Fitzhugh and Hammond. Wrong.

While comparing the views presented by George Fitzhugh and <<<< Mr. Fitzhugh actually believed that slavery was preferable to the life left in Africa, where he imagined cannibalism rampant and life threatening, but made no allowances for life threatening conditions the holds of slave ships. He viewed the African forced immigration as good for these people who were child like, of limited intellect and needing protection or supervision to stop their inferior thinking from doing themselves in, or from starving as they were not self sufficient enough to provide for themselves. The only acknowledgement which borders on accuracy was that the slavery system was necessary to maintain the progress (wealth) of white society. More frightening that he actually espoused these thoughts in two books, which were circulated to spread this poison thought throughout society.

Fitzhugh writes (as noted at http://webct.dvc.edu/SCRIPT/HIST120_5594_SP08/scripts/student/serve_page.pl?1151027847+content/html_pages/readings120_onlinea.htm+OFF+content/html_pages/readings120_onlinea.htm) : The negro slaves of the South are the happiest, and, in some sense, the freest people in the world. The children and the aged and infirm work not at all, and yet have all the comforts and necessaries of life provided for them. They enjoy liberty, because they are oppressed neither by care nor labor. The women do little hard work, and are protected from the despotism of their husbands by their masters. The negro men and stout boys work, on the average, in good weather, not more than nine hours a day. The balance of their time is spent in perfect abandon.

Hammond agrees with Fitzhugh, In a speech to the Senate in 1858, he states: the status in which we have placed them is an elevation. They are elevated from the condition in which God first created them, by being made our slaves. None of that race on the whole face of the globe can be compared with the slaves of the South. They are happy, content, unaspiring, and utterly incapable, from intellectual weakness, ever to give us any trouble by their aspirations.

And in some respects, not every slave experience was as bad as the worst. The experiences of slaves varies greatly. A primary source on slavery, The WPA Slave Narrative, (http://webct.dvc.edu/SCRIPT/HIST120_5594_SP08/scripts/student/serve_page.pl?1151027847+content/html_pages/readings120_onlinea.htm+OFF+content/html_pages/readings120_onlinea.htm)

several hundred first hand accounts of those who had experienced slavery first hand list remarkable variances in the existence of slaves. In its introduction, this phenomena is detailed:

In addition to the substantial number of life histories it contains, the most compelling feature of the collection is the composition of the sample of people who made up its informants. Although not a representative sample of the slave population, they were a remarkably diverse and inclusive cross-section of former slaves. Those whose voices are included in the collection ranged in age from one to fifty at the time of emancipation in 1865, which meant that more than two-thirds were over eighty when they were interviewed. Almost all had experienced slavery within the states of the Confederacy and still lived there. They represented all the major slave occupations. Moreover, the size of the slave units on which respondents reported living varied considerably, from plantations with over a thousand slaves to situations in which the informant was his or her owner's only slave. The treatment these individuals reported ran the gamut from the most harsh, impersonal, and exploitative to work and living conditions and environments that were intimate and benevolent.

From the slaves’ own accounts, there were intimate and benevolent relationships to be found between slaves and their owners. Many slaves were taught to read, many treated as family members, and even some provided with remuneration and eventual freedom. Not every account was full of cruelty deprivation and fearful intimidation with commensurate beatings. These remarks seem to agree with some of the base thinking of Fitzhugh and Hammond.

However, what they cannot be forgiven for is the limited scope of their beliefs. Although able to condemn barbarism in Africa, they were unable to recognize the American version. The life aboard the slave ships, the numbers which perished on the voyage, the arrivals of the sick and weak slaves as though on death’s door. It is not as though this information could have completely escaped them. And if they were aware of some benevolent arrangements for some slaves’ experience, they would also have to be aware of the beatings, mistreatment; sexual assault and complete disregard for the family units of the Africans brought into slavery. They both paid short shrift to these details.

How is it that both of these men were unable to think along the lines of James Otis, who wrote: Can any logical inference in favor of slavery, be drawn from a flat nose, a long or short face? … It is a clear truth that those who every day barter away other mens liberty will soon care very little for their own.

