Today two leading Republican politicians attempted to stake out turf for the 2024 (that's not a typo) presidential race, as Trump tried to strengthen his hand for the 2020 election.
Can I just say, it is such an incredible mental relief to come over here and see intelligent and respectful discussion? It's just so calming to hear real, smart dialogue in this moment, and I'm learning so much from you all.
OK. Will stop being astonished and mushy and get to reading....
So we have The Lincoln Project’s possible choice in Hogan and a replacement leader for the displaced diehard Trump supporters. Both seem ominous.
America cannot continue as a corporate / religion owned country for which Republicans lean more strongly.
Corporations are only out for themselves. Religion, while wonderful if done with tolerance and moderation, is still a nightmare when combined with politics.
Look at the Middle East now and history to see what our future would be like.
We need a government that is separate from religion to keep Religious Freedom in America.
We want a strong workforce and for our corporations to succeed, but not at the expense of our health, environment, and quality of life.
We need to fix the Middle Class and not let the poorest of Americans suffer because people prize Kardashians over the work of ditch diggers.
I forgot to mention that I chose not to join a church because most never seem very fair to women. It also seems politicians use religion because the biggest churches are historically ruled by white men.
I’m not a religious person. I wasn’t raised with religion, but God found me without the help of church. My relationship is personal. I don’t foist my spiritual views on others and I strongly dislike when people do that to me.
That being said, from the point of view as someone who is outside the loop on organized religion, doesn’t it seem baffling how far opposite Christian ethics many Conservatives are? And “un-American” in terms of Freedoms?
I see many who declare themselves Christians and Patriots but say un-Christian things and are fine with people they don’t like losing one or more of their Freedoms.
America is devolving into chaos and I am frightened. Trump intended for the DHS kidnapping of protestors to be intimidating. It worked. The people captured in videos being hauled away didn’t appear to be doing anything deserving of that treatment.
I’m so upset that I want beg Biden (after he takes office 🙏) to order the arrest anyone who ordered police and other law enforcement branches to be arrested and tossed into Gitmo with the other terrorists (including Trump).
Agreed, Lisa. The thing that terrifies me is that even the Christian influence into politics is corrosive, because the version of Christianity is narrow and intolerant--and doesn't speak for many many Chrisitans, IMHO. Not that it should; even if it did speak to me, it's an ideology and shouldn't mix with politics to become a theocracy.
The inherent problem with religion, at least the evangelical varieties, is that it’s never content to be “done with tolerance and moderation”. Evangelicals (like Pompeo or Pence)are driven to “spread the word” and convert everyone. Which means evangelical religion has to combine with politics, because that’s where the power to “spread the word“ and convert everyone resides. The 1st Amendment is a bit too fuzzy on the establishment clause. We need to be clear that there can be no religion in public, at all. Ever. No prayers before sessions of Congress, no “In god we trust” on our currency or “under god” in the pledge (no pledge at all, really, but that’s for another day). There should be no possibility ever that someone’s religious beliefs might be imposed on anyone else. Religion needs to be entirely private. And Pompeo needs to be defeated.
Hogan and Pomposity are two sides of the same counterfeit coin. Hogan's the kind of R that can get elected in a blue state, while Pomposity is your red state bombthrower. And as big a disgrace to West Point as his previous First In His Class, Robert E. Lee.
IMHO, anyone who has ever supported Trump is tainted for life. That especially pertains to Pompeo and Barr but really extends to almost every Republican Senator and Representative. Every single one of them needs to be thrown out. We're desperately in need of "House (and Senate) Cleaning!"
This part made me laugh out loud: "'that every human being is imbued with dignity and bears responsibilities toward fellow human beings'". What about wearing masks and social distancing? and not protesting governors who are trying to protect the health and lives of their citizens?
Heather, your letters provide a valuable place for people of many different mind sets, opinions, and believes to have meaningful dialogue via the written word. Thank you. This is such an important service.
I live in Portland, Oregon. The destruction of property within our downtown core mostly occurred in the original protests from the George Floyd killing. It is wide spread and the setting of the federal building on fire was a major crime and threatened the lives of prisoners and personnel on upper floors. As you wrote, most of those involved were immediately arrested. We have continued to have nearly nightly violence, which has occurred after the peaceful protesters have gone home. Our local police have worked to contain the actions without causing the situation to escalate. While I do believe our local leaders have been a bit timid and could have done more to quell the random violence, the national media and the White House have blown this entirely out of proportion. I don't think anyone here is afraid to go downtown. And hardly anyone in going there at 1 or 2 a.m when these violent protesters decide to do damage. They are cowards causing damage and playing to the media and national attention. As I wrote before, the use of extraordinary force by federal officers and the media attention from the White House just feels a little too coincidental to be a coincident.
Thank you for this. I am very confused about who are the people who come out at night. They appear to be different than the peaceful daytime protesters, or, rather, there seem to be some folks at night trying to stir up trouble. Is that even vaguely accurate?
Heather, I do not know the precise answer, but it is true that protests are often followed by a few bad actors, hanging on the coattails of a legitimate movement. In addition, police who have had their feathers ruffled, stand down, so crime goes up. An answer (not my own, but I agree) is to fill the vacuum quickly with community members skilled in de-escalation, social services as needed, mental health services, et al. It is also necessary to arrest those who have committed true crimes, but not an entire movement!
Most are idealistic and peaceful, but a small minority are just looking for an adrenalin rush and are out to destroy as much as possible...same mentality as the ruthless gangs that accompanied Shearman on his march to Savannah and then north. The opportunity to get away with thievery, rape, activates a certain portion of our society. This has always been the case, I think. As I have said before, I am so encouraged the youth have found their voice. Once found, it is always easier to express and fight for change.
It's not only Ivanka Trump that's living in another world! She's stuck her head in a can of beans but Pompeo is retreating into the blood and thunder world of old-time, tub thumping fundamentalist, hate filled religious bigots....Spanish Inquisition here we come!
Along with arrival of a new feeling of freedom in the "minds" of relative "pipsqueaks" like Hogan. Is this not a sign that Trump is losing control of the GOP. The fear tactic is breaking up in the face of unelectability for the Senate. This could be a prelude for a split in the Republican Party reflecting it's two main streams of thought: Taft and Eisenhower.
