New Navy Ship's Name Draws Fire

@FourWalls (86740)
United States
December 12, 2015 12:22am CST
The U.S. Navy has a new ship, and a lot of people aren't happy. Not with the boat, but with the name. The new ship, a littoral combat ship (LCS), was named after U.S. president Andrew Jackson (LCS-6). One might wonder why people would object to a ship being named after Jackson. He was a U.S. president and a war hero in the Battle of New Orleans. He's currently on the $20 bill. The reason is pretty simple, if you look into U.S. history: Andrew Jackson was a jerk. When he became president he signed the Indian Removal Act of 1830. Granted, he couldn't have done this alone -- Congress helped pass the law. However, Jackson could have vetoed it. When it came time to remove the Cherokee from their land they fought back -- legally. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the Cherokee's favor. President Jackson, however, said the Supreme Court couldn't put any muscle behind their ruling, so he continued with the relocation of the American Indians despite the ruling. (See? Terrible politicians really aren't all that new.) Under Jackson's dictatorship..er...rule, the Cherokee were forced west in what is infamously known as the "Trail of Tears." Jackson's hand in the relocation of several American Indian nations, including the Cherokee, resulted in somewhere between 2,000 and 6,000 deaths as the American Indians were displaced. The Cherokee, in particular, suffered terribly because they were sent on their "march" west in the dead of winter. Jackson was also a slave owner; however, that pales in comparison to the way he figuratively flipped a bird to the Supreme Court and marched thousands of American Indians to their deaths in order to give their land to Caucasian settlers. As someone with Cherokee heritage (my dad's grandmother), I couldn't agree more: this slime deserves to have his name become a curse, much like Hitler's, because what he did isn't unlike what Hitler did. Jackson's motives were merely different, but still reprehensible.
4 people like this
3 responses
@LadyDuck (502491)
• Italy
12 Dec 15
Let's hope not to see another Jackson soon. When people love to go against the law and logic anything can happen.
1 person likes this
@celticeagle (189880)
• Boise, Idaho
12 Dec 15
I wonder what the reasoning was on naming the ship that to begin with. I'd be curious.
1 person likes this
• Philippines
12 Dec 15
Don't they have other names to put on that ship? or maybe the one who design it or group of people who made this ship love the historical president or something. how are these ships being named to begin with.
@FourWalls (86740)
• United States
12 Dec 15
Sheesh, I'd rather see it named after Jean Lafitte (another hero of the Battle of New Orleans, although he was a French pirate). They also tend to "recycle" names -- there's a new aircraft carrier named John F. Kennedy, but that's not the boat my brother served on! (There was another Andrew Jackson earlier, a submarine...it was decommissioned in 1989.). We've had some terrible presidents who were also terrible people (not all bad presidents were bad people: I personally think Jimmy Carter was an awful president, although he is a good man -- he's more or less the "big name" spokesman for Habitat for Humanity), and they shouldn't be rewarded like this. I mean, you don't see the Navy launching the USS Warren G. Harding, do you? (Harding was one of our great scandals -- see "Teapot Dome.")