Should controversial historical statues be removed?

 

In recent years, there has been considerable debate concerning whether controversial historical statues should be removed. This debate is centered on competing narratives between those individuals who argue for the removal of the statues because they idolize negative history and those who believe that the removal of such statues is the equivalent of erasing history. A consequence of this situation is that in the United States, as well as other parts of the world with dark chapters in their history, the debate has been raging with the result in some cases being the removal of the statues of controversial figures such as those of Robert E. Lee, the Confederate army general. This paper seeks to make an analysis of the arguments brought forth by both sides of the debate in a bid to better understand the motivations behind their stances on the issue of removing controversial historical statues.

One of the most prominent arguments for the removal of controversial status is that they misrepresent history and end up glorifying the individuals that not only attempted secession from the United States, but also lost the Civil War and were among the biggest perpetuators of slavery. The major reason for the Southern states making the decision to secede from the Union was because of the impending abolition of slavery. They believed that slavery was the mainstay of their economy and therefore a natural state ('Confederate States of America - A Declaration of the Causes which Impel the State of Texas to Secede from the Federal Union'); an argument that was disagreed with by individuals in the North. Therefore, the decision to secede was essentially an economic one and involved the need to maintain slavery as an institution despite the fact that it also involved considerable suffering and dehumanization on the part of the African peoples who were bound to it. It is also essential to consider that the move to leave the Union is one that essentially sought to undermine the latter and would have created an environment within which slavery would have remained a prominent aspect of the social fabric of the Americas.

It is also noteworthy that when the Confederate States lost the Civil War, there was an attempt in the South to rewrite history. This is especially considering that they made the declaration that they had not been fighting to ensure the preservation of history, but rather were attempting to ensure that they preserved the rural agrarian southern civilization from the onslaught of the industrialized North (Little 2017). This mythology, among others, was used as a means of justifying the need for the subjugation of the African American population, based on the idea that they needed to be subjugated for their own good. Thus were the Jim Crow laws put in place and there was a concerted attempt in the South to ensure that there was the revision of history (Shah 2019). This revision essentially reversed the progress that had been made in the South during the Reconstruction and created an environment within which segregation and racism became the new order.

It is also noteworthy that the statues are a painful reminder of the institutionalization of racism in the United States. This is especially the case when one considers not only the intention of raising the statues, but also their historical impact, especially when it comes to the perpetuation of white supremacy. It is argued that putting up the statues was undertaken as a means of making sure that there was the promotion of a scenario within which there was not only the affirmation of white supremacy, but also the central role played by it in Southern culture (Aguilera 2020). Therefore, because of their original intention to promote white supremacy, the statues need to be removed as a means of ensuring that there is the beginning of the end of racism through the discarding of the symbols of its perpetuation. The continued presence of the statues promotes the idea that racism in society is still valid.

The statues continue to appeal to white supremacists and are a focus on the way that these individuals glorify the dark past of the South. The 2017 rally to defend the Jackson and Lee statues in Virginia as well as the pre-massacre tour of plantations by Dylan Roof is significant because it shows the manner through which white supremacy remains a powerful ideology in the South (Palmer and Wessler 2018). Monuments raised to men who advocated for barbaric and cruel practices should not be allowed to stand because they pay homage, not to heritage, but rather to hate. They create an environment within which it becomes quite difficult to ensure that there is an end to the ideology and institutionalization of racial discrimination and hate that has been perpetuated in the United States since the founding of the nation.

Despite the arguments that have been made above, those that advocate for the retention of controversial statues argue that the latter represent the complicated history of the country. Therefore, taking the statues down will be tantamount to not only whitewashing, but also create a potential of its being forgotten. There is the potential of the history of the country being demolished and be replaced by an oppressive regime that does not care for the past (Andrew and Sturia 2020). It is therefore essential to consider that the citizens of the United States, because of the freedom of speech, have the right to have controversial opinions because it is enshrined in the Constitution. This right should be inviolable and therefore, protections against the opinions of the majority, who may want the controversial statues to be removed, should be considered. The removal of the statues is a violation of the First Amendment and the government has the responsibility to ensure that the protections afforded to free speech are respected.

