Prof. Roger E . Rosenberg
I was born in Ohio and spent twelve summers and winters there before my four-person-and-one-dog family moved to Oakland, California. Naturally, after junior and high school, I chose to attend the University of California at Berkeley for my BA degree in history. Despite having acquired a ton of education, I still value common sense. (Tom Paine would get the reference!)
I've been a public school teacher and a university professor . . . I now take up the cause of American democracy with pen and paper (okay, laptop and mouse) but the cause remains the same: belief in self-government and the right of people to exercise their constitutional liberties freely and without artificial constraints. Up the revolution! -Prof. Rosenberg
Supervisors: Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence, Tom Paine, author of "Common Sense" and "The American Crisis", and Tatanka Iyotake (Sitting Bull) or Tȟatȟáŋka Íyotake (Hunkpapa Sioux)
Address: San Jose, California, United States
I've been a public school teacher and a university professor . . . I now take up the cause of American democracy with pen and paper (okay, laptop and mouse) but the cause remains the same: belief in self-government and the right of people to exercise their constitutional liberties freely and without artificial constraints. Up the revolution! -Prof. Rosenberg
Supervisors: Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence, Tom Paine, author of "Common Sense" and "The American Crisis", and Tatanka Iyotake (Sitting Bull) or Tȟatȟáŋka Íyotake (Hunkpapa Sioux)
Address: San Jose, California, United States
less
Related Authors
InterestsView All (7)
Uploads
Papers by Prof. Roger E . Rosenberg
I was deeply bothered by these two conflicting viewpoints so I decided to research the most blatant racist quotes from Lincoln I could find. Along the way, however, I had to read many of his speeches as well as his witticisms.
One evening near the end of the research project, I was sitting in an easy chair with an open book about Lincoln on my lap. I was still torn between these two different viewpoints and struggling to make sense of both of them. Then the pages of the book seemed to move almost by themselves and a different page stared up at me.
I found myself staring at the Emancipation Proclamation. In an instant my mind was made up. There is only one person's signature on that document and it's Lincoln's.
As I said to my history class before delivering my remarks, "I am a Lincoln man" to let them know what my point of view was going to be.
Sometimes people forget about Abraham Lincoln and why people liked him. I'm not saying he was perfect--far from it--but I believe the good in the man and the wisdom in his actions far outweigh any other misgivings we may have about him.
There is only one Abraham Lincoln in American history and his story continues to be passed down from generation to generation. This is part of that transmission belt.
Fraternally yours,
Prof. Rosenberg
Jan. 9, 2021
It has become politically incorrect to describe American history with too great an emphasis on its positive nature and achievements, given all the bloodshed and brutality associated with the exploitation and mistreatment of black people and Native Americans, along with a diverse range of other minorities and working class people in general.
This older approach has been described as seeing history through rose-colored glasses: “America is the greatest country, therefore our history is the greatest, our leaders are the best”, etc. The author has no intention of opposing the tremendous progress that already has been made in developing a far more honest appraisal of U.S. History--with the gloves off, so to speak.
A rebuttal to the overly optimistic glorification of everything American was long overdue; the new countervailing movement among scholars and activists is based on an in-depth look at actual social conditions and events.
Inevitably, an academic trend towards a stripped-down scorching treatment of the past, as exemplified by historians like Howard Zinn, opened the floodgates of anger and lingering resentment; it unleashed a tremendous passion among all those whose lineages and voices were suppressed for decades and whose ethnic-cultural identities bore the brunt of the nation’s exploitation, racism, and violence.
The author was raised in a Marxist household and so from an early age was made hyper-aware of class exploitation and racial inequities within American society. Even so, the author believes there is room to remind a younger generation of the importance of studying, and balancing, all aspects of American history.
It is both possible and desirable for students today to develop an appreciation for a balanced presentation of our nation’s story that includes “the good, the bad, and the ugly” rather than settling for an approach that ultimately proves one-sided: that is either too self-righteous and glorifying, on the one hand, or too condescending and derogatory on the other. The truth is to be found most often between two extremes--between polar opposites in interpretation.
Thus the author was inspired to write an essay “Before and After the American Revolution” in the belief that if people today could better appreciate that historical epoch which gave birth to the United States, it will help to develop a fuller understanding of the social problems facing our nation, both in the past and today.
