Untold History

 

“History is bunk,” said Henry Ford.  This was the man who wrote “The International Jew,” which asserted that Jews were out to subvert and debase western civilization.  Of course he would say history is bunk because no reputable historian would support his bigoted theory.

 

What passes for history in our schools is boring and unenlightening, which is why most students say they do not like history classes.  For them history is a chronology of kings and wars and only those of a few nations.  The facts of history are carefully selected so as not to offend the Texas Board of Education and its like.

 

On “Jeopardy!” the two subjects that contestants are worst on are history and geography.  Americans are singularly ignorant about what goes on in the world.  Much of what passes for history is really indoctrination.  Questions are not encouraged and neither is thinking in those classes.  If you haven’t already, you should read “Lie My Teacher Told Me” by James W. Loewen.  Howard Zinn’s  “People’s History of The United States.”

 

A recent popular distortion of history comes from gun advocates.  The NRA and its supporters maintain that Americans should possess military arms in case our government turns totalitarian.  They cite Hitler’s Germany, the USSR, China, and Cambodia as examples of people who could have overthrown tyrannies if they had enough guns in private hands.  This ignores the violent, armed civil wars that preceded these regimes (except the Third Reich which came to power through political process).  They spout the laughable idea that if the Jews of Germany had arms they could have prevented the Holocaust.    This is an intentional distortion of history suited to a political purpose.  It is an example of why it is vital for us to learn history.

 

Recently I watched Oliver Stone’s Showtime series “Untold History of The United States.”  Nothing in that series, so far as I could tell, is untrue, but I do not think it represents the whole picture.  Nonetheless almost all of what we see there is unknown to most people.  During our lifetime our country has been guilty of some terrible things.  These grow out of the idea of exceptionalism and the idea that the United States is a global power.

 

Exceptionalism is the belief that one’s nation is somehow above judgment no matter what it does.  This is the “house on a hill” vision so basic to our vision of our nation turned into a nightmare.  As Abraham Lncoln noted we should not be saying “God is on our side,” (which is the essence of exceptionalism), but we should be worrying about whether we are on God’s side.

 

The view that we are a global power is overextending our resources.  We have a military presence in 160 countries.  We never leave anywhere once we are there.  We spend more on the military than the next 26 nations combined and that is just the Pentagon’s government.  “Defense” budgets are found in the Departments of Energy, Homeland Security, Interior, and elsewhere.  In the span of human history empires fail when they overreach.  Decline and fall comes just as an empire reaches its greatest extent.

 

Oliver Stone needs to be taken with a grain of salt, but he has a lot of importance to teach us about who we are and what America has become.  I recommend also his “Power of Nightmares,” which gives a parallel history of the Neo-Conservative movement and Muslim fundamentalism.

 

As usual my advice is to be skeptical, even of what I write.

Do Not Fear Islam

The following is an op-ed piece I wrote a couple of years ago.  My local paper would not publish it, but I think my readers might enjoy it.  The footnote links were included because the newspaper editor insisted on them.  Some of them might be of interest.

pj

Do Not Fear Islam

               On September 11 this year my college classmate Laurie walked the ten minutes from her loft to Ground Zero to witness the demonstrations going on that day.  She writes, “I spent more time in the anti-Park51 crowd than the pro- side because I wanted to talk to people, try to educate and to find out why they thought what they did so strongly as to come to NY to demonstrate. I got the feeling that many of them are extremely misinformed and many are unfortunately genuinely very scared because of all that they do not know and the misinformation they’ve been fed, and of course plain old fashioned fear of people not like themselves,…”   A recent Pew poll shows that people who know Muslims are less likely to fear and hate Muslims.  Since Islam is a minority religion in this country (population percentage is estimated at one to two percent) most Americans have never met a Muslim let alone have any personal or work relationship with one.  More than half of Americans say they know little or nothing about Islam.[1]

