Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

Who is Interpreting Virginia’s History?

—

by

James A. Bacon
in

World-class historical sites, from Monticello to Colonial Williamsburg, play a critical role in Virginia’s economy and self image. (Any state blessed with a “Bacon’s Castle” is truly endowed with a rich heritage). Historical sites generate tourism and dollars. And therein lies a problem for historians and those who interpret history for visitors.

The current edition of The University of Virginia magazine profiles the work of UVa anthropology prof Richard Handler, who scrutinizes the history doled out at Disneyfied attractions like Colonial Williamsburg. There is an inherent tension, he argues, between pleasing the crowds with feel-good commentary, so they want to come back, and searing them with the ugly truth of an institution like slavery.

Focusing on the role of the tour guides and interpreters, he says, “They’re caught between educating and appeasing. They have a combination of anger and a lot of pride in their jobs. They live with contradictions they can’t resolve. And when we’d criticize the general historiographical contradiction at Williamsburg between constructivism and objectivism, they’d defend the institution.”

Handler raises a legitimate issue. Ideally, historical interpretations shouldn’t be tainted by commercial considerations. But things are changing. A critical strain of interpretation has made inroads, though Handler is still frustrated by the persistence of patriotic elements:

In the end all we can say is that the social history came to the museum in the ’70s, and by the ’80s and ’90s, the left-wing social historians were in control of the agenda. And yet so deeply anchored is the celebratory, patriotic story that a critical message doesn’t get out nearly as loudly as you’d think. You can certainly pick up strands of social or critical history, but the dominant message is still one of celebration.

Oh, what a shame. How terrible it is that Virginians still take pride in any aspect of their past.

The point that prompted this post is the line I italicized: the left-wing social historians [are] in control of the agenda. Handler obviously considers that a good thing. To me, that’s a huge story that needs telling. How did left-wing social historians take control of the agenda? Have they satisfied themselves with merely correcting the hagiographical excesses of past interpretations, or have they imposed a leftist race/class/gender construct onto the messages meted out to thousands of visitors every year? Inquiring minds want to know.

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

37 responses to “Who is Interpreting Virginia’s History?”

  1. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    I’m having some trouble here.

    MY view of WHO wants “untarnished” Patriotic versions of the past – with little or no mention of things we’re not proud of is NOT the left-wingers…

    And YES… guilty as charged for many “interpretive” museums who seem to go out of their way to portray a “this is the way we ALL lived” type of history – when it chooses to ignore the way life truly was for others.

    They have essentially – a conflict. They don’t want to depress ticket sales – but if you tell the truth – it will turn them off … and .. predictably.. some of them will actually claim that you are “lying” and “besmirching” our ancestors.

    I think this goes to the heart of the Ozzie and Harriet, “Father Knows Best” phenomena where June Clever goes about cleaning her house while blacks are being lynched in Alabama.

    In the movie a few good Men – the phrase “You can’t handle the truth” is uttered by character Col. Jessup.

  2. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    Jim Bacon: Here is an example. About 5 years or so ago, my liberal in-laws (college professor in GA and husband) who I’ve known and loved for 35 years visited and we did the whole Colonial Triangle here on The Peninsula.

    The interpreter at the House of Burgesses gave his talk about the first representative democracy in the Western Hemisphere. He mentioned the franchise limitations – white, male, property owner, Protestant. The crowd kind of gasped and shook their heads. I said to my in-laws, sotto voce, “That was the widest, most expansive freedom the world had ever known – and more freedom than existed anywhere in the world at the time (including the Swiss cantons – history buffs)”

    Both statements are true. But only one statment was made by the guide.

    It just depends on where you want to put the em-PHAS-is on which sy-LAB-les.

    And, by the way, the idea that slavery was an absolute moral wrong – didn’t exist in 1619 – anywhere. It was practiced on every continent. So, our moral relativism or todayism is pretty silly when applied retrospectively.

    As a Conservative, I believe we should see history as best we can in every dimension and then take the best and shove it forward to the future and dump the bad. Different people with different worldviews will have different schools of historiography.

