American Social History

THE WOUNDED GENERATION: COMING HOME AFTER WORLD WAR II by David Nasaw

szfreiberger American Social History, World War II Leave a comment
wwii veterans in uniform

(GIs returning after WWII)

During his presidential campaigns Donald Trump has described American veterans as “suckers and losers.”  He “strongly” wonders why veterans went off to fight when it was clear there was nothing in it for them.  President Trump’s attitude toward men like John McCain and millions of others is both despicable and ungrateful.  These men and women are heroes who defended our country and in most cases selflessly.  Those who have survived war zones returned home with numerous ailments from the physical to the psychological.  Today, the mental issues have been labeled post-traumatic stress syndrome (PTSD) with veterans suffering from recurring nightmares and flashbacks, uncontrollable rages, social isolation, fears of places and events that evoked memories of the war, resulting in behaviors that they did not have before they shipped out.  The label has been mostly applied to Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan war veterans, but symptoms were clearly evident for those who fought in and survived World War I and II.

In his latest book, award winning author David Nasaw, who has written such excellent works including; THE LAST MILLION which traces the plight of displaced persons after World War II, THE PATRIARCH a biography of Joseph P. Kennedy, THE CHIEF a biography of William Randolph Hearst, and ANDREW CARNEGIE, has just released a marvelous monograph entitled, THE WOUNDED GENERATION: COMING HOME AFTER WORLD WAR II.  Nasaw’s focus in the book is not on the heroism of World War II veterans, but how they adapted to civilian life upon their return from the war, how their wartime experiences impacted familial and other personal relations, and how the country they returned to treated them.  Nasaw’s most salient points revolve around the idea that these men and women were not the same people emotionally and physically as they were before the war, and the country which they returned to was quite different than the one they returned to.  How they adjusted to their issues and their surroundings are the key to the narrative.

(American Sgt. George Black addressing the crowd of homesick GI’s as they staged a demonstration outside the US Embassy in the French capital in January, 1946. They protested the slowdown in their redeployment from Europe to the US)

As the author writes in his introduction, “if we are to understand the pain and hardship veterans brought home with them we must acknowledge their experiences in the war and of war, their wounds, injuries, and illnesses, their realization that they were expendable, that chance alone would determine whether they lived or dies or returned home body and soul intact,”  therefore we must begin, not with their home coming but their actual experiences in the war.

Nasaw spends almost half the book discussing what soldiers experienced in combat, and at the same time how carefully the government informed the public of their plight with an eye on the issues they perceived would emerge once they were discharged.  From the outset Nasaw focuses on the issue of “neuropsychiatric disorders” as the term PTSD was not known.  It is clear that about 40% or about one million soldiers who were discharged or disabled during the first two years of the war fell into the category of “neuropsychiatric disorders.”  The problem for military authorities was that the army and naval medical corps were totally unprepared to deal with psychiatric disorders.  They were trained to deal with physical injuries, not mental, which were 33% of all injuries.  With the shortage of men, many of these individuals were returned to the front suffering from symptoms of anxiety and depression.  In treating these men, medical professionals were unsure if victims would ever recover.

Medics tend to wounded man.

As the narrative progresses the author makes many salient points, some obvious and others based on deeper analysis.  The American public was fully aware of what their sons and daughters were experiencing despite military censorship.  With an abundance of newspapers, magazines, books, and diaries the public was exposed to information on a delayed basis.  However, radio reports made the experience more immediate.  The government was in a bind, if it reported too many victories, particularly after the Battle of Midway authorities feared people would become complacent and the war might be close to an end.  The government knowingly believed that in “total war” the fighting could drag on for years, particularly against Japan and wanted the public to be educated to that belief.  By 1943, authorities in Washington wanted a more accurate representation of the fighting to be used as a tool against complacency in a war that had distinct racial elements to it. 

John Dower’s book, WAR WITHOUT MERCY: RACE AND POWER IN THE PACIFIC WAR develops this racial thesis, especially in Asia as the reason for the horrible conditions that soldiers faced when dealing with the enemy.  As Nasaw correctly points out, “American boys and men, once peaceful and non-violent souls, had to become merciless, pitiless killers in order to stay alive and defeat a merciless, pitiless enemy.”  The American media would caricature the “Japanese as vicious, conniving, beastly hordes of ‘monkeys’ and ‘rats,’ unstoppable, demonic torturers and killers,”  while Germans were said to be more law-abiding according to international convention ignoring the Holocaust.

American troops in a snow-filled trench during the Battle of the Bulge.

(American troops in a snow-filled trench during the Battle of the Bulge)

An interesting point that Nasaw describes deals with how soldiers spent their spare time.   We have all heard the saying “hurry up and wait” pertaining to the military and even in combat that was true.  Soldiers did not fight constantly, and outlets had to be provided for  men and women.  The creation of paperback books was boosted during the war as “pocketbooks” were created for soldiers to read as free reading material by the thousands was provided.  The most important ancillary product provided was cigarettes which was seen as a military tool that would calm nerves before and after battle, suppress hunger, and keep soldiers alert when they should have been sleeping.  During D-Day they helped to ward off sickness, reduce fear and shaking and sustain men.  They were given to soldiers at every opportunity – 63 tons worth of tobacco were delivered to the army, and tobacco farmers were deemed “essential workers during the war.  Soldiers were also seen as different if they did not smoke.  Cigarettes were provided with C rations and were available everywhere as they were a major resource for soldiers to trade.  Other activities that were employed to keep soldiers “sane” were alcohol and condoms.  As with nicotine addiction, drinking habits acquired during the war would carry over into peacetime.  Drinking served a similar purpose to smoking to calm soldiers and allow them to cope with the atrocities of combat.  In addition,  during the war over 50 million condoms were distributed by authorities who could not control the sexual drive of soldiers especially after they arrived in Italy in 1943.  Women were readily available as prostitutes as locals resorted to sex as a means to earn money, cigarettes to trade on the black market, and just to survive.

The racism that existed after the war, especially as Jim Crow was restored in the south, was a continuation of what went on in military theaters.  At first negro soldiers were given menial jobs – cleaning, cooking, waiting tables, and general labor.  Later as troop shortages continued experimentally, segregated units were created.  These units did quite well, i.e., the Tuskegee Airman, and a few combat units.  The fear on the part of southern senators was that if negroes got used to fair treatment and a better racial experience in the army it would carry over into civilian life and there would be certain expectations.  They wanted Jim Crow in the army, so negroes did not get any ideas once they were discharged.    The behavior of southern whites after the war reinforced Jim Crow as blocking voter registration, the return of brutal lynchings, and the refusal to hire negroes for other than menial jobs they had before the war, as opposed to employment which would allow them to use their military training and wartime experiences dominated race relations below the Mason-Dixon line.

(FDR signs the GI Bill)

Nasaw does an excellent job discussing problems that developed once the allies proved victorious.  The issue was demobilization.  With the end of the war in Europe soldiers wanted to be discharged, not sent to the Pacific as the Japanese were seen as fighting to the death and after Okinawa, Saipan and the rest of the island hopping strategy was implemented they knew fighting could be brutal.  European theater veterans were given 30 days leave and were then to be sent to the Pacific.  The dropping of the atomic bomb ended the war for good and domestic politics called for a rapid demobilization, however the United States needed troops for occupation duty.  Demobilization would be slow and about 1.5 million would be needed for occupation. 

The author spends the remaining 60% of the book on how the war affected American society once fighting ended.  Nasaw recounts the repatriation process and once again the racial issue arose as negroes were the last to be discharged.  By stressing the racial component to the post war period, the author relies on excellent source material, diaries, interviews of families, and other primary materials. 

Politicians in Washington did not want to deal with racial equality as the Democrats needed the support of southern senators to try and create a program which would reintegrate men and women back into civil society.  Memories of the Bonus Army of 1931 during the depression and the use of the military to crush it were still fresh in people’s minds.  The solution would evolve into the GI Bill whose rationale was not totally one of empathy but one to avoid unemployment, inflation , and retrofitting industry back to peacetime.  By providing educational funding  for tuition and books it would allow veterans to attend college and not enter the labor force which was undergoing a dramatic change as women began to lose their jobs as the men returned and wanted to reclaim their place in society.  Whatever the motivation was for the GI Bill the government implemented a “veteran’s welfare state” throughout the 1940s.

What is clear is that the federal government spent a great deal on white returning veterans.  Though Nasaw cannot settle on a figure as to how much the government spent; at times he states it is $17.3 billion, later it is $24 billion, and even later it is closer to $30 billion for the GI, bill the amount dwarfs what was spent on the Marshall Plan to rebuild Europe after the war.  Whatever the final figure was between 1945 and 1950 it was in the billions and went along way to implement the veterans’ welfare state of education, job training, medical care, and housing relief.  Many in Congress called for expanding this approach to all civilians, but that was not in the cards for decades, and even then it did not match what was spend on white veterans.

Nasaw is clear that the major issue was that veterans brought the war home with them – many were psychologically wounded and many carried diseases within their bodies.  Millions returned with undiagnosed untreated psychic wounds that would haunt them for years to come.  Men had to live with what they saw and experienced no matter how emotionally devastating it was.  For many, these experiences remained with them for the remainder of their lives.  Men came home with the characteristics of PTSD, though it was called “combat fatigue” or something similar.  When they returned they exhibited what psychiatrist, Robert Jay Lifton describes in his seminal work on survivors of the atomic bombings, DEATH AS IN LIFE as flashback, nightmares, violent tempers, survival guilt, psychic numbing,  all indicative of PTSD.  To make it even worse for women, children and the family unit, the military and society in general put the onus of helping their spouses recover on them.  They had to grant veterans the leeway to recover which the military stated would eventually occur over time.  Most veterans did not commit suicide and learned to live with nightmares and flashbacks they could not erase.  In addition to PTSD, many individuals suffered traumatic brain injuries (TBIs) from concussive explosions during the war from which they had not recovered.  All this made the recreation of the family unit as it was known before the war, impossible to recapture.

Pilot CommissionsTuskegee Airmen stand with an airplane and prepare to receive commissions and wings from Colonel Kimble, Commanding Officer of the Tuskegee Army Flying School, Tuskegee, Alabama, 1942. (Photo by Afro American Newspapers/Gado/Getty Images)

(Tuskegee Airmen)

Nasaw spends a great deal of time on the impact of the war on the family unit discussing the role of women who had lived independently during the war and now were faced with giving that up and allowing the husband to recapture his place as the breadwinner.  Many could not and the divorce rate would almost double.  The increase was also due to the fact that many men and women could not accept the infidelity of their spouses, women lonely at home, and men lonely overseas seeking comfort.

Nasaw seems to cover every aspect of how service in World War II impacted a myriad of issues following the fighting.  His coverage is comprehensive, but he also provides a wonderful touch illustrating his monograph with Bill Mauldin cartoons which were rather provocative for the time period.  Tom Brokaw has labeled those who were victorious in World War II as the “greatest generation.”  After reading Nasaw’s excellent book I would change that label to the “long suffering generation.”

(Doctors returning to the United States in the Mediterranean or Atlantic circa October 1945, The National WWII Museum)

RED SCARE: BLACKLISTS, McCARTHYISM, AND THE MAKING OF MODERN AMERICA by Clay Risen

szfreiberger American cultural history, American Political History, American Social History, Cold War Leave a comment
Joseph McCarthy
(U.S. Sen. Joseph McCarthy (center) during an investigation into alleged communist infiltration of the government, 1954 with Roy Cohn on the right).

George Santayana’s most famous quote regarding history is: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This quote emphasizes the importance of learning from past mistakes to avoid making them again.   I guess when one looks at our contemporary political, social, and economic landscape we as a society have not followed the Spanish-American philosopher, essayist, poet and novelist’s advice.  We live in a partisan world where things seem to be defined by which tribe we belong to.  It appears that our country is split almost down the middle in terms of our loyalties and belief systems.  Currently, the administration that occupies the White House is led by a cult leader whose primary goal is power and enrichment for himself and his family.  To achieve this, he has manufactured a world identified as “Make America Great Again” or MAGA and through executive orders and partisan legislation seeks to implement what has been identified as “Project 2025” which will devastate certain governmental components, social programs for the poor, the international trading system, the federal budget, our immigration system, and god knows what else that is written in the weeds of that document. 