               In my bachelor days I had a landlord who believed that the Jews were in cahoots with the Chinese to take over the world and destroy Western civilization.  He was a Bosnian and the first Muslim I ever knew socially.  Not that he was a very religious Muslim.  He liked a drink from time to time.  Once he lent me a book by Henry Ford called “The International Jew.”  This was the source of my landlord’s information.  Ford bought a newspaper (The Dearborn Independent) expressly to serve as a medium for his anti-Semitic writing.  Every Ford dealership in America gave away booklets from these writings and Ford sponsored the weekly radio “sermons” of Father Coughlin also attacking the supposed Jewish subversion of America.  He had about a third of the national radio audience and was the Glenn Beck of his day combining paranoid politics and religion.  Among American supporters of Hitler in the 1930s were American hero Charles Lindbergh and Readers’ Digest Magazine.[2]   Even after World War II, when the extent of the horrors committed by the Nazis was known, there were politicians in this country who tried to block visas for Jewish refugees on the grounds they might be subversives.[3]  To this day you can find these same anti-Jewish rants all over the Internet.

               When I read, see, or hear the Islamic faith accused of trying to take over the world or “Islamicize” America I see the same ugly forces at work.  We’ve been here before.  The ravings of extremists in the early 20th century led to the Holocaust.  I shudder to think what the current anti-Islamic rants might lead to.  This is so especially because the fear and hatred of Muslims is being actively promoted by politicians and media stars for their own purposes.  Let me be clear: I see Islamophobia as a bigotry that relies on the ignorance of most Americans about Islam and the people whose faith is Islam.

Who are America’s Muslims?  As with all large groups of people there are all kinds: religious and secular, liberal and conservative, smart and not-so-smart, open-minded and prejudiced, law-abiding and not.  Public opinion polls show that the vast majority of Muslims here want to fit in and be accepted. [4] They are seeking ways to practice their religion as a minority.  Islam teaches a moral life and its social values are the same as those of any religious tradition, by which I mean they teach the Golden Rule.  Do they have a vision of all of humanity being Muslim?  Some do, but then some Christians want to see every human soul within their faith.  Both have a history of bloodshed in pursuit of such goals.  The Koran is essentially a book of sermons preaching morality and kindness.  Some pick out verses that have ugly implications, but the same could be done with our Bible.  Some Muslim fundamentalists take verses from the Koran out of their contexts to give them violent applications.  Some Jews and Christians have done the same with the Bible.  Contrary to the common impression terrorism is against what Islam teaches about war and many authorities around the world have said so without reservation.[5]  The question is why those decrees have received virtually no acknowledgement in American news media.

               America’s Muslims are facing the same kinds of prejudice that immigrants have faced throughout American history.   The American Muslims I have known personally hope that they will, in the end, be accepted as a normal, accepted part of the American people.  Our great national tradition of pluralism which makes us a beacon of hope to the whole world requires no less.


[2] http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/lindbergh/sfeature/fallen.html and http://rationalrevolution.net/war/american_supporters_of_the_europ.htm (note that Prescott Bush, father of George H W and grandfather of George W, was among Hitler’s admirers)

[4] http://pewresearch.org/assets/pdf/muslim-americans.pdf and http://www.muslimindex.org/index.html  the latter reference is to a site that deals with a variety of issues and both of these sites are excellent resources for your writers.

[5] http://www.freemuslims.org/  This is another good source and it covers many issues.

 

 

What Is It About Guns?

[The following was posted to a friend with whom I have been discussing gun issues for years.  He recently sent me some informative material from NRA and this is my response.  I’d like to hear from others reading this blog, especially those who oppose gun control.)

