Heroification, however wrongly placed can still be good?

I knew next to nothing about the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars before reading about Rep. Harman’s resignation from Congress to be its next president, CEO and director. But I did learn some things 13 or 14 years ago about Woodrow Wilson, that prompted me to do a little checking. So I wiki’d it, and went to its site:

The mission of the Center is to commemorate the ideals and concerns of Woodrow Wilson by: providing a link between the world of ideas and the world of policy; and fostering research, study, discussion, and collaboration among a full spectrum of individuals concerned with policy and scholarship in national and world affairs.
And...
Woodrow Wilson, nicknamed the "schoolmaster in politics," is chiefly remembered for his high-minded idealism, which appeared both in his leadership on the faculty and in the presidency of Princeton University, and in his national and world statesmanship during and after World War I.
So what is it about the two freely admitted cherry-picked quotes that bugs me? I consider James Loewen’s 1995 book, Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong, one of the most important books I have ever read. And I have read a lot. It opened my eyes, took me out of my comfort zone, and inspired a lot more reading in areas I either abandoned or never felt an interest in. (I am left-brained, technically minded, naturally and enhanced skeptical.) For me, history was something you took in school because you had to. I chose other electives in college, because I didn’t have to. And I always had problems with the teachers’ interpretations not agreeing with my own (meaning I didn’t get as many “A”s because I couldn’t break the code of what they wanted me to say.) To me, history, as I felt about psychology - and biology, sociology, philosophy, etc. - history...was too arbitrary. But, we all seem to know the same Trivial Pursuit nuggets that pervade popular history "knowledge", regardless of whether we liked the subject or not. And there's a reason. For those unfamiliar with Loewen’s book, he surveyed the 12 most commonly sold high school American history textbooks, “only to find an embarrassing blend of bland optimism, blind nationalism, and plain misinformation, weighing in at an average of 888 pages and almost five pounds”, uncovering a host of blatant errors, dismal treatment of significant events (an average of three pages on the Battle of Gettysburg, one and a half of which were about Lincoln’s Address), omissions, white-washing, and {well known "News" channel personality}-izing serious lack of scholarship. I understand that most college courses will correct the damage, but how many of us studied college level history? Or if we did, which “facts” stuck with us? I grew up in a small town in Connecticut. I can’t remember what American history book we had, but given that we were a small school district in a small state, I don’t think we got much say in what the textbook companies sold us. Not unlike the problem the Texas Board of Education decision to rewrite texts visits on the small markets. Nor do I think there was much critical thought put into which books were better than others. I imagine it all came down to the best cost. So I don’t know if my textbook was one of the earlier editions of those Loewen checked, but given the small school, small state conditions it probably was. One of the (minor) reasons we homeschool is that total lack of control students of compulsory schools and their parents have over what is being taught - or not taught. Loewen does present his findings with bias and editorial. But, he did his research, presents the sources the reader can check, and his points are intuitively obvious to me. More so now than when I first read the book, because on retroflection I think/know he’s right. Writing this, I surveyed some of the comments from the 10% “one star” critics on Amazon and while you can read for yourself the mindset of the naysayers, more than 70% of the 394 reviews posted were favorable. Now, Woodrow Wilson quick shot news bites that might normally come to mind of the average person are: “he kept us out of war” (until it became obvious that the Central Powers were going to lose, and then we’d better get in and get our piece, thus the Fourteen Points - or was it really submarine attacks?); president of Princeton and the only US President with a Ph.D; a failed League of Nations; had a stroke and maybe his wife ran the government until his term ended; “make the world safe for democracy”; perhaps the Espionage and Sedition Acts, but not likely. Not covered in the glorifying textbooks of our youth is how Wilson was an outspoken racist (is that the "high-minded" part?) who undid all the desegregation his Republican (remember the times…the Republicans almost liked people back then) predecessors worked to implement, ordering the segregation of white and black federal employees. Not covered is the “world” that he wanted to make safe for democracy only included Europe; under his orders, direction or just on his watch, the US invaded Mexico 11 times, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Cuba and Panama and militarily occupied Nicaragua all eight years and controlled its government, setting the tone for pretty much then on for how we are viewed in Central America (sensing a parallel with a place Middle of East?). Plus we apparently funded and militarily supported the “wrong” side of the Russian revolution. Read the book for the cites, but an excerpt dealing specifically with Wilson can be read here). I guess it's obvious now why those quotes bugged me. Anyway, I learned from reading Loewen to be more critical of things about which I know little or nothing, not just things I am interested in about which I may or may not know nothing. And I resolved to read more history - if only to unlearn what I thought I knew. I like footnotes now, which is why, off-topic, though I enjoy his work, David McCullough frustrates me because he makes statements without reference (bibliographies don’t count) which may be his summation, may be “actual” history, or may be totally off. And who has time to check? The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars has an interesting Board of Trustees, including the cabinet positions of Secs of State, HHS, and Education, though I’m not sure how active they are. And Wikipedia hasn’t been updated, but it caught my eye that physician and medical fiction author Robin Cook apparently used to be one of the private citizen trustees. The Center has a very broad set of programs that do seem to work toward the ideals they profess, if attributed to one so not a hero. I encourage a tour of their web site. (They even had a lecture in 2005 on “some of the most repressive legislation with respect to free speech” being the work of Woodrow Wilson, so they don’t hide their namesake’s history.) I can't help but wonder if Rep. Harman’s strong political positions will adjust the focus of the Center, or if it’s even possible under the charter that she can. Why else would she take the job? I recommend taking the time to read Loewen’s book. It should spark at least one, "Oh, really?" I also have another by him, almost as fascinating: “Lies Across America: What Our Historic Sites Get Wrong”. It's about those brown signs on the side of the road and how we repaint (or sometimes just paint) the stories the ways we want, facts be damned.

