Fact: the majority of Cal's players in both of its primary money-earning sports (football and men’s basketball) are black. Fact: George Berkeley (the namesake of our Berkeley), in addition to being an esteemed philosopher, was a white supremacist. He was a plantation owner. He bought and enslaved black people, whom he used to build his o…
Fact: the majority of Cal's players in both of its primary money-earning sports (football and men’s basketball) are black. Fact: George Berkeley (the namesake of our Berkeley), in addition to being an esteemed philosopher, was a white supremacist. He was a plantation owner. He bought and enslaved black people, whom he used to build his own wealth on his New England plantation. After much research and introspection, I believe the proposal by California Hall is both ignorant and absolutely insulting. For one, unless the committee that is recommending "Cal Berkeley" as our new athletic branding has asked every current black player and prospective black athlete that has been recruited to play for Cal the following question, this naming recommendation is not only a gross insult but also extremely poor judgment - Question for current and prospective black student-athletes who are either 1.) at this time performing for Cal or 2.) considering entering Cal as a transfer or HS recruit: "Would you like the name 'Berkeley', our city's name but also a name that originates from a famous philosopher who happened to buy and enslave black people, to be added to all things pertaining to your sport (such as in the standings on ESPN's website, on your team jersey, on the fifty yard line, included in the half-court logo, etc.)?” If California Hall (or whoever makes the final decision on this matter) has not done so, this would be a crucial prerequisite (and you would do well to publish your results) before imposing this slave owner's name on all things Cal athletics. What I or other non-black alums feel about this issue is immaterial. Ask the people that it may most profoundly affect.
Let me do something that no Blue and Gold bleeding person ever does---which is quote someone from Stanford. “The American system of government is not perfect, because the founders were imperfect men. However, it’s delivered freedom to more people than any other form of government devised in human history. It is a remarkable story.” Who said it? Dr. Condoleezza Rice.
The founders of the University of California were also imperfect. So was George Berkeley. What is interesting today is---if you polled Americans and anyone in the world and asked---what does Berkeley mean? You would get many answers---from academic excellence, smart people, contrarian thinking, free speech, DIVERSITY and even hippies/counter culture. 99.9 percent of the answers would be positive. Yes, people complain about this and that (crime, homelessness, the line at Blondies, 4 missed field goals), but in my travels around the world, you say you are from or went to Berkeley---you get a positive reaction. Slave holders and white supremacy NEVER ever has come up. The fact is Berkeley has been rebranded and that is a positive thing. If George Berkeley came back to life--do you think he would be happy or mad at what he see at his namesake school? If he were a white supremacist---he would be unhappy. It would ruin his day. And isn't that the sweetest revenge?
Martin Luther King Jr. came to campus because what Berkeley stands for today vs what happened in 1728 when a plantation was purchased in Rhode Island (who knew Rhode Island allowed Slavery??). Again, as I said in an earlier post--California Hall does know that George Berkeley is an issue AND they are concerned about it. BUT, they also told me, they don't have to do anything unless the City of Berkeley changes its name, because all UCs are named after their cities.
BTW, this is a long way of saying, I agree with you the name should be the University of California or California for short for the sports teams. But in a professional setting or travels, I always say I went to Berkeley.
Fact: the majority of Cal's players in both of its primary money-earning sports (football and men’s basketball) are black. Fact: George Berkeley (the namesake of our Berkeley), in addition to being an esteemed philosopher, was a white supremacist. He was a plantation owner. He bought and enslaved black people, whom he used to build his own wealth on his New England plantation. After much research and introspection, I believe the proposal by California Hall is both ignorant and absolutely insulting. For one, unless the committee that is recommending "Cal Berkeley" as our new athletic branding has asked every current black player and prospective black athlete that has been recruited to play for Cal the following question, this naming recommendation is not only a gross insult but also extremely poor judgment - Question for current and prospective black student-athletes who are either 1.) at this time performing for Cal or 2.) considering entering Cal as a transfer or HS recruit: "Would you like the name 'Berkeley', our city's name but also a name that originates from a famous philosopher who happened to buy and enslave black people, to be added to all things pertaining to your sport (such as in the standings on ESPN's website, on your team jersey, on the fifty yard line, included in the half-court logo, etc.)?” If California Hall (or whoever makes the final decision on this matter) has not done so, this would be a crucial prerequisite (and you would do well to publish your results) before imposing this slave owner's name on all things Cal athletics. What I or other non-black alums feel about this issue is immaterial. Ask the people that it may most profoundly affect.
Let me do something that no Blue and Gold bleeding person ever does---which is quote someone from Stanford. “The American system of government is not perfect, because the founders were imperfect men. However, it’s delivered freedom to more people than any other form of government devised in human history. It is a remarkable story.” Who said it? Dr. Condoleezza Rice.
The founders of the University of California were also imperfect. So was George Berkeley. What is interesting today is---if you polled Americans and anyone in the world and asked---what does Berkeley mean? You would get many answers---from academic excellence, smart people, contrarian thinking, free speech, DIVERSITY and even hippies/counter culture. 99.9 percent of the answers would be positive. Yes, people complain about this and that (crime, homelessness, the line at Blondies, 4 missed field goals), but in my travels around the world, you say you are from or went to Berkeley---you get a positive reaction. Slave holders and white supremacy NEVER ever has come up. The fact is Berkeley has been rebranded and that is a positive thing. If George Berkeley came back to life--do you think he would be happy or mad at what he see at his namesake school? If he were a white supremacist---he would be unhappy. It would ruin his day. And isn't that the sweetest revenge?
Martin Luther King Jr. came to campus because what Berkeley stands for today vs what happened in 1728 when a plantation was purchased in Rhode Island (who knew Rhode Island allowed Slavery??). Again, as I said in an earlier post--California Hall does know that George Berkeley is an issue AND they are concerned about it. BUT, they also told me, they don't have to do anything unless the City of Berkeley changes its name, because all UCs are named after their cities.
BTW, this is a long way of saying, I agree with you the name should be the University of California or California for short for the sports teams. But in a professional setting or travels, I always say I went to Berkeley.
To wit, always has been, always should be CALIFORNIA: https://www.espn.com/college-football/preview?gameId=401524018