Monthly Archives: May 2021

Fascism in America

The GOP’s Ultimatum to America: Fascism, or Else, The GOP is More Dangerous Than Ever

Written by Umair Haque and published in Medium.com 5/28/2021

Every sensible person knows by now that the GOP has become America’s greatest threat to itself. Even Republicans with common sense — like my father-in-law, the farmer — shake their head at what’s become of their party: a hotbed of fanatics, extremists, loons, and cranks, all of whom share a single aim. And that aim is now becoming more and more explicit.

The GOP now presents America mericawith a simple, stark choice: fascism, or else. That’s the choice of authoritarianism. The GOP is hardening, in other words — into a true extremist organization, every bit the equal of far-right parties in Eastern Europe, or in a much more disturbing parallel, the Taliban, or ISIS. They, too, presented their societies — who were failed states — with a stark choice: fascism, or else.

The GOP is giving America an ultimatum. Will America reject it?

The hardening of the GOP into an organization of extremists that give the world’s most fanatical a run for their money is frightening, disturbing, and most of all, incredibly dangerous. I want to take a moment to point out precisely how and why — by way of how fast and deep the GOP’s hardening into genuine, off the charts, failed state levels of fanaticism is happening.

One of the GOP’s rising stars is Marjorie Taylor Greene. Extremists like her have replaced “moderates” like Liz Cheney. Nobody should cry tears for Liz Cheney — she voted for Trump, after all, proving her gullibility, if not complicity. And yet MJT is another creature entirely. Recently, she spelled out the choice the GOP is demanding of America — its ultimatum.

Fascism — or secession. She highlighted secession efforts in Oregon that are gaining momentum. Then she justified them and argued for them, since the “disconnected swamp” is…insert crazy conspiracy theory. The Pacific Northwest, of course, is America’s stronghold of white supremacy, and it’s no surprise therefore that secessionist movements have gathered steam there. And yet to see a member of Congress arguing for them is a serious step over the line. After all, it’s a clear violation of everything from the oath of office to basic standards to the idea of believing in a country itself.

Now, to really make sense of this idea, we have to hold a number of seemingly paradoxical facts in our head. Yes, elites have failed America — especially working class America, and especially elites in DC, who propounded idiotic theories of “trickle down economics” and “small government” and so forth (while successful societies like Canada and Europe were offering everyone things like healthcare and retirement and education precisely because they were expanding the role of public institutions and governance.) But the theories elites offered were eagerly swallowed by none other than the working class itself, because they gave it a way to continue old attitudes of racism, bigotry, and prejudice. The average working class white American wouldn’t have to invest in Black people, Latinos, Jews, Muslims — even if it meant not having basics like social insurance and social systems and forms of collective action themselves.

None of that justifies supremacy, and it certainly doesn’t justify violent secession for the purpose of white supremacy. The answer to “we’re a failing state” is not “let’s go build our apartheid utopia fascist society.” At least unless you’re a fascist.

Marjorie Taylor Greene is performing at least one service of dubious value to the rest of us. She’s so fanatical and simple minded that she doesn’t even bother couching the GOP’s ultimatum in the polite evasions and double speak the rest of them do. In her, we see it totally clearly: fascism, or else.

Or else what, you might ask? Well, she’s given you the answer. Trouble. Intimidation. Violence. Threats. Harm. Right down to a violent civil war — which is usually what this anodyne term “secession” involves — itself. Fascism, or else.

But if we look just a little more clearly, we can see exactly the same ultimatum now at work throughout the GOP, from top to bottom — only maybe given in slightly less stark and brutal and stupid terms.

Consider how the GOP House Leader has “blocked” an investigation into the “events of January 6th.” I put all that in quotes because in situations as dangerous as these, nobody should play he game of double speak pundits do. So let me put it more clearly. One of the leaders of the party who launched a violent coup aimed at stopping the peaceful transfer of power — incited by the President himself — doesn’t want any kind of formal process of investigation, much less justice, about that coup. When it put it to you that way, you should shudder, because this is the kind of thing that happens in the places impolitely once called “banana republics” — only now America is the republic, and the bananas are white supremacy itself, the things that fanatics are willing to destabilise society wholesale for.

