Read on Twitter
Yesterday, the @nytimes published an excellent article by @allyson_renee7 regarding the name of @NASA's @NASAStennis Space Center in Mississippi. I highly recommend you read it and give it some close thought. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/09/us/nasa-rename-john-c-stennis-space-center.html
Still somewhat to my amazement, the genesis for this movement to change the name of NASA Stennis -- already the center's 4th name in its 50+ year history -- again is a long thread of Tweets that I wrote in late June. You can read that whole thread here: https://twitter.com/i/events/1275836820337512448?s=50
The TL;DR version of that Twitter thread is: @NASAStennis is named after US Congressperson with a very long and very interesting history that includes, among so much else, being among the staunchest defenders of racial segregation in the US.
Also relevant: the career of the US Senator for whom @NASAStennis is named does NOT include much in the way of actually helping @NASA or the general cause of the exploration of space -- beyond ensuring that the budget for this particular NASA facility didn't get cut.
Currently, all of NASA's major centers (with the exception of JPL, which some people count and others don't) are named after white men. Most of those men made massive contributions to @NASA and related institutions like the @smithsonian or NASA's predecessor org, NACA.
Now, defending the budget of a particular NASA center is not nothing. That's certainly a significant action by any scope of the definition (whether you think it is a GOOD action or a bad one is an exercise for the reader)...
But I'll note that we don't call it the Bill Nelson Space Center in Florida, the Richard Shelby Space Flight Center in Alabama, the Barbara Mikulski Space Flight Center in Maryland, the Kay Bailey Hutchinson Space Center in Texas, or whatever else.
With the sole exception of John C. Stennis, a politician with a legacy that by today's standards could be described as "It's Complicated" at the most charitable interpretation, NASA's centers are not named for people whose influence covered only finances nor only one center.
Quoting @allyson_renee7's piece, that is indeed what Stennis' contribution to NASA / spaceflight was. "NASA’s chief historian, William P. Barry, said Mr. Stennis 'was a major influence on NASA’s budget' because of his committee positions.”
That's it. That's the justification.
That's it. That's the justification.
Also telling is the next line from William Barry, as quoted by the @allyson_renee7 @nytimes piece: "'He was a person you didn’t want to make angry at you.'"
While the same is probably true of other people for whom NASA has named its centers (LBJ, anyone?), I don't know that it would make into a two sentence description of their contributions to NASA.
For me personally, the combo of John C. Stennis's troubling history of enforcing exclusion plus his very flimsy (relatively speaking) record of supporting spaceflight / aviation means that it is time to consider moving on to @NASAStennis's 5th name.
(And I'll note explicitly that I'm just one person. My opinion shouldn't count any more than anyone else's. I also don't live in Mississippi, I don't currently work for NASA, and no one in my family was a direct victim of the disgraceful enforced segregation in the US South.)
If you've examined the issue -- and I encourage you not to form an opinion until you have examined the facts yourself -- and you agree that @NASA Stennis should move from its fourth name (which is its current name) to its fifth, you may be wondering if and how that could happen.
Be encourage that in the current Administration, under the leadership of @JimBridenstine, @NASA has changed the name of two of its major facilities. Both have been changed to honor some of the "Hidden Figures" made famous by @margotshetterly's book & its film adaptation
In 2019, @NASA changed the name of its Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Facility in Fairmont, WV to honor human computer Katherine Johnson (played by @tarajiphenson in the film Hidden Figures). https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2019/west-virginia-nasa-facility-renamed-after-agency-icon
And just a few weeks ago, @NASA changed the name of its Headquarters building in Washington, DC. It now honors another Hidden Figure, Mary Jackson (played by one of my favorite artists, @JanelleMonae). https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-names-headquarters-after-hidden-figure-mary-w-jackson
Both of those name changes were non-controversial. Both have been widely applauded. Both were done at the initiative of and due to the excellent leadership of @JimBridenstine and the current @NASA team. My hat is off to them.
And yes, if you weren't reading those dates closely, you may be surprised to note that both of those name changes came during the current US Presidential administration, not the previous one. Let's give credit where credit is due!
But as awesome as those two names and facilities are, they are not NASA Centers -- they are step down from that in importance. The process for renaming a NASA Center, as I understand it, is quite probably different.
Let's look at two illustrative examples.