  3. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    JAB, I agree with you 100 percent. We need to acknowledge the complex and often discomfiting reality of our nation’s history. But just as it is wrong to whitewash our history, it is equally wrong to judge those who preceded us without understanding the larger context of their times. Yes, our ancestors did not fully embody the ideals we hold today. But, then, as you rightly observe, NObody embodied those ideals. Our ancestors invented those ideals and tried, however imperfectly, to live up to them.

    How many ruling groups in the history of the world voluntarily relinquished their power and privilege? Who stamped out the trans-atlantic slave trade? Who stamped out the Arab slave trade? Who manumitted their slaves? How many fought bloody wars to free not themselves but another group of people? The story of America is the story of the long struggle of a people to live up to the ideal of equal rights of all men.

    As you say, it’s a matter of emphasis. Narrators can emphasize the shortcomings and hypocrisies — or they can emphasize the nobility of the ideals and the efforts, however imperfect, to live up to those ideals. The self-loathing U.S.-history-as-a-narrative-of-oppression is all too pervasive in our society. We don’t need to extend it to our museums.

    On a parallel track, as important as our ideals of justice and equality are, there are other issues to be explored. How about economic prosperity and creation of wealth? Leftists take wealth creation for granted, as if any society could do it, and focus only on how the wealth is distributed. The other great, untold story of America is how we came to create so much wealth in the first place.

    By God, we need to install some pro-capitalist historians in those museums and create our own narrative!

  4. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    JB: If you take the museums off the dole as public goods, end the taxpayer supports, and they will become capitalists very fast.

  5. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    I don’t think you can have it both ways.

    If you want facts – then why is context important – And how do you “explain” context in a completely objective manner?

    We owe it to ourselves to know and understand WHAT happened.

    The “why” behind what happened is also important but also open to interpretation.

    We need to understand where we fell short and face it rather than trying to “explain it away” when the actual facts sound terrible.

    Only when we not only UNDERSTAND but accept reality – do we have a chance to learn and to change.

    “Feel Good” history is for those who really don’t want to know and don’t want to confront realities and this is important if we are to learn and to change directions when we should be changing directions.

    We’ve got our share of good deeds but we also have our share of things we should not be repeating by refusing to accept that we did those things before with bad results.

    Pride goeth before the Fall. Right?

  6. Jim Wamsley Avatar
    Jim Wamsley

    The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation is not on the public dole.

    Colonial National Park ( Historic Jamestowne and Yorktown ) are part of the National Park service.

    You seem to miss the story of the founding of our nation with your other concerns.

  7. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    for edification…. (Wikipedia excerpts along with a warning that the definition may be considered controversial):

    Historical analysis

    The process of historical analysis is a difficult one, involving investigation and analysis of competing ideas, facts and purported facts to create coherent narratives that explain “what happened” and “why or how it happened”.

    An important part of the contribution of many modern historians is the verification or, as revisionist history, the dismissal of earlier historical accounts through reviewing newly discovered sources and recent scholarship or through parallel disciplines such as archeology.

    At the turn of the twentieth century, Western history remained notoriously biased toward the so-called “Great Men” school of history concerning wars, diplomacy, science and politics. This point of view was inherently predisposed toward the study of a small number of powerful men within the socio-economic elite.

    A pronounced shift away from crude Whiggish analyses has started, in favor of a more critical and precise perspective. For example, a common myth is that Thomas Edison invented the electric light bulb; a traditional American history might highlight Edison’s story at the expense of all others. In contrast, a modern history of Edison mentions all his predecessors and competitors, in order to show that Edison’s real accomplishments were in concert with the successful commercial deployment of technology (in tandem with inventor Joseph Swann, hence the Edi-Swann company).

  8. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Yes, Larry, everything you say, I take forgranted. I’ve got a B.A. and M.A. in history and have studied historiographical questions extensively. I quite agree that the traditional “Great Man” interpretation of history had its flaws. I also see great value in the post-WW II emphasis on social and economic history, and the study of the “common” man. However, the “left-wing” interpretation of history does not stop there. Many leftists have converted history into a sort of “oppression studies,” interpreting history through the framework of race, class and gender — as if those were the only criteria that mattered. That view, I contend, is just as flawed as the “Great Man” approach.