What is Kevin McCarthy really saying? He’s giving America an ultimatum, too. The very same one: fascism, or else. He’s saying that he’s not willing to investigate the coup attempt of Jan 6th, because, of course, he doesn’t want any ugly truths to come to light. His party only offers America two choices. Fascism, or else. Or else what? They’ll block up the gears of government, they’ll obstruct, they’ll bully, harass, intimidate. They’ll go back on their word — remember, Kevin McCarthy supported such an investigation not too long ago. But when the rubber meets the road, and the actual choice has to be offered — all that’s forgotten, and it boils down to: fascism, or else.

Or else what? McCarthy’s line — like a lot of GOP politicians — is a little more sophisticated than the obvious brutal Iran, Iraq, or North Korea-style appeals to authoritarianism MJT makes.

Their “or else” is: you don’t get a working government at all. We’ll do everything in our power to just crash the system, procedurally, formally, using whatever means we have at our hands, whatever rules and codes and systems we can abuse. We’ll stop you from doing the most basic things, like investigating a coup, even if we said we’d get behind it. Fascism, or else: or else you don’t get a working government at all.

McCarthy’s aided in this effort by the third way the GOP’s delivering their ultimatum of fascism or else to America. What’s going in the party at a cultural level, as a social movement? Something truly peculiar. A psychologist would call it mass psychotic delusion. The GOP is rewriting history.

The coup never happened — those were just tourists! They didn’t mean any harm! Never mind the gallows they built, the death threats they chanted, or the numerous people who died. That never happened. The election was stolen from us, and we’re the ones with the grievance here. How can that be? Because the promised land has always belonged to the pure blooded and the true of faith. The rest of you are just subhumans — who deserve to be treated like them, kids put in cages, hunted in the streets, violently attacked at the Capitol.

This Orwellian process of rewriting history is so notable and remarkable because it’s happening in a weirdly spontaneous fashion. Yes, leaders in the party tell the Big Lies — but the base eagerly laps them up. They’re hungry for collective delusions, psychotic breaks from reality. This entire side of politics has quite literally lost its grip, its mind. It is not thinking at all anymore.

Why is that? Because it is too busy delivering an ultimatum. What are all those snarling Trumpists really saying to the rest of us? Fascism, or else. They don’t offer any compromise, any negotiation, any room for or remotely any interest in anything else. They’re hardly sitting around weighing the merits of different policies. They are just reacting instinctively now, their animal passions triggered, their lizard brains on fire. Fascism, or else.

Or else what? In MJT’s case — the new generation of fanatical GOP politicians — the answer was: the total rupture of society, civil war. In Kevin McCarthy’s case — the old guard of politicians wary enough to couch the ultimatum in politesse — the “or else” was: you don’t get a working government. But in the Republican base’s case, in working class America’s case, the answer is even more chilling than that: mass violence, based on the total rejection of reality, because the only kind of society they will accept is a fascist one. The base’s “or else” is: another coup, another Jan 6th, more paramilitaries, “open carry,” outright contempt for the “libtards,” vitriolic hate, all of that fuelled by psychotic delusions that justify it.

Surivors and scholars of authoritarianism like me see something truly disturbing now when we look at the GOP: an American ISIS or Taliban. White Americans, I think, often still feel that’s got to be hyperbole. I wish it was. They’re not experienced with authortiarianism or fascism — and right now, they need to rely on and listen to those of us who are.

What is authoritarianism, in its most essential, distilled, purest form? When one political side gives another an ultimatum. An “or else.” And the “or else” is the threat of violence, harm, hurt, on a mass social scale, from coup to civil war to large-scale sociocultural conflict. When that side refuses to even brook the idea that consent is a norm everyone should value, and it’s inherently abusive in a democracy to say: “it’s going to be this way, or else we’re going to hurt you as hard and deep and much as we can, seriously and really harm you, from taking away your rights, to violating your bodily integrity and safety and personhood.”

