Recent comments in /f/WorcesterMA

CatumEntanglement t1_is3q8y1 wrote

It's actually coming from the chancellor of the school, Michael Collins...and he's pushing a consultant (umass hired at 6 figures to do a campus analysis on diversity) to push the plantation-slavery narrative to get the street change. This is not something altruistic from Collins because he's concerned about the word "Plantation" at all... It's a PR red herring to do 2 things: distract from the racial inequalities in things such as promotions within UMMS and to help UMMS's brand.

I was asking around at work today what the inside take was regarding UMass's insistence all of a sudden to push Worcester to rename Plantation street. The reality is no one cares about the street name b/c there are far more pertinent things going on within Umass like anti-labor and discriminatory practices within departments.

What I heard was that UMMS is looking to rename the other streets around campus, such a North road and South road that are w/in campus to be more "branded", i.e. like how other research campuses name roads to be "science-y" like "Einstein circuit" or "Curie Way". They want to rename Plantation street to be more branded because the new big building being built will have a Plantation street address. UMMS leadership has been wanting the addresses to their main research buildings to be made more research-centric, like "Discovery Street" or something like that.

It's just corporate BS, like it usually is. The real push is coming from the chancellor that a new street name would help the UMMS brand and get more big donors. They are weaponizing virtue signaling as the excuse to make it about racial connotations, or else the city of worcester would just laugh at their request to change the name of a 4 mile long street. They aren't putting in a request to change the names of north and south roads until the Plantation street situation is figured out, because if they did it now...it would be obvious that UMass’s real MO was selfishly to get a better branding opportunity.

1

Itchy_Rock_726 t1_is3cdzr wrote

Reply to comment by meriousel5991 in WoRceSteR pUnK ?¿ by Cool_Bet_9093

If a place can keep the music in the basement noise won't be a major issue. Where you get problems with the neighbors is when the attendees park willy nilly all over the nearby streets and irritate them by using up scarce street parking... especially when you block someone's driveway.

6

New-Vegetable-1274 t1_is3bw7e wrote

That's too bad, I wonder how long they'll be going out of business before they're not going out of business. This is an old NYC trick, "Going out of business, prices slashed, everything must go." Maybe this time they're serious, Maybe Holy Cross will snap it up it make it final. If it's true, too bad, they used to sell nice furniture.

1

thisisntmynametoday t1_is3571v wrote

This is the progress of your “not all plantations” argument. All of these points are demonstrably false, as outlined in many of the books I’ve posted previously.

❌ The area was called Quinsigamond Plantation even before the Europeans settled here. —> ❌Let me try to explain this very clearly: before these British people, a subset of Europeans, settled on the land, they were already calling it Quinsigamond Plantation. —> ❌Therefore, this means that the word "plantation" was applied to the area by someone well before there was slavery in the area, so it is impossible that the name is derived in any way from slavery. We also know that "plantation' was a term that was generally used for farms before the 1800s.

Actual history: The Europeans who settled here were English colonists from Plymouth and Massachusetts Bay Colonies. There was no previous use of the word Plantation in Quinsigamond prior to colonization here. The only people here were Nipmuc and other native tribes. They certainly weren’t using the word plantation.

Multiple tribes were attacked and sold into slavery by the colonists. The first mass sale of Pequots happened in 1637. Some were kept domestically, most were sold to sugar plantations in the Caribbean. Also, the first slave auction in the colonies happened in 1619 in Virginia. Plantations weren’t “just farms” until 1800, when things magically changed in your unsourced Wikipedia article.

Sources: Our Beloved Kin - Lisa Brooks This Land Is Their Land - David J. Silverman

This is a small symbolic change with minor implications. Manufacturing a ton of outrage and defending plantations illuminates the mindset of its proponents.

Ultimately we should work on larger structural changes to benefit people whose families have been damaged by slavery and plantations, but I’m pretty sure you aren’t ready for that conversation.

1

CatumEntanglement t1_is30dvg wrote

Nope. Plus then-named Central Street was mainly zoned for businesses; private residents weren't living on the street. Plus it's a very short street. It was chosen for the MLK name change because it wouldn't disrupt many people. Plantation otoh is a 4mile long street and includes lots of large apartment complexes. The number of private residents who would have to spend a lot of time and money on the street change is in the multiple hundreds. It is not an insignificant ask and burden for people, who I might add are majority POC. UMass gets to rebrand the street for themselves while the burden of cost-to-cjange goes to the taxpayers of Worcester and doubly to all the residents of plantation.

3

meriousel5991 t1_is2vgmc wrote

I mean if people are giving out the exact info of places on the down low that’s one thing, but a place like the firehouse literally has a website and social media accounts.

11