Continue ReadingHeroification, however wrongly placed can still be good?

Micheal Mpagi and the Atheist Association of Uganda

Note: I had nearly finished this post when the death of Ugandan gay rights activist David Kato was reported. By taking odd jobs, like cleaning and washing clothes, Micheal Mpagi earns his living. His true life's work: to help rid his society of theocracy and religious bigotry. Micheal Mpagi is President of the Atheist Association of Uganda (AAU). Mpagi wants to challenge the theocratic elements in Ugandan politics. He started AAU because Uganda's older (and still extant) atheist organization, Freethought Kampala, is basically apolitical (he is still a member). In an email, Mpagi told me "AAU is more [concerned with] public policies and how theocracy is swiftly becoming the foundation of our government." In an email to Atheist Alliance International, Mpagi wrote:

This is going to be a long road for atheists and humanists. Most atheists take a purely philosophical approach to religion with too little emphasis on promoting human rights and democracy. And that's probably because human rights in North America are a given. Here in Uganda--and in Africa in general--what come first are the rights of a murderous god, a god of human division, a god of hate.
The Ugandan freethought movement has a Herculean task before it. Uganda's population is 84% Christian (roughly split between Catholics and Protestants), and highly conservative if not reactionary in their religion. A proposed bill that would make certain homosexual acts--already illegal--capital crimes, was inspired in part by American evangelicals like Scott Lively, and given tacit support by Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni, who has said that homosexuality is "against God's will". AAU opposes the 2009 bill, which would make homosexuality punishable by prison or death. "We stand for human rights," Mpagi says. Mpagi has also taken a stand against extra-governmental forces that threaten human rights. Since 1987, Ugandans in the northern part of the country have been terrorized by the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), headed by the murderous Joseph Kony: [More . . . ]

Continue ReadingMicheal Mpagi and the Atheist Association of Uganda

Just a reminder…

...that we live in a country where it is necessary to draft legislation which would prevent the government from killing you without due process. H.R. 6010, introduced by Dennis Kucinich, would prohibit anyone (including the President) from the extrajudicial killing of an American citizen. It includes this handy reminder of just how far we've come from our foundational principles:

Sec. 2. (1): due process of law is a fundamental principle in the United States Constitution, the United States has a commitment to the principles included in the Bill of Rights, and no United States citizen, regardless of location, can be ‘deprived of life, liberty, property, without due process of law’, as stated in Article XIV of the Constitution

Continue ReadingJust a reminder…

Book Review: Nothing to Envy

Summary: A chilling portrait of everyday life in the world's most fanatically totalitarian state. When the Cold War ended, communism came tumbling down worldwide. The Soviet Union disintegrated, the Warsaw Pact nations joined the West, and though China's authoritarian government still stands, its economy has become capitalist in all but name. But one true communist state still exists, defiant in its isolation, sealed off from the outside world by almost impenetrable barriers. That state is North Korea, the topic of Barbara Demick's superb book Nothing to Envy. By interviewing some of the few who've successfully escaped, Demick weaves a frighteningly compelling narrative of what everyday life is like in the world's most brutal and reclusive dictatorship. Isolated from the outside world, North Korea has developed into a cult of personality rivaling anything found in the most fanatical religion. Its first president, Kim Il-sung, and his son and successor Kim Jong-il aren't just the absolute rulers of the country, they're hailed as divine saviors, literally able to perform miracles:

Continue ReadingBook Review: Nothing to Envy

The Norway Advantage

My 19-year old Norwegian niece ("Katja") just left town after visiting my family for four days. We had the opportunity to have several long conversations with her comparing Norway to the United States. I'm not going to suggest that Norway is perfect, but when you read the following list, it might make you wonder why the United States can't get its act together to be at least somewhat more like Norway. Here's what Norway offers to its citizens: - Single-payer healthcare ("The only requirement for receiving healthcare in Norway is that one be alive.") - Free schooling at the grade school and high school level. In fact free schooling at the university level as well. Competition can be fierce for getting into particular schools at the University level (my niece is keeping her fingers crossed that she gets into law school this fall), but anyone who can do the school work is allowed to go to school. - The average Norwegian has five weeks of vacation every year. - Generous maternity and paternity leave, with pay. Further, many businesses offer high-quality child care for their workers. The government offers subsidized child care. - A generous social security system

Continue ReadingThe Norway Advantage