By rooting ourselves in our nation’s history and fundamental principles, we can better equip ourselves to identify inequalities and develop the most effective strategies to confront and overcome ongoing injustices. The American Revolution was a beginning, not an end; the degree to which its purpose retains its vitality is a moral issue incumbent upon us all to recognize and address as we seek to find our own place in America’s story.
************
The pendulum of history swings first one way, then the other.
************
I was deeply bothered by these two conflicting viewpoints so I decided to research the most blatant racist quotes from Lincoln I could find. Along the way, however, I ended up reading many of his speeches as well as his witticisms.
************
One evening near the end of the research project, I was sitting in an easy chair with an open book about Lincoln on my lap. I was still torn between these two different viewpoints and struggling to make sense of both of them. Then the leaves of the book seemed to move, almost by themselves, and a different page stared up at me.
************
I found myself staring at the Emancipation Proclamation. In an instant my mind was made up. There is only one person's signature on that document and it's Lincoln's.
************
As I said to my history class before delivering my remarks the next day, "I am a Lincoln man" to let them know what my point of view was going to be.
************
Sometimes people forget about Abraham Lincoln and why people admired him so much. I'm not saying he was perfect--far from it--but I believe the good in the man and the wisdom in his actions far outweigh any misgivings we may have about him.
************
There is only one Abraham Lincoln in American history and his story continues to be passed down from generation to generation.
************
This is part of that transmission belt.
Fraternally yours ************
Prof. Rosenberg
************
A contributing factor to this bewildering lack of direction might well be the absence of a coherent and well-defined foreign policy. Our government's approach should not depend on luck, happenstance, and serendipitous circumstances.
Note:
Students, teachers, and scholars may borrow ideas or language from my writing without serious objection from the author. Still, it's nice to be acknowledged!
You know, there is a general rule of thumb that academic scholars, particularly in the field of history, should avoid all use of the pronoun “I”, with a few rare exceptions here and there. The rule will be observed in the book that is to follow but here, in the prefatory material, including this statement and Introduction, an exception must be made.
Because of the nature of the topic, in particular because of the motivation behind the book’s genesis, the author finds it morally incumbent upon himself to break that rule.
Even if it risks diminishing the value of the book, I want the reader to understand the psychological origins for what I wrote and why.
Simply put, can a white person say “I am not a racist” and be sincere? If so, then the entire theology of the Nation of Islam, to which Malcolm subscribed wholeheartedly until his “awakening”, is built on a racist lie.
Malcolm experienced a life-altering transformation during his 1964 visit to Mecca which opened his eyes to a different world view. If the book receives criticism for insisting that the Nation of Islam and Malcolm preached racism, so be it; the author takes comfort in the fact that Malcolm himself continued to develop his thinking until he, too, realized the same truth.
I affirm without hesitation and with the utmost sincerity that I believe in the fundamental equality of all races and of all human beings everywhere. I have not lost my faith in that vision—which is why I am compelled to give voice to my position regarding the anti-white racism of Malcolm and the Nation of Islam.
This essay is about Malcolm but it also about you—your beliefs, your conscience, and your humanity. Only you can decide which Malcolm, the man we thought we knew before his 1964 visit to Mecca or the man who emerged after, better represents the dreams and hopes of humanity to one day live in a peaceful and just world.
This year has seen the deaths of unarmed black men and women at the hands of police. Thousands of people have taken to the streets to protest and demand reform.
Many of the marches have been peaceful but there have also been demonstrations that ended in vandalism and violence. It seemed an appropriate time to review the basics of non-violence in theory and practice. The First Amendment protects peaceful protest, not the violence associated with looting and riots, which remain crimes in and of themselves.
Moral indignation, no matter how great, does not excuse unlawful action. The only exception is non-violent civil disobedience, when unjust laws are broken deliberately: i.e., Rosa Parks sitting in the white section of a segregated bus in Montgomery, Alabama.
That type of courage based on conscience is far different from throwing a brick through a window during the hours of darkness when a mob mentality has taken over what started off as a peaceful demonstration.
If there is a subjective element to this writing, it cannot be avoided; historians do not always have the luxury of waiting years to write calmly and dispassionately of events in the past, maintaining an objective academic tone, etc.
This crisis is here and now and the lives of real people are at stake; the author’s only purpose is to remind readers how non-violence was an integral part of the historic success of the civil rights movement and to urge protesters to limit themselves to the same methods and philosophy. Dr. King will explain the reasons why.