Yes, except the Pompeo move is far more a theocracy than Taft ever was. The Taft wing used religion to support it's business agenda; it's the other way around for Pompeo. I think both he and Barr want a theocracy, and are using their positions with Trump to get one. Frightens me.
Religion!! The framers of the constitution may have been reflective of their time, but I am still amazed how the separation of church and state was so central. I am not sure we could get there today with the force and intellect they devoted to this extremely important part of the constitution.
I always find it amusing when politicians uses Christianity and the Bible to defend their greed and intolerance. I feel they really do not understand that Jesus was a brown-skin Jewish teacher who apparently owned no property, who preached loving one's neighbor and caring for those less fortunate. It is telling that the message he preached was threatening to the establishment and government of his day. And I know, there are things in the scriptures I read and go "What!?!" Yet in all scripture there is over and over again the mandate to care for the less fortunate. There are many times that I feel I am reading a different Bible from many evangelicals and politicians.
I am not amused when politicians like Mr Pompeo stirs his base with the accusation that "Protestant Christianity" is under attack in this country. I do not see anyone being told not to practice their religion as an individual, which is one of the precepts of Protestantism that each person worships according their conscience. I see statements from the like of Mr Pompeo and some evangelical leaders as an attempt to create a theocracy in this country. And I believe such a movement is counter to the philosophy of the founding of this country. I remember the contest between John F Kennedy and Richard Nixon although I was very young at the time. I remember the attempts to smear Kennedy because he was Catholic. The slogan was that if Kennedy was elected, the Pope would be the true leader of the United States. Sounds pretty lame today, but many people believed this.
I have views on the statues but have gone on too long. Thank you Dr. Richardson for all the work you do.
Is this the America we once loved? Masked, unidentifiable federal mobsters in the streets arresting peaceful Americans? Do we have a historical parallel to this? Every day there is a new astonishing or absurd event.
Tell me, why Portland? Is it because OR is a good place to spread further division between fellow Americans?
Yeah. Democrats to stand against there, backed by a woman. Also, see Kemp overruling the AT mayor, Keisha Lance Bottoms. A Black woman. Lots of other mayors have made mask ordinances, and he hasn't peeped. But they are all white men.
Why Portland? My guess is it has something to do with Oregon's 31-year-old state law that restricts local coordination with federal immigration enforcement operations. Yes, that law pre-dates the Homeland Security Act back before INS was broken up to form DHS. Remember the Occupy ICE protests back in early 2019? The first one was held in Portland. The local authorities refused to provide any assistance to the federal officers there. Oregon's refusal to provide assistance has frustrated the administration. Oregon isn't the only place that refuses to assist, but I believe it is the only state that does so. In most states and municipalities, federal officers partner with the state and local law enforcement partners. Oregon voters rejected a effort to overturn that law in November 2018.
From a distance, as distant as I can get, the meaning of evangelical as used by right wing politicians is anti-abortion, anti-gay. (There will always be abortion and homosexuality; they will either be legal or illegal.) I am deeply bothered by the encroachment of religious fundamentalism into our government, which uses Trump as a rubber stamp. How many of us are aware that ALL conservative SCOTUS justices are Catholic? (Gorsuch was raised Catholic, now attends an Episcopal church.) Barr is also a conservative Catholic, while Pence and Pompeo are evangelicals. They are on the fast track to install themselves as powerful administrators of their outmoded religious beliefs. That they foresee themselves resurrected Founding Fathers is both specious and deplorable.
The key point in regard to SCOTUS is that those justices are conservative. Their being Catholic is not a determinant of that, just as it does not determine Justice Sotomayor's liberalism.
Yes, except it is striking that there are, indeed, so many strong adherents to a religion that opposes abortion on our SCOTUS, it seems to me. It does not reflect the will of the nation, if you look at polling.
I remember the big issue when I was a teen was Kennedy being Catholic. We lived in a very Catholic community and I didn't understand the problem, but later learned that there was an allegiance to the Church in Rome to which protestants were not subject. This was when mass was in Latin and you could smell the fish on Fridays. But, apparently Jack sinned just like the protestant guys so it was cool. :)
Respectfully, Joan, we are all somewhat programed by the teachings of our childhood, when most of us are taught our religious beliefs. Justice Sotomayor, while deciding center/left, is also Catholic. Perhaps being a woman gives her more empathy into the abortion question, while the others are male and possibly more literal. Nevertheless, the SCOTUS is 2/3 Catholic. That is a far skew from the collective voice of Americans.
I am reading Octavia Butler's second "Parable..." novel. She understood that the nation would come to this moment, and then, worse. She says that when she followed the implications of a historical change to its logical outcomes, this is where the ideas took her. She published the "Parable of the Sower" in 1992 with the narrator looking back, beginning from the year 2032! She illustrates how easy it is for a politician to claim righteousness of religion as a shield against criticism and how fragile governments are.
What? Did coronavirus and COVID-19 suddenly go away yesterday? This is why I detest politics so much, always planning and scheming for the next campaign instead of focusing on fixing the problems at hand.
Your commentary is, of course, worthwhile and cogent as usual. Mr. Pompeo is of course engaging in demagoguery, but his citation of pulling down statues and of the 1619 Project raises concerns. I believe that while the pulling down of statues by protesters is in some ways understandable, if it is allowed to stand we are allowing a small number of people to make decisions for the rest of us, never a good idea. Quite a few statues deserve to be removed, but the decision to do so should be made by elected officials or those designated by them, or perhaps by a public referendum, not by a small group of protestors. As for the 1619 Project, it was generally a worthwhile project that shed light on aspects of US history not always covered in secondary school textbooks or even in college curricula. However, the introduction by Nikole Hannah-Jones, in charge of the project, contained a serious distortion in making the statement that a major motivating factor for some of those leading the movement for US independence was a fear that Britain might, before much longer, decree the abolition of slavery in the colonies. As far as I know, no serious historian believes this, and after large protests the editors modified the wording of the introduction. Since then, I have never trusted Ms. Hannah-Jones and her work and worry that she or someone like her might eventually be made editor of the New York Times op-Ed page. Allowing some on the left to bring down statues without popular of governmental consent and seriously distort history can only play into the hands of the likes of Mr. Pompeo.