The most recent name change of a NASA Center came in 2014, when NASA’s Hugh L. Dryden Flight Research Center became @NASAArmstrong
The most recent name change of a NASA Center came in 2014, when NASA’s Hugh L. Dryden Flight Research Center became @NASAArmstrong
That name was changed as a result of congressional legislation. @SenFeinstein (D-CA) & @kevinomccarthy (R-CA) introduced the bills that lead to that name change.
That's 1 in the House, 1 in the Senate, 1 from each major political party, both from the same state as the center.
That's 1 in the House, 1 in the Senate, 1 from each major political party, both from the same state as the center.
The other particularly relevant example is the last time @NASAStennis itself changes names. As noted in @allyson_renee7's piece, "in 1988, President Ronald Reagan signed an executive order renaming the center for Mr. Stennis."
I'll note that Senator John C. Stennis was still alive when @NASAStennis was named for him, so contrary to what many believe, there is not a requirement that the honoree be deceased. This is useful knowledge if you are brainstorming potential future names.
So, we've got a demonstrated path to renaming NASA Centers that goes via the legislative branch, and another that goes via the executive branch. Options! Options are always good.
How does those options look? Well, let's just say that the legislative option isn't off to a promising start. https://www.wicker.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2020/7/wicker-hyde-smith-palazzo-kelly-guest-strongly-oppose-effort-to-rename-stennis-space-center
Yesterday, shortly after the @nytimes piece published, @SenatorWicker (R-MS), @SenHydeSmith (R-MS), @CongPalazzo (R-MS), @RepTrentKelly (R-MS), and @RepMichaelGuest (R-MS) a statement strongly opposing changing the name of @NASAStennis again.
Let's hear them out! They are elected officials in the highest legislative body in the greatest nation in the world (IMHO). Their words always merit attention and consideration.
Here's their reasoning for wanting to ensure @NASAStennis keeps its 4th (current) name.
(That's it. That's the whole statement.)
(That's it. That's the whole statement.)
I agree with the bulk of that statement, actually. The first sentence is a statement of personal opinion -- I disagree, but that doesn't mean the first sentence is wrong. And I wouldn't call supporting segregation "fair-minded" (to say the least).
And I agree with the final sentence about 50% (more on this later).
But the rest of it I think is pretty indisputably true, and certainly relevant. It's worth reading and considering.
But the rest of it I think is pretty indisputably true, and certainly relevant. It's worth reading and considering.
But again, the arguments these public officials make in support of keeping John C. Stennis as the 4th and current name of a NASA facility are not now and have never been sufficient to merit the naming of any other NASA Center for any other human being. Not even close.
What that means is that *even before you consider his long-lasting and staunch support of enforced racial segregation*, Senator Stennis's contributions to NASA to not clear the name meritorious hurdles as did the other people for whom NASA centers are named...
... that even those who think the center should keep its name don't claim that John C. Stennis made a contribution at the same scale as any of the other honorees ...
.. and, importantly, that any space fan, space professional, or space historian could name dozens if not hundreds of other human beings who DO clear that meritorious hurdle and thus are more deserving of the honor.
And again, all of that is *without even considering the question of race relations and systemic oppression at all*.
For those of you who, like me, believe that question of racial exclusion *should* be considered, the chase for moving on to @NASAStennis's 5th name is even stronger -- and we'll get into that next. But again, the case for reexamining the name is very strong *even without that!*
If you are still reading, let's move on to that light, simple, and not at all intimidating issue of the fact that a NASA Center is named for a legislative champion of enforced legal racial segregation and someone who is held up as a paragon of white supremacy.
This quote from @airandspace curator @mgtwspace in
@allyson_renee7's excellent @nytimes article says it far more eloquently than I could.
@allyson_renee7's excellent @nytimes article says it far more eloquently than I could.
Since my big tweetstorm a few weeks ago, I've heard from space fans and professionals from around the world. I've heard from people of many races and many genders. I'd say comments were about 90% in favor of a name change and about 10% opposed.
What hasn't happened is I haven't heard from a single person who works at @NASAStennis. Not in favor, not opposed, nothing. I don't know why that is -- I've heard from plenty of other NASA folks.
In all of the messages, those for and against the idea combined, I’d say maybe 5% of people had already known who John C. Stennis was before reading my tweets.
If you believe that changing names on buildings is “erasing history,” this fact is probably relevant.
If you believe that changing names on buildings is “erasing history,” this fact is probably relevant.