(The following is an excerpt from Ch. 21 in "Malcolm: Journey to Brotherhood.")
The sub-title "Journey to Brotherhood" reflects the theme of seeing his life as a journey. The first chapter "Disagreeing with Malcolm" indicates this work is something more than eulogy or hagiography.
Whether you are pro- or anti-Malcolm, you might give one of the chapters a try.
The theme for the chapter posted here is that bi-racial unity in American history reflects another side of the nation's history, one that the Nation of Islam denied was even possible in their furious assault upon all white people as racists and devils.
It may seem far afield from Malcolm's life but it is a necessary chapter on the nature of the Underground Railroad, one of the brightest shining examples of bi-racial cooperation in American history. Every author has to start somewhere.
-Prof. Rosenberg
U.S. History, Ph.D.
Eighty-seven men, women, and children trekked bravely into the Sierra Nevada Mountains in the fall of 1846 but they did not manage to cross the summit before the first great winter storm hit in late October, when the mountains soon became wrapped in a frozen silence. Heavy snowfalls made walking through waist-deep drifts impossible, although they struggled on for as long as they had any strength left with which to try. Bitterly cold temperatures, as well as lack of food and supplies, threatened to turn these mountains into a graveyard for each of them.
As it was, the mountains became the final resting place for nearly half of them. That all of these California-bound pioneers did not perish is due in large measure to the exertions of James Reed, albeit through a set of most unusual circumstances. Reed, after reaching California, made repeated efforts to rescue his wife, four children, and the other families who remained trapped in the bitter cold and deep snow. They were caught in the middle of an unusually severe winter that was to make rescue efforts as equally difficult as any further travel by the entrapped and starving pioneers.
James Reed had been forced to go on ahead of the rest of the party, alone and on foot, through the mountains to California because in a bitter altercation with another man near the Humboldt River (1) Reed had killed the man in self-defense. The adult members of the Donner Party met and banished Reed from traveling any farther with them: swift rudimentary justice.
Surprisingly, although forced to complete part of the journey alone and over unknown land, Reed made it, arriving at Sutter's Fort on October 28, 1846. He then began to organize relief-and-rescue parties, an effort much complicated by internal California politics and the Mexican-American War then under way.
_________________________________
(1) Loomis, Patricia, Signposts (San Jose: San Jose Historical Museum Association, 1982), p. 71.
Here is another chapter from my forthcoming book "Malcolm: Journey to Brotherhood."
This chapter deals with the conductors, station masters, and the fugitive slave passengers of the UGRR, emphasizing its bi-racial nature.
Prof. Rosenberg
San Jose, CA.
I, too, believe the talkin' blues genre had a huge influence on Dylan, as I hope this chapter will satisfactorily explain. -Prof. Rosenberg
If you don't know names like Woody Guthrie and Pete Seeger this chapter can be skipped.
"Bob Dylan, Bard of the Sixties": this is a traditional full-length biography of Dylan from his growing up years to his rise to stardom in the 1960's. The piece posted on Academia.edu is but one chapter from the book. It is the author's intention to let Dylan speak for himself as much as possible. The work delves deeply into his lyrics as the best way to understand this brilliant and complex folk poet.
A small confession: this work started out as a rebuttal to Anthony Scaduto's book and then took on a life of its own. The author's interpretations are his own but the Dylan lyrics should speak for themselves, as they were always intended to do--the same lyrics that helped move a generation of young people to believe they could remake the world!
Yours for guitars that stay in tune and people likewise,
-Prof. Rosenberg
The following paper is a close examination of the claim that the right of privacy is not constitutionally protected. Using the words of the Constitution itself, the author will prove to the reader that he/she does indeed have a fundamental right of privacy.
The Supreme Court in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) concluded that the U.S. Constitution, through the Bill of Rights, implies a fundamental right to privacy. Thus, the author is not breaking new ground but merely recognizing the need to reaffirm a fundamental right that has already been established to prevent its further erosion.
One of the specious arguments offered by anti-privacy advocates is that the word "privacy" does not appear in the Constitution. The author believes such thinking to be quite shallow; the word "slavery" does not appear either but that had no bearing on the reality of chattel slavery in the United States for over two hundred and fifty years!