In examining American history, I can think of three periods where contemporary events have their role model.  One is the Gilded Age of the late 19th century, when tariffs, crony capitalism, and hard-and-fast hierarchies were the stuff of American politics.  Secondly we turn to the 1920s with its version of anti-communism, an economic system that was overloaded with debt, highlighted by Wall Street, racism manifesting itself in anti-immigrant legislation, and a strict reshaping of American politics.  Lastly, is the post-World War II period highlighted by the Red Scare, when the federal government was weaponized against the American left.  This last example sounds familiar as we are bombarded on a daily basis by public commentary and social media posts by our president who has weaponized the Justice Department seeking revenge against his perceived enemies be it individual politicians, educational institutions, businessmen or lawyers who do not conform to his demands, a feckless Congress and Supreme Court, all with the goal of seeking total fealty to the beliefs of one man.

People Metal Print featuring the photograph Dalton Trumbo At House Hearings by Bettmann

(Screenwriter Dalton Trumbo before HUAC)

In Clay Risen’s latest historical monograph, RED SCARE: BLACKLISTS, McCARTHYISM, AND THE MAKING OF MODERN AMERICA the author examines a period that is close to being the precursor of our contemporary world.  President Trump vows to root out “radical left wing lunatics” and “Marxist equity” from the bowels of the state.  One of Trump’s minions, former DOGE overlord Elon Musk has proclaimed that U.S.A.I.D. designed as a soft power vehicle to enhance American popularity in poor countries particularly by improving their health care is “a viper’s nest of radical-left Marxists” and deserved to be destroyed.  This commentary which pervades actors in the current administration sounds like Senator Joseph McCarthy, legal counsel Roy Cohn, Senator and later Vice President Richard Nixon, and even Robert F. Kennedy, and many others.  In fact, McCarthy garnered a range of support, including from fellow Republicans, some ordinary Americans, and even some Democrats. His supporters often believed in the necessity of identifying and suppressing perceived communist influence, justifying the denial of civil liberties to those deemed subversive. Conversely, many Americans and political figures strongly opposed McCarthy’s tactics, highlighting the divisive nature of the movement as he lied over and over about the dangers of the “Red Menace.”  Risen’s book shows that the Red Scare burst forth from a convergence of Cold War fears and a long festering battle between social conservatives and New Deal progressives.  Risen begins at the outset of the Cold War concluding with McCarthy’s death in 1957 providing a fuller understanding of what the American people experienced at a time of moral questioning and perceived threats, and what people are capable of doing to each other under the right circumstances.

Risen has an interesting metaphor in approaching his topic by discussing how a bacillus, in this case, cultural and political can, lie dormant for decades and reappear years later.  The bacillus of the 1950s Red Scare receded but did not totally disappear in the decades that followed, but its lineage has reemerged in the last decade or so with the American hard right.   To understand contemporary culture and politics which is occurring before our eyes today we must understand it and its roots in the Red Scare.  This is not to say that Trumpism and the MAGA movement is the same as McCarthyism and the John Birch Society, but there is a line linking them.  Risen’s goal is to demonstrate that at a moment in the late 1940s, and in a certain political and cultural context, that knowing where we are today requires an understanding of where we were then.

Risen quickly turns to the origins, personalities, and actions of the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), especially toward its witnesses and the people they were trying to destroy and disseminating its right wing agenda.  The Committee would become the spear driving a decade long campaign of intolerance and political oppression.  Risen clearly develops the case that the emergence of a strong anti-government agenda which used the fear of communism as a foil against its opponents had its origin in hatred for the New Deal and Franklin Roosevelt (much like Trump’s abhorrence of any achievement  wrought by Barack Obama or Joe Biden).  The anti-communist movement morphed into an anti-civil rights movement represented by HUAC and other congressional committee investigations highlighted by its war against Hollywood, epitomized by the investigation of Dalton Trumbo and the Hollywood Ten.  For HUAC members and others the New Deal was a “stalking horse” for Soviet collectivization, which today we refer to as the deep state.  The conundrum as Risen argues is that there were two visions of America; “one built on an expansive vision of government as the guarantor of the rights and welfare of all its citizens, the other built on a retrograde nostalgia for an America built on privilege and exclusion.”

(Elizabeth Bentley testifying before the House Committee)

The author integrates the major figures of the period nicely.  Whether presenting the careers and beliefs of Presidents Harry S. Truman and Dwight D. Eisenhower, Secretary of State Dean Acheson, J. Parnell Thomas, Dalton Trumbo, J. Edgar Hoover, Roy Cohn, Richard M. Nixon, Elizabeth Bentley, Judith Coplon, Harry Bridges, Owen Lattimore,  Alger Hiss, Whitiker Chambers, Ethel and Julius Rosenberg, and a host of others, Risen analyzes their role in the Red Scare and their impact on post-war American history.

The 1948 election plays a key role in Risen’s analysis as Truman was able to defeat New York Governor Thomas E. Dewey.  After losing the 1946 congressional elections to Republicans Truman realized he needed to shore up support with those who felt he was weak on communism.  This would lead to the Federal Loyalty Program and a rhetorical war within the Democratic party represented by former Vice President and Secretary of Agriculture Henry Wallace.  During the 1948 campaign Dewey, to his credit did not get down and dirty with other Republicans who went after Truman as being “soft on communism.”  With their defeat, Republicans learned their lesson and in future elections they had no compunction about using politics of the gutter.

(Whittaker Chambers)

It takes Risen almost halfway through the narrative to introduce Wisconsin Senator Joseph McCarthy.  According to Risen McCarthy had a “unique ability to braid the two strands of the Red Scare – the culture war and the politics of Cold War security – into a single cord.”  McCarthy was a Senate “nobody” until he forced his way on the scene in January 1950 accusing the State Department of harboring 205 communists in its midst.  McCarthy’s story has been told before in excellent biographies by David Oshinsky, A CONSPIRACY SO IMMENSE: THE WORLD OF JOE McCARTHY and Larry Tye’s more recent work, DEMAGOGUE: THE LIFE AND LONG SHADOW OF SENATOR McCARTHY.  However, Risen presents an astute analysis reviewing the McCarthy hearings and his obfuscations, outright lies, and the careers he destroyed, as he turns to the role of an individual’s sexuality during the Red Scare.

Focusing on Carmel Offie, a U.S. State Department and later a Central Intelligence Agency official, who served as an indispensable assistant to a series of senior officials while combining his official duties with an ability to skirt regulations for his and others’ personal benefit.  Offie’s career is important because he was gay and becomes the center of Risen’s discussion of how McCarthy and his Republican allies believed that sexual perverts had infiltrated the government and “were perhaps as dangerous as the actual Communists.”  McCarthy and his allies helped push the politics of homophobia at a time of animosity toward Washington, particularly the State Department which was blamed for the loss of China a few months before McCarthy gave his damning speech in Wheeling, West Virginia.  The name given to the move to dismiss and prosecute gay people was the “Lavender Scare.”  Thousands would lose their jobs and careers due to their machinations as they now had another tool to fight their culture and political wars against the Truman administration and their supporters. 

(Alger Hiss testifying in 1948)

It is clear from Risen’s account that McCarthy was able to rouse support because of the earlier work of the House Un-Activities Committee, the Chambers-Hiss imbroglio, and the actions of Richard M. Nixon.  McCarthy would take advantage of the fall of China to the Communists and the outbreak of the Korean War.  Further, certain personalities gravitated to the Wisconsin senator, and they would develop a relationship based on the need for power, ideology, and the ability to use each other.  Two of those individuals were Alfred Kohlberg, a millionaire ideologue who made his money taking advantage of cheap Chinese labor and McCarthy would become his megaphone concerning the loss of China and the role of the State Department.  The second individual was Roy Cohn, who in his later career became Donald Trump’s mentor.  In his earlier career he would join McCarthy’s staff and mirror his viciousness, vindictiveness, and willingness to lie.  Risen describes him as “the chief executive of McCarthyism, Inc., determining the senator’s targets, writing his talking points, and pushing him further than even he might have chosen to go.”

The fall of China to Mao Zedong and his forces greatly impacted American politics and paranoia.  This was fostered by what is referred to as “the China Lobby,” a term often used for groups favoring the Republic of China on Taiwan under the leadership of Kuomintang head, Chiang Kai-Shek, an American ally during World War II.  The China Lobby’s collective influence, fostered by Alfred Kohlberg and others, shaped policy and politics throughout the 1940s and 50s boosting and destroying careers as they enlisted McCarthy to their cause.

 If we would set up an opposition to the China Lobby it would be called the “China hands,” career State Department diplomats and officials who had grown critical of Chiang Kai-Shek’s forces during the Chinese Civil War.  They believed the US could not turn back to imperialism and the Chinese people had the right to determine their own future.  Risen lays out the China lobby’s victory through McCarthy as many Asia experts in the State Department had their careers destroyed as well as Asia scholars at Harvard.  Interestingly, the purge of the State Department deprived policy makers with experts on Asian countries and movements.  It would be interesting to ponder what would have occurred in Korea and Vietnam if these individuals had been in place to offer their expertise.  Perhaps the many errors surrounding the eventual “domino theory” could have been avoided.

Whether it was Hollywood, HUAC, or McCarthy, all of whom Risen explores in marvelous detail, the anti-communist hysteria of the early 1950s drew much of its energy from the ongoing war in Korea, exacerbated by the entrance of Chinese Communists troops into the war.  Interestingly, General Douglas MacArthur’s headquarters in Tokyo became a satellite headquarters for the China lobby and the hard-core anti-communist right.  Once MacArthur was fired by Truman it provided the hard core right with further ammunition against the president, Secretary of State Dean Acheson, and General George C. Marshall, and others who were critical of Chiang Kai-Shek and the Kuomintang.

Richard Nixon-[C]════ ⋆★⋆ ════ [C]“ 𝕋𝕙𝕖𝕪 𝕤𝕒𝕚𝕕 ‘𝕊𝕠𝕟, 𝕕𝕠𝕟’𝕥 𝕔𝕙𝕒𝕟𝕘𝕖’ [C]𝔸𝕟𝕕 𝕀 𝕜𝕖𝕖𝕡 𝕙𝕠𝕡𝕚𝕟𝕘 𝕥𝕙𝕖𝕪 𝕨𝕠𝕟’𝕥 𝕤𝕖𝕖 𝕙𝕠𝕨 𝕞𝕦𝕔𝕙 𝕀 𝕙𝕒𝕧𝕖 ” [C

(Richard M. Nixon)

The atmospherics of the time period are expertly recreated by the author.  Risen’s descriptions of committee hearings, including the demeanor of witnesses, the response to questions, and the overall climate of this phase of American history allow the reader to feel as if they are in the committee rooms, the oval office, experiencing the political debates, and getting to know the major and minor players of the period.

A criticism of Risen is offered in Kevin Peraino’s New York Times book review entitled “Scarlet Fever: Culture in the United States is still driven by the political paranoia of the 1950s,” published on April 6, 2025.  Peraino correctly writes; “Risen, a reporter at The New York Times who has written a history of Theodore Roosevelt and the Rough Riders, among other books, coyly insists that he is “not concerned with drawing parallels between the past and the present” and desires to “leave it up to the reader to find those as they will.” But this is disingenuous. In his 400-some pages Risen touches on anti-fascism, white supremacy, campus activism, anti-elitism, cancel culture, virtue signaling, doxxing, book bans, election interference, anti-immigrant racism, F.B.I. overreach, conspiracy thinking, antisemitism, the surveillance state, anti-colonialism, the Koch family and America First-style ultranationalism. To suggest all this amounts simply to a Rorschach test for his readers stretches credulity.”

In her recent New Yorker article, entitled; “Fear Factor: How the Red Scare reshaped American politics,” historian Beverly Gage concludes; “What can we learn about our current moment from all of this? Risen hopes that readers will decide for themselves. “This is a work of history, and as such it is not concerned with drawing parallels between the past and the present,” he writes. “I leave it up to the reader to find those as they will.” So, as a reader, let me offer a few thoughts.

The unfortunate truth is that most mechanisms of the Red Scare, including congressional hearings and loyalty investigations, would not be especially hard to revive. Indeed, recent developments have indicated that they might be deployed with genuine glee. Already, the Trump Administration has started asking for lists—of federal workers who attended D.E.I. training, of F.B.I. agents who investigated January 6th cases, of scientists engaged in now suspect areas of work. Trump himself has openly announced his intention to deploy the Justice Department and the F.B.I. against his personal, political, and ideological enemies.

