Driving
around in my car with Chicago's WBBM News Radio (780 AM) recently,
I got to
hear two guttural syllables from the mouth of Fidel Castro. The
full word and the Spanish language he was speaking were unintelligible. "That
was Fidel Castro speaking to a throng in Havana, Cuba yesterday," the
robotic corporate newscaster reported. "Castro was
speaking to commemorate May 1st, which has traditionally been
observed as a worker's day in other nations." This entire
news item took about 15 seconds, in curious contrast to Fidel's
notorious taste for giving 3-hour speeches. "In other nations." Do
WBBM's writers know or even care that May 1's status as "the
workers' day" hit its stride in the United States, in connection
with the American labor movement's 8-hour struggle in the 1880s,
and especially by the way in...CHICAGO. The Anarchist International Information
Service has attempted to rescue that little, forgotten piece
of history from what Edward Palmer Thompson used to call "the
enormous condescension of posterity." At the site you will
also find the following prescient observation: "…it is not
surprising that the state, business leaders, mainstream union
officials, and the media would want to hide the true history
of May Day. In its attempt to erase the history and significance
of May Day, the United States government declared May 1st to
be 'Law Day', and gave the workers instead Labor Day, the first
Monday of September – a holiday devoid of any historical significance."
History, the real and radical
record of the past is dangerous to rulers and masters the world
over. It
reminds us that contemporary social and political hierarchies
are not "permanent," like the earth and wind and solar
system. It tells us that existing power relations are in
fact socially constructed products of human agency that can be
subverted and supplanted over time...sometimes quite quickly
(Cuba in the late 1950s, for example).
History shows patterns
and origins and the nature of certain phenomenon – the nature of fascism or imperialism
or what have you – that can't be properly understood except with
observation over time.
It teaches mistakes, wrong
ways to proceed that recur again and again if they are not properly acknowledged,
learned, and passed on. Santayana was right: "Those who
fail to understand the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat
them."
But history also teaches
non-mistakes/the right way, like some key aspects of the way
that Native North
Americans related to the Earth and other life forms – far better
than classic self-defeating Western white human supremacism over
the earth and other living beings. We should not have to constantly
reinvent the wheel on everything.
Knowing history is to possess
a critical weapon of ideological self-defense. Even in a militantly
anti-historical
society like the "United States of Amnesia" (Michael
Eric Dyson's phrase), the rulers recurrently apply curious historical
arguments and try to wrap themselves in the symbols and struggles
of the past to justify big imperialist, racist and other toxic
productions they want to carry out with minimum possible mass
interference in the present and future. The official US Hitlerization/Nazification
of just about every official Evil Other we've been supposed to
wage war against since WWII is an example. If you know
what German fascism/Nazism really was and the very real threat
it posed to humanity (in alliance with a Japanese variant), then
you were in a better position to evaluate the Bushcons' imperial
effort to make Saddam's weakened Iraq into some kind of significant
threat to Americans and world peace on par with the Third Reich.
If you know about America and the West's long history of oil-driven
intervention against democracy and independent development in
the Middle East (please see historian Rashid Khladi's recent
book Resurrecting Empire: Western Footprints and America's
Perilous Path in the Middle East, Boston, MA: 2004), then
you are in a stronger position to suspect and investigate other
motives. You are also more likely to understand the reasons for
Arabs' resistance to American and British intervention and their
related disbelief in Bush's ridiculous claim to be exporting "freedom" and "democracy" to
Muslim civilization.
This knowledge could save
you from getting your ass blown off in Iraq. It could save
you from killing an innocent Iraqi family at on occupation check
point (try living
with that in your own personal history). It could assist you
in your effort to identify and fight the interrelated forces
of empire and inequality at home and abroad.
If you know what Jefferson
and Madison actually said, wrote, and believed, you are in a
better position
to evaluate the administration's absurd claim to be honoring
the American nation's founding values by giving yet more of the
nation's already hyper-mal-distributed wealth to the super-opulent
few. If you know something about the egalitarian (what we would
today called socialist and perhaps left-anarchist) values and
behavior of historical Jesus (see Richard Crossan's book by that
name), then you are in a better position to appreciate and resist
the literally non-"Christian" (if we want to wrap the
radically egalitarian sentiments of many Galilean peasants and
artisans in the name of one mythologized historical personality)
nature of the US Evangelical right wing, which is radically authoritarian
and largely racist and more than friendly to corporate plutocracy
and aristocratic class rule.
If you know there is a
rich social, political, cultural, intellectual and economic history – a broad
civilizational record – prior, and in part opposed, to "modern" capitalism
then you are in a better position to see through the infantile
idiocy of the notion of our soulless "cash nexus" bourgeois
society as the product of timeless "Human Nature" or
God's will or other such nonsense as that.
It's not for nothing that the erasure,
effacement, and recurrent top-down revision of history is a central
theme in the great dystopian novels of totalitarian rule that
were published in the last century, including Orwell's Nineteen
Eighty Four, Huxley's Brave New World, and Bradbury's Fahrenheit
451.
And it's not for nothing that dominant
media in the real world (which reminds me more of dystopic science
fiction everyday) works to keep most of the population in a state
of manufactured amnesia: fed only small, selected, and biased
parts of the past record, with the record recurrently revised
in accordance with shifting events and new ideological requirements.