Let us deal with the substance of American society and not the shadows of sophistry!
Howard Zinn’s legions of loyal readers look upon him with great respect, almost reverence: hence “saint”.
Yet the same scholarship that engendered such enthusiasm among so many readers also produced the exact opposite effect, especially among political conservatives.
They look upon him with bitter antipathy, almost disgust: hence “sinner”.
Of course Zinn is neither and he never claimed to be anything other than who he was: a dedicated historian with a passion for justice.
--Prof. Rosenberg
San Jose, Ca.
It is not an academic work although a good faith effort has been made to match changes in belief with evidence. It is not a legal treatise so much as the tale of a personal odyssey. The author's original assumption about the couple's innocence once made sense--given the nature of McCarthyism's reputation for smear and deceit.
Today, the exact opposite conclusion makes even more sense, given the additional facts adduced in the years since the 1951 trial. This is the story of that journey.
As for the title: although the author is not related to Julius and Ethel, his last name happens to be “Rosenberg” too and thus the sub-title "A Rosenberg Remembers".
Prof. Rosenberg
PhD, US History
For the reader interested only in the heart of the essay (willing to skip the "mea culpa") I suggest you start with Section 4: "Milestones".
-Prof. Rosenberg
I was deeply bothered by these two conflicting viewpoints so I decided to research the most blatant racist quotes from Lincoln I could find. Along the way, however, I had to read many of his speeches as well as his witticisms.
One evening near the end of the research project, I was sitting in an easy chair with an open book about Lincoln on my lap. I was still torn between these two different viewpoints and struggling to make sense of both of them. Then the pages of the book seemed to move almost by themselves and a different page stared up at me.
I found myself staring at the Emancipation Proclamation. In an instant my mind was made up. There is only one person's signature on that document and it's Lincoln's.
As I said to my history class before delivering my remarks, "I am a Lincoln man" to let them know what my point of view was going to be.
Sometimes people forget about Abraham Lincoln and why people liked him. I'm not saying he was perfect--far from it--but I believe the good in the man and the wisdom in his actions far outweigh any other misgivings we may have about him.
There is only one Abraham Lincoln in American history and his story continues to be passed down from generation to generation. This is part of that transmission belt.
Fraternally yours,
Prof. Rosenberg
Jan. 9, 2021
It has become politically incorrect to describe American history with too great an emphasis on its positive nature and achievements, given all the bloodshed and brutality associated with the exploitation and mistreatment of black people and Native Americans, along with a diverse range of other minorities and working class people in general.
This older approach has been described as seeing history through rose-colored glasses: “America is the greatest country, therefore our history is the greatest, our leaders are the best”, etc. The author has no intention of opposing the tremendous progress that already has been made in developing a far more honest appraisal of U.S. History--with the gloves off, so to speak.
A rebuttal to the overly optimistic glorification of everything American was long overdue; the new countervailing movement among scholars and activists is based on an in-depth look at actual social conditions and events.
Inevitably, an academic trend towards a stripped-down scorching treatment of the past, as exemplified by historians like Howard Zinn, opened the floodgates of anger and lingering resentment; it unleashed a tremendous passion among all those whose lineages and voices were suppressed for decades and whose ethnic-cultural identities bore the brunt of the nation’s exploitation, racism, and violence.
The author was raised in a Marxist household and so from an early age was made hyper-aware of class exploitation and racial inequities within American society. Even so, the author believes there is room to remind a younger generation of the importance of studying, and balancing, all aspects of American history.
It is both possible and desirable for students today to develop an appreciation for a balanced presentation of our nation’s story that includes “the good, the bad, and the ugly” rather than settling for an approach that ultimately proves one-sided: that is either too self-righteous and glorifying, on the one hand, or too condescending and derogatory on the other. The truth is to be found most often between two extremes--between polar opposites in interpretation.
Thus the author was inspired to write an essay “Before and After the American Revolution” in the belief that if people today could better appreciate that historical epoch which gave birth to the United States, it will help to develop a fuller understanding of the social problems facing our nation, both in the past and today.
By rooting ourselves in our nation’s history and fundamental principles, we can better equip ourselves to identify inequalities and develop the most effective strategies to confront and overcome ongoing injustices. The American Revolution was a beginning, not an end; the degree to which its purpose retains its vitality is a moral issue incumbent upon us all to recognize and address as we seek to find our own place in America’s story.