Black and white image of Dwight Eisenhower sitting at a desk

(President Dwight D. Eisenhower in the Oval Office)

The history of the Red Scare suggests that it won’t take many firings, federal inquiries, or acts of public humiliation to frighten a whole lot of people. But it also offers some reason to think that such intimidation methods may not be quite as effective this time around. For starters, there is much less agreement about the Trump Administration’s agenda than there was about Communism in its heyday. The Red Scare gained momentum because nearly everyone in American political life shared the same basic assumption: Communism is bad and poses an existential threat to the American way of life. It’s hard to come up with any contemporary issue that would generate the same powerful consensus.

Generally speaking, we also have better protections for political speech and assembly than Americans had in the fifties. Indeed, some of those protections are legacies of the Red Scare. In 1957, as the anti-Communist furor was winding down, the Supreme Court issued a series of decisions limiting some of the most sweeping methods deployed against political dissenters, including parts of the Smith Act.

But to say that Trump won’t necessarily succeed in setting off a new Red Scare is not to say that he won’t try. And, in this sort of politics, the trying is part of the game. As long as the nation’s “cultural Marxists” feel vulnerable to random accusations or secret investigations, they’ll likely be more careful about what they do and say. As Roy Cohn once instructed a young Donald Trump, much can be accomplished by attacking first and dealing with the consequences later.”  Today, with trade wars, immigration, DOGE’s dismantling key aspects of the federal government, cutting foreign aid etc. we are now experiencing Cohn’s advice to Trump, and I wonder a few years down the road how bad the impact will be, and how long it might take to undo what he has done.

Senator Joseph R. McCarthy of Wisconsin during the Army-McCarthy hearings, with committee counsel Roy Cohn next to McCarthy and Republican Senator Ralph Flanders of Vermont standing at the center. Flanders, who was taking the lead in an effort to depose McCarthy, had just delivered a letter to McCarthy informing him that he intended to introduce a resolution to censure McCarthy. Here McCarthy responds saying that Flanders should take the witness stand if he has any information about the "Army-McCarthy row other than the 'usual smears... from the smear sheets.'" Flanders' original motion called for McCarthy to be stripped of his committee post. A revised motion eventually led to McCarthy's condemnation by the Senate.

(Army-McCarthy hearings, 1954)

AN UNFINISHED HISTORY: A PERSONAL HISTORY OF THE 1960S by Doris Kearns Goodwin

szfreiberger American cultural history, American Political History, American Social History, Biography Leave a comment
Image: Richard Goodwin and Doris Kearns Goodwin

(Author Doris Kearns Goodwin with her husband, Richard Goodwin, at commencement ceremonies at UMass-Lowell on May 29, 2010)

For over ten years I had the pleasure of living and teaching in Concord, MA, a town with a deep history and a number of famous residents.  One of those residents was Doris Kearns Goodwin who could be seen often on Sunday mornings at the Colonial Inn having breakfast.  It was my pleasure as Chair of the History Department at Middlesex School to welcome her as a speaker at our school and expose our students to a gifted historian with a deep understanding of the American condition past and present.  Her biographies of Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, the Roosevelts, and the Fitzgeralds and Kennedys stand out for their deep research, insightful analysis, and a writing style that draws the reader to her subject.  Other books reflected on her experience as a White House fellow in the Johnson administration, an analysis of the leadership of the subjects of her biographies, and even a personal memoir growing up in Brooklyn and sharing a love for the Dodgers with her father.  Her latest work, AN UNFINISHED HISTORY: A PERSONAL HISTORY OF THE 1960S can be classified as a biography, a memoir, as well as an important work of history assessing and reassessing the impactful events of the 1960s. 

The story centers on her relationship of forty-six years with her husband Richard Goodwin, a significant historian and public figure in his own right. Theirs was a loving relationship between two individuals who loved their country and did their best to contribute to its success.  Richard Goodwin, an adviser to presidents, “was more interested in shaping history,” Doris says, “and I in figuring out how history was shaped.” Their bond is at the heart of her latest work providing an intimate look at their relationship, family, and many of the important historical figures that they came in contact with.  The book focuses on trying to understand the achievement and failures of the leaders they served and observed, in addition to their personal debates over the progress and unfinished promises of the country they served and loved.

Image: Richard Goodwin and Lyndon B. Johnson

(President Lyndon B. Johnson prepares for his State of the Union address with, from left, Richard Goodwin, Jack Valenti and Joseph A. Califano, Jr. at the White House in Washington on Jan. 12, 1966)

Goodwin’s recounting of her life with her husband encompassing Dick’s career before their marriage, and then after they tied the knot.  In a sense it is a love story that lasted over four decades, and it also embraces the many significant roles played by Dick and his spouse.  The events of the 1960s are revisited in detail.  The major domestic accomplishments and foreign policy decisions are examined in detail from the perspective of the participants in which they were familiar with and had personal relationships.  Doris conducts intensive research and analysis and integrates her husband’s actions and thoughts throughout.  In addition, she is a wonderful storyteller relating her own experiences and that of her spouse.

Doris begins her memoir recounting her search for the young “Dick” and searching his early diary entries and letters from the 1950s onward.  She describes a young man in love with America, a theme that is carried throughout the book.  Dick believed in Lincoln’s credo – “the right of anyone to rise to the level of his industry and talents – would inform every speech he drafted, every article he wrote, and every cause he pursued.”   The power couple relied extensively on Dick’s personal archive which he assiduously maintained throughout his career and retirement years for many of the stories and commentary that Doris relates.  This personal archive was in storage for years and emerged during their senior years, i.e.; they had 30 boxes alone on John F. Kennedy’s presidential campaign.

Kennedys RFK canonical.jpg

(Bobby Kennedy)

A major theme of the memoir was “the tremor” that existed in their marriage as Dick was loyal to Kennedy, and Doris to Lyndon B. Johnson.  Doris provides intimate details of their marriage and overall relationship relating to personal struggles, politics, and portrayals of prominent figures, i.e.; date night, watching the 1960 presidential debates years later, the origin of JFK’s inaugural address Dicks role in the Peace Corps, Latin American policy, including the Alliance for Progress. etc.  Dick developed a special relationship with JFK which was shattered upon his assassination.  Interestingly, Doris spends a great deal of time discussing Dick’s transition from an early member of the New Frontier who worked on Civil Rights among his many portfolios to taking his talents as a speech writer in support of Lyndon Johnson.

One of the most enjoyable aspects of the book is how Doris recounts meaningful events decades later.  A Cuban Missile Conference in which Fidel Castro and Robert McNamara and co. attending while they were all in their eighties was eye opening, as was Dick’s meeting with Che Guevara which had implications for Dick’s career.  Throughout Doris’ wit and humor are on display as she writes “here I am in my eighties and my thirties at the same time.  I’m burning my life candle at both ends” as she explored the many boxes Dick kept for decades.


(Doris Kearns Goodwin with LBJ/Richard Goodwin with JFK)

The book’s depth is enhanced by the many relationships the couple developed over the years.  The ones that stand out obviously are the two presidents they served, but also Jackie Kennedy, Sarge Shriver, Bill Moyers, Robert F. Kennedy, and numerous others.  For Doris it was a magical marriage full of fun, love, and serious debates; she writes, “….my debate with Dick was not a question of logic or historical citation.  It was about the respective investments in our youth, questions of loyalty and love.”

Dick’s reputation was formed by his almost innate ability as a wordsmith that produced so many important speeches.  From JFK’s Alliance for Progress speech to formulating the term “Great Society,” to authoring the “We Shall Overcome,” Voting Rights, and RFK’s “South Africa’s Day of Affirmation” speeches which all impacted history based on who was speaking Dick’s phraseology and thoughts.  After writing for JFK and LBJ, Dick turned to writing and supporting Robert Kennedy, a move that would sever his relationship with LBJ.

(Doris Kearns marries Richard N. Goodwin on Dec. 14, 1975. About 170 people attended their Lincoln, MA, wedding, during which this photo was taken, including Boston Mayor Kevin H. White, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, Norman Mailer, Arthur Schlesinger Jr., and Hunter Thompson. Photo credit: Photo by Marc Peloquin. Courtesy of Doris Kearns Goodwin Papers)

Doris Kearns and President Lyndon B. Johnson, White House Cabinet Room, Oct. 29, 1968. Kearns was Secretary of the White House Fellows Association, and the event marked the presentation of the White House Fellows Report on Youth Participation. Doris Kearns Goodwin Papers, courtesy of the Briscoe Center for American History.
(Doris Kearns and President Lyndon B. Johnson, White House Cabinet Room, Oct. 29, 1968. Kearns was Secretary of the White House Fellows Association, and the event marked the presentation of the White House Fellows Report on Youth Participation. Doris Kearns Goodwin Papers, courtesy of the Briscoe Center for American History)

L-R: Ricahrd Goodwin, Bill Moyers, President Lyndon B. Johnson. Photo by Yoichi Okamoto, courtesy of the LBJ Presidential Library.

Perhaps the finest chapter in the book in terms of incisive analysis is “Thirteen LBJ’s” where Doris drills down to produce part historical analysis and personality study.  LBJ was very moody and insecure, and he often burst out his emotions.  Johnson was very sensitive about the press as he saw himself as a master manipulator and he always suspected leaks which he despised.  He went as far as planting “spies” among others he feared like Robert Kennedy.  Johnson’s approach to people was called “the Johnson treatment,” which is on display during his meeting with Governor George Wallace of Alabama and Senator Everett Dirkson during the Civil Rights struggles.  Johnson could be overbearing, but in his mind what he was trying to achieve on the domestic front was most important. 

Political expediency was an approach that Johnson and Robert Kennedy would employ during the 1964 presidential campaign when LBJ ran for reelection and Kennedy for the Senate from New York.  Though they despised each other, Kennedy needed LBJ’s political machine and popularity to win, and Johnson needed to shore up his support in New York since he was a southerner.  For Johnson he would rather have had “Bobby” lose, but he wanted his vote in the Senate.  The LBJ-RFK dynamic dominated Johnson’s political antenna.  Johnson was paranoid of Kennedy and feared he would run to unseat him in 1968.  When the Vietnam war splintered America and Robert Kennedy turned against the war it substantiated Johnson’s fears.  Further, when Dick, then out of government came out against the war, later joining Kennedy’s crusade, Johnson once again was livid.  From Dick’s perspective he acted in what he saw as the best interests of America.

Doris nicely integrates many of the primary documents from Dick’s treasure trove of boxes.  Excerpts from many of Dicks speeches, his political and private opinions, transcripts from important meetings inside and outside the White House are all integrated in the memoir.  As time went on Dick turned to Eugene McCarthy and helped him force Johnson to withdraw his candidacy in 1968 after the New Hampshire primary.  Dick would join Kennedy once he declared for president.  The campaign was short lived as RFK was assassinated by Sirhan Sirhan in Los Angeles after winning the California primary.  Dick was devastated by Kennedy’s death and would eventually attend the 1968 Democratic Convention where he worked with McCarthy delegates to include a peace plank into the Democratic Party platform.  Doris was also in Chicago and witnessed the carnage fostered by Mayor Daley and the Chicago police

(Mr. Goodwin with Jacqueline Kennedy and her lawyer, Simon H. Rifkind, rear, in Manhattan in 1966. Mr. Goodwin was for years identified with the Kennedy clan)

One of the criticisms of Doris’ memoir is her lack of attention to the political right and her obsession with the middle to political left.  That being said it is important to remember that this is not a history of the 1960s but a personal memoir of two people who fell in love, married in 1975, and the narrative correctly revolves around their firsthand experiences and beliefs.  Doris would go on to work for Johnson after he left the White House, splitting her time between teaching at Harvard and flying to Texas , to help with his memoirs.  Doris rekindles the spark of idealism that launched the 1960s which is missing today.  She introduces readers to the Kennedy-Johnson successes in racial justice, public education, and aid for the poor, all important movements.  In addition, she delves into the debate about the conduct of the war in Vietnam, including the anti-war movement, and the toppling of a president.  Doris Kearns Goodwin has done a useful service by recasting the 1960s in her vision.  It is an excellent place to start a study of the period, and its impact on what appears to be a wonderful marriage.