That is to say, I think you can make a plausible argument that my tweets about changing the name of @NASAStennis & the resulting public conversation educated more people about John C Stennis then did the name itself. It may have helped educate folks back in the 1980s, but not now
For more on the topic of the impact of having the name of someone whose racial legacy is so troubling grace a major government facility, I'd also direct you once more to this article by LCDR Reuben Keith (US Navy, Ret.). https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2020/june/case-renaming-uss-john-c-stennis
There are lots of people closer to this issue, more knowledgable of the history, or more impacted by the modern day impact of that history than I. I highly encourage you to listen to them. Again, I'm just one guy. Please please please consider the evidence & make up your own mind
If you've done the research and think the name should change, you may be wondering, "how can I help?"
I've got a few suggestions. Let's go through those. In no particular order:
I've got a few suggestions. Let's go through those. In no particular order:
Do some research on others who might be more deserving on the incredible honor of having a NASA center named after them.
This is, IMHO, the ultimate response to people who think changing names is 'erasing history' -- lots of folks seeking out history they'd never learned before.
This is, IMHO, the ultimate response to people who think changing names is 'erasing history' -- lots of folks seeking out history they'd never learned before.
I don't know that it's strictly necessary to have a new name in mind in order to support moving forward to a 5th name for what is currently called @NASAStennis... but it helps drive the conversation and provides a point of contrast for Sen. Stennis's contributions to NASA / space
There are lots of great candidates for this incredible honor. My favorite answer is still @maejemison , for the reasons I laid out earlier.
I've also heard and liked the ideas of Sally Ride, Clyde Foster, Mary Golda Ross & more.
If you have a favorite, I hope you'll share it
I've also heard and liked the ideas of Sally Ride, Clyde Foster, Mary Golda Ross & more.
If you have a favorite, I hope you'll share it
But really, have fun with this. Learn! Talk with friends (wear a mask while doing so!!!)! Debate your favorites. Remember forgotten histories, learn histories you never new. Celebrate it, mourn it, learn from it.
Which brings me to my 2nd recommendation.
Which brings me to my 2nd recommendation.
For the love of all that is holy, listen to Black people. Like, seek them out (it's not that hard!), and really listen to them. Pay them the respect of hearing and considering their ideas just like you would for any other person.
Our beloved aerospace industry doesn't have *enough* Black leaders -- only because they have been disgracefully excluded, sometimes by law and sometimes by shameful custom -- but we do have some incredible Black leaders new and old in this business. Lots of them tweet. Find them!
Really! I promise, it's not that hard. There are literally hashtags to help you easily and almost instantaneously do this! Whether it's something general like #amplifymelanatedvoices or something more specific like #blackinastro.
Okay, once you've studied your history and considered more perspectives, what can you do next?
Well, changing the name of a NASA Center will almost certainly be a matter of politics. So, that's where most of the next steps will be.
Well, changing the name of a NASA Center will almost certainly be a matter of politics. So, that's where most of the next steps will be.
Anytime I talk about politics, I start with these tips.
• Register to vote.
• Double check that you are registered.
• Educate yourself about the ballot.
• Exercise your right to vote.
• Work vigorously to ensure others are unencumbered in their own quest to do the above.
• Register to vote.
• Double check that you are registered.
• Educate yourself about the ballot.
• Exercise your right to vote.
• Work vigorously to ensure others are unencumbered in their own quest to do the above.
Beyond that, remember that politicians work for citizens. All them.
They need to listen to you. In my experience, many of them even *want* to listen to you!
So, talk to them!
They need to listen to you. In my experience, many of them even *want* to listen to you!
So, talk to them!
The fastest, simplest way to talk to politicians is to sign a petition. Thankfully, @aleighwhite recently started a petition specifically about the name of NASA Stennis. https://www.change.org/p/nasa-change-name-of-john-c-stennis-space-center
Signing a petition can definitely have an impact. But because it's the fastest, simplest way to use your political voice, that impact isn't as high as some other steps.
If you live in the USA, it is your right -- a right hard-earned by our predecessors -- to contact our elected officials and to tell them what you think and what you care about. In reality, very, very, very few people ever do.
But you can send an email -- I guarantee that your Congressperson and your Senator both have an email address that is publicly accessible and that is actually read by some human (probably not the member themselves, but by someone.)
You can call them! You can call their DC office or their office in your district. You can call both of them! You can call them more than once, if you'd like -- tell them you are calling back to check if the Senator or Congressperson has made any progress on this issue.
You can mail them letters.
I'm *pretty sure* you can even fax them, if you've just emerged from a time warp.
I'm *pretty sure* you can even fax them, if you've just emerged from a time warp.
You may even be able to visit with them or with a member of their staff in person, at a field office or in DC.