Authoritarianism is “or else,” backed up by the threat of violence. We see that now at every level of the GOP — from the establishment at the top, like Kevin McCarthy, to its new generation of fanatical leaders, like MJT, right down to the base, 70% of whom think the election was stolen, and the coup which never happened was nonetheless perfectly justified.

That’s bad enough, but the GOP is now one step even beyond that. It’s not saying, “Social democracy or else,” or “A working healthcare system or else.” It’s saying something far, far more sinister than that.

It’s saying “We want a society based on power, violence, domination, control, and dehumanization, or else. We’re the ubermen — the ones of pure blood and true faith — and the rest of you are the underman. We get to exploit and hate and demonise and scapegoat you. You live as second class citizens — if that — in our country, at our mercy, the way we tell you to live. And you die that way, too. Or else. Or else what? It’s open season. We hurt you.”

In other word’s, the GOP is saying “fascism, or else.” It’s authoritarian ultimatum to America is the worst kind there is. That’s the same one that ISIS gave, that the Taliban demanded. It’s the stuff of ultra dystopian scenarios. That is why survivors and scholars like me will use the term “authoritarian fascism”: there are two parts to it, the authoritarian ultimatum, given in the service of a fascist society of the pure and true, subjugating the impure, weak, and hated.

So. The GOP’s giving America an ultimatum. The danger is that America accepts it. This is why intelligent people say: “you can’t negotiate with extremists.” Because even accepting the terms of an ultimatum, especially one given in the name of violence, hate, right down to civil war, coup, mass delusion, fanatical extremism, my friend, is to have lost your power and centre and core and purpose at all. The only thing to do with an ultimatum — ever — is to reject it.

The Perversion of Myth in America Part 5

Dealing with the Myth of Trumpism

In past articles of this series, we have considered the meaning of myth, constructive myths, destructive myths and a perverse myth- Trumpism. In this article, we will consider how to respond to Trumpism before it destroys our democracy. We are already close to another civil war at least in our minds. In the Republican party, a faction of people including legislators have accepted the myth of Trumpism as their “guiding fiction.” Many other Republicans including legislators at all levels tolerate Trumpism whether they subscribe to it or not.

The psychiatrist Alfred Adler coined the term guiding fiction. This is a way of thinking about life which guides a person’s actions. This fiction can be constructive and helpful in making decisions and managing the course of one’s life. It can also be destructive and complicate your life to say the least.

For some people, the Trumpian myth we discussed in the last post has created a path which requires that they sell their souls to Trump and allow him to become the central focus of their lives. We talked before of the implications of the Trumpian myth including:

White supremacy and associated racism.
Belief that Trump really won the 2020 presidential election despite all evidence being to the contrary.
Acceptance of Trump as the only person who can lead us to the promised land, despite the destruction of democracy implied in his approach
Accepting Trumpism as the only truth and Trump as the Chosen One as he has described himself.

For those of us who do not ascribe to the Trumpian myth, it is time to consider how to save our country from the self-serving path Trump would like us to follow. First let us consider approaches which are unlikely to succeed.

Rational debate- Have you ever tried having a debate with a Trump devotee about politics? Based on my experience and that of others I know who have tried, such a debate leads nowhere. A constructive debate is based on facts and rational conversation about related topics. Most Trumpian beliefs turn out to be based on fantasy or outright lies like those Trump has been pedaling for years. Arguing about them is fruitless.
Attacking the Trumpian guiding fiction.- Their principle is that Trump is always right and knows what is best for everyone. He will lead them out of darkness and chaos into the society he will create for our country. This fiction is not open for debate.
Invitation to partnership- Compromise in the form of political bipartisanship or individual meeting of the minds is not an option for those devoted to the Trumpian myth. Trump is right and that is all there is to it.