I beg to differ. Statues are rarely erected in order to educate--that is a lousy form of education. Statues of political and military figures, especially, actually are forms of propaganda designed to present a particular view to the public, one that dominates the alternative view. If they were neutral artifacts of history, they would not be as exclusively male, white, and glorifying imperialism and war. As an historian I can cite numerous examples, but let me present just one anecdote:
In Columbia, SC if you go visit the Statehouse, the first things you see are numerous statues glorifying the Confederacy--the sculpture park is dedicated to presenting the SC past as the epitome of traditional white masculinity on a pretty epic scale. There is one statue, which is located around the corner from the main sculpture park, partially hidden from the main street and its adjoining street (the Statehouse lies at the juncture of three main thoroughfares in downtown Columbia) by a bower, and presented in front of the handicapped access entrance, of Black people representing the oppressions of enslavement and the struggles for civil rights. It is a beautiful monument, but its physical distance from the main sculpture park, the difficulty of reading the plaques, and the obliqueness of the meaning do not begin to counter the oppressiveness of toxic masculinity that bombards you as you walk up the main steps of the Statehouse.
On the facade of the Statehouse, prominently displayed, are multiple depictions of fasces. These are the bundles of sticks tied onto pikes that--in the years after the Civil War when the Statehouse decorative program was completed--are supposed to represent the values of the Roman Empire--not the Republic, the EMPIRE. There is no explanation of why the fasces are there, and the docents are not all that well versed in explaining the symbolism and the motives behind this decorative program. For your information the fasces was the symbol adopted by the Italian political movement called, after this symbol, Fascism and Mussolini incorporated the fasces wherever possible in his architecture and decoration. I find it very hard to believe that the decorative program on the facade of the Statehouse is accidental. But the docents don't talk about this symbol of oppression and imperialism when you do a tour of the Statehouse unless you as a visitor bring it up. So it just gets filed away by viewers as an interesting architectural element and its symbolism is not interrogated.
Inside the Statehouse, on the level where the state legislature meets, is another bit of architectural "decor": the Articles of Secession are carved stone into the walls of the main portico. Again unless you talk to a docent and ask about it, this is not mentioned--and there is no historical "discussion" in any plaque or caption that talks about this as a symbol of the white oppression of Black people.
I am white. I am not southern. I was both fascinated and repelled by the overwhelming plethora of symbols dedicated to and normalizing the plan of white (male) oppression of others in the interest of financial and political gain. There is no "equal time" or "dissenting" opinion that challenges the way the space of and around the SC Statehouse presents this vision of white dominance. The one statue off to the side cannot begin to compete with this. If I were Black or a Person of Color I would feel triggered by this symphony of symbols of white supremacy.
Also, as an historian I can tell you: history is not what happened in the past. What happened is actually more or less unknowable. History is the process of writing/thinking about the past based on the interpretation of available sources about things that happened. The histories of women, of Black people, of People of Color, of the disabled have been suppressed and disregarded until very recently because the control of historical teaching and writing was, until very recently, utterly dominated by white men. Reinterpretation is part of the process of historical writing. We constantly have to question how the past is presented to the present. It is a sacred obligation as an historian.
Fasces were portrayed in later U.S. as well and was on the back of the "Mercury" dime from 1916-1945. The modern Roosevelt dime has a torch on the back, which also looks a bit like a fasces. I was taught in the 1950s that it represented strength of unity, with the story of each stick easily broken, but bind them together and not so much.
Rephrasing: I started public school in 1954, and during those elementary school years, I was told this same thing--it was a symbol of "together we stand, divided we fall." Somebody should remind the current Republicans.
On a further note, during those same public school years, the history I was taught, all the way through high school, never mentioned things like the KKK or lynchings. And I was corrected when I used the phrase "Civil War." It was the "War Between the States," and it was not fought over slavery. At the same time, it was never made clear to me then that a large part of the reason for the South's uprising was because it wanted slavery to continue and extend into the new states coming into the Union.
Interesting. As soon as I started reading this post my mind ran to Roman victory columns. Thanks for this. And your point about the unknowability of history is spot on. Look at how hard it is to understand the present. We aren’t trying to measure an object with fixed dimensions in space and a discrete block in time. That’s why people with a partisan identity erect monuments, so they can believe in the permanence of their noble origins and the validation of their desires for such. But trying to understand actual history is trying to understand a living dynamic we ourselves are part of.
Actually, I don't think Trump pardoned the Bundys (yet). He did pardon Dwhite and Stephen Hammond, whose re-imprisonment was controversial among some eastern Oregon ranchers and started the whole deal. That said, the seizure of the refuge should have been put down the first day when there were 5 of them, 2 cases of beer, and a jar of peanut butter. The fear of another Ruby Ridge or Waco was the reason -- plus the cautious nature of Obama administration.
I'm always interested in how innocent newborn babies are grown into people who are willing to seriously harm other people, and starting life with the name Dwhite seems to have put this little baby on that path.
"Allowing some on the left to bring down statues without popular of governmental consent and seriously distort history can only play into the hands of the likes of Mr. Pompeo."
While I am not in favor of statues being pulled down in a fever of emotion I am in favor of those which glorify the more heinous aspects of our country being removed from places like parks and in front of public buildings. Put them in a museum with ample explanation of what they represent so they can be used As a teaching tool. Having them stand in public where wreaths of veneration can be placed before them is toxic and perpetuates the belief that these people were heroes.
As far as popular consent: at this moment, if government was acting and responding to popular consent we would not be in the political, social and health quagmire we're in today. The issue of statues being pulled down is a smokescreen hiding the bigger issues of systemic racism and inequality that have plagued our country from day one. The right is adept at shoving real world issues under the rug by keeping a constant, steady diet of "red meat" in front of their base.