Doris Kearns Goodwin And Richard Goodwin

THE BOOKSHOP: A HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN BOOKSTORE by Evan Fliss

szfreiberger American cultural history, American Social History, Uncategorized Leave a comment

(The Strand Book Store, 12th and Broadway, NYC)

When I first graduated from college in 1971 I worked at a small family owned publishing firm in lower Manhattan called T.Y. Crowell and Company.  It introduced me to the process of book publishing and afforded me enough of a salary that every Friday when I was paid I would walk to Broadway and 12th Street in Manhattan, the home of the Strandbook store.  I would proceed to blow half my paycheck on remaindered/used books and have a falafel sandwich from the food truck in front of the store.  This behavior continued for about a year when Crowell was sold to Dunn and Bradstreet and moved the firm to 666 Fifth Avenue (the building the Saudis bailed out Jarad Kushner with $2 billion!) and the doom of sleaze of corporate America.  This led to my resignation when the office manager, affectionately labeled by my boss as “silly bitch” refused to allow me to hang my Bob Dylan poster on the wall.  I proceeded to graduate school to earn a Ph. D in history.

The thing I carried with me from this experience was my love of books.  Today I own a library of about 8500 volumes which has created a family problem when trying to downsize.  Over the decades I have spent an inordinate amount of time browsing and buying in bookshops.  The Strand, despite its commercialization since COVID remains my favorite.  As my wife and I have traveled across Europe and other places I make it a habit to visit a bookstore and purchase a book in every city visited.  Perhaps my favorite is Bertrand Bookstore located in Lisbon, Portugal, supposedly the oldest book establishment in Europe.  Strolling on Charing Cross Street in London also produces many bookshops which I have fond memories of.  In the United States among my favorites include Powell Books in Portland and Chicago; Haslams Books in St. Petersburg, Titcomb’s Books in East Sandwich located on Cape Cod, the Harvard Bookstore in Cambridge, MA, Water Street Books in Exeter,  NH, Douglas Harding Rare Books in Wells, ME, Old Number 6 Book Depot in Henniker, NH, Toadstool Bookstore in Peterborough, NH, and of course there are numerous others that I could list!

Powell's Books City of Books on Burnside

(Powell’s Bookstore, Portland, OR)

As I have spent so much time in bookshops I have developed a love for the ambiance, smell, and contact with other book buyers who share my affliction as a book-a-holic as I cannot leave a bookshop without a purchase.  Over the years I have looked for the best history of American bookstores.  Recently, I believe I have found it, Evan Friss’ latest endeavor, THE BOOKSHOP: A HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN BOOKSTORE. 

Friss has authored an ode or perhaps a love song to his subject – a warm historical recounting of the personalities, challenges, historical perspective, and pleasure people derive from frequenting these establishments.  Friss introduces his topic by describing a small bookshop located in New York City’s West Village which opened in the 1970s.  This marked his entrance into the wonderful world of books that I have loved since my early teenage years.

Over the years independent bookstores have been disappearing.  According to Friss, in 1993 there were 13,499 bookstores in America, in 2021 just 5,591.  Friss is correct in that, “if bookstores were animals, they’d be on the list of endangered species.”

Land vehicle, Automotive parking light, Automotive tire, Automotive exterior, Automotive lighting, Alloy wheel, Fender, Rim, Town, Vehicle door,

(Books are Magic Bookstore in Cobble Hill, Brooklyn, NY owned by author Emily Staub and her husband)

Friss lays out his monograph in chapters set in a series of book establishments that includes itinerant book people who used carriages pulled by horses in the 18th century onward, trucks filled with books, kiosks on streets, book delivery trucks (long before Amazon), and of course a brick and mortar shops.  These establishments produced amazing personalities that include Toby, the owner of Three Lives Bookstore, located in the West Village; Benjamin Franklin’s Bookshop in Philadelphia in the 1770s, Old Corner Books run by B. H. Ticknor, a friend of Nathaniel Hawthorne; George Harrison Mifflin and E.P. Dutton who also owned bookshops during this period; James T. Fields who also published The Atlantic Monthly, Marcella Hahner who supervised Marshall Field’s Department store large book section and greatly impacted the role of women as book sellers through book fairs, author presentations (i.e.; Carl Sandburg’s books on Lincoln), she could make a book’s success if she endorsed and ordered it – a 1920s Oprah!; Roger Mifflin who drove a truck selling books, as did Helen McGill.   Frances Steloff developed the Gotham Book Mart that specialized in literature that dominated the New York book scene including publishing for decades including World War II.  Ann Patchett, bestselling author opened Parnassus      Books in Nashville, as the city was losing bookshops and she believed with her partner Karen Hayes that the city needed an indie bookstore that thrived as she saw herself protecting an endangered species.  Lesley Stahl called Patchett “the patron saint of independent bookstores.” Lastly, how could you author a book about bookshops and not provide a mini biography of Jeff Bezos and how Amazon tried to take over the book trade.

Friss is correct that when entering a bookstore, it is a “sensory experience” – The scent of a book known as “bibliosmia” which I love while holding a book cannot be replicated with a Kindle.  These experiences have been greatly impacted through our sectionalist history.  Since most books published in the United States before the Civil War were in the northeast, authors have to avoid any discussion of slavery for fear of lost sales below the Mason-Dixon line.  This did not stop Tickner and Fields from publishing UNCLE TOM’S CABIN.  Soon Ticknor was taken over by E.P. Hutton and merged with Houghton, Mifflin.

  • NH – EXETER – WATER STREET BOOKSTORE – DOUBLE AWNING ENTRANCE - OPEN
  • (Water Street Books, Exeter, NH)

The role of book buyers is carefully laid out by the author.  It is in this context that Paul Yamazaki is discussed and his San Francisco bookshop  It was during the late 19th century that traveling bookstores emerged from Cape Cod to Kennebunkport, Northport to Middlebury, all the way to Lake Placid.  They would drive their carts, carriages, trucks all over making customers and friends. Yamazaki would order appropriate books and deliver them to his customers – especially important in rural areas.

Friss uncovers many tantalizing stories about the book business, particularly the relationships between booksellers and the evolution of how these interactions would later lead to the forming of publishing companies that set the market with book buyers of what was available for the public to read and purchase. Perhaps the best stories are presented in his chapter on The Strand Bookshop as it brought me back to 1971 and browsing their stacks.  The picture of the shop that Friss includes from the 1970s is exactly as I remember it..  The narrowness of the aisles, the smell of used books, and the store’s ambiance were perfect.  For me going downstairs where the 50% off publisher copies is located was my favorite.  Friss includes personality studies of Burt Britton and Benjamin Bass who owned and operated Strand for years.  Friss’ focus is on the evolution of the Strand from its 4th avenue Book Row location to 12th and Broadway.  Due to Covid and  Amazon the shop went under a more commercial transformation (it now offers pastries and “Strand blend coffee”) but it remains an iconic bookshop and tourist attraction, but it has lost some of its roots from the 1960s and 70s.

Friss correctly points out that bookshops had a significant role in American foreign policy aside from its domestic influence.  The Aryan Book store opened in Los Angeles in 1933 and evolved into the center of American Nazism managed by Paul Themlitz.  Book shops were also caught up in the anti-communist movement with over 100 stores run by the Communist Party of the United States.  Wayne Garland managed a successful socialist bookstore in Manhattan called the Worker’s Bookshop and also fought against Fransico Franco in the Spanish Civil War as part of the Abraham Lincoln Battalion.  Congress even held hearings in the 1930s about these stores, particularly the growing communist movement.  This would lead to further issues during the McCarthy period in the early 1950s as government officials believed that if you frequented certain types of bookstores it was an indicator of your politics and threat level.  Apart from the right components of the book trade Fliss nicely integrates the other spectrum, recounting counterculture shops.

(Author and ownerof Parnassus Books in Nashville, TN, Ann Patchett)

Fliss doesn’t miss any angle when presenting his history of bookshops as he discusses the life of Craig Rodwell who was known as the “sage of gay bookselling.”  Rodewell would open the Oscar Wilde Bookshop in Greenwich Village in 1967 with the store serving as the front line of activism after the NYPD launched  the Stonewall Raid which would lead to the gay pride movement.  All of these types of bookshops are important to American culture which today is under attack as more and more state legislatures are producing legislation to ban books.  Interestingly, freedom of speech does not seem to be part of the right wing interpretation of the constitution.

One of the most interesting aspects of Fliss’ research is the impact of the killing of George Floyd on the book market.  As the “Black Lives Matter” movement spread the increase in book sales to black owned bookshops skyrocketed.  Fliss provides a concise history of black owned bookshops dating back to the 19th century and his conclusions are quite thoughtful.

Fliss devotes the last section to the growth of large chain bookstores like B. Dalton, Borders, Waldenbooks, Doubleday, and the goliath of stores created by Barnes and Noble.  By 1997 Barnes and Noble and Borders accounted for 43.3% of all bookstore sales.   By 2007 Barnes and Noble had $4.65 billion in book sales and the competition was slowly withering away.  Fliss explains that 2019 what once was a battle between indie bookstores and the large chains evolved into a war between in-person bookstores and Amazon.  Barnes and Noble’s massive growth had stalled, and an investor group controlled by Waterstones, Britain’s largest bookstore chain, poured money into Barnes and Noble, who like others had significant issues caused by Covid.  Its resurgence in its fight with Amazon was led by James Daunt, known as a “bookstore whisperer” in England – his goal was to make Barnes and Noble more like an independent store.  Daunt has been very successful in recreating Barnes and Noble and Fliss correctly concludes that the fate of the chain is “intertwined with the fate of American bookselling and maybe even the fate of reading itself” as Amazon is always hovering over what we read and where we buy.

Fliss has authored a phenomenal book tracing the development of bookshops for centuries culminating with the threat of Amazon and Jef Bezos who wanted to put “anyone selling physical books out of a job.”  The situation grew worse with the Kindle resulting in 43% of indie shops being driven out of business and by 2015 with its $100 billion in books sales.  By 2019 Amazon sold 50% of the books purchased in the United states.  What is clear from Fliss’ somewhat personal monograph, bookstores were a public good – the benefit was the experience – the browse, interaction with others, a place of comfort and rejuvenation.  Fliss’ work is a treasure for anyone who loves books, and possibly for those who don’t!

Strand Book Store 1 Bookstores Greenwich Village

(The Strand Bookstore)

JOHN LEWIS: IN SEARCH OF THE BELOVED COMMUNITY by Ray Arsenault

szfreiberger American Political History, American Social History, Biography Leave a comment

March in Selma(John Lewis, third from left, walks with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. as they begin the Selma to Montgomery march from Brown’s Chapel Church in Selma on March 21, 1965)

If you ever wanted to know what type of man John Lewis was, all you have to do is ask someone from the other side of the political aisle what their opinion is of him.  In this case I would point to someone who disagreed with Lewis about every conceivable issue – former North Carolina Congressman and Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows who would respond to questions about the Georgia Congressman and Civil Rights leader – “he was my friend,” and Lewis would reciprocate those feelings.  You might ask how two such disparate characters could call themselves friends – all you have to do is read Raymond Arsenault’s new biography, JOHN LEWIS: IN SEARCH OF THE BELOVED COMMUNITY to understand the unshakable integrity and believer in man’s humanity which made up the core of the former activist and progressive legislator.

Lewis believed in forgiveness and compassion as part of achieving what referred to as “the beloved community” where racial hatred would be eradicated, and we would all live in a world of fairness and equality as he was determined to replace the horrors of the past and present with his ideals.  Arsenault’s biography cannot be described as a hagiography as he delves into Lewis’ life, decisions and actions carefully offering a great deal of praise, but the author does not shy away from his subject’s mistakes and faulty decisions.  At a time when racial “dog whistles” dominate a significant element of the political class it is unsettling to listen to a presidential candidate demean his opponent’s racial heritage linking it to her intelligence and background.  This has led to racially motivated violent rhetoric that permeates the news making it a useful exercise exploring the life of a civil rights leader who fought valiantly against these elements in our society.

Selma Bloody Sunday 50th Anniversary

(Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., stands on the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Ala., on Feb. 14, 2015. Rep. Lewis was beaten by police on the bridge on “Bloody Sunday” on March 7, 1965, during an attempted march for voting rights from Selma to Montgomery)

Arsenault’s monograph begins by exploring Lewis’ rural upbringing in Pike County, Alabama.  Sharecropping was the main source of income in a white dominated economic system designed to keep tenant farmers under the thumb of their landlords.  Any progress his parents might have achieved was never enough to escape poverty.  For Lewis, growing up in this racial and economic system formed a social and intellectual laboratory as he hated working in the cotton fields and soon became intoxicated with education where the inequality of white and black opportunities was glaring.  The structure of Jim Crow society dominated.  Lewis had high hopes with the Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas but the “massive resistance” the southern white supremacists responded with disabused Lewis that the decision would ameliorate the situation blacks found themselves locked into.