************
The pendulum of history swings first one way, then the other.
************
I was deeply bothered by these two conflicting viewpoints so I decided to research the most blatant racist quotes from Lincoln I could find. Along the way, however, I ended up reading many of his speeches as well as his witticisms.
************
One evening near the end of the research project, I was sitting in an easy chair with an open book about Lincoln on my lap. I was still torn between these two different viewpoints and struggling to make sense of both of them. Then the leaves of the book seemed to move, almost by themselves, and a different page stared up at me.
************
I found myself staring at the Emancipation Proclamation. In an instant my mind was made up. There is only one person's signature on that document and it's Lincoln's.
************
As I said to my history class before delivering my remarks the next day, "I am a Lincoln man" to let them know what my point of view was going to be.
************
Sometimes people forget about Abraham Lincoln and why people admired him so much. I'm not saying he was perfect--far from it--but I believe the good in the man and the wisdom in his actions far outweigh any misgivings we may have about him.
************
There is only one Abraham Lincoln in American history and his story continues to be passed down from generation to generation.
************
This is part of that transmission belt.
Fraternally yours ************
Prof. Rosenberg
************
A contributing factor to this bewildering lack of direction might well be the absence of a coherent and well-defined foreign policy. Our government's approach should not depend on luck, happenstance, and serendipitous circumstances.
Note:
Students, teachers, and scholars may borrow ideas or language from my writing without serious objection from the author. Still, it's nice to be acknowledged!
You know, there is a general rule of thumb that academic scholars, particularly in the field of history, should avoid all use of the pronoun “I”, with a few rare exceptions here and there. The rule will be observed in the book that is to follow but here, in the prefatory material, including this statement and Introduction, an exception must be made.
Because of the nature of the topic, in particular because of the motivation behind the book’s genesis, the author finds it morally incumbent upon himself to break that rule.
Even if it risks diminishing the value of the book, I want the reader to understand the psychological origins for what I wrote and why.
Simply put, can a white person say “I am not a racist” and be sincere? If so, then the entire theology of the Nation of Islam, to which Malcolm subscribed wholeheartedly until his “awakening”, is built on a racist lie.
Malcolm experienced a life-altering transformation during his 1964 visit to Mecca which opened his eyes to a different world view. If the book receives criticism for insisting that the Nation of Islam and Malcolm preached racism, so be it; the author takes comfort in the fact that Malcolm himself continued to develop his thinking until he, too, realized the same truth.
I affirm without hesitation and with the utmost sincerity that I believe in the fundamental equality of all races and of all human beings everywhere. I have not lost my faith in that vision—which is why I am compelled to give voice to my position regarding the anti-white racism of Malcolm and the Nation of Islam.
This essay is about Malcolm but it also about you—your beliefs, your conscience, and your humanity. Only you can decide which Malcolm, the man we thought we knew before his 1964 visit to Mecca or the man who emerged after, better represents the dreams and hopes of humanity to one day live in a peaceful and just world.
This year has seen the deaths of unarmed black men and women at the hands of police. Thousands of people have taken to the streets to protest and demand reform.
Many of the marches have been peaceful but there have also been demonstrations that ended in vandalism and violence. It seemed an appropriate time to review the basics of non-violence in theory and practice. The First Amendment protects peaceful protest, not the violence associated with looting and riots, which remain crimes in and of themselves.
Moral indignation, no matter how great, does not excuse unlawful action. The only exception is non-violent civil disobedience, when unjust laws are broken deliberately: i.e., Rosa Parks sitting in the white section of a segregated bus in Montgomery, Alabama.
That type of courage based on conscience is far different from throwing a brick through a window during the hours of darkness when a mob mentality has taken over what started off as a peaceful demonstration.
If there is a subjective element to this writing, it cannot be avoided; historians do not always have the luxury of waiting years to write calmly and dispassionately of events in the past, maintaining an objective academic tone, etc.
This crisis is here and now and the lives of real people are at stake; the author’s only purpose is to remind readers how non-violence was an integral part of the historic success of the civil rights movement and to urge protesters to limit themselves to the same methods and philosophy. Dr. King will explain the reasons why.
(The following is an excerpt from Ch. 21 in "Malcolm: Journey to Brotherhood.")