You all know my take on this: no Confederates on public property anywhere. But as for the rest, there is a big difference between history and commemoration. None of us can withstand the scrutiny of our lives to become statues if that's the standard (and indeed, if anyone of us is *that* perfect, I would think that alone would be a disqualifying flaw). But I'm okay with commemorating values certain persons represent. I guess a corollary to that, though, is that when what that person represents changes, we should be willing to replace that statue. Jackson, for example, represented the power of the people in the 1930s and went on the $20 bill accordingly. Now he represents really vile racism, and it sure seems like he should come off.
I was unhappy about the Grant statue and the sentiment that some had that we get rid of all the statues of founders who owned slaves. Where does it stop? Perhaps burn all the Catholic churches because of the Dark Ages, when ppl were tortured and horrendously killed for expressing ideas contrary to their scripture. (Well, as an Atheist still fighting for rights from those Buybull thumpers, I might agree – but believe it or not I was truly saddened when Notre Dame burned).
I would say that the statues honoring Confederates be taken down from public spaces in the United States, of which they were an enemy combatant. I’m sure some private groups would come up with the cash to make a museum for them. The statues of Lee & Beauregard are in a secret warehouse around New Orleans, waiting for something.
I cannot help but agree with this. My example to support your view is another story from my homeland of Wisconsin (transplanted to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, which even still sounds exotic), where protestors tore down statues of Forward and Col. Hans Christian Heg two weeks ago in a misguided fury. No excuses will suffice for this stupidity, the latter having given his life for abolitionism, while the former is our motto. I’m as sympathetic to the cause as you can get, having marched and protested, too, this summer, but we cannot have mindless destruction of ideals and heroes in the name of protest. Subsequently, I agree with you that there must be a democratic process for this.
Thank you for your carefully written and educational opinion here.
My take on it is that there will be excesses, for sure, but we can put back up the ones we want. I was unhappy with the attack on Grant, which just seemed nonsensical.
Most need to come down and I'm ok with them being removed from all public places with a couple of exceptions. Battlefields like Gettysburg and Antietam are places where thousands of soldiers died, on both sides. If you've never been, you should go visit them. I agree and understand that the officers such as Lee, Jackson, and Longstreet, violated committed treason and are criminals. I get that. But thousands of US citizens died in that war. After the war, Lincoln's reconstruction plan welcomed southerners back into the Union and all but a few senior Confederate leaders were granted pardons. Descendants from both sides of that war make up this country and many, including Confederate descendants have made great contributions to this country. Most importantly, we need a reminder of how horrific that war was so we and future generations can ensure it never happens again. I went to Antietam by myself. Few things have moved me as much as that visit did.
The Civil War battlefields remind me of the World War II cemeteries in Normandy. Among the cemeteries for American, British, Canadian, French, and Polish soldiers, there are also 6 German cemeteries for about 58,000 soldiers killed there--by that time, mostly old men and young kids, conscripted as young as age 10, brainwashed by years of Nazi curriculum and Hitler Youth, and fueled by amphetamine-type drugs. German cemeteries among the towns and farms of residents who still remember with righteous pain and bitterness what life was like under Nazi occupation.
Yes to balanced reminders that war is hell, and a mix of accountability, education, and forgiveness are the way forward.
It must be remembered that the role of the principal protagonist in Orwell's 1984 was to rewrite history according to current political convenience. In the end the system wrote him out of history too as he made the mistake of thinking for himself. Much better to place symbols of past periods in their context and discuss them openly in their full historical context than to remove them from view. If they disappear society does not remeber its history. The new story, bit-by-bit, replaces historical reality in the collective conscious of the people and past errors are repeated with similar results.
History should have a central place in our life and be fully examined, taught and explained to our children as it is an important factor in developing their sense of "Self", in their understanding of how the world got into it's current state and why they are living in a particular place. Without this reference framework society and individuals are set adrift without direction and deprived of a sail to steer a course in the prevailing winds.
Rewriting rather than understanding fully history is an instrument of political control. People demanding that we "forget" certain elements of our past and accept their view of "what is important" are looking to impose their views on others and,most certainly, they are not interested in "enlightening" people. The result is never either democratic nor consensual.
Stuart, your comments made me think of Texas and their control of the writing of textbooks for our children. It's a constant concern, as they skew history toward their own political leanings.
Statues! I struggled with statues until the artist Titus Kaphar clarified my thinking. He said this in March 2019: "Publicly we’re having a very binary conversation about these sculptures, and it’s by and large one group saying keep it up and the other group saying take it down. And if the conversation is binary then my opinion is to take them down, but I don’t think it has to be binary. I think there are other options. If we choose to engage artists on this subject more, I think we would be getting a different set of answers to these questions. I imagine a possibility where contemporary artists are engaged to make public works that stand in the same squares as these problematic pieces that we are forced to walk by daily. I think an important part of the conversation is to take those sculptures off of their pedestals, but leave them in the squares and bring those contemporary artists to the space." https://news.artnet.com/art-world/titus-kaphar-erasure-art-history-1497391
Taking statues off their pedestals would be a very powerful statement of their place in history. While still allowing them to be seen, so that history is not forgotten, and even to be appreciated for their artistry in some cases.
Here is what professor Richardson says about statues. This gave me a lot of clarity! Makes perfect sense. I transcribed a portion of one of her History & Politics Chat videos.
The use of federal units in Oregon without the governor's request is a violation of the Constitution. What has happened to the Republican Party and their staunch defense of states rights? The President is testing how much martial law he can get away with. Trouncing on the rights of states and the people for a statue! We might as well call these troops Brown Shirts. And when you say just wait for November, I keep worrying that we might not even have an election in November with the virus or something else as the excuse. We may have already voted in the last election we'll have the right to vote in. Wake up Senators!
Can I just say, it is such an incredible mental relief to come over here and see intelligent and respectful discussion? It's just so calming to hear real, smart dialogue in this moment, and I'm learning so much from you all.
OK. Will stop being astonished and mushy and get to reading....
You were mentioned on Podcast Mueller She Wrote/The Daily Beans yesterday.
So we have The Lincoln Project’s possible choice in Hogan and a replacement leader for the displaced diehard Trump supporters. Both seem ominous.
America cannot continue as a corporate / religion owned country for which Republicans lean more strongly.
Corporations are only out for themselves. Religion, while wonderful if done with tolerance and moderation, is still a nightmare when combined with politics.
Look at the Middle East now and history to see what our future would be like.
