
The history that James Baldwin wanted America to see - samclemens
https://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/the-history-that-james-baldwin-wanted-america-to-see
======
jt2190
If you’re not into reading, “I am not your Negro” is a great introduction to
Baldwin.

It’s on Amazon Prime video:
[https://www.primevideo.com/detail/0FJUJ2Z2H5U07TO08RQWCZPIPB...](https://www.primevideo.com/detail/0FJUJ2Z2H5U07TO08RQWCZPIPB/ref=atv_dp_share_cu_r)

Official Trailer: [https://youtu.be/rNUYdgIyaPM](https://youtu.be/rNUYdgIyaPM)

~~~
BoiledCabbage
I'd also recommend watching Baldwin's debate with William F Buckley. It's
fascinating to see his clarity of thought, and how much it still ties to
arguments of today. Different words, different terms, and more euphemisms now
but same arguments of thought.

The topic of the debate is "Has the American dream been achieved at the
expense of the American negro?"

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Tek9h3a5wQ&feature=youtu.be...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Tek9h3a5wQ&feature=youtu.be&t=843)

Or even just watch the first 10 mins in from the youtube link point. The first
5+ mins slowing build to his point. Just watching their debate styles is
fascinating.

~~~
js2
Transcribed the end of Baldwin's speech for those that don't have time to
watch (but you should):

 _If the American pretensions were based on more solid... a more honest
assessment of life and of themselves, it would not mean for Negros—when
someone says "urban renewal"— that Negros are simply going to be thrown out
into the streets which is what it does mean now. This is not an act of God; we
are dealing with a society made and ruled by men.

If the American Negro had not been present in America, I am convinced that the
history of the American labor movement would be much more edifying than it is.

It is a terrible thing for an entire people to surrender to the notion that
1/9th of its population is beneath them. And until that moment, until the
moment comes, when we the Americans, we the American people, are able to
accept the fact, that I have to accept for example, that my ancestors are both
white and black. That on that continent we are trying to forge a new identity
for which we need each other. And that I am not a ward of America. I am not an
object of missionary charity. I am one of the people who built the country.
Until this moment there is scarcely any hope for the American dream. Because
the people who are denied participation in it, by their very presence, will
wreck it. And if that happens it's a very grave moment for the West._

------
zentiggr
I think Baldwin and so many others have a very strong point, and the ideal
picture of America is too enticing for many.

The blunt reality is that the country I've grown up in was facilitated by
bloodshed and presumed superiority. Every step of the founding and growth of
"America" was paid for by the blood of others.

There's no easy way for a lot of people to accept that their entire existence
comes from a horribly tainted history.

What I realized over my formative years is that no one is exempt, and everyone
has the choice to try to make life better.

And a lot of people still fall in that category of "It is hard to convince
someone of facts when their identity depends on ignoring those facts."

~~~
throwa23432rsf
It's actually worse. Since humanities is essentially controlled by Anglo-Saxon
nations, all the former brutally suppressed colonies are also given native
histories which reflect those that are just as brutal. This has changed to an
extent over the years (notably with Native Americans), but is still canonical
as far as India is concerned.

~~~
pwillia7
Is there really any argument that once resources became strained anywhere on
Earth at any time humans existed they fought for control of them violently?
What is the alternative narrative?

I feel like Native Americans were either disparate or were pretty similar to
other groups of humans if the area was populous.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wabanaki_Confederacy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wabanaki_Confederacy)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aztec_warfare](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aztec_warfare)

~~~
monadic2
There are multiple violent narratives as well. The colonial narrative never
ceases the violence. The fascist narrative tuns techniques of colonial
domination inward to use on its own people.

------
chrisco255
My proposal to the statue controversy: erect statues that celebrate the
culture of the south. The food, the music, the inventors, the blue collar
workers that built the region (both black and white), and some symbolism of
unity and coming together to build a better future. Move the civil war statues
out of town squares and to former battlefields in remembrance and for
historical sake.

