Jack Kemp

Reading an article on the statue controversy by Courtney O'Brien at Townhall.com, I found this gem of a line, best read while listening to Frank Sinatra's rendition of "New York, New York." Here it is.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/cortneyobrien/2017/08/18/it-begins-green-party-vp-candidate-wants-washington-jefferson-statues-removed-n2369877?utm_source=thdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&newsletterad=

Cities like New York were named after slave traders. Does the state have to change its name? What's off limits?

END QUOTE

So I went looking for verification of this and found the following:

http://www.biographybase.com/biography/James_II_of_England.html

As Duke of York he was heavily involved in the slave trade, the British end of it being monopolised by the Royal African Company, of which he was head, and which the Stuart family set up when they retook the throne in 1660. Thousands of his slaves were branded on the forehead with the letters 'DY'. As Lord High Admiral he commanded the navy, and a little-known fact is that the city of New York was named after him following its capture by English forces in 1664. The following year, he commanded the defeat of Dutch forces at the Battle of Lowestoft.

END OF QUOTE

Wikipedia states that this Duke of York eventually became King James II of England who reigned from 1685 to 1688.

So, I guess we will have to change the name of New York City back to New Amsterdam and the state name back to New Holland. Yeah, right. As they say in Brooklyn (Breuckelen, in the original Dutch), Fahgettaboutit.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:36 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 244 words, total size 2 kb.