We need a government that is separate from religion to keep Religious Freedom in America.
We want a strong workforce and for our corporations to succeed, but not at the expense of our health, environment, and quality of life.
We need to fix the Middle Class and not let the poorest of Americans suffer because people prize Kardashians over the work of ditch diggers.
Amen.
I forgot to mention that I chose not to join a church because most never seem very fair to women. It also seems politicians use religion because the biggest churches are historically ruled by white men.
I’m not a religious person. I wasn’t raised with religion, but God found me without the help of church. My relationship is personal. I don’t foist my spiritual views on others and I strongly dislike when people do that to me.
That being said, from the point of view as someone who is outside the loop on organized religion, doesn’t it seem baffling how far opposite Christian ethics many Conservatives are? And “un-American” in terms of Freedoms?
I see many who declare themselves Christians and Patriots but say un-Christian things and are fine with people they don’t like losing one or more of their Freedoms.
America is devolving into chaos and I am frightened. Trump intended for the DHS kidnapping of protestors to be intimidating. It worked. The people captured in videos being hauled away didn’t appear to be doing anything deserving of that treatment.
I’m so upset that I want beg Biden (after he takes office 🙏) to order the arrest anyone who ordered police and other law enforcement branches to be arrested and tossed into Gitmo with the other terrorists (including Trump).
Agreed, Lisa. The thing that terrifies me is that even the Christian influence into politics is corrosive, because the version of Christianity is narrow and intolerant--and doesn't speak for many many Chrisitans, IMHO. Not that it should; even if it did speak to me, it's an ideology and shouldn't mix with politics to become a theocracy.
The inherent problem with religion, at least the evangelical varieties, is that it’s never content to be “done with tolerance and moderation”. Evangelicals (like Pompeo or Pence)are driven to “spread the word” and convert everyone. Which means evangelical religion has to combine with politics, because that’s where the power to “spread the word“ and convert everyone resides. The 1st Amendment is a bit too fuzzy on the establishment clause. We need to be clear that there can be no religion in public, at all. Ever. No prayers before sessions of Congress, no “In god we trust” on our currency or “under god” in the pledge (no pledge at all, really, but that’s for another day). There should be no possibility ever that someone’s religious beliefs might be imposed on anyone else. Religion needs to be entirely private. And Pompeo needs to be defeated.
As a religious woman, I agree with you, with the clarification that religion does not need to be hidden away in secret.
I am pursuing Life, Liberty and the Resolve to never vote for a Republican as long as I live.
Hogan and Pomposity are two sides of the same counterfeit coin. Hogan's the kind of R that can get elected in a blue state, while Pomposity is your red state bombthrower. And as big a disgrace to West Point as his previous First In His Class, Robert E. Lee.
IMHO, anyone who has ever supported Trump is tainted for life. That especially pertains to Pompeo and Barr but really extends to almost every Republican Senator and Representative. Every single one of them needs to be thrown out. We're desperately in need of "House (and Senate) Cleaning!"
Really nicely put.
This part made me laugh out loud: "'that every human being is imbued with dignity and bears responsibilities toward fellow human beings'". What about wearing masks and social distancing? and not protesting governors who are trying to protect the health and lives of their citizens?
Heather, your letters provide a valuable place for people of many different mind sets, opinions, and believes to have meaningful dialogue via the written word. Thank you. This is such an important service.
I live in Portland, Oregon. The destruction of property within our downtown core mostly occurred in the original protests from the George Floyd killing. It is wide spread and the setting of the federal building on fire was a major crime and threatened the lives of prisoners and personnel on upper floors. As you wrote, most of those involved were immediately arrested. We have continued to have nearly nightly violence, which has occurred after the peaceful protesters have gone home. Our local police have worked to contain the actions without causing the situation to escalate. While I do believe our local leaders have been a bit timid and could have done more to quell the random violence, the national media and the White House have blown this entirely out of proportion. I don't think anyone here is afraid to go downtown. And hardly anyone in going there at 1 or 2 a.m when these violent protesters decide to do damage. They are cowards causing damage and playing to the media and national attention. As I wrote before, the use of extraordinary force by federal officers and the media attention from the White House just feels a little too coincidental to be a coincident.
Thank you for this. I am very confused about who are the people who come out at night. They appear to be different than the peaceful daytime protesters, or, rather, there seem to be some folks at night trying to stir up trouble. Is that even vaguely accurate?
Heather, I do not know the precise answer, but it is true that protests are often followed by a few bad actors, hanging on the coattails of a legitimate movement. In addition, police who have had their feathers ruffled, stand down, so crime goes up. An answer (not my own, but I agree) is to fill the vacuum quickly with community members skilled in de-escalation, social services as needed, mental health services, et al. It is also necessary to arrest those who have committed true crimes, but not an entire movement!
Most are idealistic and peaceful, but a small minority are just looking for an adrenalin rush and are out to destroy as much as possible...same mentality as the ruthless gangs that accompanied Shearman on his march to Savannah and then north. The opportunity to get away with thievery, rape, activates a certain portion of our society. This has always been the case, I think. As I have said before, I am so encouraged the youth have found their voice. Once found, it is always easier to express and fight for change.
It's not only Ivanka Trump that's living in another world! She's stuck her head in a can of beans but Pompeo is retreating into the blood and thunder world of old-time, tub thumping fundamentalist, hate filled religious bigots....Spanish Inquisition here we come!
Along with arrival of a new feeling of freedom in the "minds" of relative "pipsqueaks" like Hogan. Is this not a sign that Trump is losing control of the GOP. The fear tactic is breaking up in the face of unelectability for the Senate. This could be a prelude for a split in the Republican Party reflecting it's two main streams of thought: Taft and Eisenhower.
Yes, except the Pompeo move is far more a theocracy than Taft ever was. The Taft wing used religion to support it's business agenda; it's the other way around for Pompeo. I think both he and Barr want a theocracy, and are using their positions with Trump to get one. Frightens me.
Religion!! The framers of the constitution may have been reflective of their time, but I am still amazed how the separation of church and state was so central. I am not sure we could get there today with the force and intellect they devoted to this extremely important part of the constitution.
