ADVERTISEMENT

Paul Robeson memorial coming to Voorhess Mall

I like the idea, except that pretty much the two places on campus that don't need changing are Voorhees Mall and Queens campus. Why not put this somewhere else?
 
I like the idea, except that pretty much the two places on campus that don't need changing are Voorhees Mall and Queens campus. Why not put this somewhere else?
Agreed. Put it in the new quad they are going to build across from the college ave gym.
 
I know I am in a small minority on this, but I do not consider Paul Robeson a role model. He slavishly followed the Communist Party line all his life, to the extent of endorsing the Hitler/Stalin pact that set the stage of World War II
 
I like reading this. Paul Robeson is a legend regardless of his political persuasion later in life. The man was a stud athlete, a brilliant student and a very talented actor/singer.
 
I know I am in a small minority on this, but I do not consider Paul Robeson a role model. He slavishly followed the Communist Party line all his life, to the extent of endorsing the Hitler/Stalin pact that set the stage of World War II

Context! Abject racism probably explains, if not excuses, Robeson's controversial political beliefs during his lifetime. His considerable accomplishments both at RU and afterward certainly seem to warrant a statute. While at Rutgers College he was a top-student and highly decorated debater know for his great oratory skills; he won 15 letters in four varsity sports, including two-time 1st team All-America honors in football; he was elected Phi Betta Kappa and became class valedictorian (1st African American to achieve that honor). He went on to be an early civil rights advocate and an international star on stage and screen known especially for his brilliant vocals. . . . . I could go on . . . .
 
  • Like
Reactions: MidwestKnights
CP members in the civil rights movement had the effect of allowing red-baiters to discredit civil rights groups. That's why it was so important that Martin Luther King be a man of the cloth. I respect Robeson's accomplishments at Rutgers -- how could I not? -- but think his subsequent record makes it problematic to honor him. And Robeson didn't just agree with communists in the civil rights movement, but in everything.
 
Robeson's life is problematic in terms of trying to come to a simple, or single summary of it. My reading of his life was that he was the most talented person probably to ever go to Rutgers, and that his heart was in the right place and he fought for what he felt was right.

His early support of communism could be forgiven in my mind, as many were attracted to it early on; the problem is that when the horrors became apparent, he chose to be blind to them. The horrors he personally experienced as an African American in the US are well-documented, and this probably contributed to his stubbornness to see the Soviet Union for what it was.

In the end, I see him as a heroic, but misguided figure of immense talent across many, unrelated, areas of expertise. Pretty close to one of a kind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RU MAN
If Robeson had only been a communist early, I wouldn't have a problem. Lots of people flirted with communism or even joined the party in the 1930s, when conditions in the United States were so desperate. But Robeson remained one throughout his life.. In all other respects, Skillethead, I agree with you.
 
The Soviet Union was very good at using racial propaganda. Their response to American complaints about their human rights record was to show video to their citizens of dogs and hoses being released on peaceful black protesters.

Unlike today, you couldn't just Wikipedia to find out about the real human rights record of a country.
 
The Soviet Union was very good at using racial propaganda. Their response to American complaints about their human rights record was to show video to their citizens of dogs and hoses being released on peaceful black protesters.

Unlike today, you couldn't just Wikipedia to find out about the real human rights record of a country.

Can't excuse Robeson that way. By the 1930s, it was clear that Stalin had engineered a terrible famine in the Ukraine, and that there were no human rights in the nation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RU MAN
Definitely not an excuse. Just want to give some context, as too often today we don't recall the access to information was poor then, nor the awful discrimination that many minorities suffered.
 
Well, wasn't there a huge famine in the US at the time? On top of flagrant human rights violations?
 
The American government did very little in response to reports of the Ukrainian famine. Most of the world was largely complicit by ignoring what was happening. I don't believe the US ever officially addressed the famine for a long time and in fact formally recognized the USSR right around the same time despite what it knew. American press actually helped cover it up.

History certainly demonstrates that he was wrong about Stalin (obviously). But it's hard to say what he really knew or believed of Stalin and the USSR. It's reasonable to understand his distrust of his own government and his comments about Stalin to Congress in 49 seem to indicate he had come to realize that he was wrong about Stalin (if not communism) but would not give Congress (of all people) the satisfaction of acknowledging it.

I think as others have said he is a complicated figure with remarkable accomplishments and operating at a time of great political turmoil for African Americans and others. I also believe his activism and efforts were rooted in an honest, good faith, and fearless fight against an evil that plagued our nation. His academic, athletic, and artistic talents were remarkable enough. When you consider he threw away his career and probably millions of dollars for his commitment to civil rights, I'd say he's worthy of such a memorial.
 
I think the US also realized it needed Stalin to defeat fascism. In many ways the USSR got a lot of passes until after the war.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mal359
Certainly no one in the West would have known about the famines by reading the New York Times, whose correspondent seems to have adored Stalin. Nor would one have known by reading the 1930s memoirs of Lincoln Steffens, the muckraking journalist, who admired both Stalin and Mussolini. (Good thing he died before Hitler came along!)

But what was well known in the 1930s -- because it was publicly announced by the Soviet Union -- was that Stalin was holding trials of prominent Communist party members for alleged treason, and that it was pretty clear these charges were trumped-up. This drove many American party members away. But not Robeson. He also ignored events like the Hitler-Stalin pact and the assassination by a Soviet agent of Leon Trotsky. But Robeson stayed in the party.