    Culture matters. Ideas matter. Human nature matters. Leftists tend to denigrate those prisms for interpreting history. I don’t know that the “left-wing” museum administrators in Virginia do, but leftist historians generally do. When Handlers says that left-wing social historians are “in control of the agenda,” I’d like to know more about what that means.

  9. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    left-wing social historians are “in control of the agenda,”

    well that makes two of us.

    looks like with you background in History that I seriously trounced on the “preaching to the choir” concept.

    🙂

    There’s a couple of Will Rodgers quotes that apply here .. to me also:

    “”We are all ignorant, just about different things”

    “An ignorant person is one who doesn’t know what you have just found out.”

    I plead guilty to both.. but I know DANG WELL.. I’ve got some company… 🙂

  10. Will Vehrs Avatar
    Will Vehrs

    Interesting discussion.

    I’m a tour guide at the Poe Museum now. The Edgar Allan Poe story can be told without much reference to race, gender, and “patriot besmirchment” issues. As a result, there’s not much controversy and visitors seem more open to thinking about Poe as a man of his time, instead of a man being judged by contemporary standards.

    Perhaps it’s just easier to understand personal failings and weaknesses in an artistic context than a political one, although Poe was a defender of the Southern power structure.

  11. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    While some leftist historians may go to the other extreme, its just dishonest to not mention that triumphalist history is a pretty darn common pitfall too: and one that most of what critical leftism was responding and overreacting to.

    Before criticism, history was basically one long JAB wet dream of proud white guys just making things better and better for everyone, with no details, and plenty of fantastical revisionism. Leftism may have gone overboard in responding to that, but don’t pretend that it was out of the blue.

    In fact, most museums are often responding to that directly, in that they get a bunch of folks who think the founders were a bunch of flawless guys in togas.

  12. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Will, I’d be interested to know how much of the historical context of early 19th century Richmond you weave into your Poe narratives. What do you emphasize?

    Anonymous 11:01, I don’t recall anyone advocating that we return to the hagiographies of the past. The question is to what extent the imperfections (as judged by our values today) of the past are emphasized.

    There’s an interesting contradiction at work. Leftists emphasize moral relativism when it comes to judging other cultures. Oooh, we shouldn’t judge them with our values. But letists don’t hesitate to impose the values of contemporary society upon societies of the past — especially when it serves to delegitimize the heroes of their contemporary ideological foes.

    What concerns me is that a leftist “dominant narrative” will replace the old conservative “dominant narrative.” I’m not saying that such a thing is, in fact, happening here in Virginia. I’m only raising the possibility that it is based upon Handler’s comment.

  13. Jim Wamsley Avatar
    Jim Wamsley

    “What concerns me is that a leftist “dominant narrative” will replace the old conservative “dominant narrative.” I’m not saying that such a thing is, in fact, happening here in Virginia. I’m only raising the possibility that it is based upon Handler’s comment.”

    Your concerns may be allayed by listening to Handler’s podcast linked to the article you linked.

    http://www.virginia.edu/flashaudio/reunions2006/handler_060206.mp3

    The short answer is “No, they now feature Revolutionary City programming.”

  14. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Isn’t it interesting how different folks want their history in certain forms. We can call it context but it’s much more than that in my view. It’s about whether or not truth is respected or slice/diced to suit preferences.

    I’m not going to say that the truth will set you free or that the truth will never harm you but I do believe one of the core reasons why this country is so divided is the way we deal with realities that we don’t wish to accept and so the ones we don’t like get “submerged” and our excuse is that we “need to understand the context”.

    Sorry.. When we talk about Jefferson and his view towards slavery .. but we don’t want Sally Hemings mentioned because we want a “context” that recognizes the man’s greatness and to IGNORE his humanity – I think we’re doing a disservice to ourselves – and our kids.

    Do we REALLY want to live in our own tidy little world with strategically placed “blocks” of what we don’t want to see/hear?

    It would seem to me that before we ever get to the point of “judging” or getting involved with judgements such as “moral relativity”… we need to stand for truth. If we can’t do that.. FIRST.. then the other stuff is deck chairs on a sinking vessel in my view.

    Dialogue is no longer a way to understand and collaborate towards some acceptable middle ground – it is, instead, rhetoric wielded much like weapons swung over one’s head when confronting the enemy.