The development of Lewis’ approach to achieving change is explored in detail and we learn the impact of Martin Luther King, Jr. on Lewis at an early age.  Arsenault spends a great deal of time delving into the King-Lewis relationship from the mid-1950s civil rights struggles through King’s assassination in April 1968.  The development of the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) which Lewis would come to lead, and King’s Southern Christian Leadership Council (SCLC) is important as it shows the dichotomy that existed in the Civil Rights movement particularly as they split from each other in the early 1960s as Black nationalists like Stokley Carmichael and H. Rap Brown advocated violence against white supremacists took over SNCC. 

No matter what aspect of Lewis’ career Arsenault discusses he presents a balanced account offering intimate details whether delving into Lewis remarkable rise within the Civil Rights movements from the late 1950s to 1970; his exceptional organizational skills, the schism that developed and seemed to dominate the movement, his four years on the Atlanta City Council through his congressional career.  In recounting Lewis’ decision-making, he relates how each judgement was reached and how it affected his social gospel of the beloved community ideology. 

Portrait of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. 8x10 Silver Halide Photo Print

(Martin Luther King, Jr.)

Make no mistake the book is more than an intellectual approach to Lewis’ role in the Civil Rights movement.  Arsenault seems to cover all the major aspects of the Civil Rights movement from sit ins, stand ins to boycotts challenging the White supremacist governors, sheriffs and other officials in Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, and Tennessee.  Places like Selma, Jackson, Montgomery, Memphis come to dominate the narrative as does the impact of peaceful and violent events on Lewis’ belief system and planning.

For Lewis it was a battle to maintain his belief in nonviolent protest as a tool to uplift his community.  At times he would become frustrated after he was physically beaten or arrested, but he would always seem to veer away from anything which would contradict his core ideas, even when close friends and other leaders moved away from a total non-violent approach.  He grew angry when the younger generation turned to black power and confrontation, but he always remained loyal to his core principles.

Arsenault’s portrayal does reveal a confrontational and antagonistic strain in Lewis’ personality on rare occasions.  One that comes to mind is the nastiness of his Georgia congressional campaign against his friend Julian Bond and fellow activist which cost both men a deep friendship when Lewis was victorious.

rosa parks

(Rosa Parks on a Montgomery bus in 1955)

Perhaps Arsenault’s most interesting chapters include Lewis’ evaluation of the Kennedy brothers who came late to the game of protecting civil rights workers.  At the outset, Lewis had great hopes for John F. Kennedy, however he would be disappointed as the politics of Southern Democrats got in the way.  With the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which the Supreme Court would undermine in 2013, Lewis felt more optimistic, particularly with the metamorphosis of Robert Kennedy, especially after Dr. King was assassinated.  There are chapters dealing with the Freedom Riders, important historical figures like Medgar Evers, Emmett Till, Rosa Parks, James Lawson, Andrew Young, Martin Luther King, Jr., James Farmer, Bayard Rustin, along with the Bull Conners, Sheriff Clark, Governors John Patterson and Lester Maddox among many that lend a sense of what it was like to deal with and live through such a tumultuous period in American history.

In the last third of the book, Arsenault describes the Republican resurgence under Gingrich, Reagan and the Bushes which made it difficult for Lewis to navigate the House of Representatives as any liberal agenda was dead on arrival on the House floor.  At times he grew upset for the lack of progress that resulted in few if any legislative victories.  He had high hopes for the election of Barack Obama, but it was not to be due to Republican obstructionism and in many cases outright racism.  The arrival of Donald Trump took his frustration to new levels as events in Charlottesville, Va, a Muslim ban, hideous commentary concerning immigrants, and the actions of Mitch McConnell in the Senate made the achievement of a “beloved community” impossible.  Before his death, Lewis would witness a Republican party taking America backwards trying successfully in many cases to undo fifty years of progress made under Democratic leadership – something against which he had repeatedly warned.   What separated Lewis from most of his Congressional colleagues was his historical perspective.  He could not accept the racism of the Trump administration which returned him to the dark days of the 1960s culminating in the deaths of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy.

(Robert Kennedy’s speech in Indianapolis, IN following the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr.)

In light of Donald Trump’s racial attacks against Kamala Harris, Lewis’ life story seems apropos in light of where we are as a society and how far, or perhaps not as far we have come after the Civil Rights movement.  If there is one area that Arsenault could have explored more was learning about the people who knew Lewis the longest and what these relationships actually meant to him.  However, Arsenault’s book is well written, researched based on documents and interviews, and has produced a thoughtful and measured account of Lewis’ life and work which continued even as he contracted pancreatic cancer and worked until ten days before his death in 2020 as he visited Black Lives Matter Plaza in Washington, DC.

Image: Tear gas fumes fill the air as state troopers, ordered by Gov. George Wallace, break up a demonstration march in Selma, Alabama(Tear gas fills the air as state troopers, on orders from Gov. George Wallace, break up a march in Selma on March 7, 1965, on what is known as “Bloody Sunday”)

THE WOUNDED WORLD: W.E.B. DU BOIS AND THE FIRST WORLD WAR by Chad Williams

szfreiberger American Social History, World War I, World War II Leave a comment

(W.E.B. Du Bois)

W.E.B Du Bois devoted his life’s work to achieving equal citizenship for all African Americans.  He worked tirelessly to achieve his goals after becoming the first African American to earn a doctorate from Harvard University and would go on to teach social sciences at Atlanta University, become one of the founders of the NAACP, edited “The Crisis” magazine which was his megaphone to the black community, lectured worldwide, promoted African and West Indian rights against colonial powers, and published a series of thought provoking books.  Du Bois was a firm believer that for African Americans to achieve full civil rights and political representation they would have to be led by a black intellectual elite – the key being advanced education that would lead to leadership.  He targeted racism, lynchings, Jim Crow laws, and all types of discrimination in his writing and public appearances.

 One of the most controversial aspects of his belief system was supporting America’s entrance into World War I, a decision he would come to regret.  He argued that if African Americans joined the American Expeditionary Force (AEF) in Europe to fight Germany and showed their talent and bravery it would raise their level of acceptance by the American people upon their return resulting in greater rights of freedom and safety.  This dream was negated by the reality of American racism , covert and overt violence, and persecution – all conditions consistent with the African American experience throughout American history.  Even US Army officials exhibited extreme racism and blatant lies as they erroneously depicted the combat experience of African American troops in Europe.

Black and white photo of African American Army officer walking downstairs passing a white Officer. Both men are wearing World War One style uniforms and hats.
(Charles Young at Camp Grant in 1919).

To atone for this grievous error in judgement, Du Bois wanted to set the historical record straight as World War I did not prove to be the catalyst for equal rights.  His strategy centered on a book he would spend nearly two decades entitled, THE BLACK MAN AND THE WOUNDED WORLD.  His effort was never completed nor published but it has become the core of an important new monograph by Chad L. Williams, THE WOUNDED WORLD: W.E.B. DUBOIS AND THE FIRST WORLD WAR.

Williams’ book is a comprehensive study of how Du Bois went about achieving his goals.  He recounts his battles with the NAACP to obtain funding and support, his battles with fellow historians who he competed with him in trying to produce the definitive study of the war, the role of his ego which did not allow him to accept enough assistance and share the limelight, his writings, particularly in the NAACP magazine, “The Crisis” which he edited, his travels worldwide promoting the Pan African world, and most importantly disseminating his ideas and research a function of his relationship with black veterans of the war, and a firm belief that American racism was destroying black progress, and the colonial European powers imprisoned people of color in a system where they could not achieve progress.

Williams’ approach is a carefully developed thesis supported by numerous excerpts from Du Bois’ writings and commentary buttressed by accounts provided by friends and foes alike, in addition to communications with black veterans and competing historians.  Williams fully explores Du Bois’ ideology which rested on his fear that if Germany were victorious in the war its racist government would negatively impact “Black folk” and brown people throughout the world.  He knew Germany well having studied at the University of Berlin providing him with firsthand knowledge of the Kaiser’s march toward autocracy, militarism, and empire.  He argued that black loyalty to England, France, and Belgium was of the utmost importance despite their colonial records. He believed an allied victory representing democracy was the only acceptable outcome in the war.  However, the result of this call to duty was dominated by racism in the military as whites refused to serve with blacks, military leaders refused to allow black officers to command black troops resulting in southern white racist officers treating black soldiers with contempt and at times violence.  Williams mentions examples of black officers like Major Charles Young, a graduate of West Point, but being an exceptional soldier did not allow him to fulfill the role Du Bois sought for him and others as the leaders of a new generation of blacks who would gain acceptance from American society.

(Over 350,000 African American soldiers served in WWI)

Williams portrays the lies put forth by military authorities when it came to black officers and their service, the performance of the 369th and 92nd divisions of the army, particularly the 368th Infantry Regiment, known as the Harlem Hell fighters, who were assigned to the French Army in April 1918. The Hell fighters saw much action, fighting in the Second Battle of the Marne, as well as the Meuse-Argonne Offensive, where black officers were blamed for the slow progress of the offensive with white officers falsely reporting on the performance of thousands of black troops.  The treatment of black soldiers carried over into their medical care during and after the war  where at first, black doctors and nurses were not allowed to treat black veterans at the new Tuskegee Institute Hospital.

When black  veterans returned home they were met with violence and race riots resulting in the deaths of over a thousand people in Tulsa, OK, Chicago, IL, Knoxville, TN, Phillips County, AK, Charleston, SC, and Washington, DC all described in detail by the author.  Further with the 1919 Red Scare many blamed black soldiers for bringing communism to America when they returned from Europe. When confronted with the reality of the African American soldier’s experience during their training, the war itself, and the reception they received upon returning from the battlefield, Du Bois committed himself to telling their story.

Williams pulls no punches in presenting Du Bois’ failed odyssey in completing his work.  First, he was overwhelmed with materials from his own travels to France  to conduct research and influence the Paris Peace Conference.  Second, he could never get a handle on the voluminous amounts of material sent to him by black veterans.  Third, his intense schedule that saw him work for Pan-African conferences and other causes.  Lastly, his other writings, lectures, and as mentioned before his ego which did not allow him to work successfully with others.  Further, he distorted his own experiences praising France for using Senegalese troops in the war and their treatment of blacks.  All one has to do is examine the French colonial experience to see how wrong he was.  Another example is his visit to the Soviet Union in 1926 and for a time believing in the “Marxist wonderland.” 

African-American soldiers (and one of their white officers) of the 369th Infantry, known as the Harlem Hellfighters, practice what they will soon experience, fighting in the trenches of the Western Front. They are wearing French helmets and using French-issued rifles and equipment, the logic being that since they were fighting under French command, it was easier to resupply them from the French system than trying to get American-issued items. (National Archives and Records Administration)

(African-American soldiers (and one of their white officers) of the 369th Infantry, known as the Harlem Hellfighters, practice what they will soon experience, fighting in the trenches of the Western Front)

In the latter part of the narrative Williams explores Du Bois’ life work particularly his realization that his World War I opus would never be completed.  The 1920s to 1945 period produced a great deal of success academically with the publication of BLACK RECONSTRUCTION, a widely accepted history of African Americans from 1850 to 1876.  In explaining Du Bois’ ideas in his books and other writings Williams traces Du Bois evolution ideologically as he argued that racism and colonization were responsible for two world wars and the failings of democracy pushing him further to the left.  As he grew older Du Bois concluded that even after World War II, African Americans were confronted with the same hostility and violence as they did in the post 1918 period.  Much to Du Bois’ dismay it was apparent that the arguments he developed for decades pertaining to racism and colonization still applied and he would work assiduously to ameliorate this situation until his death.