The history of the United States is not only continuously evolving, but it is also multilayered to such an extent that it is quite complicated. Those individuals that disagree with the beliefs that are promoted by the statues should undertake a research in order to gain an understanding what is represented by these monuments. The attempt to remove these statues and their history from sight is one that should be considered tantamount to the erasure of history because it involves a situation where there is a failure to establish a context for the reasons the monuments were raised in the first place (Davidson 2017). The recognition of the fact that the history behind the statues will always be a part of American history would be a sign of maturity. This is especially the case when one considers that other cultures, such as the Roman Empire, did not topple the statues of the pagan gods when it became Christian.

It is also noteworthy that removing the statues will create a slippery slope which could lead to the removal of the statues of any individuals that are considered to be the least problematic to the majority. This is especially the case when one considers that during the protests that came about following the death of George Floyd, numerous Confederate statues were toppled or damaged, including statues of Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, and Ulysses Grant. It is important to consider that individuals like Washington and Jefferson were major contributors to the country, as seen through the affirmation of the democratic system by Washington when he declined to be king, and Jefferson, who not only authored the Declaration of Independence, but also represented the United States diplomatically for many years (Ambrose 2002). These individuals are therefore important cornerstones to the history of the United States and should therefore not be erased through the removal of their monuments.

Moreover, there is the need to appreciate the contributions of some of the Founding Fathers, as well as other national leaders, despite their legacy as slave owners. Jefferson, for example, promoted the idea of equality and religious freedom, and he was also an abolitionist, albeit a hypocritical one because despite being a slave-owner, he also believed that the slavery was an institution that was no longer viable and a hideous blot ('Jefferson's Attitudes toward Slavery'). Also, Grant is an individual that came from a family of abolitionists and when he inherited a slave from his father in-law, he promptly freed him (Fling). He further supported the enlistment of African American men into the Union Army during the Civil War and when he ran for president, he was endorsed by Frederick Douglass.

To conclude, the way that the debate concerning the handling of controversial historical statues should be handled is through a mature dialogue between both sides. This is because the figures represented by these statues have played a significant and historical role in the making of the nation and they cannot be erased from its history. Instead, there should be a process within which coming to terms with and accepting the role of these individuals should be made a priority and advanced for the sake of reconciliation between the two sides of the debate as well as opposing groups across the nation can be achieved.

Emotional Intelligence and Well Being

 

One of the most significant interests in the field of psychology is the matter of wellbeing. This is an important factor especially when one considers that in the modern world, which is often hectic and places individuals under considerable pressure, there is the need to make sure that the wellbeing of individuals is maintained at all times. Mental health professionals have come to place a focus on the manner through which a diversity of factors, including emotional intelligence, can contribute effectively to the attainment of wellbeing (Zelenski, Murphy, & Jenkins, 2008). Mental and physical wellbeing are essential factors to consider within the psychological field, with the result being that there is the need to factor in the role of emotional intelligence as a means of attaining the goal of promoting it. This paper considers the role that emotional intelligence plays on the attainment of wellbeing.

Emotional intelligence has gained considerable attention in recent years because of the manner through which it has the capability of ensuring that individuals have the necessary coping resources to promote wellbeing (Schutte, Malouff, Thorsteinsson, Bhullar, & Rooke, 2007). There is a direct connection between emotional intelligence and a diversity of positive outcomes when it comes to such areas as careers, mental health, and academic performance. It is therefore a pertinent means of making sure that there is the promotion of the general wellbeing of individuals. It can be used as an intervention strategy with great promise because of its ability to ensure that individuals are essentially trained in a manner that provides them with the means of having a high quality of health as well as good social relationships that generally contribute to their wellbeing. In this way, individuals with emotional intelligence skills are more likely to have both mental and physical wellbeing than those without.

It is also essential to consider the manner through which happiness or wellbeing is approached from a psychological perspective. There are two main approaches to happiness at a theoretical level; the hedonic and the eudaimonic (Ryff, 1989). The hedonic approach is one that essentially affirms the idea that happiness is based on the absence of negative affection and instead, is represented by a presence of positive affection. The eudaimonic approach, on the other hand, considers happiness to come about when an individual attains their potential based on the consequence of full psychological functioning. From the latter perspective, the psychological wellbeing of an individual is essential to the attainment of happiness, which results in the creation of a pleasant feeling concerning aspects of life including the past, present, and future, which ensures that life is viewed meaningfully (Peterson, Ruch, Beermann, Park, & Seligman, 2007).