  15. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Larry, You’re setting up a straw man. I don’t know of anyone today who would censor Sally Hemmings from the Thomas Jefferson narrative. I certainly don’t advocate that.

    When dealing with a subject as explosive as sex and race, however, I would think it appropriate to present Sally Hemmings in the context of the historiographical debate — first and foremost, how certain are we that Jefferson did father her children, and secondly, what meaning do different scholars derive from that fact.

    To me, it’s the debate that makes history so fascinating. Before I started Bacon’s Rebellion, I maintained a website called “The Jesus Archive” dedicated to the study of the historical Jesus, first century Christianity and second temple Judaism. Not only was 1st century Palestine a fascinating period of history, the debates over the true nature of Jesus are among the most intellectually stimulating i’ve ever engaged in.

    You and I are really arguing for the same thing — we’re both against dogmatic intepretations of history. The only difference is that you’re inveighing against the conservatives, and I’m inveighing against the leftists. (As you might imagine, I spent much of my energy on The Jesus Archive disputing the currently fashionable interpretation among liberal Christians of Jesus as first-century, Jewish social reformer.)

  16. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Jim – I appreciate what you are are saying but I really don’t see it in terms of left or right but more in terms of WANTING (needing) to know the truth in any historical account – before we ever get to the point of judging values of historical figures.

    We cannot (in my view) , because we don’t like and/or fear the truth be going around either trying to hide/ignore facts or worse to present a context – that is not truthful – or worse revising history to “fit” our preferred reality.

    I think ..Daniel Patrick Moynihan once said: “You are entitled to your own opinions but you are not entitled to your own set of facts.”

    I’m too am fascinated by the wide variance in Biblical Accounts and interpretations.

    Wikipedia is an interesting exercise in “facts”… Check it out… they go to pains to show what is generally agreed to and what is not… and what the different competing accounts are… and disclosure of controversy on contested points.

    I find it interesting that schools won’t endorse Wikipedia but will endorse – clearly – some major sanitized “politically-correct” accounts of history….

    I remember the race riots when Martin Luther King was killed – etched in my own mind – but I am amazed when I talk to other folks who say they were “too busy” to notice…. I know a lady who lived in Birmingham.. and said she never knew about the dogs and firehoses.. that she did not live in that section of town and was tied up with her own life.

    Like I said.. at the beginning.. I don’t see this as a left or right issue.. but maybe I alone in my view of this.

  17. Will Vehrs Avatar
    Will Vehrs

    Jim, I talk a lot about 19th century Richmond–we have a wonderful scale model of Richmond in Poe’s time–but I don’t cover a lot of “social” issues. No one on my tours has ever asked me how Poe felt about slavery or Jacksonian democracy.

    No museum visitors seem particularly bothered that Poe married his 13 year old cousin ….

    I give Sunday tours at 12, 2, and 4.

  18. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Jim – I hope I’m not preempting a separate thread on this issue…

    but looking at the NYT this morning – an Ad for the History Channel which tonight at 8 for it’s show entitled “Desperate Crossing: The Untold Story of the Mayflower”

    The AD shows the phrase “They sailed to pursue Religious Freedom” and altered to the phrase
    “They sailed to avoid Religious Prosecution”

    The subtitle given on their main webiste: “Every American knows the story of the Pilgrims, their courageous voyage on the Mayflower and the first Happy Thanksgiving. But the homogenized and sanitized history learned as children and revisited every Thanksgiving holiday bears faint resemblance to the actual people and dramatic events of that desperate time.”

    They also have a forum.. the first thread makes this point:

    “The purpose the history channel is to keep pounding revised history into people’s minds until they eventually forget the real history of America which was based and was always known to be based, on Judeo-Christian values.

    The first sign of their bias was when Jim Loewen who wrote the book Lies Across America visits the Mayflower II replica exhibit, and in an attempt to debunk the museum’s displays, says that the museum did well to show a boat of the first inhabitants of America. He said, “It’s good to start with somebody else’s boat that was here first.”