Throughout the two decades of preparing the book Du Bois had to overcome his “Close Ranks” editorial from the war supporting the use of African American troops in the war as a vehicle to obtain equality.  His decision was wrong, and he would pay a price professionally and personally.  Williams describes Du Bois’ effort as his most significant work to never reach the public as he struggled to finish his manuscript and the legacy of the war, however, “By rendering this story in such rich archival detail, Williams’s book is a fitting coda to Du Bois’s unfinished history of Black Americans and the First World War.”*

  • Matthew Delmont. “W.E.B. Du Bois and the Legacy – and Betrayal – of Black Soldiers,” New York Times, April 4, 2023.
W.E.B. DuBois, 1904

CALHOUN: AMERICAN HERETIC by Robert Elder

szfreiberger American cultural history, American Political History, American Social History, Biography Leave a comment
Oil on canvas painting of John C. Calhoun, perhaps in his fifties, black robe, full head of graying hair

(John C. Calhoun)

Today we live in a country where white supremacism is on the rise, descendants of former slave’s demand reparations, state legislatures try to obstruct the teaching of black history, the College Board gives in to extremists who did not like the content of Advanced Placement African history classes, the Supreme Court ends affirmative action for colleges, and state’s rights advocates seem to have the floor.  Three years short of our 250th anniversary, the United States finds itself with a bifurcated population politically, economically, and socially over issues of race.  The question is how did we get here, when did it originate, and who is responsible?  Historian Robert Elder tries to provide some of the historical background in his recent biography of the former 19th century South Carolina Senator, Vice President, and Secretary of State John C. Calhoun, in CALHOUN: AMERICAN HERETIC.  Some might argue how a man who was so impactful in the first half of the 19th century could still maintain such influence today.  The answer offered by Elder is clear.  Calhoun, a slave owner who argued that slavery was a positive good for America, furthered the doctrine of “state interposition” which for many became the legal argument for secession that led to the Civil War, and was the dominant spokesperson for the south, state’s rights, and the enslavement of blacks deserves a great deal of credit for setting the United States on the path it now finds itself confronting – a political climate that does not seem to have an exit ramp, with racial violence on the upswing.

Portrait of Henry Clay

(Henry Clay)

Elder’s monograph should be considered the definitive account of Calhoun’s life through the lens of a cultural and ideological biography.  The account encompasses all facets of Calhoun’s life and covers the most notable events of the first half of the 19th century.  In doing so Elder traces the intellectual development of his subject very carefully.  He pulls no punches as he outlines in detail how Calhoun went from a proponent of optimistic nationalism featuring what historians refer to as Henry Clay’s American system which consisted of internal improvements such as roads and canals linking the country’s economic development, a low tariff to promote trade, a National Bank, and the use of federal funds to assist the states to achieve his goals. 

As the War of 1812 approached Calhoun justified his views of federal power over the states as a necessity because of the exigencies of war.  Further his ideology was predicated on the concept of “honor,” particularly as it related to British impressment of American citizens.  Throughout his career honor was foremost in his mind especially in debates with colleagues and those who opposed his beliefs.  Elder has engaged in a prodigious amount of research that yields wonderful character studies of Calhoun’s contemporaries.  An interesting example of his commitment to his personal honor belief system is the author’s description of his disagreements reflected in debates with Virginia’s House  leader, John Randolph.  Calhoun as his wont was to employ a carefully crafted barrage of logic that demolished his opponent, raising points with surgical precision one after the other.  It was Calhoun’s strength of debate and putting pen to paper that allowed him to be the equal among the great figures of the period, like Henry Clay, Daniel Webster, among others.

The head and shoulders of a man with light skin and gray hair nearly fills this vertical portrait painting. Shown against a peanut-brown background, the man’s shoulders are angled to our left, and he looks off to our right with blue eyes. His gray hair curls around his forehead and over his ears. His bushy gray eyebrows gather over a furrowed brow, and sideburns grow down past his earlobes. His long, straight, slightly hooked nose and high cheekbones are set into his long, oval-shaped face. His pink lips are closed over a rounded chin, which is framed by vertical wrinkles. The white edge of a collar peeks above the high neck of a velvety black garment with wide lapels. The area beneath the man’s shoulders is a dark ivory color, perhaps indicating that this painting is unfinished.

(President Andrew Jackson)

However, by the late 1820s he argued that the tariff of 1828 was unconstitutional.  His solution,  referred to as the South Carolina Exposition and Protest, argued the concept of “nullification” whereby the states had the right to declare federal actions as “null and void.” His viewpoint was clear as the Tariff of 1816 was designed to provide revenue, not to encourage manufacturing.  The 1828 version was not a revenue measure.  At this point Calhoun was not calling for disunion, as Elder argues he was trying to find a way to preserve the structure of the Union consistent with the principle that power resided in the people, although the people of states.”  Calhoun would work creatively to find solutions for problems that arose within the system.

Calhoun was always a fervent defender of slavery though his justifications were part of an evolutionary process.  He always argued that treating slaves as property gave masters a financial interest in their well-being.  Calhoun was very wary of the British who ended the transatlantic slave trade in 1807 and ended slavery at home in 1833.  His concern rested on his fear that London would undermine slavery as the United States expanded and their machinations throughout the western hemisphere. He would consistently point out British hypocrisy especially its rule of India and of course with his Irish lineage his dislike of England was predictable.

Calhoun’s mindset could be very convoluted as he saw no connection between European feudalism with its lords and vassals and southern slaveholding society.  For Calhoun slavery was a “positive good” as Africans achieved a degree of civilization they had never previously attained.  Further, he argued that slaves were treated better than European laborers who existed among the poor houses of Europe.  Slavery created a stable society unlike the labor unrest in the north.  Finally, he stated slavery was “an institution uniquely suited – morally, economically, politically – to the conditions of the modern world.”  A believer in English philosopher, Jeremy Bentham’s utilitarianism, the greatest good for the greatest number, slavery fit perfectly as black inferiority and lack of progress were self-evident.  Calhoun could compromise at times (see the Missouri Compromise of 1820 or the Compromise of 1850), however, when he believed southern rights centering on slavery were threatened he would draw the line.

Portrait of Daniel Webster

(Daniel Webster)

Elder is correct when he argues that the second watershed in Calhoun’s development apart from 1828 occurred in 1836 as he finally came to reject Jeffersonian principles he once espoused.  First was conflict with Andrew Jackson who created “Pet Banks” that his administration could fund instead of a National Bank – this would foster the Panic of 1837, the worst depression in US history to that point as cotton prices were hit hard.  Further, the election of Martin Van Buren in 1836 reinforced Calhoun’s fears of hereditary monarchy.  The result Calhoun’s views of state’s rights solidified resulting in his vehement support for slavery.  These views were further exacerbated with the Texas annexation crisis, the Mexican War, and northern attempts to block or limit any expansion of slavery into territories acquired from the war.  For Calhoun legislation like the Wilmot Proviso which would not allow slavery in any territory obtained from Mexico pushed Calhoun over the edge arguing that if this went into effect disunion could only result.

(Floride Calhoun, wife of John C. Calhoun)

Elder’s portrayal is of a brilliant man driven by intensity and unrelenting ambition.  He believed that “Providence had placed him” on earth to complete his duty for his country.  Elder strongly suggests that as Calhoun’s political career evolved his moods began to darken as does his belief system.  Elder states he could be “noble, stubborn, suicidal or delusional,” all of which is supported by Calhoun’s own writings, speeches, political activity, and interaction with his contemporaries.  Had Calhoun simply argued that slavery was a necessary evil whose abolishment would mean disaster for the south instead of arguing in a very tortuous manner that it was a moral good, economically sound, and made the south more democratic, he might be viewed more positively by history.  However, his makeup would not allow this, and his defense of white racism, treatment of his slaves, and stubbornness are responsible for his reputation. 

In Elder’s telling, Calhoun loved his country and his region, and despite his flaws his impact on American history cannot be denied.  Elder’s work is one of objectivity that is well supported by the documentary evidence and should remain the most important biography of Calhoun for many years to come.

John C Calhoun by Mathew Brady, 1849. Some scholars think the senator and vice-president was Melville’s model for Captain Ahab.

(John C. Calhoun)

A FEVER IN THE HEARTLAND: THE KLU KLUX KLAN’S PLOT TO TAKE OVER AMERICA, AND THE WOMAN WHO STOPPED THEM by Timothy Egan

szfreiberger American cultural history, American Political History, American Social History Leave a comment

( David C. Stephenson)

Today, we live in an America beset by racist groups who over the last decade seem to have been accepted by a significant element of society.  The anti-Semitic murders at a Pittsburgh synagogue and the murder of George Floyd are just two examples in a world where white supremacists and extremists engage in attacks against Jews, Blacks, Muslims, the LGBT community, Asians, and Hispanics seemingly on a daily basis.  If that was not bad enough, according to the Anti-Defamation League, the ACLU, and other civil rights organizations violence against minorities is on the rise along with malevolent  threats against what racists see as “the other” in our society, while many politicians, including an ex-president grant these groups legitimacy through their public support and commentary.  For some this period is an aberration in our history, however, the historical record does not support that conclusion.

One of the more interesting historical examples is the 1920s – the Jazz Age, a period which witnessed the height of a uniquely American hate group, the Ku Klux Klan.  Their region of support was not the south, but the heartland and the west.  They hated Blacks, Jews, Catholics, and immigrants and would do anything to block these groups from entering the United States and achieving the American dream.  The group was led by a charismatic charlatan named D. C. Stephenson.  This era with its focus on the KKK and its “Grand Dragon” is the subject of Timothy Egan’s latest book, A FEVER IN THE HEARTLAND: THE KLU KLUX KLAN’S PLOT TO TAKE OVER AMERICA, AND THE WOMAN WHO STOPPED THEM.  Egan, a Pulitzer Prize and National Book Award Winner has written a number of excellent monographs including, THE WORST HARD TIME describing the depression and THE IMMORTAL IRISHMAN which deals with the Great Irish Famine of the 1840s.   In his latest work he has produced a riveting historical thriller which deals with one of the darkest periods in American history.  The period under discussion is highlighted by a cunning con man and his supporters and the woman who stopped them.  The narrative evokes deep emotions as it reflects a deeper concern that we are now inside an even more dangerous period of racial hatred and violence.

Hiram Wesley Evans, Imperial Wizard 27471u waist up.jpg

(Wesley Hiram Evans)

Egan immediately lays out the problem in his introduction as in the 1920s the KKK controlled three state governorships including Indiana which Stephenson ruled as an autocrat, and a number of mayor’s offices nationwide.  In addition, the KKK had its own 30,000 man legally deputized police force, and the state of Indiana passed the world’s first eugenic sterilization law, something that Adolf Hitler noticed and studied.  In the South whites wiped out Black voting rights and imposed Jim Crow laws absolving government from supporting equal rights and was supported by a Supreme Court with only one justice dissenting.  Lastly, the KKK claimed fifteen US senators and 75 House members to impact Congress.

As in all of Egan’s works A FEVER IN THE HEARTLAND is deeply researched and reflects the author’s command of the material.  From the outset Egan argues that the KKK problem began at the conclusion of the Civil War with its foundation in Tennessee under the leadership of the defeated Confederate general, Nathan Bedford Forrest who unleashed a reign of terror throughout the south after the assassination of Abraham Lincoln and the accession of Andrew Johnson to the presidency who was an out and out racist.  Lynchings, murders, violence rampaged throughout the south until General Ulysses S. Grant assumed the presidency and by 1872 he had crushed the Klan and Forrest disbanded it. 

The Klan would rise again with a slightly different agenda beginning in 1921 sending recruiters throughout the Midwest providing employment for D. C. Stephenson was living in the segregated city of Evansville, IN with the hope of expanding the organization in the north.  Stephenson would soon move on to Indianapolis, a city Egan describes along with other midwestern cities and states as having become racially unhinged following WWI.  People were fed racist lies and religious bigotry with no basis in fact by the Klan under the leadership of  Stephenson, who Egan describes as a “drunk and a fraud, a bootlegger and a blackmailer,” a rapist and a man prone to lies, violence, using bribery to achieve his aims.  He left a family behind in rags and distress who he refused to support. 

No photo description available.

(Madge Oberholtzer)

Egan explores Stephenson’s life and beliefs in detail and concludes he was nothing more than a huckster who traded in racial theories that were demeaning and dangerous.  He would help reconstruct the KKK in part as a business investment that eventually would make him a millionaire.  Egan lays out Stephenson’s strategy and the resulting machinations which would allow him to take over the state of Indiana leading to his view that “I am the law” which he would use as a basis for his actions.  He would help spread KKK doctrine to Texas, Colorado, Ohio, and Pennsylvania as his ultimate goal was to use the Klan as a vehicle to take over the federal government and gain the presidency.  Egan carefully develops the theme that racial hatred was not a southern phenomenon, but a northern one as membership in the Klan in the Midwest was rapidly expanding throughout the early 1920s.  This expansion was due to the Klan’s rejection of modernism and a belief the world was spinning too fast and the threat of the “other,” southern European, Russian, and Italian immigrants who were mostly Jews and Catholics were a threat to what they viewed as the traditional American way of life.

