|
The
Human Element
Lewis
Goldberg
01/06/2003
In
historical analysis, one of the hardest components to retain is the human
element. Our sanitized, spit-shined packages of historical knowledge -
clearly labeled and placed on ADA-certified accessible shelving - convey
only the facts that are 'acceptable.' The victors of wars write the history
books - so goes the saying - and the history of our American Empire is no
different.
Just
as polite families used to protect the family drunk by making excuses for
his ill behavior [Oh, he has a bad headache...the flu...didn't sleep
well last night...etc.] so we Americans cover for Uncle Sam by
distorting the reality of the world's events and our interaction with them.
And just as in the family dynamic, where confrontations with the family
drunk must be purged from memory, so must our human history be purged from
the national memory. For instance, it would not register well for the
current regime to widely publish accounts of the hardship of Southern
families during and after the War Between the States [WBTS,] and the
blanket demonization of all things Southern ensures that nearly no market
for such a product exists. The speakers of truth - as
Gary North would say - preach to the remnant.
Picture
this: It's 1855 and you are a planter in South Carolina. Yesterday, you
spent fifteen hundred dollars [in 1855 money!] for a negro to work
in the fields. Tonight you're sitting around after supper, telling the wife
and your two older sons, "Hey, I got an idea...why don't we beat that
negro we got us yesterday until he dies!?" It makes no sense at all,
yet this is the kind of logic to which we are treated, not only in pop
culture, but in learned circles, as well, where they take isolated cases
and make them a rule. If a math teacher does it, he's shown the door - if
an historian does it, they give him tenure.
Forget
our War for a moment - take any conflict of nations for an example, and
peer into the lives of the everyday folks whose desires were swallowed by
the forces of national momentum. WWII Germany is always a good example
because it was the largest wartime regime of which we know so little. We
forget that behind the Nazi swastika were families: moms and dads, cute
babies, grandpas who brought candy when they visited, teachers, factory
workers, janitors, shop-keepers, schoolgirls with crushes on the older
boys, and every other walk of life you can imagine. We can impose the same
on the dread former Soviet citizenry because now we can pick up the phone
and call them - or send them e-mail. Can we imagine the same of today's
Iraqis? You betcha.
Does
exploration of this perspective mean that no war is justified - ever?
Certainly not, as the citizens of a nation share in the guilt of the
leaders by working for the greater will, which makes each citizen of an
enemy nation an enemy by imputation. But after the guns are silent, we tend
to cling to the generalizations around which we unified during combat,
which has all the intellectual aesthetics of calling every Japanese we meet
'Japs' or Germans 'Krauts,' thereby masking the real cause of the late
conflict, and guaranteeing that people who quote Santayana will be right
more often than wrong.
But
many will say that there is nothing to be gained from empathizing with the
enemy. However, how capable of avoiding similar conflicts are we if we
ignore any aspect of a war? The answer is: not very. If a researcher
wants to investigate the validity of events surrounding the Holocaust,
having the word 'Nazi' spat at them as an epithet and having them arrested
[as in Germany today] virtually ensures that we will miss the next
holocaust. The unfounded assertions that slavery caused the 'civil war'
guarantees that we learned nothing from the conflict, and that the States
will clash again - probably over the same issues we yet refuse to recognize:
taxes [a recurring theme in US History if there ever was one.]
Many
who read this article may at this point conclude that the American Civil
War and WWII are cited as examples together because both were wars against
similar evils, but this would only be further proof that the two wars can
be mentioned in the same breath because they are both wars that people - en
masse - have agreed to stop thinking about. This agreement is our death
notice and conviction.
Meanwhile,
to make the "world safe for democracy," we focus all our energies
looking for 'Hitler.' We have forgotten that Hitler was democratically
elected and that his agenda conformed to what polls of the day would have
shown comprised the issues of primary interest to most Germans. As I said
to an esteemed colleague the other day at lunch, the next Hitler will be on
the ballot, and many of us will send him campaign contributions. Add to
that, he'll probably have Federal Matching Funds, as well. How many sincere
individuals think the united States stand unified because slavery has been
abolished, and that 'racial harmony' is the ticket to national
righteousness?
Right
now in Washington D.C., the party out of power is trying to figure out the
issues of primary interest to most Americans. On the other side of town,
the color-blind folks at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission are
busy tallying heavily-pigmented individuals. Meanwhile, the seeds of the
next revolution are already sprouting.
Your comments and questions are encouraged. [editor@patriotist.com]
Patriotist
LG_tag_122402.html
|