(Ironically today, we find ourselves in a war where those very words should resonate powerfully. In the name of the War on Terror, we have given up our civil rights without a peep, under the guise of the Patriot Act. The right not to be wire tapped, the right not to be lied to or supplanted with false intelligence which leads us to war, the subjection of air travelers to racial profiling for unreasonable search. We have bartered the liberty of Iraqi civilians, and in the name of saving our own liberty, have lost a large part of it instead. )

Also, the alternative to a life in slavery for many Africans may not have been appealing. Writes in …… that life for those whose slave days were behind them found many longing for at least part of their previous lives. To consider, from a passage in LIFE AMONG THE CONTRABANDS.

A letter to MR. Garrison from Harriet Jacobs, “Life Among the Contrabands.” The Liberator, September 5, 1862

Jacobs describes her relief work among the fugitives from slavery who had fled to Washington, D.C. "

Next morning, I went to Duff Green's Row, Government head-quarters for the contrabands here. I found men, women and children all huddled together, without any distinction or regard to age or sex. Some of them were in the most pitiable condition. Many were sick with measles, diptheria, scarlet and typhoid fever. Some had a few filthy rags to lie on; others had nothing but the bare floor for a couch. There seemed to be no established rules among them; they were coming in at all hours, often through the night, in large numbers, and the Superintendent had enough to occupy his time in taking the names of those who came in, and of those who were sent out. His office was thronged through the day by persons who came to hire these poor creatures, who they say will not work and take care of themselves. Single women hire at four dollars a month; a woman with one child, two and a half or three dollars a month. Men's wages are ten dollars per month. Many of them, accustomed as they have been to field labor, and to living almost entirely out of doors, suffer much from the confinement in this crowded building. The little children pine like prison birds for their native element. It is almost impossible to keep the building in a healthy condition. Each day brings its fresh additions of the hungry, naked and sick. In the early part of June, there were, some days, as many as ten deaths reported at this place in twenty-four hours. At this time, there was no matron in the house, and nothing at hand to administer to the comfort of the sick and dying. I felt that their sufferings must be unknown to the people. I did not meet kindly, sympathizing people, trying to soothe the last agonies of death. Those tearful eyes often looked up to me with the language, "Is this freedom?"

nother place, the old school-house in Alexandria, is the Government head-quarters for the women. This I thought the most wretched of all the places. Any one who can find an apology for slavery should visit this place, and learn its curse. Here you see them from infancy up to a hundred years old. What but the love of freedom could bring these old people hither? One old man, who told me he was a hundred, said he had come to be free with his children. The journey proved too much for him. Each visit, I found him sitting in the same spot, under a shady tree, suffering from rheumatism. Unpacking a barrel, I found a large coat, which I thought would be so nice for the old man, that I carried it to him. I found him sitting in the same spot, with his head on his bosom. I stooped down to speak to him. Raising his head, I found him dying. I called his wife. The old woman, who seems in her second childhood, looked on as quietly as though we were placing him for a night's rest. In this house are scores of women and children, with nothing to do, and nothing to do with. Their husbands are at work for the Government. Here they have food and shelter, but they cannot get work.

Fitzhugh and Hammond may have had a few threads which were accurate. Life could be pretty horrific outside the boundaries of slavery as well. What they did not think through was how united the choice would have been, could it have been made to every indentured worker, to let them fare for themselves altogether. The change would need to be gradual, to build in protection and phase out legally ignored cruelty. However, the decision still should have been arrived at in a much more expedient fashion.

Bacon's Lamentable Times

Bacon’s Lamentable Times

An excellent example of early American protest occurred in Virginia in 1675, when Nathaniel Bacon rose against the Governor William Berkeley, and led virtually his own army (self-titled “Baconians”) in deliberate raids to purge the Virginia territory of local native Americans. His efforts culminated in a march to rid Virginia of its ineffectual governor. Unfortunately, he would die prior to Berkeley being removed from office, as a result of his rebellion. Fiercely determined to exterminate these native groups of ‘savages’,(thereby ending attacks on colonists whose properties bordered the native villages), he led multiple raids attempting to rid Virginia of every last Indian, thereby increasing the amount of land available for white settlers, especially those without financial resource. Surprisingly, primary sources abound for these events, which took place in 1675-1676.