~~~
celticninja
You are still keeping statues of people who don't deserve statues though. Why
would you put a Confederate general statue anywhere as opposed to a union
general statue, given they freed the slaves. Unless of course you want to
remember those who tried to keep slavery because you hold racist views.

~~~
seebetter
Well some people think Robert E. Lee handled the defeat of the war in a noble
way. While I’ve heard many perspectives, I’m not sure of the origins of the
war or the implications. President Lincoln was a legitimate racist, so his
opinion compared to a slave owner’s mind are both horrific representations of
humanity. If it was solely for slavery, and there was no other way to end it,
then it was worth 600,000 Americans lives.

I am, however, for keeping all statues. They aren’t the reason for wealth
inequality or racism. It’s a diversion than only helps the powerful.

~~~
082349872349872
Other parts of the world ended slavery (when?) without civil wars, which
strongly suggests there were other ways to end it.

------
zenit-mf-1
In this video, James Baldwin responds brilliantly to Yale philosophy professor
Paul Weiss on the Dick Cavett show.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fZQQ7o16yQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fZQQ7o16yQ)

------
lordnacho
I've found it pretty interesting how the South lost the civil war, but there's
still plenty of people waving the flag and revering figures from that side of
the war. I think in most places if there's a war, the losing side doesn't get
that kind of treatment.

One thing I always wondered what what the "Southern way of life" means to
people. Aside from slavery, which most modern people don't defend, what are
the distinguishing characteristics? What makes it worthy of admiration? I ask
because I hear the idea brought up a lot, but there's never any explanation
about what exactly is different. Is it perhaps to do with religion?

~~~
catherd
I don't think there is a single "Southern way of life" since the South is a
pretty big place.

I'm not particularly interested in history, but from the little I paid
attention, the part I grew up in was too steep, rocky, and poor to have (any?)
slaves. What we did have was a large number of Scotch-Irish who have a strong
tradition of:

\- insularity

\- contrarianism

\- hardscrabble self-sufficiency

\- anti-authority

\- love nothing more than maintaining a good feud

\- religion (protestant roots)

\- loving "the land" (hunting, your farm, etc.)

Ignoring the morals of the situation, from an economic perspective the North
could afford to give up slavery. They were richer and their more
industrialized economy wasn't based on slavery. The Southern economy was
(completely?) reliant on slavery, and when the Northerners legislated their
economy away the rebellion was somewhat predictable. Painting anyone involved
as a racist is easier and true to a large extent, but there were strong
components of "don't tell me what to do" and just not having any viable
economic alternatives that also contributed.

In my mind at least, a lot of modern day Southerners of a certain type (the
poor white trash type, not the Gone With The Wind aristocratic plantation
owner type that doesn't really exist any more) just love telling outsiders
they can fuck off, and waving the rebel flag/preserving statues are pretty
handy avenues for that.

~~~
itsoktocry
> _a lot of modern day Southerners of a certain type (the poor white trash
> type.._

It's amazing to me that someone can type something like this and no one bats
an eye. Imagine stereotyping any other class of a people as "trash" and it
being wholly acceptable.

~~~
JSavageOne
I don't see anything wrong with calling racists "trash". The Confederacy
fought for slavery, hence it's fair to say that anyone who waves around a
Confederate flag is trash (as is anyone who wears a Nazi uniform).

He never said that all southerners are like that.

~~~
chrisco255
Now you're conflating being poor and white with being racist...which itself is
a bigoted claim and underscores your ignorance of that community.

~~~
onei
I would point out that they called rascists trash rather than white trash, but
perhaps the two are synonymous in the US.

More generally, those that are poor and/or unemployed can be stirred up using
a scapegoat. Speaking from personal experience, working class Brits have
blindly followed the claim that EU immigration was the cause of all employment
problems when the recession was really to blame. This was of course the result
of what the government of the day claimed and partly why Brexit is a thing.
These attitudes were present long before Brexit was a thing, Brexit just so
happens to be the result (so far).

Moving back in time further, there was great animosity between native
inhabitants of Bristol (the same place that threw a statue in a harbour) and
Welsh migrants to moved there for work post-WW2. Again, the perception was
that the Bristol jobs were being taken by those that had no right to them.
Now, no one looks twice if you drive an hour across the border.

Rascism in America has deep roots, so obviously the issue is much more complex
and can't be explained this simply. Nonetheless, it's not hard to manipulate
people against others that have look different, have different values, a
different background or a different religion. It's just playing on ignorance.
These days, American politicians focus anger on Mexicans and Muslims, but it's
the same story playing out as before.