It is necessary to consider that emotional intelligence is a critical aspect of attaining happiness and wellbeing. This is especially the case when one considers that most important decisions should be made based on emotional intelligence as a means of determining the psychological impact of the decisions that are being made (Durlofsky, 2018). Emotional intelligence is therefore the ability by individuals to not only identify, but also understand and manage their emotions in a positive manner that provides for the attainment of positive results. Without such efforts, it can be quite difficult for the individuals involved to reduce psychological issues such as anxiety and stress, as well as undertake actions aimed at ensuring that there is the overcoming of the challenges of life. However, with emotional intelligence, individuals have the capability of handling their emotions in a way that allows for their happiness.

Emotional intelligence is also an important quality for individuals to have because of the influence it has on relationships and behavior. It involves a process of self-awareness which enables individuals to live in a way that they undertake actions intentionally and with purpose which results in relative autonomy (Schutte et al., 2007). Furthermore, it allows individuals to make sure that they achieve the goal of making important decision based on reason over being based on current circumstances, the latter which often leads to a failure to consider the consequences. It is therefore necessary to consider that the development of emotional intelligence is a critical aspect of the attainment of personal success while at the same time making sure that the individuals involved are also happy. The eventual aim of attaining happiness should be the major goal of developing emotional intelligence.

Emotional intelligence is often related to the way that individuals perceive themselves. Therefore, under such circumstances, it is necessary to consider the need to make sure that there is the promotion of this form of intelligence because it allows for self-assessment which can be a good factor when it comes to attaining personal peace (Mukhalipi & Shane, 2019). Moreover, emotional intelligence can be used in a diversity of ways by individuals to not only correct what may be their weaknesses and build on their strengths as a means of bringing about the attainment of the goal of happiness. Wellbeing can therefore be attained through the intervention that seeks to enhance emotional intelligence to such an extent that creates an environment within which individuals are better able to self-assess and come up with meaningful decisions that positively affect their lives.

The diverse models that are involved in emotional intelligence tend to be highly effective when it comes to the potential benefits that that bring about. This is especially the case when it comes to the way that the positive psychological interventions involved in emotional intelligence will often end up making it possible for individuals to develop positive behaviors that allow for the attainment of the goal of promoting wellbeing. Emotional intelligence can be used as a means of enhancing the psychological and subjective wellbeing of individuals in such a way that fosters good health and an enhancement of performance among individuals. Furthermore, emotional intelligence is critical to the achievement of happiness in the form of satisfaction with the self and the social environment.

The discussion above considers the role that emotional intelligence plays on the attainment of wellbeing. This is because emotional intelligence has gained considerable attention in recent years because of the manner through which it has the capability of ensuring that individuals have the necessary coping resources to promote wellbeing. Moreover, from a theoretical perspective, the discussion above has shown that there are two main approaches mainly the hedonic and the eudaimonic. Moreover, emotional intelligence is a critical aspect of attaining happiness and wellbeing and is also an important quality for individuals to have because of the influence it has on relationships and behavior. The latter allows for an enhancement of positive thought that further ensures that there is the attainment of psychological wellbeing and happiness among individuals.

Is a minority government structure preferable to an absolute majority in Canada?

 

The parliamentary democracy of Canada is one that promotes the idea that the party with the most seats in parliament ends up forming the government. However, there are instances where a party will win either just over half or fewer than half of the seats in parliament. A consequence is that it creates an environment within which the party is faced with the reality of having to form a minority government (Gagnier, 2011). This places it in a circumstance where it has to ensure that it negotiated with opposition parties in order to secure the passage of legislation through parliament. The psychology and dynamic of minority governments tend to be quite different from majority governments because of the manner through which they have to pay critical attention to matters of contact with other political parties as well as undertake a diversity of negotiations in order to stay in power. It is also pertinent to note that because of the way that minority governments operate, it has become common for them to ensure that they play a waiting game where they wait for the most opportune moment to call a general election in order to win a majority (Gagnier, 2011). However, prior to requesting the governor general to dissolve parliament and call for elections (Canada, 2015), the prime ministers in minority governments will constantly work to ensure that they maintain the confidence of parliament. This paper makes an analysis of minority governments in Canada within the context of determining whether or not they are preferable to an absolute majority.