Especially interesting is a letter, written by a female colonialist, Mrs. An Cotton, from Q. Creek Virginia, describing the discord, fear and anti-Indian sentiment, the failure of the Governor to acknowledge these emotions, and chronicling the circumstances leading up to Bacon’s actions. Her letter was sent to Mr. C. H. at Yardly in Northamptonshire. The text was published from the original manuscript, in the Richmond VA Enquirer of 12 September 1804, and can be found online at the Virtual Jamestown Project, listed in the section titled First Hand Accounts of Virginia, 1575-1705. This source states her letter was written in 1686. The Virtual Jamestown project describes itself as “a digital research, teaching and learning project that explores the legacies of the Jamestown settlement and ‘the Virginia experiment.’ As a work in progress, Virtual Jamestown aims to shape the national dialogue on the occasion of the four hundred-year anniversary observance in 2007 of the founding of the Jamestown colony. “

Mrs. Cotton’s letter provides a comprehensive narrative, with excellent background detail. Her description of events agrees with other primary and secondary sources and includes the emotion of the period. Mrs. Cotton begins by informing Mr. C. H. of events leading up to Bacon’s Rebellion, and describing the temperament of Virginia at the time. Her narrative, as listed at The Jamestown Project, describes these events as follows:

Maryland and Virginia had acknowledged the Susquehana Indians as engaged enemies. A group of soldiers, led by ‘Colonel Washington’ held the Indian’s fort under siege as the Susquehanas were determined not to relinquish their land to the colonists. Six of the Susquehanas were sent with a message of peace to the soldiers surrounding their tribe. These six were beaten to death by Washington’s men, Ms. Cotton proceeds to note, in “an action of ill consequence… For the Indians having in the darke, slipt through the Legure, and in there passage knock'd 10 of the beseigers on the head, which they found fast a-sleep, leaving the rest … resolved to imploy there liberty in avenging there Commissionres blood, which they speedily effected in the death of sixty inosscent soules, and then send in there Remonstrance to the Governour, in justification of the fact, with this expostulation annext: Demanding what it was moved him to take up arms against them, his professed friends, in the behalfe of the Marylanders, there avowed enimyes… Complanes that there messingers sent out for peace were not only knock'd on the head but the fact countenanc'd by the governour; for which … they had revenged themselves, by killing ten for one of the English; such being the disperportion between there men murthered, and those by them slane…” Ms. Cotton’s reporting ensures understanding both that the retaliation of the Susquehana’s caused fatalities exponential in number to those inflicted upon them, and that the Governor shared responsibility for this event, as the Susquehanna’s were reaching out to him for an explanation of his allegiance with the ‘Marylanders’, their enemies, after he had signed a treaty with them, proclaiming them friends and partners in the fur trade. Virginians believed his reluctance to ‘deal with the savages’ stemmed from his treaty. The Governor had lost the support of many Virginians, as he was, per Mrs. Cotton, “…judged too remiss in applying meanes to stop the fewrye of the Heathen” native Americans, whose attacks on colonists were spreading fear and rage throughout Jamestown. Virginians thought the Governor spineless.

After establishing this foundation, Ms. Cotton notes, Nathaniel Bacon enters the scene. “Esqr. Bacon, newly come into the Countrey, …whom they (colonists) desired might be commissionated Generall, for the Indian war; Which Sr. William … accepts of a commission from the peoples affections, signed by the emergences of affaires … and so forthwith advanceth with a small party … against the Indians; on whom, it is saide he did signall execution.” Both the online sites for The American Colonist’s Library, and the Virginia Center for Digital History provide an accounting from the year 1704, by Robert Beverly, noted as ‘one of Virginia’s earliest historians, titled “Robert Beverly On Bacon’s Rebellion, 1704”. Beverly corroborates Cotton’s assertion that as a leader, Bacon was the people’s choice: “He was young, bold, active…of powerful elocution. …He was every way qualified to head a giddy and unthinking multitude. Before he had been 3 years in the country, he was, for his extraordinary qualifications, made one of the council, and in great honor and esteem.”