~~~
mistermann
> These days, American politicians focus anger on Mexicans and Muslims, but
> it's the same story playing out as before.

And other politicians focus anger on people who have concerns about, for
example, the effect of immigration on the economy at the micro level.

All of this is as you say: playing on ignorance. But I disagree that it's
_just_ that (although I doubt you intended strong emphasis on that
word)...what's _actually_ going on is _a whole bunch of things_ , some of
which humanity and science has knowledge of (but largely ignores, depending on
the topic of conversation, for complicated reasons), and a whole bunch of
other stuff that we do not have knowledge of.

In an abstract conversation, most everyone can agree that we have very little
understanding of how humans work, but when the discussion is of a specific,
object level idea, we seem to lose access to that abstract knowledge.

------
scarmig
History is a narrative, and States all want to write a particular narrative to
make the governance of their communities easier. It's always been an absurdity
that the USA somehow decided that maintaining a bunch of tacky statues of
traitorous assholes built a half century after they lost a war is somehow key
to creating an American history; after all, we don't commemorate Tojo with a
statue at Pearl Harbor.

But what is a narrative US governments can write now that everyone, across all
the many demographics that make up our nation, will consent to? In the case of
public monuments, I cannot imagine any subjects that could unite the US today
or in the near future. Just yesterday, protesters tore down the bust of
Ulysses S Grant in Golden Gate Park; statues of Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt
offend racial sensitivities; name a President from Washington to Trump, and
someone will rage at their manifold evils.

You can argue that that's all for the best, as every leader of US government
has a lot of blood on their hands. But I find that troubling: you can
simultaneously recognize that people have a mixed legacy while also
celebrating their accomplishments. And there's a fair bit of hypocrisy in the
style of critique as well: many progressive heroes themselves have mixed
legacies, but for some reason I doubt many of the statue-topplers today would
applaud someone vandalizing statues of white supremacist Elizabeth Cady
Stanton (though who knows; today's hero is tomorrow's unperson), to say
nothing of other more polarizing cases like Angela Davis.

Perhaps relinquishing the use of history to build a sense of an American
nation is the only way to go. But I guarantee that giving up our imagined
community of "America" will be deadly to progressive goals and racial harmony.

~~~
jacobush
I don’t understand what you are advocating.

~~~
scarmig
Not advocating anything here. Just pointing out that every nation has heroic
myths that the government nurtures, and those national myths make many (good!)
things possible that wouldn't otherwise be.

~~~
082349872349872
Do national myths need to be heroic? When we started virus measures (lasting
two months), the government didn't invoke William Tell, instead leaning on the
spirit of "Unus pro omnibus, omnes pro uno."

Two american songs that resonate most with my head-canon of the "American
Dream" are:

"Coat of Many Colors"
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYAdKXzGtcY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYAdKXzGtcY)

"This Land"
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRnHx3yVuf4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRnHx3yVuf4)

neither of which are particularly statue-wise heroic. But it's been a long
time since I've been in the States. What are some current national mythos
songs there?

~~~
antepodius
I don't think you'll get an answer that. Everyone in the US who's
sophisticated knows it's a mark of said sophistication to show aloof disdain
towards 'the US'.

~~~
tclancy
That is a ridiculous take. It is also possible people with education can see
the flaws in the US myth too. I love a lot about this country but we have all
manner of fractures and do a poor job trying to impose a single vision on to
lots of different experiences.

~~~
antepodius
They see the flaws in the myth, and thus move to deconstruct the myth. As they
go, people become less connected, have less in common, as the shattering of
the dream spreads down from the academies through social leylines, leaving
behind atomisation as it goes.

You could describe the same process as 'late-stage capitalism'. Cynical
detachment not unlike the death of god. The problem is, the flawed lie was at
the base of what people had in common, and quickly-constructed replacements
don't have staying memetic power.

~~~
082349872349872
As to quickly-constructed, I'd thought my suggestions too old and too outdated
("Coat of..." being 50 years old, and "This Land" nearly 75).

I'd look for older national myth songs, but I'd rather hear from someone who
is committed to, not merely interested in, the future of the US.

Anyone? Bueller?

