America Revised

Some forty years ago, shortly after I came to Albany, the late Kathy Katz put Frances Fitzgerald’s America Revised in my hands. I had become a history buff as a kid and knew that much of what was in my high school texts was nonsense. So did my teachers. It wasn’t ‘til I took history courses at college that I was assigned books and authors who actually cared about truth. There’s nothing new about the distortion of history in service of telling kids fairy tales about America. But teaching our children that minority groups have played important and positive roles in America remains a political football.

Fitzgerald ended America Revised saying “To teach history with the assumption that students have the psychology of laboratory pigeons is not only to close off the avenues for thinking about the future; it is to deprive American children of their birthright.” The politicization of history over just telling the truth makes it impossible for our children to deal with it. Instead of dealing with real problems they first have to clear the lies we tell them out of the way.

I was appalled and immediately set about to address the constitutional implications in a lengthy law review article which was reprinted in a journal for teachers of history. Whatever private schools might do, public schools, and schools that exist on public dollars, have an obligation to the truth. My response was to try to figure out how to deal with it. Broadcasters used to be required by the fairness doctrine to provide a balanced presentation of important public issues. To give only one side of an issue wasn’t fair to the truth or the public. And to give only one side of important and contested historical issues misrepresents the facts and isn’t fair to the students or our country. To omit factual examination of what has been done to and done by African-Americans by such studies as the 1619 Project distorts American history for political purposes. Students are entitled to more. By the way, we discovered that students in honors courses were reading history books that described abolitionists, those who worked to abolish slavery, as the “lunatic fringe.” That was simply outrageous but illustrates the continuing perversion of history by politics and prejudice.

As I summarized:

two factors justify constitutional scrutiny of school texts: the almost uniquely captive status of public school students, and the accompanying danger that indoctrination may severely undermine the central first amendment value that criticism of government and public officials not be inhibited.  Not only do individual students suffer from enforced exposure to one-sided communications chosen by the government, but, if this indoctrination is effective, the community’s political life suffers as well.  The question involves not only individual rights, but also government’s role in structuring public discourse.

To ban all teaching of the history of minority groups in this country is not only or even primarily to ban “Critical Race Theory,” but to cheat students and the public of the realization that no one group has a monopoly on contributions to our country – indeed our country is better because our political, racial, ethnic and religious groups have benefitted from each other’s contributions. Politicians have no right to twist and censor historical facts for their own purposes. They can say what they please but have no right to use the law to censor facts, history and ideas from schools or libraries to suit their political preferences.

It’s time to squelch the liars and protect those who tell the truth and present history and other facts fairly – in state houses, on school boards, and on state and local book selecting agencies. Our kids and our future together as Americans deserve better.

Violence in Iran

Iran’s rulers are responding to demonstrations with violence, imprisonment and murder. That’s very painful for many of us. I believe at least one of our Iranian friends lost her life as the result of the Revolution in 1979, though I haven’t been able to find out for certain. I’m sure some of our friends have experienced similar grief either in 1979 or coming from the current violence. Can America do anything about it?

The background is the Iranian-American relationship or lack of it. The people of Iran have long wanted a cordial relationship with the US which helped support the nuclear deal that Obama struck with Iran when he was president. But Iran’s growing relationship with Russia has the political effect of hardening the American position regarding Iran, regardless of what the Administration might prefer. On the Iranian side, Trump’s renunciation of the nuclear deal made them unwilling to trust this country. Whether or not you think it was a good deal, breaking it eroded confidence that we would fulfill our part of future agreements and left little room for diplomacy.

The war in Ukraine deepened that split by giving Iran opportunities to deal with Russia. Historically Russia was a threat to Iran, which inclined many in Iran toward stronger relations with the US. But worsening relations with the US made it increasingly reasonable for Iran to supply Russia with weapons and it has. Thus the war in Ukraine embedded our relations with Iran into a much more complex and entrenched regional issue.

Europe seems to have partly reconciled to the US but I have no realistic idea what confidence building measures could bring Iran back to a bargaining table – unless either the Putin government or the Iranian theocracy collapses. Either of those events could make Russia an unacceptable partner for Iran and therefore open the possibility of better relations with this country. But I think the ground will have to shift in a pretty large way before there will be room for diplomacy. And I don’t have a good idea what intermediaries might be able to offer that could bridge that gap.

The circumstances I’ve just described make it almost impossible to do anything in this country about the horrible violence in Iran. We might once have offered relief from sanctions if the killings stopped. But the breech between our countries makes that or whatever we might once have offered useless. At this point I doubt either the American people or the Iranian authorities would stand for that kind of deal.