(Again, if you do that, please please please wear a mask. Please.)
(Again, if you do that, please please please wear a mask. Please.)
Even though five members of Mississippi's Congressional Delegation have already come out with a statement strongly opposing changing the name of @NASAStennis, you can still call them up and ask them to change their minds. Especially if you live in the State.
Mississippi also has one other Representative in US Congress: @BennieGThompson (D-MS). You'll note that he is of a different political party than the five who signed the letter opposed to the name change. You may also notice his skin is of a different color than the others.
Congressman Thompson was an active participant in SNCC (Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee) during the Civil Rights Era. It's possible that he may have some opinions about John C. Stennis & about how deserving he is of being one of ~10 humans who name graces a NASA center
You may notice this sentence in @BennieGThompson's bio: "He organized voter registration drives for African-Americans throughout the Mississippi Delta on behalf of the organization before graduating and following in the footsteps of his mother by becoming a school teacher."
Now, I'll admit that my head twisted about 30 degrees when I read this incredible quote in @allyson_renee7 's well-reported and well-written piece in the @nytimes.
Now, I personally think that the views of the family are relevant and should be considered. But we're fortunate enough to have public leaders like @BennieGThompson and @repjohnlewis who lived through that history. I'm curious what they'd think about that quote and about Stennis.
I'm not being facetious, I really am curious. Senator Stennis was a real person, with all of the complexities that entailed. His legacy is complex. Check this out from @allyson_renee7's article:
I genuinely wonder what @MikeEspyMS thinks?
I genuinely wonder what @MikeEspyMS thinks?
I'll return again to my soapbox to say: this shouldn't be about erasing history. This should be about learning history we never knew, correcting our misconceptions of history we didn't understand, and learning actual lessons from a more complete view of history.
Okay, I'm early done with this tweet storm. (I think.) But I want to close the same way @allyson_renee7 did in her piece. I could not agree more with the final section of her piece.
.x.!.^.
Disclosure: I know Ms. Garvin in real life and I am deeply, profoundly proud of her. But even if I didn't know her, even if I disliked her (inconceivable to me, but for the sake of argument!), still, I'd say:
So please, if you've read my words or the @nytimes, if you've read and learned and considered, if you think that the name of @NASAStennis should be changed for the 4th time in that facility's short history: speak up about it, and help make that change happen. BUT DON'T STOP THERE
Names matter, because words matter. But John C. Stennis is not the only name worth learning more about (Wernher Magnus Maximilian Freiherr von Braun, anyone?!?). What's more, there are many thing that still matter much more than words and names, as important as those things are.
What other history don't you know?
There's a lot of history I don't know, and I'm a giant space nerd who has worked in the space industry for 20 years and gobbles up books like they were candy. I'm gonna keep learning.
There's a lot of history I don't know, and I'm a giant space nerd who has worked in the space industry for 20 years and gobbles up books like they were candy. I'm gonna keep learning.
And hey: what part of the *PRESENT* don't you know?
Don't delude yourself into thinking this is a historical problem that will just go away over time. It is not.
Don't delude yourself into thinking this is a historical problem that will just go away over time. It is not.
What aren't you seeing? What are you just pretending you don't see? What do you see and feel bad about, but do nothing about? Where have you been so paralyzed by the fear of doing something wrong that you've just done nothing?
Have you looked around at your teams? Your executives, your C-Suite, your board? Your interns and your early career hires?
Is your talent mix consistently different for the mix of your applicant pool? Do you applicant pool differ for the available pool? Why?
Is your talent mix consistently different for the mix of your applicant pool? Do you applicant pool differ for the available pool? Why?
Here’s a dangerous way of thinking that I see all too often in my beloved aerospace industry: People comparing their own demographic numbers only to their peer companies in the same industry. Those data are not entirely without value, but they are nowhere near enough
Here's what I good, the bad, and the ugly of what I see when I look at the aerospace industry, my field of 20 years.
The good: A workforce full of bright, good humans working on meaningful, purpose-driven missions, making the most of their powerful, data-driven brains.
The good: A workforce full of bright, good humans working on meaningful, purpose-driven missions, making the most of their powerful, data-driven brains.
The bad: lost in the background is a mass of equally talented, equally good, equally purposeful human being who have been left behind and deliberately locked out of the industry due to what they look like, where they were born, or how much money their parents earned.
The ugly: the near total failure of people in the industry to use those powerful, data-driven creative brains to put any effort whatsoever into considering why the Bad listed above exists or how to improve it.