The Governor had not authorized Bacon’s Commission to advance on the neighboring natives, and proceed with this colonial version of ethnic cleansing. Cotton reports Governor Berkeley’s anger at Bacon’s initiative: “In his (Bacon’s) absence he (Bacon) and those with him, were declared Rebells to the State, May 29…” and Berkeley led his own soldiers “raised to reduce him to his obedience … advanceth some 30 or 40 miles to find Bakon. … but not knowing which way he was gon, he (Berkeley) dismisseth his army, retireing himself and councell, to James Towne, …”

Cotton describes Bacon’s returning to Jamestown, to report his progress against the Indians, when he was instead imprisoned with many of his men. Bacon was sent to trial, and forced to apologize for his initiative and insubordination to the Governor. Bacon, was again falsely promised that a Commision to fight the Indians would be shortly forthcoming and was readmitted as a member of Jamestown’s leadership council. Upon discovering no Commission would be offered “ he smothers his resentments, and …returnes to Towne at the head of 4 or 5 hundred men, well Arm'd: … reassumes his demands for a commission. Which, after som howers struggling with the Governour, being obtained, …he takes order for the countreyes security, against the attemps of sculking Indians; fills up his numbers and provissiones, …and so once more advanceth against the Indians, ….” Beverly again corroborates Cotton: “Upon his return…(the Governor chose) to admit him again of the council; after which he (Blakely) hoped all things might be pacified…. Bacon still insisted upon a commission … to go out against the Indians. “

Bacon was now know as ‘General Bacon’ by Virginians, who felt he, not Berkeley, would protect their interests. Shortly after leaving again to fight, (without Commission by the Governor) he received word that the Governor would attempt to imprison him upon his return. By Cotton’s account, he was “wery and spent from his Indian servis. This strange newes put him, and those with him, shrodly to there Trumps, beleiveing that a few such Deales or shufles (call them what you will) might quickly ring both cards and game out of his hands.”

The Governor’s setting his sights on Bacon, as an enemy of the territory, instead of supporting his raids on the murderous Indians, to end their attacks upon the colonists, enraged Bacon. How could the Governor not see that it was necessary to destroy them (Virginia’s Indians) and why was he wasting his time focusing on Bacon? According to Cotton, Bacon described the native American’s as wild animals, attacking defenseless colonists this way: “…that while he (Bacon) was a hunting Wolves, tigers and bears, which daly destroyd our harmless and innosscent Lambs, that hee (Bacon), and those with him, should be persewed in the reare with a full cry, as more savage beasts. …” Marshall verifies Cotton here, attributing to Bacon: "for to think that while I am hunting Indian wolves, tigers, and foxes which daily destroy our harmless sheep and lambs, that I, and those with me, should be pursued with a full cry, as a more savage and no less ravenous beast." Bacon would turn his focus on the Governor and brought his “Baconians”, five to six hundred strong, along with him. Cotton reports: “ after a short consult with his officers, he countermarcheth his Army (about 500 in all) downe to the midle Plantation… “ in order to oust the Governor. “Governour …sends out some 6 or 7 hundred of his soulders, to beate Bacon out of his Trench: But it seems that those works,…could not now be storm'd …” Beverly agrees with Cotton on the events and (roughly) even agrees with the soldiers’ number: Notwithstanding… Bacon still insisted upon a commission…against the Indians; from which the governor endeavored to dissuade him… He had the luck to be countenanced in his importunities, by the news of fresh murder and robberies committed by the Indians. … he stole privately out of town; and having put himself at the head of six hundred volunteers, marched directly to Jamestown. A second verification of Cotton’s accouting and numbers is found in H.E. Marshall’s History textbook, "This country of ours; the story of the United States, Part II, Chapter 20." by Henrietta Elizabeth Marshall (1876-). From Chapter 20: “Bacon had grown tired of waiting for the commission which never came. … he marched back again at the head of six hundred men. … Bacon answered (the Governor) peaceably enough. "No, may it please your honour," he said, "…We are come for a commission to save our lives from the Indians which you have so often promised."