Hi Bart

Thanks for sending this.  I’ve read a few items on it and it is the sort of substantial documentation that helps me judge an issue.
I think I’ve been clear that I do not oppose gun ownership by private citizens.  What I oppose is the lack of regulation that protects the public interest.
I’ll give you a small example.  When I was in Santa Fe there was an incident involving a man firing an AR-15 at our synagogue.  His story was that he did not know what the building was and that he as returning fire from people who had been chasing him (he was no choir boy) who had ambushed him from the darkened parking lot (the synagogue invested in parking lot lights after this).  His bullets tore through every wall of the synagogue to the arroyo behind it.  First of all I do not believe that private citizens should possess that kind of fire power.  I’ve read that the AR-15 is fun to use for target shooting, but this was being used against human beings).  I do believe that anyone who owns a firearm ought to be required to carry liability insurance for damage and harm to persons or property caused by use of said firearm.  I also believe that anyone possessing such a firearm should have formal training in its use and be able to pass a written test on relevant laws and to show the ability to use the weapon properly.  This wold be in addition to prohibiting a variety of categories of people from owning or using such weapons including those with violent crime records, mentally ill persons, minors, and persons who might reasonably be suspected of abuse of these firearms (political extremists – and, yes, I know this is a dodgy category).  I think I am being reasonable and I’ll bet the vast majority of gun owners, even NRA members, would agree with much of this.
I’d like to know how a reasonable person could disagree with anything in the last paragraph.  I’d like to know how anyone could justify putting battlefield weapons into private hands and how they can justify the sale of large-capacity magazines, armor-piercing shells (teflon, but I’ll bet there are others), fingerprint-proof guns, dum-dums, and guns without trigger-locks.  Most of all I do not understand the passio of gun advocates.  I’m passionate about a lot of issues, especially human rights and peace, so I do understand political passion.  I do not understand the passion about guns.  It strikes me that people who stockpile weapons live in fear.  This was true of Nancy Lanza who believed that our economy would collapse and therefore she needed to be seriously armed.  That is the root of the Newtown outrage.  Add to that adolescent power fantasies and radical politics.  Even in Dodge City people had to check their firearms before going into a bar.  The reality is that most victims of homicides knew their killers.  To me it looks strange and frightening that so many people deny reality and believe that more guns equals more security rather than the opposite, which I believe is the reality.
Please explain it to me or maybe you know someone who can.  I’m quite willing to listen.

Jews in The South

 

 

            If someone had told me I would take a pulpit, let alone retire, in the South I would have responded, “Impossible.”  My only experience in the South had been the march in Selma where I faced a strange and hostile environment.  Then, about twenty-five years ago, I insisted that my family include Asheville in a summer car trip.  I’ve been singing  Appalachian songs since my early teens and greatly admired singers like Doc Watson.  I wanted to see where this music came from.  Like so many who visit I fell in love with western North Carolina and said on that trip, “This is where I’d like to end up.”  By some happy stroke of luck I came to Hendersonville.

            Wherever I have lived I have studied its history and especially its Jewish history.  I have learned something about the local Jewish history and also read about Jewish history in the South.  This week-end I participated on the committee that hosted the annual conference of the Southern Jewish Historical Society.  Papers were presented but the program included a lot about our local history, including a program on Hendersonville as the Southern Catskills.  Jews have been spending summers here for well over a century.  A great many businesses in downtown Asheville were owned by Jews and, of course, Main Street in Hendersonville had many Jewish shops and businesses for much of the 20th century.

            Southern Jewish history is often surprising.  During the Civil War, in proportion to their numbers, Jews were equally represented in the Union and the Confederate armies.  I already knew about Judah P. Benjamin who had served as Jefferson Davis’ Secretary of War, Secretary of The Treasury, and Secretary of State (and turned down a nomination to be the first Jewish Supreme Court justice).  It was General Grant who issued General Order 11 singling out Jews for black market trading in Tennessee.  No such orders were issued by the Confederacy.  One of the most important Jewish pro-slavery sermons was delivered by Rabbi Morris Raphall on January 4, 1861, months before Fort Sumter fell.  He feared the break-up of the Union and said he was uncomfortable with the institution, but for the good of the nation he felt it necessary to let the slave states have their way.  His congregants also had business concerns.  New York was an important clothing manufacturing center and that depended on cotton from the South.

            What many people do not know is that the largest Jewish city in the country was once Charleston SC and that Savannah GA, Baltimore MD, and New Orleans LA were all important Jewish communities.  The first Reform congregation in America was in Charleston.  Aside from Judah Benjamin, other prominent southern Jews were Mordechai Manuel Noah, the first Jewish ambassador, appointed by President Madison to represent America in the Kingdom of Tunis where he gained the freedom of many imprisoned Americans.  David Levy Yulee was the first Jewish Senator as well as Florida’s first Senator.  I must also mention Francis Salvador of Charleston.  He is considered the first American casualty of the Revolutionary War. 

            When I first came here the housing market had not yet collapsed and I got many phone calls from northerners telling me they were considering moving here.  Some were surprised there is a synagogue here.  They asked about anti-Semitism (some, but much less than I experienced in the North), Jewish neighborhoods (no such thing here), and whether there is a Hebrew school (still only an idea and desire then, but we’re making progress now).  These people had the same kinds of doubts I had before I got here.  We know better.