The only possible exception I can see would be a welcome hand for refugees. From an American perspective, Iranian refugees have been good friends and very productive citizens. I should add that my heart bleeds for refugees from many equally cruel circumstances.  I wish Iranian-Americans didn’t attack each other over American policy toward Iran with claims that one or the other side in American politics has blood on its hands – it’s a fruitless response to their pain. Those calling for negotiations may not be accomplishing anything but they are not making it worse either. Those calling for armed confrontations are asking for trouble but are not the cause of what’s happening now. I would pray for the Iranian people and offer the demonstrators a place of safety. There are more suggestions and a good deal of current information on the Peace Corps Iran Association website and look for the Advocacy Bulletin.

The proverbial curse threatens “may you live in interesting times.” These are! I wish I could see a better way out.

— If you think I’m on target, please pass it on. For the podcast, please click here. This commentary was scheduled for broadcast on WAMC Northeast Report, on January 24, 2023.

What’s “Radical”?

I’d like to ask what’s “radical”? A lot of our political conversation is about what is and is not “extreme” or “radical.” That’s about policy and it’s important. But what does it mean?

Should we avoid being radical by behaving like everyone else? Would we avoid being radical by falling over the cliff like lemmings because other lemmings are doing it too? Is average OK because everyone around us must know what they’re doing? People do things in groups they would never do on their own. Forgive me, but that’s the psychology of mobs, which made storming the Capitol on January 6, 2021 possible; rioters were surrounded by others urging them on. It’s why social media can be poisonous, feeding people steady diets of the violent radicalism they’d already shown interest in. If we are going to survive, we have to do better.

Here’s what I think is radical:

Radical is the environmental change that’s coming if we don’t have a Green New Deal – and fast. It will kill and embitter not only our lives but our children’s and grandchildren’s.

Radical is the racial and ethnic nationalism that threatens to tear this country apart, tear apart the business, infrastructure, labor force, science and education that we’ve been living off and building on.

Radical is letting our health systems fail in the midst of global pandemics. And since climate change feeds and spreads illnesses that a cooler climate used to keep far away from most of us, we will keep having pandemics.

Radical is refusing to defend ourselves from infectious diseases because some people think they know more than scientists who’ve spent their lives studying how to control infectious diseases, even after scientists developed vaccines at “warp speed” that could have saved the lives and health of millions of Americans.

Radical is letting our water systems fail us, so the water isn’t fit to drink, or so that we and our crops are parched by droughts, like the droughts in other countries we’ve sent relief to, except there’ll be no one left to help us here.

Radical is a Supreme Court that won’t lift a finger to guard democracy from politicians intent on defending themselves from the voters by creating voting districts they can’t lose. Radical is a Supreme Court that closes its eyes to the threat of firearms to ourselves, our children, our neighbors and our democracy. Radical is a Supreme Court that considers nothing more sacred than blocking every attempt we make to save ourselves and our country.

Are Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders radical? Many of their proposals, like the Green New Deal, are an effort to conserve what we’ve had and help us build better lives. Is that radical? Or is letting deadly problems fester radical?

The reason why some countries have suffered so cruelly from natural disasters, is that they turned against themselves, fighting each other instead of drought, disease and climate change. If we’re so wrapped up in fighting each other that we can’t address the threats to our very existence as people, families and nation, then we’ll disappear like ancient civilizations without so much as gravestones. Are we better than that? Can we deal with our problems? Or are we just preparing to fall off the cliff so the vultures can pick the dead flesh off our bones?

— If you think I’m on target, please pass it on. For the podcast, please click here. This commentary was scheduled for broadcast on WAMC Northeast Report, on January 17, 2023.

City Living

As the pandemic and inflation settle down, we’ll have lots of folk with new jobs looking for places to live. Let me suggest that we should rethink our housing, zoning, and living policies.

I was brought up in Brooklyn so I’m used to city living. But every summer we left the city on June 30, dad’s last day of work, and came home in September on the day after Labor Day. We spent that time in upstate New York – on the Southern Tier, on the shores of Lake Champlain, and at Chautauqua Institution in the western tip of New York – and traveled through and went to see the sites of New York going, coming and in between. I square danced and played ball with the locals wherever we were. And loved every minute.

When we returned from our Peace Corps service and married, we got a tiny apartment in Manhattan and enjoyed every cultural opportunity the big City offered. Then we moved to St. Louis and exploded into a full floor apartment owned by a lovely Black former postal carrier who wanted to integrate the block but rented to us anyway and then, in his 80s, couldn’t do enough for his tenants. I commuted, when possible, across Forest Park by bike.

