdy Avatar

            Right, and let’s destroy our society and get 600K people killed for an institution with billions in market value, that we’re aggressively expanding to western territories, but we’re going to get rid of anyway for some unstated reason. Makes sense! Oh, and when we do get rid of it, you can be sure that our former slaves will be equals…because isn’t that what the CSA is all about?

          8. M. Purdy Avatar

            Right, and let’s destroy our society and get 600K people killed for an institution with billions in market value, that we’re aggressively expanding to western territories, but we’re going to get rid of anyway for some unstated reason. Makes sense! Oh, and when we do get rid of it, you can be sure that our former slaves will be equals…because isn’t that what the CSA is all about?

  7. Rafaelo Avatar

    A constructive suggestion: The Board of Visitors should require incoming 1st years to have read one (1) Jefferson biography. Jefferson, the Art of Power is pretty good. Jefferson’s failed efforts to abolish slavery as a young legislator; Congress censoring his Declaration of Independence to remove his complaint that the English brought us slavery; Sally Hemmings; the startled dinner guest who saw an enslaved mirror image of Jefferson serving dinner. And oh, by the way, something about founding a country, and then the very University at which student editors of the Cavalier Daily now are free to flaunt their ignorance.

  8. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    There’s a pretty good article in Wiki about Jefferson and Slavery. It’s based on more than 170 references:

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/91c8dcd55e52e4986171272fa66c16289a749129e4e6793fbe22fe18012380d2.jpg

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      But Larry, Jefferson didn’t own slaves. Didn’t you study Virginia History? They were business partners and happy Negros.

  9. john harvie Avatar
    john harvie

    Wonder if W&M will cancel his graduation diploma or whatever was awarded in his day.

  10. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Why should Ryan have to say anything when he has this so-called TJC to do that?

  11. Helen Dragas, a “reasonable democrat”, to her credit saw the downward trend that hard left leadership was taking UVA and attempted to do what was in the best interests of the institution and decouple political ideology from the Jeffersonian ideals of a UVA education. Ryan is merely Sullivans force multiplier but this trend away from Jefferson is the will of the board. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sh6VsLByAXE

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      And what happened next?

      1. What we have now is what happened next. Now UVA has an even more bloated board happy as pigs in shit wallowing in cash while students bear more tuition brunt and UVA fails to maintain their once great standing while Stanford continues to accel while expanding access. Name some great schools that copy the current UVA business model. Name them.

        Dragas was right all along and honest analysis proves this. While UVA chugged along, Stanford and other top institutions blew by. https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/newsroom/school-news/stanford-launches-building-business-models-online-course

        1. M. Purdy Avatar

          “Honest analysis”? What are you talking about? UVa is in the best financial position it’s ever been in, ranks nationally, and had record applications and competitiveness for its incoming class.

          1. They are raising tuition why.. hoarding obscene cash troves for whom?

          2. M. Purdy Avatar

            It’s still a great deal. But you’re right that they should be more generous with their endowment in giving scholarships.

          3. And that was a driving force behind the boards decision before Dubby Wynn launched a war salvo at Dragas.

            A great education for the few elite or the many? What was Jeffersons intent?

          4. M. Purdy Avatar

            It’s kind of a false dichotomy. It doesn’t have to be either, and ideally it’s not. It should still be the flagship elite university, but be generous enough to not be solely for the elite. That’s my two cents, anyway.

          5. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            any more or less than always and like other higher ed?

            you guys and your “what-about-ism”. geeze.

    2. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      ” Dragas and a handful of fellow plotters on the board forced Sullivan to resign because the president supposedly wasn’t moving fast enough to address admittedly serious financial and technological trends threatening U-Va. and other public universities. In particular, they wanted quick action to cut costs and embrace online learning.”

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/helen-dragass-missteps-show-need-to-change-makeup-of-u-va-board/2012/06/27/gJQAOLnd7V_story.html

      1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
        James C. Sherlock

        Cut costs? what a concept. Embrace online learning? And that was before COVID. Helen Dragas was a visionary.

        1. She still is even moreso.

        2. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          Yep – a difference of opinion on strategic directions but not about Anti-Jefferson, racism, slavery, etc

          right?

