That the United States Capitol, and specifically the Statue of Freedom that rests above it, was built by slave labor has long been a source of shame. The House sought to redress that grievance on Tuesday evening, however slightly, with a resolution acknowledging the role slaves played in the construction. Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) isn't having it. The resolution passed 399-1, with King voting against. The purpose of the resolution, according to its text, is to direct "the Architect of the Capitol to place a marker in Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center which acknowledges the role that slave labor played in the construction of the United States Capitol.".... A King spokesman did not immediately return a call....
OK, so acknowledging that slave labor was used in the construction of the US Capitol will change exactly nothing. Then again, that's not really the point, is it? What we're talking about is owning up to our history, one that isn't always pretty and is very often unpleasant. The reality is that this nation was far too often built by exploiting the poor and the powerless. That a sitting Congressman would refuse to acknowledge this is almost beyond comprehension. Then again, this is Steve King we're talking about here, a man no reasonable person would ever suspect of having a surfeit of compassion or simple human decency. Truth be told, Steve King has demonstrated himself to be a self-serving, self-absorbed waste of humanity completely devoid of anything resembling compassion. If I didn't know he was representing Iowa, I would have guessed he's from Texas.
Of course, the vote in question will change nothing. Why now and why this issue is a mystery...unless King happens to have no particular philosophical problem with the institution of slavery. I don't know this to necessarily be the case, but what other conclusion is an observer left to draw?
KING: I would just add that there were about 645,000 slaves that were brought to the United States. And I'm with Martin Luther King, Jr. on this. His documents, his speeches - I've read most of them. And I agree with almost every word that came out of him. Slavery was abhorrent, but it was also a fact of life in those centuries where it existed.
And of the 645,000 Africans that were brought here to be forcibly put into slavery in the United States, there were over 600,000 people that gave their lives in the Civil War to put an end to slavery. And I don't see the monument to that in the Congressional Visitor Center, and I think it's important that we have a balanced depiction of history.
Not a "balanced depiction of history"? OK, fine; so if the idea of recognizing the 600,000 who died in the Civil War, why not work towards that as well? How about taking some positive action instead of voting against a resolution that was designed to recognize a historical reality?
Between the hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of slaves and the 600,000 who died during the Civil War, there is no lack of suffering that could stand to be recognized. Why not vote to approve a motion that simply recognizes and acknowledges a historical fact? History is not about balance; it's about truth and reality. Yes, the 600,000 who died during the Civil War deserve to be recognized...so make it happen if you feel it's so important. All voting against this resolution does is to expose King to accusations of racism and ignorance...and I'm not about to dispute either point.
WE DESERVE BETTER...and Lord knows Iowa certainly does.
