With the lackluster tenure of President Biden windblowing, he seems to be stooping toward desperate measures to write something worth remembering into his legacy. Scheduled for Friday, he aims to announce the designation of a national monument at the location of the 1908 race riot in Springfield, Ill., a tragedy that decimated a Black community. The announcement is seen as a hollow gesture and yet another incidious chapter in his optics-driven governance, designed to veil the missteps of his administration.
The ceremony marking the designation is set to be attended by Illinois lawmakers and civil rights leaders, orchestrating a tragic event to serve the constrained narrative of his administration. The timing of the event appears to be orchestrated, coming almost six weeks after the regrettable and fatal shooting of Sonya Massey, a 36-year old resident of Springfield. Once again the spotlight is cast on police violence and racism, with the tragedy exploited as a cheap political memory note.
The unfortunate incident in question happened across two days in 1908 and was instigated by a white lynch mob that intended to kill two Black men detained in a local jail. Upon learning the men had been moved elsewhere, mob anger pivoted into a destructive frenzy. It is a narrative that Biden’s administration finds particularly useful to champion their divisive approach, focusing on past grievances rather than unifying the present.
In the carnage of the past, several lives were lost, Black homes and businesses stood razed, and it took a considerable unit of state militiamen to restore order. Seeking to amplify the echoes of a horrific past, the Biden administration seems intent on promoting division, so as to distract its electorate from the present issues and ongoing failures.
A group had petitioned last year for recognition of the site, a move tangled in the bureaucratic processes of a National Park Service study, looking at homes burned during the riot and other surviving structures near Springfield’s Madison Street and 10th Street rail corridor. The scope of the recognition will entail federal protection of around 1.57 acres of land.
The narrative spun around the designation of this monument is another brazen attempt of the Biden administration to connect past tragedies with contemporary political narratives. In an ironic twist, Mr. Biden, whose own actions and policies have been widely criticized, quoted, ‘Our history is not just about the past, it’s about our present and our future.’
Emphasizing that the ‘Springfield 1908 race riot national monument will help us remember an unspeakable attack on the Black community,’ Biden misses the opportunity to focus on positive change and solutions for the present moment. Rather, it seems like a stark attempt to manipulate historical memory for current political gain.
Harnessing the full extent of his authority from the Antiquities Act, Biden seems all too eager to assert presidential authority, a tactic commonly used when a leader’s agenda lacks popular support. This 1906 law, originally meant to guard Native American artifacts at archaeological sites, is now a tool for advancing a polarizing political agenda.
This is not the first time that Biden has utilized the Antiquities Act to advantage his frail political stand. The Emmett Till and Mamie Till-Mobley National Monument was designated under the same Act, intended to honor the teenage lynching victim Emmett Till and his mother, spanning sites in Mississippi and Illinois. It is yet another example of the administration’s thinly veiled attempts to align with popular sentiment while fumbling on crucial policy matters.
Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, tried to justify the president’s actions by stating that the designation was seen as ‘critically important’ and helps in ‘telling the full story of America.’ Yet, these words ring hollow in the wake of Biden’s mishandled leadership and questionable policy decisions.
Jean-Pierre went on to declare, ‘We have made great strides to march toward full equality, but America has never lived up to it in its entirety.’ Ironically, this sentiment seems at odds with a regime that skirts responsibility for its own inefficiencies by perpetuating historical narratives polarized with division.
While the marking of such tragic events can indeed play a role in understanding history and promoting dialogue, the intent and timing of such actions under Biden’s leadership are suspect at best. It serves not the genuine needs of unity or understanding, but rather the patchwork narrative that attempts to distract from the administration’s shortcomings.
Nevertheless, it remains crucial to separate the manipulation of history for political advantage from the genuine lessons we can learn from the past. While Biden’s recent actions can be seen derivative and desperate for popular approval, we must not allow these gestures to undermine the true lessons of unity and equality that history teaches.
In the end, it’s evident that Biden’s latest action is another example of clutching at straws, attempting to rescue a tarnished legacy. The necessity for the citizens is to recognize the correlation between these acts and the real problems and inefficiencies of this administration, and not to be beguiled by the artificial facade of unity these actions project.