    If you go to the website of Jim Lowen – you’ll see this:

    “Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong”

    ….”James Loewen spent two years at the Smithsonian Institute surveying twelve leading high school textbooks of American History. What he found was an embarrassing amalgam of bland optimism, blind patriotism, and misinformation pure and simple, weighing in at an average of four-and-a-half pounds and 888 pages.”

    here are the URLS:
    http://boards.historychannel.com/category.jspa?categoryID=700000005
    http://www.uvm.edu/~jloewen/liesmyteachertoldme.php

    So – OPINONs about this? Is this a more realistic rendering of history or is it a “leftist” revisionist history plot?

  19. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Will, Do you find that museum visitors are more interested in the personal pecadillos of historical figures than social issues? That would mirror the preference of the public to watch, say, Entertainment Tonight, than the nightly news. Brad and Angelina are more interesting to the population at large than George W. and Donald Rumsfeld. Perhaps, then, museums are simply giving visitors what they want when they emphasize the “Great Man” storylines.

    Larry, As for the Mayflower and the pilgrims, clearly they need to be taken down a notch or two. Everybody knows, or should know, that the first thanksgiving took place in Virginia — at what is now Berkeley plantation!

  20. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    re: “Do you find that museum visitors are more interested in the personal pecadillos of historical figures than social issues? “

    what is the purpose of a museum?

    A museum is typically a “permanent institution in the service of society and of its development, open to the public, which acquires, conserves, researches, communicates and exhibits, for purposes of study, education, enjoyment, the tangible and intangible evidence of people and their environment.” This definition is taken from the International Council of Museums (ICOM) Statutes.

    hmmm… this sounds pretty non-partisan…. to me…

    Now with regard to that pesky phrase “evidence” :

    Evidence in its broadest sense, refers to anything that is used to determine or demonstrate the truth of an assertion. Philosophically, evidence can include propositions which are presumed to be true used in support of other propositions that are presumed to be falsifiable.

    then.. the plot thickens considerably with the word “truth”:

    Common dictionary definitions of truth mention some form of accord with fact or reality. There is, however, no single definition of truth about which scholars agree, and numerous theories of truth continue to be widely debated. Differing opinions exist on such questions as what constitutes truth, how to define and identify truth, what roles do revealed and acquired knowledge play, and whether truth is subjective, relative, objective, or absolute. This article introduces the various perspectives and claims.

    then… “moral relativity”:

    In philosophy, moral relativism takes the position that moral or ethical propositions do not reflect absolute and universal moral truths, but instead make claims relative to social, cultural, historical or personal circumstances. Moral relativists hold that no universal standard exists by which to assess an ethical proposition’s truth. Relativistic positions often see moral values as applicable only within certain cultural boundaries or in the context of individual preferences. An extreme relativist position might suggest that judging the moral or ethical judgments or acts of another person or group has no meaning, though most relativists propound a more limited version of the theory.

    okay. so the purpose of the post – if to ask – if there is agreement with the above statements? In other words – can we agree on definitions?

  21. Jim Bacon Avatar
    Jim Bacon

    Larry, so far so good. I have no problem with the definitions you offer.

  22. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Great!

    Then I think the territory probably is that many might feel the PRIMARY purpose of history or museums is to recognize achievements – and not necessarily failures or other negative information.

    but I would stop short of claims that such activities accurately portray the true measure of the subjects and for myself…actually… I FEEL later, after I’ve researched more.. that I’ve received essentially an “advertisement” and I’m sorely in need of a Consumer Reports version of history.

    And .. we ignore history too.. if someone is known for a dastardly act… any achievements in that life are ignored.

    I’ve now gotten to the point.. that whenever I receive a dose of “history”, (or even alleged “facts” for that matter) I go check other sources – routinely because I’ve seen too much of “history” or even current events tinged by someone in an effort to promote a particular viewpoint or a particular doctrine, etc.

    I see this in both conservatives and liberals… so that leaves me wondering.. why someone would claim that the true history debate is about “liberal” interpretations of history.

    But let me ask, am I wrong if I say that it “seems” that liberals want MORE info and Conservatives want LESS info.

    Liberals want the tarnish and warts to show and conservatives want to polish …those images they hold reverent and deeply resent efforts to show the tarnish.

    Wrong?

  23. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    When I finished my first grad school I sat down and wrote what I learned. It was about a half a page of key things.

