Category Archives: History

I too

by Langston Hughes (1902 – 1967)

I, too, sing America.

I am the darker brother.
They send me to eat in the kitchen
When company comes,
But I laugh,
And eat well,
And grow strong.

Tomorrow,
I’ll be at the table
When company comes.
Nobody’ll dare
Say to me,
“Eat in the kitchen,”
Then.

Besides,
They’ll see how beautiful I am
And be ashamed—

I, too, am America.

At first glance this would seem to be a clever pun and eloquent distillation of W. E. B. Du Bois’ 1897 writing about two-ness in Black American identity.

…American world, — a world which yields him no self-consciousness, but only lets him see himself through the revelation of the other world. It is a peculiar sensation, this double-consciousness, this sense of always looking at one’s self through the eyes of others, of measuring one’s soul by the tape of a world that looks on in amused contempt and pity. One feels his two-ness, — an American, a Negro; two souls, two thoughts, two unreconciled strivings; two warring ideals in one dark body, whose dogged strength alone keeps it from being torn asunder. The history of the American Negro is the history of this strife, — this longing to attain self-conscious manhood, to merge his double self into a better and truer self. In this merging he wishes neither of the older selves to be lost. He does not wish to Africanize America, for America has too much to teach the world and Africa; he does not wish to bleach his Negro blood in a flood of white Americanism, for he believes—foolishly, perhaps, but fervently—that Negro blood has yet a message for the world. He simply wishes to make it possible for a man to be both a Negro and an American without being cursed and spit upon by his fellows, without losing the opportunity of self-development.

Yet Hughes also may be invoking a poem by a popular yet infamously racist poet.

Walt Whitman (1819 – 1892) supposedly wrote about diversity in 1867, invoking visions of variation in individual agency, with “I hear America singing”.

I hear America singing, the varied carols I hear,
Those of mechanics, each one singing his as it should be blithe and strong,
The carpenter singing his as he measures his plank or beam,
The mason singing his as he makes ready for work, or leaves off work,
The boatman singing what belongs to him in his boat, the deckhand singing on the steamboat deck,
The shoemaker singing as he sits on his bench, the hatter singing as he stands,
The wood-cutter’s song, the ploughboy’s on his way in the morning, or at noon intermission or at sundown,
The delicious singing of the mother, or of the young wife at work, or of the girl sewing or washing,
Each singing what belongs to him or her and to none else,
The day what belongs to the day—at night the party of young fellows, robust, friendly,
Singing with open mouths their strong melodious songs.

What’s missing from the list of voices in 1867?

That’s right after the Civil War.

This is what Whitman called the varied voices in America? And he says “belongs to him or her” as if there’s freedom through ownership, yet leaves out the burning issue of those denied freedom because they… are varied.

Whitman wasn’t just a white guy being like white guys at the time. No. Definitely not.

We have ample evidence of millions of white men fighting to end slavery, to end racism. When people say white men weren’t anti-racist in 1867 they’re displaying sad ignorance.

The attorney general with a newly created 1870 Department of Justice, Amos Akerman, was in fact accused of wanting too much equality. And he was a former Confederate colonel who redeemed himself immediately at the end of war.

Silas Soule?

And hello, John Brown?

Whitman doesn’t get any slack on this point. Stop normalizing his racism at a time when many, many prominent white men were virulently anti-racist and gave the ultimate sacrifice to equalize rights.

Whitman should have known and done better. Hughes doesn’t call this out directly, but you can hear that message in his singing.

ChatGPT: Robert E. Lee Enslaved His Own Daughters

Here’s a question I often get asked: why didn’t Robert E. Lee allow his daughters to be free or marry? It’s a topic worth far more discussion, especially as America seems obsessed with putting up statues of the man as if to celebrate state-sanctioned rape of women.

I put that same question to ChatGPT and its response is…

Source: ChatGPT

Daughters within the Confederacy had no rights because they were just “human property” of the pro-slavery government?

Source: ChatGPT

Robert E. Lee, according to this software, was a cruel and harsh master who participated in the systemic mistreatment and oppression of his human property — his own daughters.

Ouch.

Well, this is awkward.

The “United Daughters of the Confederacy” (UDC) have been the ones in America putting up all the obviously controversial anti-American statues of the brutal and dehumanizing Lee to promote continued abuse of women.

But Confederate monuments were always a tool of white supremacy — that is their history. Long after the Confederacy’s demise, Southerners — and, more specifically, white women — used statues, textbooks, and public ceremonies to prop up its legacy. Many of these memorials were put up by Ladies Memorial Associations around the same time that Jim Crow laws were passed in the South—the same groups that edited history textbooks to include a more favorable treatment of the Confederacy. These women wielded race and class privilege to rewrite history.

That article goes on to point out that the UDC poisons history with some truly crazy ideas.