The bluster of the Wizard of Oz and the intellectual nakedness of the Emperor’s New Clothes are stories that give us some insight into what we face in Trump and his devotees. As for answers and alternatives to Trumpism there are several possibilities which might well make a difference. Here are the ones which came to my mind:

Allowing Trump devotees to see that their needs can be met by paths other than adhering to his empty promises. This is already taking place on several fronts. We are in the midst of a coordinated effort to manage the COVID pandemic which is showing good results. Bailout through cash payments has started our society on the path to recovery. Some Republican legislators are even taking credit for the benefits to their constituents which they voted against. Current proposals before Congress also include taking responsibility for protection of the environment, our home. In addition, police reform is also a legislative proposal leading us toward more protection and less brutality.
Recognizing the lack of practical proposals. In Trump’s quest for the presidency in both elections, he had no concrete proposals other than the New Order he promised. Details of this plan never appeared, not to mention getting anything done- only the overthrow of the status quo which was well underway during Trump’s tenure as president.
Realizing that the only stated goal of the Republicans is to defeat Democrats and block anything they propose. Other than that, the Republicans have nothing concrete to offer even in light of the many needs of our country and citizens.
Recognition that unreformed police tactics are a danger to all of our citizens.
Recognition of the benefits of the rule of law other than operating on the whims of leaders such as Trump and retribution for not supporting him unconditionally in their attempt to build a society around their own needs rather than those of society as a whole.
Recognition of the contributions of immigrants over the lifespan of our society as opposed to societal inbreeding.
Recognition that all individuals, despite their political leanings, can make a contribution to rebuilding our society together.
Recognition that healthcare, education and job opportunities will create a safer society by greatly reducing the number of citizens angry and frustrated by their lack of progress.
Learning to recognize the contributions of new cultures toward enriching the American experience as we have done with past immigrant groups throughout American history.
Welcoming Republicans who are willing to compromise as partners in working toward our national progress.

In my opinion, none of these possibilities will result in resolution of our difficulties and disagreements. Yet together and with other possible factors beyond our current awareness, they can help us build a society in which we can all prosper and where we can all live together in peace.

When Exactly Did America Stop Being Racist?

Written by Scott Woods and published in Medium.com, 5/1/2021

By refusing to cop to ingrained oppression in the U.S., political leaders are living in denial

Scott Woods May 1·6 min read

Many Americans have been mulling over Republican of South Carolina, Senator Tim Scott’s wildly fantastic rebuttal to President Biden’s address to Congress earlier this week.

These remarks, delivered Wednesday night, found Scott offering jaw-dropping observations about the Republican party that the last four years of American life have proven patently false: that the GOP had a Covid-19 relief plan; that GOP changes to Georgia voting laws will somehow make it easier for more people to vote; that the GOP opposes Supreme Court-packing. It was a fun house mirror of appraisals.

Being a Black person in America, there was one line from the bizarre oration that stuck out. “Hear me clearly,” Scott said, “America is not a racist country.” Mind you, this is after Scott recounted a litany of racist acts that he’s experienced over the course of his life, presumably to show that he understands what racism is.

If Scott were the only high-ranking politician to make such a claim, I wouldn’t care. There’s nothing that Scott can say on the matter of racism that would surprise me, given his voting record and who writes his scripts. But when Vice President Kamala Harris responded to Scott’s claim (“I don’t think America is a racist country but we also do have to speak truth about the history of racism in our country and its existence today”), I took note. Not because I agree, but because she and Scott actually agree on something.

President Biden offered his two cents on the matter, as well: “I don’t think America is racist, but I think the overhang from all of the Jim Crow and before that, slavery, have had a cost and we have to deal with it.”

What’s confounding about their collective conclusion is that they don’t deny that racism exists so much as it isn’t nearly as broad or ingrained as to be considered a way of life. Scott doesn’t provide any evidence that this is true (and, in fact, provides evidence that it isn’t), but Harris, at least, references White supremacists as domestic terrorists, which is a reasonable enough platform. That said, I’m left to assume she might come down differently than most people who believe racism in this country is systemic and not just comprised of tiki torch-wielding mobs.

The question I have for Scott, Harris, Biden, and anyone else who thinks America isn’t racist is: When did that stop being the case?