    One was that I learned that issues were not Janus-faced, but diamond faced. Also, that there is never a definitive solution because someone will always oppose it based on a different perspective of facts, outputs and outcomes.

    Therefore, I’d be happy if museums, historical sites and history books showed some complexity – the major themes of a single story. Not the one answer.

  24. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    One of the things that I have found extremely helpful is to have a time-line chart of historical events. I like this because if helps to maintain a perspective and it examines events as much or more than individuals – because often, there are more than one person involved in even discrete events.

    My wife is a fan of this also and very active in Church as so I asked her if there was such a thing as a Religious timeline chart. We didn’t know the answer but thought it might be helpful – as we were discussing the order and precedence of the protestant movement as associated with the movement of people to North America in pursuit of religious freedom … for example.. what came first the Anglicans or the Episcopalians…. or .. what was going on in the world is Islam .. at the same time in the world of Christianity…

  25. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    Larry Gross: Time-Life did a series of books on a time line called Timeframe. There are some timelines on line – try Google.

    I’ve seen a lot of religious timelines in Bibles and other books that extend to the present.

    An inter-disciplinary time line showing science/technology, art, literature etc. is especially illimunating.

    That is one of the visions for my web site is an interactive timeline – but I don’t have the resources to do it now.

  26. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Thanks JAB!

    I hope (dare I say Pray) that you’ll get your interactive website online.

    It could be very cool…

    you know.. what might be even cooler … a timeline for Virginia.. 🙂

    lcg

  27. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    The timeline I have in my head is for American Civilization but tracing the ideas – (obviously not all the ideas) – back to the start of civilizations in 3000BC

  28. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    One more thing, Larry, look at the grahic I have on the Culture War as ideas split – on a time line on my web site.

  29. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    JAB – I did look.. and it is a nice site with really good explanatory graphics.

    I was raised as the son of a Marine who was Catholic.

    I was a practicing Catholic, got confirmed and went to Catholic School for a number of years

    I then became a Southern Baptist

    I’m not married to an Episcopalian.

    I don’t think any of the 3 have the only path – nor do I believe that Judeo-Christian’s as a group have the only path. I pretty much subscribe to the reasons why people left Europe and came here so they could practice whatever Religion they want to practice. I don’t think God wrote off the folks who believe in Islam nor the Religions practiced in Asia or other parts of the world.

    I think it is a really, really, really bad idea to codify religion of any flavor into government for exactly the reason people fled Europe or people kill each other in Ireland or the Middle East or the Germans justified their treatment of Jews (as well as other religions)

    I don’t believe in Manifest Destiny or Munificent Destiny because I believe they lead to wars and they end up being justification for inhumane treatment of other humans. If everyone in every other country and every other religion subscribe to manifest/munificent destiny – I’d fear for the future of civilization.

  30. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    Larry Gross: I didn’t follow all of your comments because we use such shorthand in blogs. Like I don’t know what you mean the ‘only path’.

    Munificent Destiny is an idea I have for our Nation. It is my word. The idea is to use our wealth in a realpolitik way to help where we can with capital investment while protecting our freedom and opportunity. More to it than I can put in this post.

    It isn’t about telling others what to do, except to contain Islamists in Islamic Civilization until they get rid of the Islamists with reforms like our Renassaince (sp), Reformation, Enlightenment, and Great Awakenings, or convert.

    Who wants to codify religion into government except for the Human Secularists pushing their paganism as the state religion?

  31. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    ” American Civilization begins with the world view of the consensus culture. From 1607 to 1962 the consensus culture for the English-speaking peoples who are known as Americans was Judeo-Christian Culture.”

    “The Great Commission is short hand for how Christians take Jesus’s command to spread the Good News to the ends of the Earth. The thinking of overwhelming Christian majority has provided the basis for the American consensus culture. Civilizations are built on cultures. America’s culture evolved to be a Judeo-Christian consensus culture.”

    I’m pondering these things… and trying to reconcile the involvement of Christian organizations in government and government elections – not as individuals – but as formal groups.

    How would you feel if Islamics or Latter Day Saints copied the Cristian Coalition Strategies?