The sub-title "Journey to Brotherhood" reflects the theme of seeing his life as a journey. The first chapter "Disagreeing with Malcolm" indicates this work is something more than eulogy or hagiography.
Whether you are pro- or anti-Malcolm, you might give one of the chapters a try.
The theme for the chapter posted here is that bi-racial unity in American history reflects another side of the nation's history, one that the Nation of Islam denied was even possible in their furious assault upon all white people as racists and devils.
It may seem far afield from Malcolm's life but it is a necessary chapter on the nature of the Underground Railroad, one of the brightest shining examples of bi-racial cooperation in American history. Every author has to start somewhere.
-Prof. Rosenberg
U.S. History, Ph.D.
Eighty-seven men, women, and children trekked bravely into the Sierra Nevada Mountains in the fall of 1846 but they did not manage to cross the summit before the first great winter storm hit in late October, when the mountains soon became wrapped in a frozen silence. Heavy snowfalls made walking through waist-deep drifts impossible, although they struggled on for as long as they had any strength left with which to try. Bitterly cold temperatures, as well as lack of food and supplies, threatened to turn these mountains into a graveyard for each of them.
As it was, the mountains became the final resting place for nearly half of them. That all of these California-bound pioneers did not perish is due in large measure to the exertions of James Reed, albeit through a set of most unusual circumstances. Reed, after reaching California, made repeated efforts to rescue his wife, four children, and the other families who remained trapped in the bitter cold and deep snow. They were caught in the middle of an unusually severe winter that was to make rescue efforts as equally difficult as any further travel by the entrapped and starving pioneers.
James Reed had been forced to go on ahead of the rest of the party, alone and on foot, through the mountains to California because in a bitter altercation with another man near the Humboldt River (1) Reed had killed the man in self-defense. The adult members of the Donner Party met and banished Reed from traveling any farther with them: swift rudimentary justice.
Surprisingly, although forced to complete part of the journey alone and over unknown land, Reed made it, arriving at Sutter's Fort on October 28, 1846. He then began to organize relief-and-rescue parties, an effort much complicated by internal California politics and the Mexican-American War then under way.
_________________________________
(1) Loomis, Patricia, Signposts (San Jose: San Jose Historical Museum Association, 1982), p. 71.
Here is another chapter from my forthcoming book "Malcolm: Journey to Brotherhood."
This chapter deals with the conductors, station masters, and the fugitive slave passengers of the UGRR, emphasizing its bi-racial nature.
Prof. Rosenberg
San Jose, CA.
I, too, believe the talkin' blues genre had a huge influence on Dylan, as I hope this chapter will satisfactorily explain. -Prof. Rosenberg
If you don't know names like Woody Guthrie and Pete Seeger this chapter can be skipped.
"Bob Dylan, Bard of the Sixties": this is a traditional full-length biography of Dylan from his growing up years to his rise to stardom in the 1960's. The piece posted on Academia.edu is but one chapter from the book. It is the author's intention to let Dylan speak for himself as much as possible. The work delves deeply into his lyrics as the best way to understand this brilliant and complex folk poet.
A small confession: this work started out as a rebuttal to Anthony Scaduto's book and then took on a life of its own. The author's interpretations are his own but the Dylan lyrics should speak for themselves, as they were always intended to do--the same lyrics that helped move a generation of young people to believe they could remake the world!
Yours for guitars that stay in tune and people likewise,
-Prof. Rosenberg
The following paper is a close examination of the claim that the right of privacy is not constitutionally protected. Using the words of the Constitution itself, the author will prove to the reader that he/she does indeed have a fundamental right of privacy.
The Supreme Court in Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) concluded that the U.S. Constitution, through the Bill of Rights, implies a fundamental right to privacy. Thus, the author is not breaking new ground but merely recognizing the need to reaffirm a fundamental right that has already been established to prevent its further erosion.
One of the specious arguments offered by anti-privacy advocates is that the word "privacy" does not appear in the Constitution. The author believes such thinking to be quite shallow; the word "slavery" does not appear either but that had no bearing on the reality of chattel slavery in the United States for over two hundred and fifty years!
Let us deal with the substance of American society and not the shadows of sophistry!
Howard Zinn’s legions of loyal readers look upon him with great respect, almost reverence: hence “saint”.
Yet the same scholarship that engendered such enthusiasm among so many readers also produced the exact opposite effect, especially among political conservatives.