Yes, the Soviet Union did become popular in the U.S. in World War II, when the U.S.S.R. became a vital ally against Hitler. But this promptly faded after the war as it became clear that the U.S.S.R. was taking over Eastern Europe against its will and establishing what Winston Churchill called "an iron curtain."
 
I hate to defend Stalin, but Trotskyism was absolutely insane, and would have been a disaster.
 
Oh sure, but it's really not hip to go around killing off those who differ with you. By 1940, there was no threat from Trotskyism.

When I was at Berkeley, the Socialist Workers party was active. It thought of itself as Trotskyist. There was this blonde woman who hung around the Daily Californian's offices, where I was a reporter and editor. She was rather nice looking, so we started calling her "the Trot Fox."
 
I wonder how much of the empathy for the Soviet Union came from siding with the democratic side in the Spanish Civil War, which included communists and had significant backing in the US. Some might have considered Europe a facist/communist dichotomy.
 
I wonder how much of the empathy for the Soviet Union came from siding with the democratic side in the Spanish Civil War, which included communists and had significant backing in the US. Some might have considered Europe a fascist/communist dichotomy.

You are quite correct. You probably have heard of the International Brigade and the Abraham Lincoln Brigade, which fought for the Loyalist government against Franco. It now turns out that the Soviets were not at all sincere in their desire to preserve the Spanish Loyalist government. The Soviets also walked off with Spain's gold reserves, which were stored in the Soviet Union. A really sad story. You can also read George Orwell's excellent book, Homage to Catalonia, which talks about his experiences as a soldier in Spain and about what he saw as the Communist betrayal of the Spanish Revolution, which was headed by anarchists.
 
Yes, as a Spanish major, we are basically trained to look back at Spanish Civil War more than most Americans who follow history!

Additionally, if you ever in Madrid, Picasso's Guernica is a must see (a painting meant to show the bombings of a Spanish town by Hitler and Mussolini).
 
Yes, as a Spanish major, we are basically trained to look back at Spanish Civil War more than most Americans who follow history!

Additionally, if you ever in Madrid, Picasso's Guernica is a must see (a painting meant to show the bombings of a Spanish town by Hitler and Mussolini).

You are probably too young to remember that Guernica used to hang in the Museum of Modern Art in Manhattan. Picasso said he didn't want the painting in Spain until liberty was restored, i.e. until the Franco regime ended.

P.S. I think it's great how friendly this thread has been over a fairly controversial subject. Now if we can only persuade the other boards to be the same way . . .
 
I know I am in a small minority on this, but I do not consider Paul Robeson a role model. He slavishly followed the Communist Party line all his life, to the extent of endorsing the Hitler/Stalin pact that set the stage of World War II

Perhaps if your country treated you and people like you the way it treated Robeson and people like him during that era -- we couldn't even get an anti-lynching law passed in Congress, for pete's sake -- you, too, would have looked to another system. Paul Robeson was a giant as an athlete, a giant as a scholar, a giant as an entertainer, and if he wanted to have the full rights of an adult male human in his native nation and found that impossible, I am not going to judge how he responded.

Damn proud he not only went to Rutgers but is from New Jersey.
 
Perhaps if your country treated you and people like you the way it treated Robeson and people like him during that era -- we couldn't even get an anti-lynching law passed in Congress, for pete's sake -- you, too, would have looked to another system. Paul Robeson was a giant as an athlete, a giant as a scholar, a giant as an entertainer, and if he wanted to have the full rights of an adult male human in his native nation and found that impossible, I am not going to judge how he responded.

Damn proud he not only went to Rutgers but is from New Jersey.

Fantastic Post!!!! Well Said!!!
 
w
I know I am in a small minority on this, but I do not consider Paul Robeson a role model. He slavishly followed the Communist Party line all his life, to the extent of endorsing the Hitler/Stalin pact that set the stage of World War II

Cam law you are 100% wrong he like most in the 20s and 30s viewed communism as Nuevo ideal government. On paper it was and for an intelligent black man raised in the US at the times he also viewed communism as it was presented as the altruistic society.
Yes he went to the USSR and was used and abused by the very government he came to admire.
When attempting to re enter the USA from Canada. he was stopped and J. Edger Hoover replied ..."allow him back in as he (Paul Robeson) is no communist. For personal reasons my father interviewed Paul in the late 60s and early 70s on just these points.
Please go back and re write your prejudice history of this man. "Slavishly" this word is prejudice & "all his life" is a blatant lie use "flirted with" rather the Slavishly and a part of his enlightenment age a span of 10-15 years (until he saw first hand the "light", NOT all HIS LIFE)
 
Last edited:
w

Cam law you are 100% wrong he like most in the 20s and 30s viewed communism as Nuevo ideal government. On paper it was and for an intelligent black man raised in the US at the times he also viewed communism as it was presented as the altruistic society.
Yes he went to the USSR and was used and abused by the very government he came to admire.
When attempting to re enter the USA from Canada. he was stopped and J. Edger Hoover replied ..."allow him back in as he (Paul Robeson) is no communist. For personal reasons my father interviewed Paul in the late 60s and early 70s on just these points.
Please go back and re write your prejudice history of this man. "Slavishly" this word is prejudice & "all his life" is a blatant lie use "flirted with" rather the Slavishly and a part of his enlightenment age a span of 10-15 years (until he saw first hand the "light", NOT all HIS LIFE)

+1
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT