In America’s latest, bizarre journey into the land of political correctness, black abolitionist Harriet Tubman will be replacing Andrew Jackson, the seventh President of the United States, as the face on the U.S. $20 bill.
The decision was made by Treasury Secretary Jack Lew, and met with wide approval by many liberals, who are grateful to see an iconic, historical figure from the African-American community finally reach a pinnacle of American symbolism. Founding father Alexander Hamilton, whose image is on the $10 bill, was originally the fellow earmarked to be the odd man out in the government’s quest to put a woman and/or minority figure on the country’s paper money, but Lew said the change to bump Jackson instead was made for several reasons, not least of which is Hamilton’s resurgent popularity as a result of the wildly-successful musical Hamilton currently running on Broadway.
Wouldn’t you know it, however…the decision to put Tubman on a piece of American currency has actually angered some in the liberal community who think it inappropriate that she should serve as a symbolic representative of the very capitalism (they say) she fought in her capacity as an anti-slavery warrior.
In fact, The Washington Post’s Wonkblog has an article up, “The irony of putting Harriet Tubman on the $20 bill,” that makes the case for wrongheadedness in the decision to have Tubman’s likeness featured on money. In addition to quoting various activists who feel this way, article author Danielle Paquette herself points out, “The abolitionist icon, after all, fought the oppressive system that launched our economy. Why would she want to become a symbol of it?” According to Paquette, then, the entire American system of capitalism would not exist without slavery.
Here, again, liberals reinforce the truth behind something actor Robert Mitchum once said: “There just isn't any pleasing some people. The trick is to stop trying."
By Robert G. Yetman, Jr. Editor At Large