Coolidge, Calvin

(President Calvin Coolidge)

Aside from Stephenson there are a number of important historical figures that Egan introduces.  Henry Ford, the catalyst for the rise in anti-Semitism through his newspaper the Dearborn Independent which had a circulation of over one million and the use of his wealth.  Patrick O’Donnell, bravely stood against the Klan using his newspaper, Tolerance to spread the truth about their beliefs and the danger they presented.  Hiram Wesley Evans, former Imperial Wizard who eventually shared leadership of the Klan with Stephenson and later had a falling out with him.  Daisy Douglas Barr, a Quaker preacher who held a broad vision of White Supremacy and worked to develop a role for women in the Klan.  President Calvin Coolidge who did nothing to offset the Klan’s popularity and used it for his personal political benefit.  Governor Edwin Jackson and Senator James Watson both from Indiana owed their political success to Stephenson.

Egan’s narrative is in two parts.  First he developed the strategies and actions of the Klan from 1920-1925.  The author drills deeply into Klan ideology and the personalities that spread their beliefs.  He points to numerous historical examples from the 1921 Tulsa Massacre, the acceptance of eugenics as science to justify Klan actions, Klan control of state legislatures to implement their programs, events designed to attract more members and reinforce their beliefs and goals, and the lack of response by state and federal officials to the violence against Blacks, Jews, Catholics, and immigrants.  Egan will then shift his story to that of the events of March 1925 and introduce a series of new characters, the most important of which is Madge Oberholtzer, the manager of the Indiana Young People’s Reading Circle, a special section of the Indiana Department of Public Instruction.  When she heard  rumors that her job and program were about to be eliminated because of budget cuts she turned to Stephenson who she felt had the political power to assist her.  Stephenson would take a shine to her which in the end resulted in a brutal rape and the death of Oberholtzer.

Egan explores the events that led to Oberholtzer’s rape and murder and the trial that followed.  He introduces Asa Smith, Oberholtzer’s lawyer, and Will Remy, an unassuming prosecutor for Marion County, IN, both of whom wanted to destroy Stephenson and cut the Klan down to size.  Egan’s descriptions are disturbing because of the violence involved and the political system that Stephenson sought to manipulate to obtain his acquittal at a time when there were between two and five million Klan members nationwide.

(Prosecutor William Henderson Remy and jury that convicted Stephenson))

Egan writes with adept authority with an eye toward disconcerting detail as a White Protestant racial movement sought to take advantage of the historical racial animus that has existed in the United States from its outset.  Jeff Shesol’s New York Times book review of April 2, 2023, encompasses how deeply the Klan became ingrained in American society; “It offered a more expansive set of resentments, providing more points of entry for aggrieved white Protestants. Racial purists were armed with the so-called science of eugenics and stoked with fears of being replaced by “insane, diseased” Catholics and Jews. Moral purists and traditionalists were called from the pulpit to wage war against modernity — enlisting in K.K.K. vice squads that beat adulterers and smashed up speakeasies.  But the Klan did more, in this period, than raise the fiery cross. For a startlingly large number of Americans, Egan writes, the Klan “gave meaning, shape and purpose to the days.” It was possible to do your shopping at Klan-approved stores and cook Klan-approved recipes, to enroll your sons in the Junior K.K.K. and daughters in the Tri-K Klub, and to spend evenings singing Klan songs by the piano. The K.K.K., in later parlance, was an ecosystem. “Folks got their news from editors loyal to the Klan,” Egan explains, or from a disinformation network that spread lies with speed. Corruption kept the enterprise running and growing: The police and politicians were bribed; businesses owned by Jews, Catholics or Blacks were shaken down; leaders and recruiters — including pastors — got a cut of initiation fees, dues and robe sales.”

Egan’s main theme that Oberholtzer’s death and Stephenson’s conviction stopped the Klan before it could take over America  goes a bit too far.  Granted, it was a major reason why the Klan’s membership rapidly declined within a few years of the trial, but more importantly was the graft and public hypocrisy reflected in the rot exhibited by Klan leadership and organization played more of a role in its regression.  In addition, there were other actors who were emboldened to take on the Klan including Black editors, Jewish and Catholic groups which all contributed to the weakening and loss of influence by the Klan.

Despite Egan’s overemphasis of Oberholtzer’s role in the narrative the book is clearly written, well supported, and an addictive read.  Anyone with interest in understanding the rise and fall of the Klan, and perhaps the rise of White Supremacy today should take the time to read Egan’s work – it will be eye opening.

David Curtis Stephenson

AMERICAN MIDNIGHT: THE GREAT WAR, A VIOLENT PEACE AND DEMOCRACIES FORGOTTEN CRISIS by Adam Hochschild

szfreiberger American cultural history, American Diplomatic History, American Political History, American Social History, World War I Leave a comment
Pres. Woodrow Wilson at his desk, Washington, D.C.

(President Woodrow Wilson)

The four years that followed America’s entrance into World War I was a grim period in American history that seems painfully relevant today.  It was a time of racism, white nationalism, anti-foreign, anti-immigrant feelings, and of course plague.. On top of that American society suffered from a misogynistic view of women, and an appalling level of political partisanship.  By 1920 the culmination of World War I and the Versailles Treaty were almost in place.  The treaty itself was punitive and over the next decade it would be used by opponents of the Weimar Republic in Germany as a cudgel to destroy any hope in achieving democracy and greatly facilitated the rise of the Nazi Party and  Adolf Hitler.  Fast forward to the turn of the 20th century, we find Russia beginning to reject the promise of democracy following the collapse of the Cold War leading to the reemergence of Pan Slavism and the rise of Vladimir Putin.  The similarities may be divergent, but it is clear that the economic misery in Germany in the 1920s and Russia in the 1990s is more than a coincidence in bringing authoritarianism to power in both countries.

The second decade in the 20th and 21st centuries tend to mirror each other.  The fighting in the trenches on the western front during World War I matches the trench warfare that has existed in eastern Ukraine since 2014 and seems to be growing worse each day.  The Russian Revolution helped produce the authoritarianism of Vladimir Lenin and Joseph Stalin, in much the same way that the end of communism brought to power, first Boris Yeltsin, and his handpicked successor, Vladimir Putin.  The end of World War I brought about the failure of Woodrow Wilson’s League of Nations, and recently Donald Trump tried to unravel NATO and while Putin is trying to destroy NATO by invading Ukraine, the former president’s acolytes have continued to try and undermine the Biden administration’s effort to assist the Kyiv government.

A. Mitchell Palmer. LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

(Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer)

In 1917, Lenin bragged that the Soviet Union would lead an ecumenical revolution in the name of Karl Marx.  Today, Putin wants to recreate the former Soviet Empire and “Russify” its “near abroad” regions.  During the 1920s Russia was an economic pariah, today economic sanctions imposed by the west are seen as one of the main weapons imposed in order to block Putin’s expansionism.

The difference today is that a number of countries which suffered under western colonialism; India, China, Iran, and Saudi Arabia find themselves benefitting from Russian cheap energy and trade as they pursue their own reasons for their supposed neutrality in dealing with the war in Ukraine.  There were many errors made in the diplomatic realm in 1919 that we see resurfacing today – one can call it the revenge of former western victims of imperialism.

Wood, Leonard

(General Leonard Wood)

Across the Atlantic we also witness the similarities between the two time periods.  Domestically the United states has found itself in the midst of violent anarchist movements on the right.  Groups like the Proud Boys and their ilk and the MAGA crowd engage in political violence in much the same way as leftist anarchists did in the post-World War One era.  Politically, the lack of bipartisanship today is a daily occurrence where “owning the libs” by the MAGA crowd is more important than passing legislation for the benefit of the American people.  In 1919, the leader of the Republican opposition was Senator Henry Cabot Lodge who despised Wilson and resented democratic control of the presidency and congress over the previous eight years.  He led the opposition to the ratification of the League of Nations in the Senate and was successful in part because of Wilson’s own political errors and a belief that he was infallible.  In the same way NATO was threatened by extinction under the presidency of Donald Trump, another president whose belief in their own judgement was beyond reproach, and the likes of Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy who seems like he will do anything to satisfy the right wing fringe of the Republican caucus and stop American aid to Ukraine.  A further similarity between the two periods is that of dealing with disease or pandemics.  In 1918-1919 it was influenza which the government downplayed resulting in over 675,000 death which Wilson paid little attention too, and of course COVID-19 the last few years resulting in over 1,000,000 deaths, conspiracy theories, and a president who saw the disease as a plot to hinder his reelection as opposed to properly protecting the American people.  Lastly, immigration issues have dominated both periods.  The 1920s witnessed an increasing war against labor, communism, and immigration in general as it seemed the “Bolsheviki” were mostly Jews from Eastern Europe, not the good “white stock” of Northern and Western Europe.  The period is known as the first Red Scare, but today we have similar issues.  The lack of bipartisanship prevents immigration reform and politicians are quick to point to the southern border as a national security threat.  Trump’s commentary on immigrants is well known as well as those dealing with “shit hole” nations. 

The mindsets of Wilson and Trump are also similar, and that mindset led to numerous errors for the American people.  Wilson proved to be a sanctimonious character who believed his way was always correct and if you didn’t support him you were no longer an accepted part of his administration.  Trump has a similar mindset, but there is a difference.  Wilson held strong beliefs in his Fourteen Points which he hoped would bring an end to all wars.  Trump, believes in nothing apart from his use of the presidency for his and his families self-aggrandizement, and perhaps keeping him out of prison and an orangejump suit.

Emma Goldman seated.jpg

(Emma Goldman)

The lack of bipartisanship in Congress was clear concerning the League of Nations, the increasing belief in eugenics and anti-migrant and racist tropes led to violence against minorities be it the Tulsa  or Omaha massacres or other events throughout the south.  This resulted in the 1924 Johnson Act that created quotas to bar certain groups from the United States.  Though women finally got the vote after the war, impediments for them and blacks remained to keep them from exercising their rights of citizenship.

Fast forward to today we have disagreements over aid to Ukraine and the US role in NATO.  Further, we have election deniers who still have not given up overturning the 2020 election no matter what the courts have ruled.  The crisis at the southern border, the bombing of synagogues, the shootings of young black men and schools, and of course the events of 1/6.  These occurrences can be laid at the doorstep of MAGA conspiracy theorists, FOX news and Donald Trump and reflect how little the US has grown as a united nation over the last 100 years.  Philosopher George Santayana was correct in 1905 when he stated, “those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”  I guess the lesson no longer applies as a large segment of our population has cut history and government courses from educational curriculum on many levels as is highlighted currently by Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’ attempts to rewrite his states curriculum stressing only the “good parts dealing with whites,” and leaving out anything negative like slavery and genocide of Native-Americans out.

The first two decades of the 20th and 21st centuries are uncanny in their similarities and it makes it important to consult Adam Hochschild’s latest book, AMERICAN MIDNIGHT: THE GREAT WAR, A VIOLENT PEACE AND DEMOCRACIES FORGOTTEN CRISIS to understand the evolution of events surrounding World War I and its culmination, its impact on societal movements throughout the world including the United States, and how many of these issues remain with us today reflecting on the idea that we have not come as far as we think in the last century.

Eugene V. Debs

(Presidential candidate and Socialist Eugene V. Debs)

As the case in many of his books like KING LEOPOLD’S GHOST, TO END ALL WARS, SPAIN IN OUR

HEARTS, and BURY THE CHAINS Hochschild exhibits a mastery of the historical material and sources including astute analysis that is important for the reader to digest.  He possesses an easy writing style that makes it easier to absorb material that can be very disconcerting.  In his current work Hochschild has created a narrative that is more of a socio-political history than a recounting of World War I and the treaty that followed.  The book is separated into two distinct parts.  First the reader is presented with an America that is in the grip of a patriotic fervor that had never been seen before.  Anti-German feeling fostered by submarine warfare raised levels of hostility that remained throughout the war.  The result was the loss of civil rights for a large component of American society particularly labor and anyone who questioned the Wilson administration.  President Woodrow Wilson was seen as a progressive, but the policies implemented under his watch caused tremendous repression and violations of constitutional protections of free speech.  The repression resulted in vigilantism, violence, and an unequal implementation of justice.  Legislation and later Supreme Court decisions codified these the Espionage Act, the Sedition Act, or the actions of the Postmaster General and other propaganda organs.  Big Business saw this as an opportunity to go after labor unions like the IWW and the Socialist Party.  Racists saw this as an opportunity to repress blacks in the south as well as the north as many southern blacks migrated north to escape adverse treatment and hopes for employment.  In addition, the government deputized private groups to assist in this repression and violence.  A number of personalities dominate this section including President Wilson, radicals like Emma Goldman, Postmaster general Albert Burleson, and many others.