A recent example: the Chicago Tribune recently
published a retrospective piece on the fall of Saigon (the American
exit from South Vietnam in April 1975) bearing the title "Some
Wounds of [the Vietnam] War Healed – Many Others Won't Go Away." There's
nothing about the people of Vietnam in this article on "the
Wounds" of a war that was fought on their own devastated
land and cost literally millions of their lives (as many 3 million
Vietnamese were killed between 1962 and 1975), inflicting horrible
direct and "collateral damage" that lasts to this day.
"Thirty years after the war's
end," this article says, the Vietnam War "remains a
catch-all metaphor for [America's] most traumatic period in the
last half century" and "still evok[es] anger, ambiguity,
and resignation." All this lingering emotion and conflict
about the war is understood as a tactical (not moral) "mistake" and "defeat." The
notion that the American assault on Vietnam was a terrible imperial
crime enacted against the people of a relatively tiny peasant
nation, is entirely invisible. Vietnam's proportionately greater
trauma, inflicted by imperial armed forces who routinely referred
to Indochinese as "gooks," is deleted from the record.
It's all "down the memory hole," to quote Orwell's Nineteen
Eighty Four.
We are thereby encouraged
to linger on in amnesiac oblivion to the crime we continue to
perpetrate
in Iraq, where we appear to have killed 100,000 civilians just
between April 2003 and October 2004. It is not uncommon, by the
way, for the US of Amnesia's troops to refer to their Iraqi victims
as "ragheads" and "hajis" and the like. (See Bob
Herbert's recent Times column, "From 'Gook' to Raghead.")
Those who fail to acknowledge the crimes
of the past are doomed to repeat them.
Funny how dominant US media's
disregard for the real past jibes with the sentiments of the
Prime Minister
of the authoritarian "communist" Vietnamese government. According
to the May 1 (May Day) New York Times, that official – Phan Van
Khai – marked the fall of Saigon by "sen[ding] out a message...urging
all sides to close the past, look to the future." The Vietnamese
state is seeking lucrative foreign investment deals and encouraging
an ongoing "rush to global capitalism" (in the Chicago
Tribune's words) that hopes for American good will and does not
stand to profit from serious confrontation with the terrible
record of the past. Forget. Move on. (For some of that record
see the opening paragraphs of my recent Znet piece, “Rethinking
America’s Vietnam ‘Defeat’: Thirty Years Later.”)
Later in the May 1 issue
of the Times (section 1, p. 18), you can read – in a historically sensitive
article (nicely done, Ralph Blumenthal) – a different message
from Raymond Bailey, a Baptist minister in Waco Texas. "Before
we can claim our future," Bailey says, "we have to
confront our past."
Bailey is in the Times
because Waco is currently in the middle of a major public debate
over the
memory of that city's grisly chaining, burning, and lynching
of a black teenager named Jesse Washington in 1916. Under
trial for an alleged rape of a white woman, Washington was "snatched
and mutilated and burned alive outside City Hall before some
15,000 spectators – half of Waco's population at the time – and
[with] a photographer alerted in advance to shoot picture postcards. Afterward,
the charred corpse was dragged through the streets and hung from
a telephone pole." Texas, it turns out, was home to 500 "of
the 4, 697 recorded lynchings [in the US, mainly blacks murdered
in the South] between 1880 and 1930."
Currently, some black and
allied white (including Bailey) activists are pushing to commemorate
the lynching
through the creation of a public monument. Many of the
local white people don't want to see that happen, with the grandson
of Washington's alleged victim saying that "Waco is not
that type of town anymore." Interestingly enough, the grandson
says it's "a stupid idea to put up a monument to a black
man who killed my grandmother."
Why does the race of the
killer matter? Shouldn't he be upset about the memorialization
of anyone who
killed his grandmother?
And how does he know that Washington
was in fact the killer? According to Patricia Bernstein's recent
book, The First Waco Horror: The Lynching of Jesse Washington
and the Rise of the NAACP (2005), Washington was an "illiterate
cotton hand," who signed his "confession" with
an 'X.' He was convicted in an hour-long trial where his defense
lawyers didn't ask a single question. The jury returned
a guilty verdict in 4 minutes."
Whatever "kind of town" Waco
is today (no "haji" haters there, I hope), it has put
up memorial markers for the loony tunes Christian rightist Branch
Davidians (nearly 80 of whom were killed by federal forces in
1993). Waco also boasts "halls of fame for the Texas
Rangers law officers and for Texas sports legends" and a "granite
teardrop marking the 50th anniversary of [a 1953] tornado that
killed 114 people" in Waco. "There is even," the
Times reports, "a Dr. Pepper Museum, memorializing the Waco
drugstore where the drink was invented in 1885."
Recently, Bernstein was
walking out of Waco's City Hall with a copy of her book under
her arm. A
receptionist saw the monograph and said, "Oh you don't want
to read that," to which the author said, "I wrote it."
I'm with Bailey and against
the grandson, the receptionist, and Phan Van Khai. Open the book
of history
and keep it open in order to more effectively and democratically
move forward. You'll find a lot that horrifies but also
much that inspires and instructs.
Paul Street is the author of Empire and Inequality: America and the World Since 9/11 (www.paradigmpublishers.com)
and Segregated Schools: Race, Class, and Educational Apartheid
in the Post-Civil Rights Era (New York, NY: Routledge, 2005
[forthcoming]). |