You have permission to edit this article.
Edit

The Post and Courier provides a forum for our readers to share their opinions, and to hold up a mirror to our community. Publication does not imply endorsement by the newspaper; the editorial staff attempts to select a representative sample of letters because we believe it’s important to let our readers see the range of opinions their neighbors submit for publication.

top story

Letters to the Editor: Few neighborhoods with plantation names are historic

Belle Hall Plantation SECONDARY_1.jpg (copy)

Residents of Belle Hall Plantation in Mount Pleasant will vote via mail-in ballots on whether to change two neighborhood signs, removing the word "plantation." One sign is at the entrance; the other is the "Plantation Centre" sign near the clubhouse. File/Andrew J. Whitaker/Staff

As a full-time and career social studies teacher, I fully appreciate the need to preserve history.

There is merit to the argument that the erasure of historical memory will only ensure that we, as a society, learn the wrong lessons, celebrate the wrong heroes and repeat the same mistakes.

The deliberate misinterpretation of history has long been used as a weapon of oppression by those in power. We need look no further than the anti-Semitic curriculum of the Third Reich or the anti-bourgeoisie textbooks of Stalin’s Soviet Union for evidence.

However, dropping the word “plantation” from the names of many predominantly white neighborhoods in the Lowcountry simply does not constitute the “cancellation” of history.

Most obviously because few of these neighborhoods are actual plantation grounds.

The history of these neighborhoods dates back to the late 1990s, not the late 1800s.

The use of the word “plantation” in the names of many of these communities was, at best, intended to conjure up antebellum allusions to large homes, acres of land and fresh lemonade that meant to appeal to affluent white families.

At worst, the word has been received by many black neighbors as an implied “whites only” sign to discourage minority homeownership and the complexities that would certainly follow.

I’m all for the preservation of actual history and historical grounds. But housing developments that romanticize the word “plantation” to sell homes and appeal to white homeowners constitute neither.

JOHN HUBER-MACNEALY

Sandy Point Lane

Mount Pleasant

Say ‘no’ to open carry

Commentary: SC travel and tourism industry still needs help

In their March 20 commentary “SC travel and tourism industry still needs recovery help,” Helen Hill and Michael Tall, CEO and board chairman, respectively, of Explore Charleston, speak to what we all witnessed during the past year as businesses and nonprofits dependent on tourism have struggled to hang on.

With government recovery help and the availability of the COVID-19 vaccine, tourists are slowly returning and locals are venturing out. There is reason to hope.

But, in its wisdom, the South Carolina Legislature is poised to pass an open carry bill, allowing people from every state to visit here, bringing their weapons and carrying them openly.

This is a sure way to harm the tourism economy in a state heavily dependent upon it.

Why would we do this? There seems to be no benefit, only more opportunity for tragedy. We are still reeling from the news that Colorado has experienced another mass shooting. As one law enforcement officer expressed, how would one know, among those openly carrying a gun, who might be a killer?

I support the Second Amendment. I have had hunters in my family all of my life and I am glad that South Carolina is a state in which people can enjoy that recreation.

But open carry? It is the wrong choice for South Carolina.

Please speak up now and let state legislators know that you, along with many other South Carolinians, oppose open carry.

SALLIE M. DUELL

Get a weekly recap of South Carolina opinion and analysis from The Post and Courier in your inbox on Monday evenings.


East Battery

Charleston

Fear rule changes

The news that President Joe Biden is “open to big Senate rule changes to aid agenda” should strike fear into the hearts of all Americans, regardless of political persuasion.

The nation’s founders knew that it was important to restrain the tyranny of the majority, so they designed layers of safeguards.

The removal of these safeguards, in conjunction with the fealty to party-line voting, tends to push the legislative process to the views of the extreme members of either party.

While Americans agree on far more than we disagree, this proposed dynamic will proceed at the expense of common values.

Laws that are passed without significant minority party votes could be seen to not hold true to the desires of the majority of voters.

There is usually a happy medium to be achieved, and failing to do so risks disastrous consequences when ideologically pure, but fantastical in real world terms, measures are enacted.

At this point, the intersection of Friedrich Hayek’s “Fatal Conceit” of government and the law of unintended consequences rears its ugly head with predictable results.

Any upcoming societal and economic disasters will be in direct proportion to measures passed by 51-50 votes in the Senate.

Dr. JOSEPH CARASTRO IV

Bower Lane

Johns Island

Streets embarrassing

What’s going on with the state of the streets in downtown Charleston?

I am constantly reminded of skiing when driving on the peninsula. I can’t decide whether I am on a slalom course, necessitating quick and short turns, or a mogul field with bumps.

As a resident, it is extremely frustrating and annoying, and for a top tourist destination, it’s embarrassing.

DAVID AVRUTICK

Gibbes Street

Charleston

Get up-to-the-minute news sent straight to your device.

Topics

Breaking News

Columbia Breaking News

Greenville Breaking News

Myrtle Beach Breaking News

Aiken Breaking News