            I have lived and worked in several places, including three foreign countries.  One thing I have learned along the way is that, to be happy in a new place, it is essential not to bring our preconceptions with us.  Learning to adapt is necessary.  I learned early on not to honk my horn except in an emergency situation.  I learned that people are more willing to help strangers here than anywhere else I have lived.  I learned that there people here are fascinated by Jews and respect us, especially those who are synagogue goers.  Morris Kaplan, Sammy Williams, Francee Sherman, Don Michaelov and others of our community have been regarded as central figures in our county.  I have done interfaith work my entire career, everywhere I have lived or worked.  Nowhere have I been in more demand as a speaker, teacher and even preacher by Christians.

            It turns out my prejudice against taking a pulpit in the South was misplaced and wrong.   Meeting with Jews from all over the South at the history conference and at the Limmud weekend Phyllis and I attended a couple of months ago showed me that we should embrace this wonderful place we are living in

TRUTH

My two sons, Shanan and Joshua, suggested I start a blog on WordPress.  After thinking about it, I have decided to try.  I have always enjoyed communicating with all sorts of people.  I used to write a lot of letters.  Over the past quarter century I have found email to be a good medium for me.  I discuss, argue, and teach with all kinds of correspondents, especially people with whom I do not agree.  By profession I am a pulpit rabbi, now retired, but my favorite activities have always been teaching and engaging in dialogue.  My intention for this blog is to do teach and discuss.  My real passion is for truth, but truth is a difficult thing to find.

As a rabbi I will cite rabbinic sources quite often and I might as well start now.  When the Creator was about to make human beings the angels argued for and against it.  The Torah says (Genesis 1:26), “And God said, ‘Let us make a human in our likeness.'”  Who was God talking to?  One tradition says that the Creator was taking counsel with the angels, who had already been created.  “Some of the angels argued against creating man and others in favor. For example, the angel representing kindness was for man’s creation, for man bestows kindness. Truth opposed man’s creation, since humans are full of lies. God heard these arguments, and finally seized the angel representing truth and hurled it onto the ground, as it says in the verse, “and He threw truth to the ground” and created man anyway. The other angels protested. How could God abandon truth, which is known as His signature? God responded “may truth rise from the ground” and our Sages then cited the verse, “truth shall grow from the ground.” (from http://www.aish.com/sp/ph/48956911.html)  Our world is such that truth is not easy.  Even the physics of our universe involves uncertainty as a basic principle.

I want to take this post to talk about truth.  In symbolic logic there are two values: true and false.  I want to add two more: doublethink and bullshit (if that offends you, maybe this is not a blog for you, but, as i will explain, bullshit is a good word to use in a legitimately philosophical way).

TRUE AND FALSE – Assertions of fact are verifiable and can be fairly judged either true or false.  Arguments and opinions can be useful or enlightening but, for my purposes, are neither true nor false.  For most people this is a distinction that is hard to accept.  It is easy to confuse opinion with fact in our own minds.  I will try my best to make this distinction in my posts.  If I say something is true or false, that means I have fact-checked it.  If i express an opinion or make an argument, I am open to disagreement and challenge.  I do not think any human is infallible.  No one is always right and no one is always wrong.  I do not want people to take me at my word just because I wrote something.  What I want is to inspire my readers to think and to think critically.

DOUBLETHINK AND BULLSHIT – Many of you readers (assuming there are many of you) recognize the term “doublethink” from Orwell’s “1984.”  At my undergraduate school, Shimer College (which will come up often in this blog because I credit that school for much of my ability in thinking, teaching, and writing), we were required to take nine all-day comprehensive exams to graduate.  The first of these was Logic.  We had to read “1984” to prepare for this exam because its author wanted to stretch the use of symbolic logic to include doublethink – three values, rather than two.  (from Wikipedia) According to the novel, doublethink is:

“To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget, whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again, and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself – that was the ultimate subtlety; consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word ‘doublethink’ involved the use of doublethink.”

“The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them… To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies – all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth.”

In my opinion Fox News regularly indulges in doublethink, but this is not exclusive to them or to the political right.