I was wondering this myself: last time I looked, we still had a separation of Church and State in this country, correct?
I always find it amusing when politicians uses Christianity and the Bible to defend their greed and intolerance. I feel they really do not understand that Jesus was a brown-skin Jewish teacher who apparently owned no property, who preached loving one's neighbor and caring for those less fortunate. It is telling that the message he preached was threatening to the establishment and government of his day. And I know, there are things in the scriptures I read and go "What!?!" Yet in all scripture there is over and over again the mandate to care for the less fortunate. There are many times that I feel I am reading a different Bible from many evangelicals and politicians.
I am not amused when politicians like Mr Pompeo stirs his base with the accusation that "Protestant Christianity" is under attack in this country. I do not see anyone being told not to practice their religion as an individual, which is one of the precepts of Protestantism that each person worships according their conscience. I see statements from the like of Mr Pompeo and some evangelical leaders as an attempt to create a theocracy in this country. And I believe such a movement is counter to the philosophy of the founding of this country. I remember the contest between John F Kennedy and Richard Nixon although I was very young at the time. I remember the attempts to smear Kennedy because he was Catholic. The slogan was that if Kennedy was elected, the Pope would be the true leader of the United States. Sounds pretty lame today, but many people believed this.
I have views on the statues but have gone on too long. Thank you Dr. Richardson for all the work you do.
Is this the America we once loved? Masked, unidentifiable federal mobsters in the streets arresting peaceful Americans? Do we have a historical parallel to this? Every day there is a new astonishing or absurd event.
Tell me, why Portland? Is it because OR is a good place to spread further division between fellow Americans?
Perhaps because Oregon has a female Democrat Governor. Facts certain to enrage the president.
Yeah. Democrats to stand against there, backed by a woman. Also, see Kemp overruling the AT mayor, Keisha Lance Bottoms. A Black woman. Lots of other mayors have made mask ordinances, and he hasn't peeped. But they are all white men.
Right. Bullies attack those whom they perceive as weaker, not equals.
Why Portland? My guess is it has something to do with Oregon's 31-year-old state law that restricts local coordination with federal immigration enforcement operations. Yes, that law pre-dates the Homeland Security Act back before INS was broken up to form DHS. Remember the Occupy ICE protests back in early 2019? The first one was held in Portland. The local authorities refused to provide any assistance to the federal officers there. Oregon's refusal to provide assistance has frustrated the administration. Oregon isn't the only place that refuses to assist, but I believe it is the only state that does so. In most states and municipalities, federal officers partner with the state and local law enforcement partners. Oregon voters rejected a effort to overturn that law in November 2018.
Why your Letters are so important — I missed half this news today, and I was paying attention.
From a distance, as distant as I can get, the meaning of evangelical as used by right wing politicians is anti-abortion, anti-gay. (There will always be abortion and homosexuality; they will either be legal or illegal.) I am deeply bothered by the encroachment of religious fundamentalism into our government, which uses Trump as a rubber stamp. How many of us are aware that ALL conservative SCOTUS justices are Catholic? (Gorsuch was raised Catholic, now attends an Episcopal church.) Barr is also a conservative Catholic, while Pence and Pompeo are evangelicals. They are on the fast track to install themselves as powerful administrators of their outmoded religious beliefs. That they foresee themselves resurrected Founding Fathers is both specious and deplorable.
The key point in regard to SCOTUS is that those justices are conservative. Their being Catholic is not a determinant of that, just as it does not determine Justice Sotomayor's liberalism.
Yes, except it is striking that there are, indeed, so many strong adherents to a religion that opposes abortion on our SCOTUS, it seems to me. It does not reflect the will of the nation, if you look at polling.
I remember the big issue when I was a teen was Kennedy being Catholic. We lived in a very Catholic community and I didn't understand the problem, but later learned that there was an allegiance to the Church in Rome to which protestants were not subject. This was when mass was in Latin and you could smell the fish on Fridays. But, apparently Jack sinned just like the protestant guys so it was cool. :)
Respectfully, Joan, we are all somewhat programed by the teachings of our childhood, when most of us are taught our religious beliefs. Justice Sotomayor, while deciding center/left, is also Catholic. Perhaps being a woman gives her more empathy into the abortion question, while the others are male and possibly more literal. Nevertheless, the SCOTUS is 2/3 Catholic. That is a far skew from the collective voice of Americans.
The US Conference of Catholic Bishops only wishes every Catholic adhered strictly to their orders!
I can’t stop... pompous Pompeo the pontificator
...of perilous perspectives on pachydermic perversion
I am reading Octavia Butler's second "Parable..." novel. She understood that the nation would come to this moment, and then, worse. She says that when she followed the implications of a historical change to its logical outcomes, this is where the ideas took her. She published the "Parable of the Sower" in 1992 with the narrator looking back, beginning from the year 2032! She illustrates how easy it is for a politician to claim righteousness of religion as a shield against criticism and how fragile governments are.
Excellent read.
Need to check that out!
They are both excellent and definitely worth the time. Butler is a fantastic writer.
What? Did coronavirus and COVID-19 suddenly go away yesterday? This is why I detest politics so much, always planning and scheming for the next campaign instead of focusing on fixing the problems at hand.
Now, now, don’t fret. We’re still the grand prize winner in the worldwide Coronavirus Sweepstakes. So much winning...
Your commentary is, of course, worthwhile and cogent as usual. Mr. Pompeo is of course engaging in demagoguery, but his citation of pulling down statues and of the 1619 Project raises concerns. I believe that while the pulling down of statues by protesters is in some ways understandable, if it is allowed to stand we are allowing a small number of people to make decisions for the rest of us, never a good idea. Quite a few statues deserve to be removed, but the decision to do so should be made by elected officials or those designated by them, or perhaps by a public referendum, not by a small group of protestors. As for the 1619 Project, it was generally a worthwhile project that shed light on aspects of US history not always covered in secondary school textbooks or even in college curricula. However, the introduction by Nikole Hannah-Jones, in charge of the project, contained a serious distortion in making the statement that a major motivating factor for some of those leading the movement for US independence was a fear that Britain might, before much longer, decree the abolition of slavery in the colonies. As far as I know, no serious historian believes this, and after large protests the editors modified the wording of the introduction. Since then, I have never trusted Ms. Hannah-Jones and her work and worry that she or someone like her might eventually be made editor of the New York Times op-Ed page. Allowing some on the left to bring down statues without popular of governmental consent and seriously distort history can only play into the hands of the likes of Mr. Pompeo.