Rather than accept defeat, Confederate women immediately began rewriting history to suit their outlook. The Old South was transformed into a bucolic paradise where… slaves were happy. The mental gymnastics are truly staggering. An article in UDC Magazine (the official magazine of the United Daughters of the Confederacy) claimed that the Middle Passage wasn’t so bad, because “the sixteen inches of deck space allotted each slave is not all that smaller than the eighteen inches the Royal Navy allowed for each sailor’s hammock and the slaves rapidly had more room due to the much higher death rate.” That article was published in 1989.

It’s crazy because the UDC twists extreme heat and filth in cramped space without ventilation or sanitation with the spread of deadly disease under the violent and abusive ship crew… all the way into that strange phrase: slaves “rapidly had more room due to the much higher death rate”.

That inhumane article should be added to the dictionary definition for Nazi lebensraum (room acquired to live in more comfortably after certain inhabitants are killed — genocide).

It reminds me of claims that Leland Stanford’s wife died from having too nice a lunch.

But I digress.

Were ALL women in the Confederacy slaves and property guarded by an unjust state, or were the white women treated differently? You probably know the answer, given the level of crazy that formed into a UDC.

The Confederacy never actually established an age requirement. So [women] bound their breasts if they had to, and just kind of layered on clothes, wore loose clothing, cut their hair short and rubbed dirt on their faces. […] Even in the cases where these women were found out as soldiers, there does not actually seem to be much uproar. More or less, they were just sent home.

Yeah, those pro-slavery soldiers? They included white women.

Hardly being treated as slaves, white women were fighting before AND AFTER the Civil War to enslave Black women.

Sorry about that ChatGPT.

On the one hand this flawed software tries to generate a salient point about Robert E. Lee’s unbelievably brutal treatment of his own family, a true monster. On the other hand it’s factually false that his bizarrely caged daughters experienced anything as bad as his Black slaves.

His daughters were white, after all… or were they?

Why Nazi Lawyers Rushed to Behead Sophie Scholl in 1943

A fresh deep dive into the prosecution of Sophie Scholl illuminates a complete lack of justice in Nazi Germany, grotesque absence of law and order.

She was targeted by a Nazi who was trying to be as cruel as possible to women. He had given a speech to students where he demanded girls stop learning and birth a child for Hitler instead. Protests broke out and he grew unstable, angry at the resistance.

On January 13, 1943, students protested against a particularly aggressive Nazi even by NSDAP standards. In a speech at the Deutsches Museum, he had insulted female students and recommended they “give the Führer a child” rather than sit in the lecture hall. He said it would make him happy to put “one of my adjutants” at the disposal of anyone not pretty enough to be impregnated yet — he “promised a pleasant [rape] experience”.

If that sounds familiar, he used a social platform monopoly to mock girls for being hot or not, as a show of unregulated power.

During this state of mysogynist rage he was informed Sophie had been arrested for dropping anti-Nazi leaflets. He rushed everything, jumping to extremes in order to stage a bogus trial with Nazi lawyers and judges conspiring against her in every way. With no real representation, denied any rights at all, she was beheaded almost immediately.

Today she is remembered as a national hero, as she astutely predicted, one of the most important Germans of all time.

Such a fine, sunny day, and I have to go… What does my death matter, if through us, thousands of people are awakened and stirred to action?

The Failed FOX: Chinese Balloon Played Right-Wing U.S. Propagandists Like a Fiddle

Is it any wonder that extremist right-wing propaganda mouthpieces were hyperventilating about a balloon? Seth Meyers probably said it best:

I take that back. A comment on Seth Meyer’s commentary said it even better:

Don’t know why they’re freaking out so hard over a balloon. There was a Russian blimp in the Whitehouse for years…

And now for some crucial history from November 1945 (Report on the U.S. Office of Censorship) on why FOX News should have known to just shut up about a stupid balloon.

Late in 1944 voluntary censorship was presented with a unique problem in connected with the landing of Japanese bomb-carrying balloons in the western part of the United States… Censorship asked editors and broadcasters not to mention these incidents unless the War Department officially gave out information. There was complete compliance with this request, even when six persons were killed by one of the bombs in Oregon on May 5, 1945. Stories of the tragedy did not disclose the cause. […] The Japanese received neither information nor comfort about their fantastic scheme to attack the United States.

If nothing else this could have been a case of simple unity across the American defense spectrum. There’s no good in politicizing such an obvious case of foreign interference, no gain from dumping fuel onto a Chinese fire, and instead every reason in the world to come together and quietly and calmly let the oxygen out. Censorship of toxic speech, counter-intuitively proven during WWII as essential to democracy, is being hugely undervalued as FOX keeps blowing the wrong way.

Or, as I wrote years ago, “broadcast subversion and manipulation by foreign military intelligence or domestic collaborators” has a known fix called regulation.