Philosophy professor Harry G. Frankfurt published an essay entitled “On Bullshit”in Harper’s in 1986 which later became a best-selling book.  He defines bullshit this way (from Wikipedia).  ‘Bullshit can either be true or false but bullshitters aim primarily to impress and persuade their audiences, and in general are unconcerned with the truth or falsehood of their statements (it is because of this that Frankfurt concedes that “the bullshitter is faking things”, but that “this does not necessarily mean he gets them wrong”). While liars need to know the truth to better conceal it, bullshitters, interested solely in advancing their own agendas, have no use for the truth. Thus, Frankfurt claims, “…bullshit is a greater enemy of the truth than lies are”‘ (Frankfurt 61). [I highly recommend this book to you]

So there we have it.  True, false, fact, opinion, argument, doublethink, and bullshit are categories that the skeptical and critical thinker should consider when getting information or ideas from any medium. I call this process, as many do, a crap detector.  I find it serves me very well.

Now I leave you with a question as I will try always to do.  Are doublethink and bullshit actually different categories or is this a distinction without a difference?

I will consider this blog a waste of time if it does not make you think.  Please let me know what you think.  Consider me as if I were ADHD with a short attention span.  Keep your responses brief.  I find that writing letters to editors with a 200-word maximum is a great discipline in both thinking a writing.  If you really want me to read your email and respond you will honor this limit or something close to it.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Who Are You, Wayne LaPierre?

Mr. LaPierre

 

Thank you for your open invitation to email comments to you.  i want to address you, not as the EVP of the NRA but as Wayne LaPierre, the man.  You appear in your recent statement to continue to take the NRA position that always advocates more guns, because the NRA is not so much an advocate for gun owners as it is a shill for the gun manufacturing industry.  I want to know if your statements are what your job demands or what you personally believe.

 

Let me introduce myself.  I am a religious pacifist who has never so much as touched a gun, unless you include the toys that my mother objected to when I was a child.  Nonetheless I do not question the right of sane, responsible people from owning firearms.

 

Freedom must be matched by responsibility and, in the case of guns, that means there must be limits on the manufacture, sale, ownership, and use of firearms.  This balance of freedom and responsibility is a basic underpinning of society.  I could write at length about particular aspects of the relevant issues, but I doubt you would be interested in those arguments.  You have seen them all before.

 

I do not believe that the NRA represents the good of our nation and possibly not even the opinions of its own members.  The NRA exists to promote the sale of guns of all kinds.  To do so it has promoted a climate of fear – fear that the government will take away everyone’s guns, fear that every person is in need of personal protection with deadly force, and even fear that our government will become a tyranny and will have to be put down.  These fears are based on fantasies.  No one is coming to take away 300 million guns.  Few people, even trained police, can effectively use firearms when under attack.  The people who fear the government are the hundreds of right-wing armed groups that exist in this nation today are living with a very ugly fantasy.  BTW I have met several people who have helped oust tyrants like Marcos, Charles Taylor, and the Communist regimes in such nations as Poland and Czechoslovakia without violent means.  Gandhi and King are not exceptions.  There are many others like them who have succeeded in freedom struggles.  No guns were used or needed.

 

I believe it is the fantasies and the fear they provoke that is the underlying problem.  Nancy Lanza, a sane and well-educated person, bought her weapons because she feared that the US economy will collapse and that one must be ready to use violent force in ones defense if that happens.  She taught her son, who was obviously very disturbed, how to use these weapons, probably so he could protect himself under that scenario.    The NRA bears a lot of responsibility for her mindset and her actions, which, in the end, resulted in her own death at her son’s hands.

 

Mr. LaPierre you are in a unique position to do something about this.  I use the word “unique” in its exact sense.  You are the one person who could do the most to promote reasonable reforms and to express what is fantasy and what is real.  No one else could do it as well as you could.  Yes, the NRA might fire you for doing so, but that would make them look wrong and would make you look courageous, which you would deserve.

 

So I ask, “who are you?”  Are you the shameless and unscrupulous huckster who promotes unfettered access to all kinds of guns and ammunition and nothing more?  Or are you a man with a conscience and a heart that knows his job has created a situation that makes gun violence a national plague?  Do you have the courage to stand up for common sense?  Do you have the guts to tell the nation that the NRA promotes and subsidizes violence for profit?  What kind of man are you?

 

Very sincerely,

Rabbi Philip J Bentley