I would figure a way to somehow refuse to accept Tubman bucks. "Give me two $10s or four $5s..."
---
Yea!
by Gordon Bakken
Some people are suggesting that we put Harriet Tubman's
picture on our $20 bill.
I checked her out on the web to see what she could have done
that was so notable. Turns out, she was famous for helping slaves
escape from the South into Canada.
Now, slavery might or might not have been a good idea, but
at that time it was legal. Federal law specifically prohibited
Northerners from helping slaves escape. In fact, the Constitution
itself prohibited Northerners from aiding escaped slaves. Thus the
famous Tubman was really nothing but a criminal - by the laws
then, which is all that counts.
If we really want to put the face of a criminal on our money, I
suggest Al Capone might be a better candidate. True, he did break
the law during prohibition, but unlike Tubman, his main activity
was not to steal from people, but mostly just to provide people
with what they wanted at the time, in this case liquor.
I question whether we really want to put the face of any
criminal on our money. Although many would say that would
exclude all politicians. But if we do, Harriet Tubman and Al
Capone would be candidates. Both violated the Constitution, both
are famous, and the action of both was eventually made legal by
Constitutional Amendments.
It could be said that both of those candidates also did some
good. In trying to evaluate that, one must look at those they
helped. Who needed help more, a slave or a free man with no
alcohol? That is not obvious.
Tubman is often quoted as saying, “I freed a thousand
slaves. I could have freed a thousand more if only they knew they
were slaves.” (Since she could neither read nor write it is difficult
to verify that she actually said that.) Freedom might have sounded
great to slaves at first, but when they realized that freedom did not
include meals and a place to sleep, they may not have been so sure
it was a step up.
Also the alcohol drinkers could be questioned. Were they
really better off with booze? Drink took some of their money, and
they did not perform as well at work or home after drinking.
(These are reasons alcohol was outlawed in the first place.)
Both Tubman and Capone have fans. Which one should be
on our money? The answer is clear: neither.
---
Nay!