I beg to differ. Statues are rarely erected in order to educate--that is a lousy form of education. Statues of political and military figures, especially, actually are forms of propaganda designed to present a particular view to the public, one that dominates the alternative view. If they were neutral artifacts of history, they would not be as exclusively male, white, and glorifying imperialism and war. As an historian I can cite numerous examples, but let me present just one anecdote:
In Columbia, SC if you go visit the Statehouse, the first things you see are numerous statues glorifying the Confederacy--the sculpture park is dedicated to presenting the SC past as the epitome of traditional white masculinity on a pretty epic scale. There is one statue, which is located around the corner from the main sculpture park, partially hidden from the main street and its adjoining street (the Statehouse lies at the juncture of three main thoroughfares in downtown Columbia) by a bower, and presented in front of the handicapped access entrance, of Black people representing the oppressions of enslavement and the struggles for civil rights. It is a beautiful monument, but its physical distance from the main sculpture park, the difficulty of reading the plaques, and the obliqueness of the meaning do not begin to counter the oppressiveness of toxic masculinity that bombards you as you walk up the main steps of the Statehouse.
On the facade of the Statehouse, prominently displayed, are multiple depictions of fasces. These are the bundles of sticks tied onto pikes that--in the years after the Civil War when the Statehouse decorative program was completed--are supposed to represent the values of the Roman Empire--not the Republic, the EMPIRE. There is no explanation of why the fasces are there, and the docents are not all that well versed in explaining the symbolism and the motives behind this decorative program. For your information the fasces was the symbol adopted by the Italian political movement called, after this symbol, Fascism and Mussolini incorporated the fasces wherever possible in his architecture and decoration. I find it very hard to believe that the decorative program on the facade of the Statehouse is accidental. But the docents don't talk about this symbol of oppression and imperialism when you do a tour of the Statehouse unless you as a visitor bring it up. So it just gets filed away by viewers as an interesting architectural element and its symbolism is not interrogated.
Inside the Statehouse, on the level where the state legislature meets, is another bit of architectural "decor": the Articles of Secession are carved stone into the walls of the main portico. Again unless you talk to a docent and ask about it, this is not mentioned--and there is no historical "discussion" in any plaque or caption that talks about this as a symbol of the white oppression of Black people.
I am white. I am not southern. I was both fascinated and repelled by the overwhelming plethora of symbols dedicated to and normalizing the plan of white (male) oppression of others in the interest of financial and political gain. There is no "equal time" or "dissenting" opinion that challenges the way the space of and around the SC Statehouse presents this vision of white dominance. The one statue off to the side cannot begin to compete with this. If I were Black or a Person of Color I would feel triggered by this symphony of symbols of white supremacy.
Also, as an historian I can tell you: history is not what happened in the past. What happened is actually more or less unknowable. History is the process of writing/thinking about the past based on the interpretation of available sources about things that happened. The histories of women, of Black people, of People of Color, of the disabled have been suppressed and disregarded until very recently because the control of historical teaching and writing was, until very recently, utterly dominated by white men. Reinterpretation is part of the process of historical writing. We constantly have to question how the past is presented to the present. It is a sacred obligation as an historian.
Fasces were portrayed in later U.S. as well and was on the back of the "Mercury" dime from 1916-1945. The modern Roosevelt dime has a torch on the back, which also looks a bit like a fasces. I was taught in the 1950s that it represented strength of unity, with the story of each stick easily broken, but bind them together and not so much.
Rephrasing: I started public school in 1954, and during those elementary school years, I was told this same thing--it was a symbol of "together we stand, divided we fall." Somebody should remind the current Republicans.
On a further note, during those same public school years, the history I was taught, all the way through high school, never mentioned things like the KKK or lynchings. And I was corrected when I used the phrase "Civil War." It was the "War Between the States," and it was not fought over slavery. At the same time, it was never made clear to me then that a large part of the reason for the South's uprising was because it wanted slavery to continue and extend into the new states coming into the Union.
Interesting. As soon as I started reading this post my mind ran to Roman victory columns. Thanks for this. And your point about the unknowability of history is spot on. Look at how hard it is to understand the present. We aren’t trying to measure an object with fixed dimensions in space and a discrete block in time. That’s why people with a partisan identity erect monuments, so they can believe in the permanence of their noble origins and the validation of their desires for such. But trying to understand actual history is trying to understand a living dynamic we ourselves are part of.
It was apparently fine for armed protesters to seize and damage the Malheur Wildlife Refuge in 2018 - they were pardoned by Trump.
Yeah. Not pushing back on these guys mattered. And the Bundys before them.
Actually, I don't think Trump pardoned the Bundys (yet). He did pardon Dwhite and Stephen Hammond, whose re-imprisonment was controversial among some eastern Oregon ranchers and started the whole deal. That said, the seizure of the refuge should have been put down the first day when there were 5 of them, 2 cases of beer, and a jar of peanut butter. The fear of another Ruby Ridge or Waco was the reason -- plus the cautious nature of Obama administration.
I'm always interested in how innocent newborn babies are grown into people who are willing to seriously harm other people, and starting life with the name Dwhite seems to have put this little baby on that path.
"Allowing some on the left to bring down statues without popular of governmental consent and seriously distort history can only play into the hands of the likes of Mr. Pompeo."
While I am not in favor of statues being pulled down in a fever of emotion I am in favor of those which glorify the more heinous aspects of our country being removed from places like parks and in front of public buildings. Put them in a museum with ample explanation of what they represent so they can be used As a teaching tool. Having them stand in public where wreaths of veneration can be placed before them is toxic and perpetuates the belief that these people were heroes.
As far as popular consent: at this moment, if government was acting and responding to popular consent we would not be in the political, social and health quagmire we're in today. The issue of statues being pulled down is a smokescreen hiding the bigger issues of systemic racism and inequality that have plagued our country from day one. The right is adept at shoving real world issues under the rug by keeping a constant, steady diet of "red meat" in front of their base.