    True believers in Christ go to other countries to perform humanitarian acts and don’t require US govt protection and don’t have any agenda beyond proving that their faith means helping others regardless of their religion or government.

    What the USA should be known and respected for FIRST as a Nation with a Judeo-Christian culture is blind humanitarianism rather than feared and loathed as a threat to their well-being.

    Until I see that happening.. I tend to believe that the same kinds folks who killed each other in Ireland.. will continue to be enabled by countries like the USA in pursuit of what they think is the “right” government and “right religion and any justification as a means to an end.

    We don’t need a State Religion and a lack of one is not Paganism in my view. WE can be humanitarian without adherence to ANY specific flavor of religion in my view.

    Here’s what Paganism is:

    Paganism (from Latin paganus, meaning “a country dweller” or “civilian”) is a term which, from a western perspective, has come to connote a broad set of spiritual or religious beliefs and practices of natural or polytheistic religions. The term can be defined broadly, to encompass many or most of the faith traditions outside the Abrahamic monotheistic group of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. “Pagan” is the usual translation of the Islamic term mushrik, which refers to ‘one who worships something other than The God of Abraham’

    note the phrase: “western perspective”

    “Both “pagan” and “heathen” have historically been used as a pejorative by adherents of monotheistic religions (such as Judaism, Christianity and Islam) to indicate a disbeliever in their religion.”

    There’s quite a bit more at: “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paganism”

    suffice to say .. MY relationship with Christ is NOBODY’s business but mine and I consider those who judge on this issue as arrogant beyond reason.

    If we all took that attitude .. would God condemn us for doing so?

    I don’t think so. At least my God wouldn’t and if your God does.. then fine and dandy ..but don’t impose him on me and don’t ask me to pay taxes so we can deploy Armed Forces worldwide to protect those who advocate such.

    We need to learn to live peaceably with others who wish us no harm but believe differently.

    When we can learn to do that – I think God will smile.

  32. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    Larry Gross: We aren’t communicating. Again, the shorthand of blogs and websites doesn’t provide the connections like conversation.

    Every society has a culture. Cultures can produce Civilizations. The Civilizations of the world are recorded,named and numbered.

    Our American Civilization, a branch of Western Civilization, is based on Judeo-Christian culture. Judeo-Christian culture was the consensus culture until the 1960s.

    Individuals think and do what they want. Culture shapes and limits ideas by language, history, myth, etc. but individuals have incredible Free Will to think.

    Christian organizations involvement in current affairs is as old as the Republic. It changes over the years as the organizations do.

    I don’t follow who wants what government protection or has what agenda.

    The US as the most powerful uber-super power in the world is loathed and feared for just being so rich and powerful.

    Ireland is a lousy metaphor for anything except Irish politics.

    Who are these folks seeking right government and right religion and any justification as a means to an ends?

    I see Secular Humanism, a modern Paganism, as the state religion being pushed by Liberals.

  33. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    “It changes over the years as the organizations do.”

    even past the 1960s” .. who made that the end of the process?

    “The US as the most powerful suber-super power in the world is loathed and feared for just being so rich and powerful.”

    No the are feared because they will invade and damage you if you don’t do what they want… and you are weak…(don’t have nukes). We’ll even diss our allies if they don’t agree with us… We expect them to do what we say .. our way or the road… this is what Manifest (munificent) is about. It’s not about working together with BOTH your allies and your enemies .. it’s slinging the weapons of righteousness… no matter what the others believe.

    Ireland is a lousy metaphor for anything except Irish politics.”

    How about Bosnia? I can name about a dozen more where religion is involved in the hate….

    “I see Secular Humanism, a modern Paganism, as the state religion being pushed by Liberals.”

    I respect your viewpoint but I respectfully think you are wrong…. Liberals are not pushing ANY religion and by dong so – they’re accused of being Secular Humanists.

    This is how things are done now days. If you are opposed to the War in Irag – then you are in favor of terrorism, if you don’t want religion in Govt . .then you are anti-religion… a “pagan”…

    If you are “tolerant” of others… then you’re a human secularist – a spineless type person whose principles are noodles…

    There IS no middle ground… no room for the complexities that are realties…

    we’ve been through this.. throughout history.. the Catholics were really good at it in the middle ages…

  34. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Here’s what I intended to post.. but I got a bit off track(exerpts):

    Cultural resource chief at Shenandoah has helped park tell truer, more balanced histories

    REED ENGLE would never take full credit for changing the way Shenandoah National Park tells its history–the injection of candor into everything from explaining the park’s “benevolent” creation to the way black visitors were prohibited from all areas but Lewis Mountain.

