Skip to main content

REMOVE THEIR NAMES: Kr*v*s, R*b*rts & the Monuments to their Barbarism at Claremont McKenna College

"Without exception, cultural treasures...have an origin [we] cannot contemplate without horror....There is no document of civilization which is not at the same time a document of barbarism."

                                            -- Walter Benjamin, "Thesis VII," On the Concept of History.

In recent months and years, names that should never have been affixed to public buildings have been coming down, especially on our college campuses.

In 2017, Yale University, for instance, removed the name of white supremacist John Calhoun (Yale 1804), from one of its residential colleges, renaming the college after Grace Murray Hopper (who earned a PhD in maths from Yale in 1934).  It's good to have removed Calhoun's name, but let's agree that it should not have taken a century-plus to know that white supremacism and slavery are wrong and that Calhoun deserves no honors: it should not have taken a century-plus to remove a name that should never have been honored with a building. 

Which brings us to the question: what buildings have names of contemporary and still-living figures that should be removed now, not in the next century, not in retrospect.  Ethics, after all, doesn't require or benefit from waiting until a distant future.      

For the Claremont Colleges, where I teach, I will start by proposing two: Kravis Center and the Roberts Pavilion, both of Claremont McKenna College (CMC).

Henry Kravis (henceforth "K") and George R. Roberts (henceforth "R") are alums of CMC, class of '67 and '66 respectively; and both are now trustees of College--not so coincidentally, they're also cousins.  They first gained broad public attention in the 1980s, when they pioneered what are known as "leveraged buyouts" of LBOs and led one of the most famous and infamous LBOs, the takeover of RJR Nabisco (a story told in the book, Barbarians at the Gate).  

As is characteristic of the high-risk, high reward financial maneuvers of the neoliberal era of financial de-regulation, LBOs have proven highly lucrative for finance capitalists (like K & R), at the expense of diminished compensation for workers (to invoke Thomas Pikkety's analysis of the broad increase in wealth inequality in recent decades; see also the 2010 film, "Inside Job," for the contribution of LBOs to the instability of financial markets and the resulting harms from that instability).

Rapacious finance capitalism is not entrepreneurial, in the sense of really building anything--and it is nothing to honor persons for by placing their names on monumental buildings on a college campus.

But we do not need to look back on the 1980s to see that K&R are hardly persons of ethics and hardly persons deserving of honor.   

At this very moment, right now in 2021, the investment firm KKR, which K & R jointly lead, is financing the Coastal Gas Link Pipeline (CGL), which is set to pass through un-ceded Wet'suwet'en Territory, despite tribal opposition, for the purpose of transporting fracked natural gas.

Let's say this clearly.  As fully as slavery was evil in its day, and not just a century-plus later, trampling the rights and lives of Indigenous people is evil right now--the wrongness of this is not a fruit that ripens only later. And the same is true in 2021 of any further extraction of fossil fuels, with fracking deserving special attention as particularly awful contributor to our unfolding climate catastrophe and a wide range of environmental harms.

Put simply, we know now that K & R are unethical profiteers, and there is no good reason to wait a century-plus to REMOVE THEIR NAMES.

The Claremont Colleges campaign to REMOVE THEIR NAMES is in solidarity with the larger struggle to Shut Down KKR.  The local campaign can be followed on twitter @KKRKills

Comments

  1. Today, KKR reported record quarterly earnings. Which brings to mind this quotation from Kim Stanley Robinson's *The Ministry of the Future*:

    "It seems quite possible that these [un-extracted] 2,500 gigatons of carbon might eventually come to be regarded as a kind of stranded asset, but in the meantime, some people will be trying to sell and burn the portion of it they own or control, while they still can. Just enough to make a trillion or two, they'll be saying to themselves---not the crucial portion, not the burn that pushes us over the edge, just one last little taking. People need it. The nineteen largest organizations doing this will be, in order of size from biggest to smallest: Saudi Aramco, Chevron, Gazprom, ExxonMobil. . . Executive decisions for these organizations' actions will be made by about five hundred people. They will be good people. Patriotic politicians, concerned for the fate of their beloved nation's citizens; conscientious hardworking corporate executives, fulfilling their obligations to their board and their shareholders. Men, for the most part; family men for the most part: well-educated, well-meaning. Pillars of the community. Givers to charity. When they go to the concert hall of an evening, their hearts will stir at the somber majesty of Brahms's Fourth Symphony. They will want the best for their children."

    #RemoveTheirNames

    ReplyDelete
  2. petiMspecho_1999 John Chongbang Download
    aladtobkonf

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Response to the Pitzer Administration's "Statement on Ukraine"

On Tuesday, March 15, Pitzer's president and vice-president for academic affairs co-signed a statement of support for, and solidarity with, Ukrainians .  That statement ended with this comment: " We stand with Ukrainians who are demonstrating tremendous bravery, resilience, unity, and courage as they defend their homeland."   What's tragic and disturbing is that this valuable statement against state oppression when Ukrainians are the victims entirely contradicts the administration's opposition to taking a stand against state oppression when Palestinians are the victims.   The recent "Statement on Ukraine" evidences jarring dissonence when read next to  this statement of March 14, 2019 , when the same Pitzer president issued an unprecedented veto of shared governance, in order to block the Pitzer community's taking a stand against Israeli state apartheid and ethnic cleansing.   What follows is my public response to the administration's recent &quo

follow up on "The Debt Ceiling Deal and Progressives"

The composition of the bipartisan Debt Ceiling Panel bodes ill for there being serious cuts in the U.S. military budget as part of any "second phase" deal to reduce the U.S. deficit.  Put simply, the states with large military contractors are fully, if not overly, represented on the Panel.   Of particular note on the Democratic side is Senator Patty Murray of Washington.   Progressive commentators have generally responded favorably to her appointment (and conservative voices have singled it out for criticism), but Boeing is a major employer in Washington (with some 30,000 workers in the state) and its PAC is a major source of campaign funds for Murray.  Almost certainly, for example, the cuts in military spending that would be triggered if the panel reaches no compromise would hit, and perhaps eliminate, the 35 billion dollar contract awarded to Boeing this past February to build roughly 200 new refueling "tanker" aircraft for the military. Murray no doubt will

SECULAR STUDIES IN THE NY TIMES AND HERE AT PITZER

Back on May 7th, the headline in the NY Times read: "Pitzer College in California Adds Major in Secularism." The problem is that this headline was simply false.  No major was proposed; and none was approved. The NY Times article also reported the founding of a "department of secular studies" at Pitzer College (along with the major).  The truth or falsity of this second claim is more complex than the claim about the major--but this claim too is largely misleading.   To start, Pitzer prides itself on not having any "departments."  The closest analog to "departments" at Pitzer are odd beasts known as "Field Groups," and these "Field Groups" come in two kinds at the College.  The kind that is most like a department at other colleges are known as "Type A" field groups; there are also "Type B" field groups (which I will explain in a moment).  And the grain of truth in the NY Times story was that Pitzer Colle