Minority governments are not strange in Canada and in fact, they have appeared often for almost a century. The first minority government at the federal level appeared in 1921 when the Liberal Party came to power under Mackenzie King (Bakvis, 2015). This government was able to survive for close to four years through negotiations and making sure that they maintained a slight majority through the bringing in of susceptible members of the Progressive Party. The ability of the Liberals to remain in power for such a long time despite having a minority government can be considered critical because it shows the manner through which King was able to not only hold the members of his party together, but also seek out alliances with MPs that were willing to support his government initiatives. The latter is also pertinent because it shows the way that minority governments have to ensure that they use negotiations with other parties in order to not only maintain power, but also establish a level of leverage in parliament to make sure that critical laws are passed. In this way, minority governments in Canada have been able to survive in circumstances that would otherwise have been extremely difficult, as seen in other countries where formation of governments tend to be quite tedious.

One of the most important factors when it comes to a minority government in Canada is that the role of parliament becomes more prominent. This is especially considering that the house leaders of all parties end up playing a key role when it comes to matters of negotiations as well as diplomacy between the different parties. It also ensures that there is the promotion of means through which progressive agendas in society are also advanced, as seen through the way that in Canada, minority governments tend to be associated with progressive legislation such as the public pensions and medicare that came about because of the cooperation between the Liberals and the NDP (Bakvis, 2015). Minority governments are therefore bound to makes sure that there is the promotion of a scenario where it is possible for cooperation with other political parties to take on a more prominent role in governance. In this way, more individuals in society, specifically based on demographics, will have some form of representation in government because of the desire by government to negotiate with other parties in order to survive. Minority governments can, under such circumstances, be considered more representative of the population of the country.

Minority governments also have the potential of collapsing because of unexpected controversies or scandals. This is especially the case when it comes to cases over ethics and impropriety that might create an environment within which the government, because it is in the minority, is unable to perform its duties effectively. An example of such a situation was that of the damage that was suffered by the Liberal brand in Quebec because of the sponsorship scandal (Bakvis, 2015). However, it is noteworthy that despite the environment of instability that is generated by a minority government, many Canadians look positively towards such governments because of the belief that they are more responsive. These governments have to consider the views of their own members as well as those in other parties as a means of ensuring that there is the passage of legislation. Because they do not have an absolute majority, minority governments will often be sensitive to public opinion to such an extent that they will more likely than not respond more to the public than would otherwise have been the case.

It is important to consider that every action of a minority government is often conditioned to ensure that it covers its fragility. This is because they are placed in a vulnerable position where they do not have the leverage to make ensure that they take unilateral decisions. Instead, they are placed in a situation where they are left at the mercy of opposition parties, which tend to hold government more accountable during this period. However, it is important to note that opposition parties will often focus more on seeking to ensure that they question every government action, which results in bitterness within the legislature; creating an environment of instability because the political actors will not be seeking to achieve the same goals. The public service therefore ends up becoming negatively affected because the individuals involved in the political process are not only in constant disagreement, but there is a failure by the government to pass laws that are critical to running state functions. The loss of civility in parliament makes it difficult for politicians to serve the public good and helps to project the environment of instability which makes a majority government more desirable.

There is the perception, especially among Canadian politicians, that minority governments are temporary. Therefore, there is often little attempt to ensure that there is the formation of a coalition government with other parties. This has come to reduce the incentive to ensure that there is the creation of long-term cooperation deals between parties with the result being that a majority of Canadian parties will often work alone. Securing majorities has become a daunting task for a considerable number of minority governments. A lot of minority governments have been influenced by the way that John Diefenbaker, despite having a minority government in 1957, ended up winning a majority government by the largest margin in the history of Canada less than a year after his government initially won the elections (Russell & Sossin, 2009, p. 130). This has created a trend in Canadian politics where there is little motivation to form coalition governments in the belief that in a subsequent election, they will win a majority. In this way, many prime ministers have been unable to secure majorities and have instead ended up with minority governments. The quest for a majority is ironic because it has often led to a continuation of minority governments in the country for most of its modern history.

The experience of Canada with minority governments can be considered paradoxical because despite their considerable frequency, they are still seen as temporary. In addition, despite many citizens considering minority governments as being unstable, and there being a desire for more stable majority governments, the continued frequency of minority governments shows that the latter remain a critical aspect of Canadian society. There is the need to make sure that there is the promotion of a scenario where this problem is addressed through seeking the formation of coalition governments based on long-term partnerships between the various political parties. Thus, the problems associated with minority governments within parliament would be overcome and more stable governments of the majority would be formed.