    Along the way, he and others have helped to tell the following stories that they feel help make Shenandoah a more real and compelling place:

    Lewis Mountain. Until recent years, the fact that the park was once segregated got short shrift.

    Now, Shenandoah is telling the whole story of the way the park was “whites only” in every area but Lewis Mountain from the day it opened in 1939 until 1951. Research is ongoing to put the Lewis Mountain area into context with segregation in the region and country.

    Skyland. The history of this resort and Massanutten Lodge had been interpreted solely as the achievements of George Pollock, in the park’s outdated style of history Engle described as “the stories of old, white men.”

    Now when you visit the restored 1911 cabin, you learn more about the true builder of the lodge and the real force in what was a thriving, creative community–Pollock’s wife, Addie.

    She and a handful of other interesting, liberated women in the teens and ’20s made Skyland a progressive spot where alternative religions, mysticism and other vibrant interests thrived.

    The new exhibit and video tells a more objective tale, describing how and why the park was created but also including the perspective of those who didn’t want to leave their homes.

    http://fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2006/112006/11212006/238525

    I have to tell you – I see this as a GOOD thing but the vibes I’m getting … is that some folks think this is a “bad” thing… the messes up an otherwise “positive” story.

    Is this “rewriting” history? Horrors .. is this that dreaded thing called “revisionist history”?

    my gawd.. what is the world coming to.. when all this messy stuff about Shenandoah Park is bandied about like dirty underwear… !

    Is this a liberal “plot” to besmirch history? Is REED ENGLE an irreverent malcontent that should be fired?

  35. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    Larry Gross: Staying on topic here with local interpretations of history.

    It’s fine to tell the ‘whole’ story like Paul Harvey, but I’d ask that it be put into context and then scale, if it is possible of importance.

    In other words, how much of the story of the Park is about segregation and what segregation meant to the development of the park, growth etc. Is it 40% of the story of the park? Or 4%? Just give it the attention it deserves in the whole story.

    Likewise, if some women went wild in the woods (love alliteration), likewise did preachers poach pigs, or moonshiners shine stills? There are a lot of stories in human endeavors. Just put them in a coherrent balance.

    A contrary example is this – and I’m stepping on toes here – name an article about WW II that doesn’t talk about the Tuskegee Airmen, Go for Broke (441 Inf ?), or lady pilots, etc blah, blah, blah. The big story isn’t one Japanese-American combat regiment and two black divisions, but that they contributed to a 90 division Army that defeated two hegemonic enemies across the globe. See, the big picture (great TV show from the 50s!) is that WE won, not that they served during a time of discrimination. Their story is relevant, important and interesting but not the cause and effect of the whole – we were attacked and we won. Just like Blutto said in Animal House – remember when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

  36. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    Why not just relate the facts and let others decide significance?

    Why have a gatekeeper who functions essentially as a censor to substitute their own idea of what is significant and what is not?

    My view is that.. if we believe that we need to allocate percentages to how much is covered – we’re to the camel nose under the tent… in terms of subjective judgments becoming involved in the process.

    I know there are some downsides to Wikipedia but it gives one a “short” history.. with “hot links” if you want to drill deeper… they reference the material… they show differing viewpoints… and in general strive for balance – based not on their idea of balance but people who read the entry….

    and if there is flat out disagreement.. that is acknowledge also.

    I think this same approach could be used for interpretive history… museums, etc.. but let’s not have gatekeepers.

    lay out the facts and let folks decide for themselves.. any attempt to “color” or redact is an opportunity for mischief and worse.

  37. James Atticus Bowden Avatar
    James Atticus Bowden

    Larry Gross: If you have room for 1000 words on a plaque at a museum or rest stop, whatever, some one has to write the narrative.

    I agree that more info is better info. But, there is a word limit in textbooks, signs, etc.

Leave a Reply

Read More