We lived there for three years, had our first child and then I got an offer for a job in Manhattan. I told my colleagues I was going back to nature. But I was serious. My commute was a two-mile walk across the Brooklyn Bridge. It’s a gorgeous walk. It took me a while but I convinced my wife that we should sell our car. We paid zero for gas, never mind inflation. In fact we had zero car expenses – no repairs, no insurance – except when we rented for a vacation.

When we moved to Albany we bought a home about two miles from my office and I continued walking to work although cars are necessary here. I did the same when I was invited to teach at schools in Boston, Milwaukee and Akron, loved the walk and kept my body in better shape. By the way, I tend to think on my feet, and ideas often pop up, sending me to write them down on my computer as soon as I can.

I recognize that city living means respecting our neighbors’ needs – some things are outrageously dangerous to do in cities. But it meant we had – and have – friends all around. When the kids were small they had friends in the building, across the street or down the block.

Heating and cooling apartments, condos and co-ops take much less fuel so they’re more environmentally friendly. And, this may surprise some of you, but it was great for the kids. They could walk to see their friends or take the bus to most of what they wanted to do. They grew up with more experience and self-confidence. I don’t want to make light of the problems some communities face, both urban and rural, and we have to teach children how to stay safe wherever we live, but, generally, we didn’t have to worry that something was going to happen.

With all the environmental damage taking place, I think we need to relearn the joys of city living, rethink housing and zoning policies, protect the green spaces and the farms. Did I mention vacationing on a farm when I was little?

— If you think I’m on target, please pass it on. For the podcast, please click here. This commentary was scheduled for broadcast on WAMC Northeast Report, on January 10, 2023.

Did You Catch the Grinch?

People are frustrated they and their children aren’t doing as well as their parents. There’s a grinch out there mucking things up. Did you catch it? It’s time to lock it up!

How come our parents’ did well? Education and immigration! !! Think mines and factories were staffed and roads and railroads built by the sons and daughters of the American Revolution? We got immigrants to do the dirty jobs – Chinese, Irish, Poles, all kinds of immigrants plus immigrants lured under false pretenses and then treated like slaves. America burst into an industrial powerhouse beginning with the Civil War when unlimited immigrants came. We bought, ate, rode and drove on what they made. They still want to do all that for the rest of us but we no longer let them. The jobs are different now – including agricultural and essential work – but the needs are still there.

And we used to make sure to educate them. Without education and immigration we’d be subsistence farmers with little to show for our efforts. Before the land grant colleges, authorized during the Civil War and financed with federal investment, our methods of agriculture were medieval. Without both education and immigration there’d be no infrastructure, no industry, no hospitals, no health systems.

The Republican response is cut, block and deport. Block and deport immigrants so there aren’t enough workers and nothing gets done except for complaining about inflation. Send back those who grew up here and let them take their educations somewhere else. They must imagine we’d be healthy if we could keep out all those who want to be our nurses, aides and doctors – you think we graduate enough doctors by ourselves? Silly.

Cut, block and deport. Cut their rich friends’ taxes. Cut every program, starting with Social Security, Medicare and the Affordable Care Act that benefits anyone else, and let most of us, including essential workers, squirm. Cut jobs and education because there’s no money. And there’s no money because Republican penny pinchers cut taxes for themselves and their rich friends!

The tax system has been continuously distorted by the wealthiest Americans and their corporations since 1980. The marginal tax rate for average Americans has been about a fifth of their income from 1970 to the present. In 1970, however, the top tax rate for the wealthy, paid only on their top dollars, was 70%. But the maximum tax rate, regardless of earnings, declined to 37% or about 3/8s of however much income they declare, and the wealthy actually pay much less because they have access to tax deductions and loopholes that most of us don’t. Remember Warren Buffet who was outraged to discover that his secretary paid a higher tax rate than he did.  No wonder we “can’t afford” anything – can’t afford to repair roads, water systems, or keep schools functioning at the same high level we benefitted from when we and our parents went to school. The grinches are making out like bandits.

Frankly, the wealthy ought to pay more than average Americans. They don’t need those high dollars as much as ordinary Americans need every penny of what they make. And they get a lot more benefits from government. Just ask their lobbyists!

So, did you find the Grinch? Lock it up and ship it out on the big plane Woody Guthrie labeled “Deportees.”

— If you think I’m on target, please pass it on. For the podcast, please click here. This commentary was scheduled for broadcast on WAMC Northeast Report, on January 3, 2023.