A near riot followed. Bacon and followers emptied the Council and set fire to parts of Jamestown in the process. Berkeley fled Jamestown for Accomack after proclaiming Bacon a rebel. Cotton: “With in too or three days after this disaster, the Governour reships himself, soulders,…to Accomack; leaving Bacon to enter the place at his pleasure, which he did the next morning before day, and the night following burns it downe to the ground …” The date was July 29^th. Marshall again verifies: “as soon as Bacon was safely away, and at grips once more with the Indians, the Governor again proclaimed him and his followers to be rebels and traitors.”

Bacon again requested the involvement of Virginians, and the Council, wanting a concensus on the elimination of the Indians and in opposition to Berkeley’s leadership. Bacon drafted a letter to the King of England, read to the citizens prior to being sent, pointing out Virginian’s differences with their Governor in his approach to taxation, solutions to the native American threat to Virginia’s society, and the institution of policies which caused abuse of trade and violations of justice, and Bacon includes the complicity of Berkeley’s councilmen. The letter’s contents were summarized and detailed by Cotton, with comment “And so concludes with an Appeale to the King and Parliament, where he doubts not but that his and the Peoples cause will be impartially heard.”

This letter, whose details agree with Cotton’s description, is available in its entirety, signed by ‘Nathaniel Bacon, General by Consent of the People’ on Virtual Jamestown, "The Declaration of the People, against Sr: Wm: Berkeley, and Present Governors of Virginia," 1676. “This document is Nathaniel Bacon's summary of the grievances of the people of Virginia against Sir William Berkeley, governor of the colony, and his advisors. The declaration includes a list of each of the grievances and of Berkeley's "wicked and Pernicious Councellours and Confederates, Aiders and Assistants against the Commonality."

Cotton’s story continues: once this letter was on its way to the King of England, Bacon again set off in his quest to annihilate the Indians, in the company of approximately 900 ‘Baconians.’ Berkeley, learning of Bacon’s departure, returned to Jamestown, as Cotton states, “from Accomack, with about 1000 soulders ..” entreating the colonists by sending “a summons…with a pardon to all that would decline Bacons and entertaine his cause. ...” Cotton’s version of Bacon’s story is ending: “Bacon being informed, he stops his proceedings that way, and begins to provide for another expedition against the Indians,…which while he was a contriveing, Death summons him … he surrenders his life…’ And Bacon’s Rebellion lost it’s core; the movement would fall apart shortly after his death.

However, Cotton’s narrative continues. She describes the Governor’s vengeance against Bacon’s men. Great numbers were hanged although justice prevailed in the end: the Governor was stripped of his office by the King, and summoned to England, where he died in shame months later. Marshall corroborates the accounts with this summary: “It seemed as if the Governor's vengeance would never be satisfied. But at length the House met, and petitioned him to spill no more blood. "For," said one of the members, "had we let him alone he would have hanged half the country." News of his wild doings, too, were carried home, and reached even the King's ears. ‘The old fool,’ cried he, ‘has hanged more men in that naked country than I did for the murder of my father.’ So Berkeley was recalled. At his going the whole colony rejoiced. Guns were fired and bonfires lit to celebrate the passing of the tyrant. Berkeley did not live long after his downfall. …The King refused to see him, and he who had given up everything, even good name and fame, in his King's cause died broken-hearted, a few months later.”

After reviewing Cotton’s account, we can conclude she missed her calling as an historian. Her letter was well written, cohesive and inclusive of great detail and background. She captured both the events and the emotions of the time, and must have been well invested in life outside the normal milieu for colonial women: home and hearth and children. We may infer that she was intimately involved in current events, was included in discussions with husband, neighbors and fellow citizens, and was rather well educated

It appears that the account was written some 10 years “after the fact” and one must raise the question of the accuracy of some statements, especially in light of her own statement, first sentence of the letter: “...I have, by his permition, adventured to send you this briefe account, of those affaires, so far as I have bin informed.” The statement “ I have bin informed” indicates second-hand knowledge, although the bulk of information read in secondary sources seems to corroborate her statements. A few minor discrepancies were noted in the documentation, however, these did not affect the overall accounting.