          1. DJRippert Avatar
            DJRippert

            You are right, as far as I remember. The debate was about the future strategy for UVa without the culture war arguments.

  12. Donald Smith Avatar
    Donald Smith

    “Ryan and his coterie harbor negative views of Jefferson but do not state their beliefs openly for fear of alienating alumni and compromising the flow of donations.”

    Another possible reason they “do not state their beliefs openly”—they’re cowards.

  13. disqus_VYLI8FviCA Avatar
    disqus_VYLI8FviCA

    Censorship is the primary tool of those with a poor argument or those lacking the skills to defend their position through logic and reason. The leadership at UVa and ignorant yet sanctimonious students, too far indoctrinated to listen to opposing points of view lean on censorship heavily to avoid having to present their positions supported by reason rather than misdirected emotion.

  14. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    The decent moderation of today will be the least of human things tomorrow. At the time of the Spanish Inquisition, the opinion of good sense and of the good medium was certainly that people ought not to burn too large a number of heretics; extreme and unreasonable opinion obviously demanded that they should burn none at all. -Maurice Maeterlinck, poet, dramatist, and Nobel laureate (29 Aug 1862-1949)

    Slavery was an institution marked by brutality, rape, murder, mutilation, breeding, buying and selling of human beings. It is inescapable. Thomas Jefferson was a slaver, and if naught but by association was tolerant and guilty of all. TJC hasn’t enough whitwash. The argument of “But, there were good Nazis,” just doesn’t wash.

    Of course, the question is, “What to do about it?” As a W&M alumni, the solution is obvious — raze the damned place brick by brick.

    1. Why “brick by brick”? Are you concerned that bulldozers will emit too much CO2?

      😉

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        Pleasure. No way W&M stops a UVa running back. Next best thing.

        1. What? Hit him with a brick?

          1. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            If W&M had someone who could hit a running back with a brick then they’d have a quarterback.

          2. Nice!

  15. Peter Galuszka Avatar
    Peter Galuszka

    Don’t you have anything better to do than debate student editors at the Cavalier Daily?

    1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      You read it.

    2. DJRippert Avatar
      DJRippert

      It is a worthy point about the attitudes of some UVa students in positions of power (for students). However, I graduated from UVa 41 years ago and the students who worked at the Cavalier Daily weren’t generally representative of the student body then and are probably not now.

      Journalism does seem to attract a lot of odd ducks, wouldn’t you say?

  16. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
    f/k/a_tmtfairfax

    If one goes back to judge dead people by current standards, shouldn’t that apply across the board? Why not investigate the ancestors of the leaders of the anti-Jefferson crowd and find out what they did or didn’t do in their lifetimes. If they too are descendants of slaveholders or Anglicans, who discriminated against damn near everyone, shouldn’t that be publicized? If we are liable for the sins of our ancestors, we all should be. And our bad ancestors called out.

    Both former President Obama and I are descended from Mareen “the Emigrant” Duvall, who owned slaves. And I have a few Anglican ancestors too. I suspect that so is the former President. What are we to do?

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      Part of it goes to who was adopted as a hero of Jim Crow and White Supremacy.

      Black folks pretty much take a dim view of Jim Crow and their heros.

      Which is funny as hell when these issues like this one is a food fight between white folks as to who is “woke” and who is racist and such.

      1. DJRippert Avatar
        DJRippert

        Heroes of Jim Crow? Like politicians who, in their twenties during the 1980s, dressed up in blackface or wearing KKK uniforms. Or, who nicknamed themselves “Coonman”?

        1. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
          f/k/a_tmtfairfax

          If this were true, why didn’t the Washington Post write about it day-in and day-out for months? After all, Democracy Dies in Darkness.

          But this can give comfort to the parents, spouses and children of ax-murders and serial killers. Their relative could have been a member of the MSM.

  17. UnicornSparklesEnergy Avatar
    UnicornSparklesEnergy

    They are so mean!

    Hatred of Jefferson is widespread in the university he founded, and the Ryan administration has permitted the virus to spread uncontested.

  18. Todays Marxists throwing shade would not let Jefferson get a job at UVA.

Leave a Reply