I think we can all agree that America has been a racist country at some point. Slavery, Jim Crow, and segregation were all orders of the day in American life. These were laws whose outcomes helped build this country from its inception. Without slavery, you don’t have America as you know it — and I don’t just mean in some butterfly effect kind of way. I mean you have no Washington, D.C. or White House. Without segregation, you have no traffic light or pacemaker. And while those may appear at first glance to be nifty dividends, these are blues inventions; things that exist because Black people had to make do in the face of unrelenting racial assault on every level. In short, at some point in the past, America was genuinely and legally racist.

I’d like to know when that stopped. What magical moment in the past baptized America and washed away its bigotry? Which rights were activated on behalf of Black people that absolved America of its original sin?

Tim Scott and Kamala Harris should both, especially as Black Americans, have been able to say that America still struggles with its racism problem. It’s not something America used to be or fixed or voted out of office.

Perhaps the answer is a legal one. When legislation like Brown v. Board of Education (1954) or the Civil Rights Act (1964) were passed, America was obligated to adjust its reality. It could no longer legally discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, and several other personal identities that, oddly, people are still contending with today. Except that America didn’t meet that obligation so much as pivot into more subtle and efficient ways of discrimination. Schools attended by predominantly Black students were and remain routinely under-resourced. You can still see the crimson ink where housing discrimination hasn’t changed since redlining was legal. Disparities in health care, law enforcement, political representation, and living wages persist almost unabated by civil intervention across the board.

All of which begs several questions. If the net result of living in America while Black exposes the same disparities and injustices as it did several generations ago, how is racism not a strain of America’s DNA? How does drawing out daily examples of inarguable and systemic bias not serve as evidence of racism’s existence in American life? How is it that certain Americans can continue to benefit from the ancient and White-facing machine of privilege born of hundreds of years of free Black labor — privilege that Black people consistently cannot access — and the country not be racist by default?

There’s a difference between not being a racist society and being a society that at least tries to get it right most of the time. Despite what most citizens (who, as it turns out, are predominantly White) think of themselves, America is neither of these countries. It turns out that America’s favorite pastime is in fact not baseball but denial. It’s a pervasive and insidious strain of identity that refuses to not see itself as great, even in the face of profound horrors.

The January 6 storming of the Capitol earlier this year was shocking to much of America, but not enough to claim its hands are clean. That tsunami of animus came from somewhere, and it certainly hasn’t felt like the representation of a minority opinion since then. Scott essentially came out as every conservative’s best Black friend and told them they’re not wrong — that somehow, all of the people still accessing America’s privilege conveyor belt are the underdogs here — even though the insurrection lies at the feet of Republican flame-fanning.

What most of America doesn’t get about racism is that ignoring it doesn’t make it go away. That faux-philosophical chestnut has never been true a single day in the history of America (or anywhere else for that matter). Consider a hypothetical in which a White employee is iffy on the prospect of the new Black hire. In such a scenario, said White person has lunch with their new colleague and realizes they’re an okay person after all. This wouldn’t be an example of race becoming invisible or transcending race or any other diversity fable; this is a person recognizing that there’s more to Blackness than skin color.

The White person never forgets that the Black person is Black, they simply realize that there’s more to the person than what they see. And just like a person can never get to that lunchtime promised land by ignoring someone’s race, a society can never reckon with or resolve that which it cannot admit.

Tim Scott and Kamala Harris should both, especially as Black Americans, have been able to say that America still struggles with its racism problem. It’s not something America used to be or fixed or voted out of office. It is something that plagues us, much like the pandemic with which we’re now wrestling. It’s a condition of the American existence, and conversely a weed its citizens have to keep pulling out of the ground. But we’ll never get hold of it unless we grab it by the root.

The Perversion of Myth in America- Part 4 The Trumpian Myth

So far we have explored the nature of myth in a positive sense, a number of useful myths and some destructive myths in America. Now we turn to the myth which some see as creating an American crisis but which others see as the key to our salvation as a nation. We are taking about the Trumpian Myth. Let’s look at what Trump brings to the table.