Mrs. Cotton’s letter, written over 300 years ago, paints a vivid picture of the social mores of the pre-revolution era, and defines the social classes as defined by financial markers, as well as provides insight to the lives of slave and freeman, European adventurer and Native Americans, many of which extended into the mid 19^th century, and, some misconceptions still present today.

Work Cited

Bacon, Nathaniell. "The Declaration of the People, against Sr: Wm: Berkeley, and Present Governors of Virginia." 1676. Grady, Paul. 2000. Virginia Center for Digital History. Charlottesville, Virginia. http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin/jamestown-browse?id=J1035

Beverly, Robert. “On Bacon’s Rebellion, 1704.” June 2001. http://www.etsu.edu/cas/history/docs/bevbacon.htm

Cotton, An. “To Mr. C.H. at Yardly in Northhamptonshire”. 1686. Published from original manuscript in The Richmond Enquirer. September 12,1804. Komksi, Beth. 2000. Virginia Center for Digital History. Charlottesville, Virginia. http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin/jamestown-browse?id=J1058

Marshall, Henrietta Elizabeth. “Chapter 20: Bacon’s Rebellion.” This Country of Ours; the story of the United States. New York. George H. Doran Company. 1917. http://digital.library.upenn.edu/women/marshall/country/country-II-20.html

Module Three Blog Post

"The treatment of heroes (Columbus) and their victims (the Arawaks) - the quiet acceptance of
conquest and murder in the name of progress- is only one aspect of a certain approach to history, in which the past is told from the point of view of governments, conquerors, diplomats, leaders. It is as if they, like Columbus, deserve universal acceptance, as it they-the Founding Fathers,
Jackson, Lincoln, Wilson, Roosevelt, Kennedy, the leading members of Congress, the famous
Justices of the Supreme Court- represent the nation as a whole. The pretense is that there really is such a thing as 'the United States,' subject to occasional conflicts and quarrels, but
fundamentally a community of people with common interests. It is as if there really is a 'national
interest' represented in the Constitution, in territorial expansion, in the laws passed by Congress,
the decisions of the courts, the development of capitalism, the culture of education and the mass
media. " APHOTUS..p.10

