|
July 16, 2004
Some things I'm not fortunate enough to forget....
It's poetry review time, like it or not! (Which means that it's time to analyze drivel -- which I tend to hate....) An unfortunate truth about me is that I'm really not all that into poetry. But John Kerry came to Philadelphia yesterday and in a speech to the NAACP, singled out in a praiseworthy manner not one but two Stalin apologists. That offends my low standards. I might have been willing to overlook one. You know, nobody's perfect, and, of course, "mistakes were made." But two? That's too many! The two in question were W.E.B. DuBois and Langston Hughes. As to DuBois, his love of Stalin and Communism and his malevolent anti-Americanism are not open to serious dispute (see my previous post on the subject). Here's Kerry's reference to DuBois: W.E.B. Du Bois talked about the two Americas years ago. He called it "a nation within a nation." John Edwards and I have talked about that divide for many years now.What "nation within a nation" was DuBois talking about? Here's PBS: Du Bois moved increasingly to the left in his political thinking, embracing a Marxist analysis of black labor in the United States and eventually advocating a "nation within a nation" form of black economic separatism or cooperation during the Great Depression. In 1944, in his mid-seventies, Du Bois declared that he would spend "the remaining years of [his] active life" in the fight against imperialism.I'm not at all sure that Kerry understands what the "nation within a nation" meant. DuBois wanted to create one, and Kerry thinks he referred to an existing one. Here's more: In contrast to Garvey, Du Bois believes in the existence of “a dual identity or ‘double consciousness’ that is both African and American, and, consequently rejects black nationalism proper.” Du Bois makes no suggestion that Black Americans should “return” to Africa, but that they actually have more right to call themselves American since they did the bulk of the work to build America. However, his nationalist ideas are similar to Garvey’s in relation to his beliefs of “origins” and the historical basis of modern Black identity. When he discusses beginnings “he makes a number of claims about the superiority of Africa,” and like Garvey “he professes that more so than other groups, Africans advanced ‘from animal savagery toward primitive civilization.’” Du Bois sees African Americans as a “protonation” not yet realized, a “nation within a nation,” and “privileges an African Gemeinschaft (an organic community based on kinship) over the European Gesellschaft (a rationalized, mechanistic community).”DuBois is considered by many to be the father of multiculturalism, and hence his "nation within a nation" idea must be seen within that context: Du Bois (1933) conceptualization of Pan Africanism was based on anti-racist, anti-colonial, anti-imperialism and for "the industrial and spiritual emancipation of Negro people (p. 247)." As Gbadegesin notes (1996), Pan Africanist movement took its roots from "the social heritage of insult in slavery and colonial exploitation (p. 233)." Du Bois organized five Pan-African conferences, in 1911, 1921, 1923, 1927 and in 1945 to emphasize the collective work of Africans, African Americans and the colonized people of the world. In order to combat colonialism, Du Bois urged people of African descent to put aside language, cultural, religious differences to unite for a common struggle. Within the context of Pan Africanism, Du Bois collaborated with Ghanaian leader Nkrumah in attempts to organize collective struggles of Africans and African Americans. As noted by Moses (1994), Du Bois’s political views were deeply grounded within Afrocentric thoughts, particular within African music, history, spirituality, etc. Du Bois viewed African communalism and collective nature of family useful within the African American context. For Du Bois, knowledge from the continent of Africa was important for Black resistance in the United States, which he called a "nation within a nation."So perhaps, in fairness to Kerry, the reason he and Edwards have "talked about that divide for many years now" is, as Kerry claims, to "end the division between the fortunate America and the forgotten America" and "come together to build one America." If so, it will mark a new moment in Democratic Party politics, as multiculturalism is based not on ending divisions but creating them. Again, I'd be a little more willing to trust Kerry if it weren't for the fact that he goes on to quote a second Stalin apologist, the poet Langston Hughes: The great poet Langston Hughes put it this way:Stirring words of praise. "Let America be America again" sounds like a hell of a campaign slogan too! (It is, of course, Kerry's campaign theme.) But what does it mean? Here are some lines Kerry omitted: Who said the free? Not me? Aside from the Marxist sentiments, it's inherent in the poem that the word "again" is used mockingly -- for Hughes makes clear that America never was the way he wants to remake it; the reason for the word "again" is to give lie to the despicable and hypocritical American Dream (which fellow Stalin-lovers know to be a cruel myth). Timothy Noah recently