Greek mythology contains the myth of Narcissus among many others. According to the legend, Narcissus was known for his beauty. A long life was predicted for him as long as he never recognized himself. He rejected the love of a nymph and fell in love with his own reflection in the water and eventually died either of frustration or possibly by killing himself.

There have been many theories about what is going on with Trump. One is that he has narcissistic personality disorder. Another is that he has antisocial personality disorder. Both are listed in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM 5). A third option is that he has a combination of the two.

A person diagnosed as having Narcissistic Personality Disorder must show at least five of the following symptoms:

1. A grand sense of self importance.

2. Preoccupation with dreams of unlimited power, success,

physical attractiveness and love.

3. Belief that he or she (usually he) is of special or high status.

4. A need for excessive admiration.

5. A sense of entitlement and expectation of favorable treatment or

compliance.

6. Exploitation of other people to achieve personal goals.

7. Lack of empathy regarding the needs and feelings of other people.

8. Envy of other people or thinking that other people envy them.

9. Arrogant behaviors and attitudes.

A person diagnosed as having Antisocial Personality Disorder must show

at least three of the following symptoms:

Repeated failure to follow social norms resulting in grounds for arrest.
Engaging in deceitfulness.
Impulsivity and not planning ahead.
Irritability and aggressiveness.
Reckless disregard or concern for the safety of other people.
Chronic irresponsibility.
Lack of remorse about hurting others.

I had no difficulty finding all of these symptoms in both groups as being present in Trump. Does that mean it is necessary to choose one diagnosis or another? He clearly shows patterns consistent with both diagnoses.

Although there is no combined diagnosis in the DSM-5, Arlin Cuncic at www.verywellmind.com discusses the idea of a narcissistic sociopath with features of both the personality disorders we just reviewed. Here each of the two diagnoses intensify and make each other worse. As with each of the separate diagnoses, the combined pattern first shows itself during adolescence and most likely is due to both genetic and environmental factors. Cuncic describes a person with both as “on a quest for power and control, who uses the love and admiration of others as a tool to dominate and manipulate. There will be no guilt, no apologies, and no remorse coming from the narcissistic sociopath.” This also appears to me to be a very apt description of Trump.

All of this brings us to the Trumpian Myth. Wikipedia describes A Big Lie as “a propaganda device by a politician used for political purposes- a great distortion or misrepresentation of the facts.” It goes on to describe the term as one coined by Hitler in Mein Kampf as “a lie so colossal that no one would believe that someone could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.”

As I see it there are currently three parts to the Trumpian Myth:

1. The first is MAGA. Paul Blumenthal describes the part of the myth as “foretelling a great and cataclysmic future event where deliverance will arrive through the exertion and sacrifice of believers. The present order will be swept away.” This is the promise on which Trump ran and which he promised to continue if reelected through the slogan “Keep America Great”

as if he had accomplished his goal during his administration of making America great.

In my assessment, he made a good start on sweeping away our democracy by diluting and crippling many of the federal agencies which support democracy. He did this mostly by restrictive policies and installation of agency directors who either had no idea how to run their agencies or who had ideas of how to cripple them. Yet he does deserve credit for supporting the COVID vaccines although he did undermine other aspects of containing the pandemic. Other than supporting the vaccine development, I had trouble finding anything positive unless you were super-rich and wanted a tax cut.

2. The second part of the myth is that the January 6 attack on the Capitol was not an attack but a “love fest” and that Trump did not incite it. In addition, any Republican who does blame Trump for any part in the insurrection (or lack of insurrection) needs to be purged from the ranks.

3. The third part is that Trump actually won the 2020 election. Phony votes were supposedly introduced by Democrats or by others acting in their interest. Seemingly endless recounts and sham recounts have been the order of the day in order to expose the “Big Steal” with more planned across the country.

Under the pretense of voter fraud which must have taken place in their view,

Republicans are hard at work in many states to reintroduce restrictive laws to limit voting by undesirable individuals who might vote against Trump such as Blacks, and other people of color as well as poor and younger voters.