You all know my take on this: no Confederates on public property anywhere. But as for the rest, there is a big difference between history and commemoration. None of us can withstand the scrutiny of our lives to become statues if that's the standard (and indeed, if anyone of us is *that* perfect, I would think that alone would be a disqualifying flaw). But I'm okay with commemorating values certain persons represent. I guess a corollary to that, though, is that when what that person represents changes, we should be willing to replace that statue. Jackson, for example, represented the power of the people in the 1930s and went on the $20 bill accordingly. Now he represents really vile racism, and it sure seems like he should come off.
I was unhappy about the Grant statue and the sentiment that some had that we get rid of all the statues of founders who owned slaves. Where does it stop? Perhaps burn all the Catholic churches because of the Dark Ages, when ppl were tortured and horrendously killed for expressing ideas contrary to their scripture. (Well, as an Atheist still fighting for rights from those Buybull thumpers, I might agree – but believe it or not I was truly saddened when Notre Dame burned).
I would say that the statues honoring Confederates be taken down from public spaces in the United States, of which they were an enemy combatant. I’m sure some private groups would come up with the cash to make a museum for them. The statues of Lee & Beauregard are in a secret warehouse around New Orleans, waiting for something.
I cannot help but agree with this. My example to support your view is another story from my homeland of Wisconsin (transplanted to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, which even still sounds exotic), where protestors tore down statues of Forward and Col. Hans Christian Heg two weeks ago in a misguided fury. No excuses will suffice for this stupidity, the latter having given his life for abolitionism, while the former is our motto. I’m as sympathetic to the cause as you can get, having marched and protested, too, this summer, but we cannot have mindless destruction of ideals and heroes in the name of protest. Subsequently, I agree with you that there must be a democratic process for this.
Thank you for your carefully written and educational opinion here.
My take on it is that there will be excesses, for sure, but we can put back up the ones we want. I was unhappy with the attack on Grant, which just seemed nonsensical.
Most need to come down and I'm ok with them being removed from all public places with a couple of exceptions. Battlefields like Gettysburg and Antietam are places where thousands of soldiers died, on both sides. If you've never been, you should go visit them. I agree and understand that the officers such as Lee, Jackson, and Longstreet, violated committed treason and are criminals. I get that. But thousands of US citizens died in that war. After the war, Lincoln's reconstruction plan welcomed southerners back into the Union and all but a few senior Confederate leaders were granted pardons. Descendants from both sides of that war make up this country and many, including Confederate descendants have made great contributions to this country. Most importantly, we need a reminder of how horrific that war was so we and future generations can ensure it never happens again. I went to Antietam by myself. Few things have moved me as much as that visit did.
The Civil War battlefields remind me of the World War II cemeteries in Normandy. Among the cemeteries for American, British, Canadian, French, and Polish soldiers, there are also 6 German cemeteries for about 58,000 soldiers killed there--by that time, mostly old men and young kids, conscripted as young as age 10, brainwashed by years of Nazi curriculum and Hitler Youth, and fueled by amphetamine-type drugs. German cemeteries among the towns and farms of residents who still remember with righteous pain and bitterness what life was like under Nazi occupation.
Yes to balanced reminders that war is hell, and a mix of accountability, education, and forgiveness are the way forward.
It must be remembered that the role of the principal protagonist in Orwell's 1984 was to rewrite history according to current political convenience. In the end the system wrote him out of history too as he made the mistake of thinking for himself. Much better to place symbols of past periods in their context and discuss them openly in their full historical context than to remove them from view. If they disappear society does not remeber its history. The new story, bit-by-bit, replaces historical reality in the collective conscious of the people and past errors are repeated with similar results.
History should have a central place in our life and be fully examined, taught and explained to our children as it is an important factor in developing their sense of "Self", in their understanding of how the world got into it's current state and why they are living in a particular place. Without this reference framework society and individuals are set adrift without direction and deprived of a sail to steer a course in the prevailing winds.
Rewriting rather than understanding fully history is an instrument of political control. People demanding that we "forget" certain elements of our past and accept their view of "what is important" are looking to impose their views on others and,most certainly, they are not interested in "enlightening" people. The result is never either democratic nor consensual.
Stuart, your comments made me think of Texas and their control of the writing of textbooks for our children. It's a constant concern, as they skew history toward their own political leanings.
Statues! I struggled with statues until the artist Titus Kaphar clarified my thinking. He said this in March 2019: "Publicly we’re having a very binary conversation about these sculptures, and it’s by and large one group saying keep it up and the other group saying take it down. And if the conversation is binary then my opinion is to take them down, but I don’t think it has to be binary. I think there are other options. If we choose to engage artists on this subject more, I think we would be getting a different set of answers to these questions. I imagine a possibility where contemporary artists are engaged to make public works that stand in the same squares as these problematic pieces that we are forced to walk by daily. I think an important part of the conversation is to take those sculptures off of their pedestals, but leave them in the squares and bring those contemporary artists to the space." https://news.artnet.com/art-world/titus-kaphar-erasure-art-history-1497391
Taking statues off their pedestals would be a very powerful statement of their place in history. While still allowing them to be seen, so that history is not forgotten, and even to be appreciated for their artistry in some cases.
"Put on a pedestal." I had never really thought about that phrase before....
Here is what professor Richardson says about statues. This gave me a lot of clarity! Makes perfect sense. I transcribed a portion of one of her History & Politics Chat videos.
http://www.blogster.com/whenwewerentlooking/confederate-racist-statues-the-voice-of-reason
(Not intended for self-promotion)
Removing all statues, in my mind, would be an improvement. Nearly all of them glorify (white male) dominance. It is not the best use of our attention.
The use of federal units in Oregon without the governor's request is a violation of the Constitution. What has happened to the Republican Party and their staunch defense of states rights? The President is testing how much martial law he can get away with. Trouncing on the rights of states and the people for a statue! We might as well call these troops Brown Shirts. And when you say just wait for November, I keep worrying that we might not even have an election in November with the virus or something else as the excuse. We may have already voted in the last election we'll have the right to vote in. Wake up Senators!