reminded the Kerry forces not only of the underlying Stalinist sentiments, but of the lie inherent in Langston Hughes' chorus of "Let America be America again." It's not nostalgia, as the poet makes abundantly clear by stating over and over again that it "never was." Rather, the poem's goal is to remake America into something it never was: a Stalinist workers' paradise: Anyone who takes the time to read "Let America Be America Again" will quickly understand that its entire thrust is that nostalgia for a golden age of American freedom is a crock. In the poem, idealized paeans to "the dream [America] used to be" alternate with parenthetical responses exposing the harsher reality ("America never was America to me"). Who is this angry dissenter? Hughes answers in a voice that echoes Walt Whitman's:Is that what Kerry wants? I'm sure he'd deny it, but when he goes out of his way to laud two Stalin apologists, and makes a poem by one of them the center theme of his campaign, I find it unsettling.I am the poor white, fooled and pushed apart,and so on. Rather than pretend America ever was the land of the free (remember, this was written by a black man in the Jim Crow era), Hughes urges his heterogeneous countrymen to fulfill for the first time America's promise of freedom: I don't want to live in a workers' paradise where the state owns the means of production. This country is too close to that already. The fortunate versus the forgotten? I don't know how to analyze such phraseology; like much of what Kerry says it defies rational analysis. How, for example, does one determine whether one is "fortunate" or "forgotten"? Are these two words opposites? It strikes me as a waste of time to get into a lengthy discussion over whether one can be forgotten as well as fortunate. (Some are very fortunate to be forgotten, while others are very unfortunate to be remembered....) But I will say this: Communism was unfortunate, and it should not be forgotten. Why praise those who supported it? UPDATE: Might the key to successful interpretation (of the Hughes poem and campaign theme) lie somewhere in Kerry's heart? "The question, setting aside the campaign, is: Where is John Kerry's heart?" said Kagan, who has advocated a muscular U.S. approach to world affairs. "My sense is his heart is in the anti-Vietnam, '70s-'80s left." (Via Glenn Reynolds.)Again? UPDATE (in reverse order): If you want more 70's nostalgia, you won't be disappointed. Just keep scrolling to the last post. Justin wrote it, and I think it's a real gem. posted by Eric on 07.16.04 at 08:51 AM
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/1188 Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Some things I'm not fortunate enough to forget....:
» The MSM and the DPRK from Kobayashi Maru
Philosophical sympathy between the MSM and Kim Jong-il seems to be fresher and more blatant than I'd imagined. John Hinderaker over at Powerline has done a superbly thorough fisking of Barbara Demick's outrageous LA Times article that I won't even at... [Read More] Tracked on March 4, 2005 09:51 AM |
|
December 2006
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
December 2006
November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Laughing at the failure of discourse?
Holiday Blogging The right to be irrational? I'm cool with the passion fashion Climate change meltdown at the polls? If you're wrong, then so is God? Have a nice day, asshole! Scarlet "R"? Consuming power while empowering consumption Shrinking is growth!
Links
Site Credits
|
|
"Communism was unfortunate, and it should not be forgotten."
You said it all.
Would a Rightist politician have gotten a pass if he had quoted Ezra Pound? Hmmm....
One Negro who is forgotten today is Manning Johnson, who broke with Communism and joined the John Birch Society. He wrote a book "Color, Communism, and Common Sense", "...the story of one Negro who went through the fire and came out tempered steel...."
He was a deep Christian, a friend of the Rev. Dr. Billy James Hargis, and his favorite hymn was "The Old Rugged Cross".
He testified before the House Un-American Activities Committee on Communist infiltration in the churches:
"It is an axiom in Communist organization strategy that if an infiltrated body has 1% Communist Party members and 9% Communist Party sympathizers, with well-rehearsed plans of action, they can effectively control the remaining 90% who think and act on an individual basis. In the large sections of the religious field, due to the ideological poison which has been filtered in by Communists and pro-Communists through seminaries, the backlog of sympathizers and mental prisoners of socialistic ideology is greater than the 10 percent necessary for effective control."
How true that is. And, once again -- the _style_! I keep thinking of how so many of the crackpot warnings of the Birchite Far Right of the 1950s, 1960s, and early 1970s have turned out to be so palpably true today. The National Council of Churches, the U.N., "sensitivity training" -- all are today instruments of One-Worldism and Political Correctness, a.k.a., neo-Communism.
I am proudly one who thinks and acts on an individual basis rather than a mental prisoner of socialistic ideology.