These aspects of the Trump myth are touted by the loudest voices in the Republican Party with practically total support or at least lack of objection on the part of Republican House and Senate members of Congress.

The final post in this series will focus on what to do about all of this.

The Perversion of Myth in America

Part 3- Destructive Myths

In the last post we considered some of the major myths designed to guide people toward living a purposeful life in Western Civilization. In this post we will consider a number of myths in what is now the United States. They took us in a darker direction and still have an effect on our civilization from the earliest days to the present time.

Karen Armstrong in her book, A Brief History of Myth, stated that “we need myths that will help us identify with all our fellow beings, not simply with those who belong to our ethnic, national, or ideological tribe. We need myths that help us to venerate the earth as sacred once again, instead of merely using it as a resource.” Such lofty ideals are not always appreciated, including the principles discussed by our Founding Fathers (no mothers included.) Instead the main focus was on wealthy male landowners.

One unfortunate myth in the North was the preoccupation with witches, paralleling hysteria about witchcraft in Europe. The Reverend Parris, a trader in the Caribbean, brought home with him a slave couple. The wife ended up spending a fair amount of time with the Parris girls, often focused on stories of the islands including those involving Voodoo lore and practices.

The rest of the story is not entirely clear. It appears that the girls started telling fortunes and having “fits.” Suspected witches were brought before the girls. If the presence of the suspects was followed be the girls having fits, this was taken as a sure sign that the suspects were witches. Although all this appeared to start with child’s play, it took a deadly turn to the point that one hundred forty one “witches” were arrested and nineteen hanged.

In the nineteenth century, President James Polk championed the theory (myth) of Manifest Destiny. This belief or doctrine held “that the expansion of the United States throughout the American Continent was both justifiable and inevitable” according to the compendium, Oxford Languages.

Long before the term Manifest Destiny was invented, the early northern European settlers viewed what was to became America as ripe for the taking despite centuries of civilization on the part of the native peoples who were living here long before Europeans even knew that this land existed. The history of the United States includes pushing the native people out of the way. Although there were some attempts to negotiate with them, for the most part these people were seen as an obstacle and an inconvenience. They first were pushed to the western areas of the continent and eventually confined to reservations. Even then, reservations were consolidated and reservation land was minimized as the lands they were given came to be seen as ripe for development or appropriating natural resources. Manifest destiny was considered to apply only to “white” citizens. Manifest destiny of course was a myth to justify expansion throughout the land. There was no legal or moral justification for it but as a self serving “truth.”

Although the idea of white supremacy seems to be of our making, or imagining, it was alive and well in Europe before the first Northern European settlers reached America. They viewed the American territories as meant for them as superior people to the exclusion of Irish, Italian, Asian or African people, unless they were brought in as servants and slaves. Slavery existed from the early days of America. It was taken into account in our Constitution in order to make southern states feel comfortable being part of the American experiment.

Slavery in itself was not a myth but rather a stark practice associated with the myth of white superiority. Struggles over the institution of slavery continued throughout the early days of our nation, ending ultimately in the Civil War which banned slavery but did not end racism which continues to divide us even today. Racism is not in itself a myth either but again depends on racial superiority for its justification. People kidnapped and brought to this country were viewed as having no more rights than livestock. The most equality Blacks in the South were able to manage up to the Civil War was to have each counted as three fifths of a person which benefitted Southern White landowners in their representation in Congress but did not benefit Black people at all. There were free black people in the North. When I visited Charleston, I learned that there were some free Black slave owners.

Black people after the civil war started making some progress during the years of reconstruction which eventually came to an end, giving way to the Jim Crow era, the remnants of which linger until today. Great strides have been made toward racial equality over the years, but significant pockets of racism continue to pervade our society in accordance with the myth of white superiority. Educational and job opportunities, housing opportunities and police protection to name a few are still much more readily available to whites than to people of color including Native American people, Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians as well as anyone else not considered white enough thrown into the less desirable basket.

