Renaming Army Bases: Long Overdue, On the Cusp

A U.S. Army base named after an enemy? What about 10 of them? The racial reckoning of 2020, amidst everything else, called attention to the fact that 10 men who renounced the U.S. Constitution and fought to secede from the Union during the Civil War are so honored.

Three (Fort Lee, Pickett, and Hill) are in my own state of Virginia. The other seven are also in states of the former Confederacy: Fort Bragg in North Carolina, Forts Gordon and Benning in Georgia, Rucker in Alabama, Hood in Texas, and Polk and Camp Beauregard in Louisiana. Most, although not all, were Confederate generals.

I thought about this as I prepared to participate in a WebEx “virtual book talk” about Civil War Alexandria at the newly opened National Museum of the U.S. Army (more about the museum and the event below). On the one hand, it makes no sense. In the context of American history, it unfortunately makes perfect sense.

Why Name a U.S. Army Base after a Confederate?

For both “Lost Cause” and practical reasons. The first camps were quickly created during World War I. Instructions were to select a name “not unpopular in the vicinity of the camp.” Excusing the convoluted double negatives here, these honorees would not be “not unpopular” among the white population in the Jim Crow South. These names removed a hurdle in establishing a military installation in a new place.

To read about the practices across the armed services, the Congressional Research Service prepared a good summary.

Why Now, and Will It Happen?

The NAACP, local people, and some in the Army have advocated for name changes for many years. The official Army position was about the tradition of these names, it would be stabilizing to change them, done in the spirit of reconciliation, etc., etc. Finally in June 2020, the dam broke.

As I write this in mid-December 2020, legislation to change the names within three years is tucked inside the National Defense Authorization Act. Congress passed the bill with a “veto-proof majority.” That part is important because Trump has stated he would veto the bill specifically over the name-changes—a bill that contains scads of provisions to operate the entire military enterprise, i.e., our national security. It will be interesting to see if (1) he follows through on the veto and (2) if so, the members of Congress who usually kowtow to him will vote to override the veto..

Union Views

Screen shot taken by my husband during the 12/18/20 Q And A. I am the middle image below, John Maass from the Army museum in the main part of the screen.

As I spoke last night with John Maass, from the National Museum of the U.S. Army, I thought about the soldiers and civilians (including, of course, Julia Wilbur and Harriet Jacobs) in Alexandria during the Civil War. (The recording of our conversation will be available soon and I will link to it.)

What would they think that 155 years after the end of the Civil War, we are dealing with the absurdity of honoring the enemy?

The museum opened in November but closed to visitors because of COVID-19. Based on the online content, it includes stories and artifacts from a broad range of people who served the country. I hope as it gets established, it honors heroism but does not shy away from thorny issues like this.

NOTE; As of 1.1.2021, President Trump did veto the defense bill and stated this was one of the main reasons why. The House overrode his veto but it remains pending in the Senate.