In the second half of the book, Hochschild’s analysis zeroes in on the continuing repression after the war and the rise of the Red Scare.  The constant round up of immigrants for deportation, legislation to block immigration, violence against blacks, even those who fought in World war I, the continued imprisonment of people jailed for opposing the war, a domestic war against the new enemy communism which seemed to be spreading in Europe were dominant themes.   Throughout President Wilson did not oppose these extreme measures as his focus was on gaining passage of his precious League of Nations which ultimately failed.  After suffering a debilitating stroke trying to sell his League, Wilson was effectively a non-executive for the last eight months of his presidency as his wife Edith seemed to have been a co-president.  Two of the dominant personalities of the period were Attorney-General A. Mitchell Palmer, and General Leonard Wood.  Both sought their respective party nominations for president in 1920 and ran on a platform of anti-immigration and deportation.  In Palmer’s case his actions relate to an anarchist bombing of his home in 1919 which changed a progressive into a right wing fanatic employing the likes of the young J. Edgar Hoover.

Portrait of white woman in dark clothing

(Kate Richard O’Hare)

A number of important movements and personalities are explored, many of which lead to current comparisons.  The first, Woodrow Wilson who oversaw the war on dissent resulting in violence and jailings.  Wilson was a southerner who held strong racist ideas despite his progressive reputation and showed little interest in protecting civil rights after the American entrance into the war.  Wilson’s problem throughout was that he believed that bargaining was beneath him and his autocratic tendencies eventually would dominate his approach to politics.  Apart from Wilson, the author focuses on personalities who normally do not receive the coverage of a President, Secretary of State or other high officials.  The reader is exposed to William J. “Big Bill” Flynn, the former Chief of the Secret Service and New York City Police Detectives who would head up the Bureau of Investigation, the precursor of the FBI, a man who would hire the young J. Edgar Hoover who would copy the Library of Congresses card catalogue system to track what he deemed to be enemies of the people.  Women who spoke out against the war and were jailed receive a great deal of coverage.  Emma Goldman, Dr. Marie Equi, and Kate Richard O’Hare are front and center.  The role of Postmaster General and his weeding out all opposition to the war effort through the mails; the jailing of Eugene Debs; Grace Hammer, a Sherman Detective Agency employee imbedded within the IWW as “an underground cheerleader” for the war to root out dissidents; Leo Wendell, a Justice Department spy, Lt. Colonel Ralph Van Deman, the domestic military intelligence chief, Louis F. Post, the only member of the Labor Department who fought against deportations, Judge Kenesaw Mountain Landis who had no difficulty with objectivity dealing with dissidents, Congressman Albert Johnson who led the fight for immigration quotas that blocked immigrants from anywhere apart from northern and western Europeans (sounds like Trump!) are just a few whose impact on American history and their actions should serve as a lesson for all to study.

The infamous Palmer Raids, mass arrests by the Justice department on the Union of Russian Workers and other organizations receive extensive coverage.  In particular was the radical Division within the Justice Department fostered by J. Edgar Hoover who was put in charge of these raids and implemented the surveillance, arrests, police raids, internment camps, legal chicanery, all strategies employed for decades to come.  Hoover saw the resulting deportations as a “feather in his cap.”  Wilson is just as culpable as he remarked in 1919, “any man who carries a hyphen about with him carries a dagger that he is ready to plunge into the vitals of this republic.”

Hochschild also stresses how the Wilson administration drew upon America’s experience in the Philippines, employing torture techniques like water boarding and counter insurgency in the United States to ferret out dissidents.  General Leonard Wood was the master of implementing these techniques.

Albert Sidney Burleson

(US Postmaster Albert Burleson)

In summary I turn to Thomas Meany’s review in the October 9, 2022, that appeared in the New York Times; “Hochschild’s sharp portraits and vignettes make for poignant reading, but at times skirt fuller historical understanding. We hear about newspapers and magazines being shut down, but little about what was being argued in them. Powerful thinkers about the political moment, such as Randolph Bourne, are absent from “American Midnight,” while John Dos Passos features more as a backup bard than a literary chronicler with historical insight. Hochschild attributes much of the failure of American socialists to expand their ranks to the racism and xenophobia that bedeviled the white working class. But there were also significant problems of organization in the American labor movement, which struggled to unite unskilled immigrant workers with workers in established unions. Trotsky had expected America to make as great a contribution to world socialism as it had to capitalism; he was appalled by the lack of party discipline, later damning Debs with faint praise, as a “romantic and a preacher, and not at all a politician or a leader.” The Catholic Church inoculated large segments of immigrant workers from radicalization, while canny capitalists like Henry Ford devised ways to divide workers into a caste system with different gradations of privilege. For all of the success of the strike waves of 1919, almost none of them left any permanent new union organization in place, nor did socialists make much headway in electoral politics.

In the closing portions of this tale, Hochschild shows that, by contrast, a generation of American liberals learned what not to do from Wilson. As his international crusade sputtered into catastrophe, with Wilson signing off on the Versailles Treaty, which laid the kindling for World War II, younger members of his staff were already preparing to become different kinds of liberals. Felix Frankfurter, who, as a young judge advocate general, gallantly tried to counteract some of Wilson’s domestic terror, and Frankfurter’s friend Walter Lippmann, who worked on Wilson’s foreign policy team, were determined to cast off the administration’s excesses. Both envisioned a state that would protect civil rights instead of violating them, and oversee a more efficient and fair economy. In the early 1930s, even as they drifted apart, Lippmann and Frankfurter would help impart a crucial lesson to the Roosevelt administration: If it wanted to snuff out American socialism, it was better to absorb some of its ideals than to banish them.”

WilsonOffice.jpg

(President Woodrow Wilson)

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVITUDE: DONALD TRUMP’S WASHINGTON AND THE PRICE OF SUBMISSION by Mark Leibovitch

szfreiberger American Political History, American Social History Leave a comment
The Trump International Hotel Washington, D.C.

To date there have been countless books written about Donald Trump’s machinations.  They seem to cover all aspects of his presidency, personality, and private life.  They range from psychological profiles, the women he has been involved with, his career in business, his election in 2016, his presidency, and finally his defeat in 2020 and its ramifications for the American people.  The books are written mostly by reporters who have covered Trump, acolytes, family members, and people that Trump has used.  Most are well written and are supported by author’s research in addition to the facts and reality of living with the MAGA world.  No matter how important each book may be in their own right, none can compare with Mark Leibovich’s new book, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVITUDE: DONALD’S TRUMP’S WASHINGTON AND THE PRICE OF SUBMISSION.  What sets Leibovich’s work apart from others is his writing style, which is humorous, sarcastic, caustic, and in its own way analytical.  Leibovich’s narrative encompasses much of the same material as others, but it is in his presentation that makes another rehash of the Trump years palatable.

As he has done in his bestseller, THIS TOWN which dissected the current political culture in Washington, his latest focuses and confronts the leadership of the Republican Party and their minions and appley describes the type of power hungry individuals who have ridden roughshod over the former principles of the GOP and latched onto Donald Trump to maintain their own self-interest and political office. In his entertaining account Leibovich zeroes in on Senators Marco Rubio, Lindsay Graham, Ted Cruz, along with other characters like Rudy Giuliani, Chris Christie, Reince Priebus, among others who seem to dominate Trump’s circle, despite the fact that most previously chronicled their distaste for Trump.  What all of these personages have in common is that they sold their souls to the devil, in the name of the “Donald.”

Leibovich’s profile has a locus that seems to be the Trump International Hotel in Washington, DC.  After reading Leibovich’s account it is hard to distinguish between the importance of the Hotel and the White House.  It is clear that the hotel is the center of power where acolytes, notable members of society, Trump supporters, and administration colleagues gather to make policy and plan what is best for Donald Trump and America in general.  

Unlike many of the new books on Trump, personal memoirs by individuals who have seen the light and analyze how the MAGA world has altered American politics, Leibovich zeroes in on the creation of a dangerous culture of submission within the GOP and the nihilism and cynicism that has resulted.  At times Leibovich’s humor and sarcasm dominates the narrative, but in reality his narrative is based on factual information, and it is a serious analysis of what Trump and his MAGA converts have done to America.

Leibovich’s purpose in authoring the book is not to rehash events and personalities that have dominated the news for the last seven years but to tell the story of the ordeal Trump has put this country through – “the supplicant fanboys who permitted Donald Trump’s depravity to be infected on the rest of us.”

Leibovich is correct that the key to Trump’s support in 2016 and 2020 was that his followers saw him as a truth teller, despite the fact he was a habitual liar.   Further, Trump’s appeal in the MAGA world is clear – “Trump’s spool of personal grievances had become their own.  In effect, his narcissism did, too.”  From the outset Trump presented an alternative reality that was supported by the likes of Sean Spicer, Kellyanne Conway, Hope Hicks, Vice President Pence. Mark Meadows, Reince Priebus and a host of many other enablers.  Leibovitch takes the reader through each of these individuals and their role in dealing with Trump, be it the size of the 2016 inauguration crowd, the cabinet meeting when Trump’s appointee kowtowed to their leader, to the clearing of Lafayette Park by the military in order for Trump to have a photo op in front of a church holding a bible.  Leibovich’s commentary is priceless as he describes Hicks – “She has the distinct superpower in her ability to manage Trump, not unlike how a care provider might have a special knack for managing a particular toddler.”

Leibovich has the ability to put on paper exactly what mature  people were thinking in response to Trump’s latest scheming.  Mitch McConnell comes under Leibovich’s lens as the political operator and power hungry person that he exhibits each day.  It is a fundamental problem, but Leibovich makes it acceptable as he describes McConnell’s “zombie walk – stony faced, owlish, and keep walking” approach to responding to the most egregious actions taken by Trump.  McConnell is not the only person to be skewered by Leibovich.  Lindsay Graham is a special target particularly his relationship with Senator John McCain, supposedly his friend and accomplice in the senate.  But his true nature is front and center when McCain passes away and Graham “sucks up” to Trump as he knew how to stroke the president’s erogenous zones, i.e., undoing Obama’s accomplishments and restoring America to greatness.  In a sense McCain’s death was liberating for Graham as he could now be out in the open about what type of person he really is.

Washington, D.C., January 4 2019: President Donald Trump enters the Rose Garden at the White House after meeting with Democratic leadership to discuss the ongoing partial government shutdown.
(President Trump and Congressman Kevin McCarthy)

Trump converted many lemmings such as Ron DeSantis and Devin Nunes who experienced non-descript careers before attaching themselves to Trump.  Trump had a gift in knowing how to draw in disaffected characters.  Leibovich is correct that in a sense that Trumpism was like “group therapy for conservatives who feel alienated from, and hostile toward, the progressive consensus…Trumpism is, at heart, not a philosophy, but an enemies list.”  Republicans had the remarkable ability to “suspend belief” when it came to impeachment and other issues and illegalities.  They had to or else the Trump smear brigade of Fox News and co, plus supporters would have made their lives miserable.

(Congresswoman Elizabteh Cheney)

Leibovich tries hard to find heroes in the Republican Party.  He praises Mitt Romney for voting for impeachment and other comments, but in the end Romney can not overcome his past, just look at his actions in dealing with the “Big Dig” in Boston when he was Massachusetts governor. Perhaps the topic that is most disturbing which even Leibovich’s sarcasm and humor cannot overcome is the rehashing of January 6, 2021.  It is here that the author describes the “land the plane” strategy pursued by the GOP leadership to get the country to January 20th and Joe Biden’s inauguration.  Along the way Leibovitch drills down into the duplicitous and hypocritic Speaker of the House hopeful, Kevin McCarthy.  There is no need to trace his anger at Trump for January 6th to his visit to Mar-a-Lago a few weeks later when he realized he could not be Speaker without Trump.  So off he went to kiss the ring and kowtow once again.  What is most disturbing is that January 6th underscores how extreme Trump’s one way loyalty really is and the contempt he has for those most devoted to him.

If there is a pseudo hero in Leibovitch’s account it is Liz Cheney who despite her conservative credentials and voting record (93% with Trump) is being drummed out of the GOP because of her stand for constitutional principles and democracy.  Be that as it may, we as Americans are stuck.  Even if Donald Trump passed from the scene, Trumpism is embedded in the GOP and almost half the country.  It will be interesting if Attorney General Merrick Garland decides to prosecute Trump, Trump declares for the GOP nomination for 2024, or any matter of things that could rip our country further apart.  One thing is clear in that the Trump acolytes will continue to serve his interests because they correspond with their own need for power and recognition.