One final myth remains to be discussed which now threatens the very existence of our democracy, that of Trumpism. We will address this in the next post.

When Exactly Did America Stop Being Racist?

By refusing to cop to ingrained oppression in the U.S., political leaders are living in denial

Written by Scott Woods and posted in Medium.com

Photo: Bonnie Cash-Pool/Getty Images

Many Americans have been mulling over Republican of South Carolina, Senator Tim Scott’s wildly fantastic rebuttal to President Biden’s address to Congress earlier this week.

The question I have for Scott, Harris, Biden, and anyone else who thinks America isn’t racist is: When did that stop being the case?

The Perversion of Myth in America

2. Myth in Other Words

This is the second in a series of posts exploring the classical meaning of myth throughout prehistoric and historic times and its current perversion in America. This post considers several ways in which myth is expressed.

In the first post in this series, I described myth as a folklore genre consisting of narratives that play a fundamental role in society. Myth is a way of expressing what is important to individuals, groups, tribes and cultures throughout history. A whole book could be written about these traditions. In this post, I will talk about a few Western traditions with which you and I may be more familiar.

One tradition in the Jewish belief is Midrash, writings related to the interpretation of biblical texts. This includes the meaning of the words, what is behind the text and what is beyond it. A body of Midrash has been compiled by Jewish biblical scholars over the years, a significant part of which were compiled in the early centuries A.D.

Christianity has its own traditions and explanations of the Hebrew scripture, referred to as the Old Testament and the more specifically Christian bible known as the New Testament. The Church Fathers consisted of writers also living in early centuries AD. Their work centered on explanation and interpretation of the meaning of the Christian bible still prominently revered and referred to in scholarly discussion of the bible by Christians. The main fathers were Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine and Gregory the Great.

Although Muslim belief and tradition is a recent newcomer in Western society, it also plays a significant role in the thinking and belief of some Americans. According to Muslim belief, the purpose of life is to live in complete submission to Allah whom Muslims believe to be the same God as that of Jewish and Christian traditions. People are free to follow or not to follow Allah’s will for them but there eternal consequences for making the wrong choice. They believe that Allah’s will is revealed in the Koran given by Allah to Muhammad, the Torah given to Moses, The Gospel of Jesus, the psalms to David, and scrolls to Abraham.

That leaves atheists. They do not have any belief in divinely revealed truth. Perhaps the best characterization of the atheistic approach is contained in an incident involving George Bernard Shaw. Someone once asked him what would happen if when he dies he find out there is a God. His reply was “If there is a God we will sit down and discuss it man to man.”

Among the psychological thinkers of the last two centuries, Alfred Adler wrote about the concept of “guiding fiction.” He saw this as a personal principle which people rely on to guide their understanding of life and use to form the basis of how they act. It does not appear that many people are necessarily aware of the principles they live by. Yet they usually act consistently as if in line with a set of beliefs. This set of beliefs is often more evident to others than to the individual. Ideally the guiding fiction is realistic and adaptive according to Adler. In other words they are in tune with the true nature of their culture and helpful to them in living a meaningful life.

Nicholas Shumway has extended the idea of guiding fictions to nations where their peoples seek to understand what they are about and what their goals are as nations. The United States has among its guiding fictions “the American dream, the melting pot, and government of the people, by the people, for the people.”

These fictions represent the ideal but we do not always live up to it. Yet we still see these fictions as our goals and we would like to think we live in accordance with them. We have often failed throughout the history of our nation. At the time our nation was founded, “We the People” in practice meant white men for the most part to the exclusion of the native people living throughout the continent, people of different color and traditions and marginalization of women. More recently we have marginalized people with other than traditional sexual orientation and identity although we have made progress in this area. We have also marginalized the poor to some extent, sometimes blaming them for their predicament and leaving them to their own devices.

Despite this we now have a new way of looking at each other on the horizon and the prospect of taking the needs of the earth into account as we move forward. We may also move closer to the original guiding fiction or myth for our country and perhaps for the world. In the next post, we will look some historical distortions of myth and the harm they have done.