Perhaps twelve years of Catholic school, initially, made me more likely to accept what I was taught than my public school counterparts. After all, 'faith' and 'belief in the teachings' were terms that I ran into on a daily basis. My private school used the standard history texts, depicting a brave Columbus and those savage, scalping, cut-throat Indians. So, I was a bit confused when one September night, the newscast, broadcasting during my dinner, detailed the story of a group of angry citizens protesting the upcoming Columbus Day parade, attempting to have it cancelled. Why would anyone want to end the parade for this brave explorer, I wondered. My father explained that, in truth, while the Indians had been peaceful and friendly in their initial encounters with explorers, it was Columbus and his explorers who approached the Native Americans with violence. Hoping the explorers would become intimidated when violence was met with violence, the Indians' response took on the savage character so widely depicted in books and media. This may have been the first time I became conscious of the advice not to believe everything I happened to read. However, it bothered me immensely, even at that young age, that my history book was not giving me the complete story.
My high school US History course was much more forthcoming. I still read the texts with one
eyebrow raised. The Columbus experience had had a permanent affect on my skepticism level.
But it also created in me the need to look at a scenario from more than one angle. My high school
professor, with quite a bit of interjection from my father, added several more perspectives to my
elementary knowledge of the subject. Questioning historic depictions developed quite a list of
topics. Did Lincoln free the slaves because he personally believed slavery was wrong or simply to end and win the Civil War? When the Germans sank the Luisitania, a passenger liner, did the US
government admit its hold was loaded with ammunition for the Allies? Did FDR have warning of
the attack on Pearl Harbor, but instead sacrificed a fleet to bring about American commitment to
entering WWII? Who was behind the assassination of JFK? In addition to being skeptical regarding the veracity of what I read, I now also had learned to be skeptical of what my government was telling me.
The first chapter of A People's History of the US excited me to find an author who wanted more examination of detail and provided in differing perspectives than by most previous historians. "Still, understanding the complexities, this book will be skeptical of governments and their attempt, through politics and culture, to ensnare ordinary people in a giant web of nationhood pretending to a common interest." APHOTUS.p. 11 Historically, Chapter One of A People's History of the United States, acquaints us with many facts
not universally recognized when the average US citizen reflects on this period in our history. The
original North American inhabitants were a match to European society in many aspects of culture,and in some ways, were superior. These peoples did not need law enforcers or prisons. The societies cared for each other and shared willingly skills and tools, food and possessions. The size of the Native American population (estimated at 75 million) which was decimated by the settlers and explorers. Causes range from exposure to new diseases to violent attacks and mistreatment at the hands of the European invaders. A significant cause of Native American population decline was simply the breaking of their spirit in response to the inhumanities to which they were subjected. How does a society endure when conditions seem dire enough to warrant the drowning of your children in an effort to spare them?
Currently, the author's approach could not come at a better time. College students, about to
assume the responsibility of functional citizenship (entering the workforce, helping to shape the
economy and US Capitalism, voting for the first time in a presidential election whose outcome may change the direction of our country) need to be aware of multiple perspectives and also need to develop the ability to recognize when perspectives are being omitted. "My viewpoint, in telling the history of the United States, is different: that we must not accept the memory of states as our own. Nations are not communities and never have been. The history of any country, presented as the history of a family, conceals fierce conflicts of interest (sometimes exploding, most often repressed) between conquerors and conquered, masters and slaves, capitalists and workers, dominators and dominated in race and sex." APHOTUS p. 11 Much unrest exists today regarding the documentation of our current national history. Example after example shows our government continues to mislead us, or omit important details, in this Age of Information. Questions abound regarding the 'intelligence information' the current administration used to enter into war with Iraq. (Weapons of Mass Destruction, anyone?) Were these errors simply mistakes, or an invention of a war-determined administration? Did this administration 'out' a CIA agent and pardon those complicit to save themselves? How many Iraqi civilians have truly died in this war? Why don't US and European newspapers agree on these numbers (hundreds vs. hundreds of thousands)? Why is the media not allowed to photograph the flag draped caskets of soldiers killed in the "War on Terror", unlike previous wars? Whose perspective are we hearing and reading today? Are we living "the quiet acceptance of conquest and murder in the name of progress" or in the name of national security, terminology thrown into the dialog to scare and silence us. Had we not grown accustomed to being handed one interpretation of history, might we have found our outrage for Abu Ghraib? "Still understanding the complexities, this book will be skeptical of governments and their attempts, through politics and culture, to ensnare ordinary people in a giant web of nationhood pretending to a common interest. "..."But I do remember (in rough paraphrase) a statement I once read: "The cry of the poor is not always just, but if you don't listen to it, you will never know what justice is." ..."And in such a world of conflict, a world of victims and executioners, it is the job of thinking people, as Albert Camus suggested, not to be on the side of the executioners." APHOTUS..p 11 Zinn's text was first published in 1980 yet serves us as a wake-up call to us today. Let us hope we fully grasp his lessons on perspective and all he intends to teach us.

A little bit about me...

Hi. I thought I'd mention the reason that I'm taking history online. I have chronic migraine headache syndrome and figured it might be easier to have at least one class online this semester. The rain makes it worse, so I do better in the fall semester than the spring.

A giant yellow lab named Riley lets my family and I live in his house. Sometimes we even get to sit on his furniture and use his beds. If you leave the room for more than a minute with your sandwitch unguarded on the counter, you will come back to find the counter licked clean; the only remains of your food being a few crumbs on a chubby 6 year old fido's lips.

I'm and English major, hoping to end up writing and editing books. In my freetime I enjoy spending time with my friends and family, reading as many books as I can lay my hands on, and watching movies from just about any genre. My friends and family mean the world to me, there is nothing more important to me than they are.

I collect several things; anything Beauty and the Beast, interesting prints and paintings, a few Buddas, and books books books. Of all my collections my books are the most treasured.

About as liberal as they come, please don't be offended if my opinions ever seem overly strong. That is simply how I am. I have a tough time toning it down if I am truly passionate about a topic.

Hopefully this class will turn out well, I'm of to a bit of a rocky start with school, as it has been very rainy, and my headaches have been very severe and uncooperatve.

Anyway, that's me in a nutshell.