"Learning about the founding of the nation is critical, but painting it as a glorious moment of resolution or a perfect creation sets unrealistic standards we can never meet again. "

I would argue that setting unrealistic standards we can never meet again is precisely the role our Founders should play. Where are Jesus's faults? How can we benefit from asking "What would Jesus do?" if Jesus has clay feet?

A country needs a mythos its people can aspire to emulate. Today I listened to Copland's "A Lincoln Portrait" on the radio. The piece isn't about what Lincoln did; it was about what Lincoln SAID. https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4165357 Do we really want these words sullied by the facts of Lincoln's racial ambivalence and expedient campaign rhetoric? Or do we want them to ring out as a call to our better angels?

I know that Washington could tell a lie, but when you tell my six-year-old about how Washington came clean about that cherry tree, do you want to add "But he owned slaves when he grew up, so who gives a fuck what he thought about honesty?"

I have yet to see one decision I would want anyone to make in their lives that is better made by virtue of knowing that the Founders were assholes by modern standards. Call them "complex" if you wish, but the history wars are not about painting them as complex; they are about painting them as evil incarnate; to allow that the literal truth about them is useful is to surrender in that war.

There are many ways to bring the wrongs of the European invaders on this continent into the light without causing all of their ancestors to lose hope of rising above their all-too-human beginnings. Homo sapiens is an invasive species, but the past is, as the man said, a foreign country, and we assess its morals at our peril. I think we can stand having a few guys on pedestals.

Shall we dwell on MLK's peccadillos, too? Better "I have a dream," than "I have the hots."