They look upon him with bitter antipathy, almost disgust: hence “sinner”.
Of course Zinn is neither and he never claimed to be anything other than who he was: a dedicated historian with a passion for justice.
--Prof. Rosenberg
San Jose, Ca.
It is not an academic work although a good faith effort has been made to match changes in belief with evidence. It is not a legal treatise so much as the tale of a personal odyssey. The author's original assumption about the couple's innocence once made sense--given the nature of McCarthyism's reputation for smear and deceit.
Today, the exact opposite conclusion makes even more sense, given the additional facts adduced in the years since the 1951 trial. This is the story of that journey.
As for the title: although the author is not related to Julius and Ethel, his last name happens to be “Rosenberg” too and thus the sub-title "A Rosenberg Remembers".
Prof. Rosenberg
PhD, US History
For the reader interested only in the heart of the essay (willing to skip the "mea culpa") I suggest you start with Section 4: "Milestones".
-Prof. Rosenberg
less than it is, one of the greatest events in human history.”
Q. Does the president take an inaugural oath? Yes
The president is not above the law. The Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment (Section 3) is intended to prevent an insurrectionist from holding office. The Constitution's impeachment provision (Article II, Section 4) clearly shows that the Founding Fathers did not think the president was above the law or that he could avoid being held accountable for his behavior, especially unethical actions.
I am not sure if this is a serious essay with a sense of the absurd or a personal reflection with sacrilegious barbs; perhaps one, perhaps the other—perhaps both. It is odd growing up in America with access to a good education and yet meeting so few teachers along the way to help the thoughtful student grapple with difficult philosophical questions:
• Is human nature inherently good or bad?
• Is human reason able to overcome the harm done by selfish individuals?
• Are the “races” of humankind (based on skin color) inherently equal in character?
• Do the vicissitudes of history contain within them their own rationale, an inevitable pace that can be neither hurried nor slowed down--or do racial and national traits as separate qualities enter each epoch, uninvited or otherwise?
• In short, do white people lie more often than non-white populations?
It is my contention that they do. I have not the time or the inclination to attempt a proof along traditional academic lines—years of research, mathematical equations, umpteen sources and a barrel or two of footnotes—and it’s just as well. If my thesis is correct, it won’t make any difference. White people lie within academia as often as they do with non-academic falsehoods: the cruel and vicious racist assertions that we know all too well from the last five hundred years of history. At some point, both kinds of lies join together to form one mighty stream of falsehood: crude lies, sophisticated lies, it makes little difference.
For that matter, sanctimonious ministers, prejudiced professors, and glib politicians have proven quite adept at promoting both sorts of lies: from the cruel, depraved, and vulgar to the pseudo-scientific (the latter long since fallen into disrepute). It’s easier to deal with the obvious than the subtle so let’s just pick one example: racism. White people exploited African slave labor to an extreme degree; then they hurriedly created a galaxy of racist lies to justify what was in essence a brutal labor regime.
They engaged in verbal overkill when all that needs to be said is much simpler; they had the advantage in guns, ships, and technology. They also had an abundance of ambition, greed, and ruthlessness to maximize these material advantages through the use of chains, whips, and terror. They took what they wanted by force and tried to cover up their naked aggression with deceitful excuses and unconscionable rationalizations. Their main motivating force was not religion or trade or civilizing “savages” but greed, pure and simple—everything else was secondary.
But I get ahead of myself: first things first. Here’s the essay on “Why Do White People Lie?” Belonging to that race myself, I think I ought to know whereof I speak!
The author holds a doctorate in U.S. History with which training he has tried to maintain a serious and respectable tone.
Those who need footnotes and highly complex analytical verbiage must needs go elsewhere--it is not for them this remembrance was conceived or delivered.
Sometimes memories of those who were there can convey more life and vitality than the most diligently researched work.
The author met the leaders of the Black Panther Party and from these meetings the following remembrance was born.
Yours for truth without footnotes,
Dr. Rosenberg
It is not, strictly speaking, an "academic work" although a good faith effort has been made to match changes in belief with new evidence. It is not a legal treatise, either, so much as the tale of a personal journey.
The author's original assumption of the couple's innocence once made sense--given the nature of McCarthyism's reputation for smear and deceit.
Today, the exact opposite conclusion also makes sense, given all the additional facts adduced in the years since the 1951 trial. This is the story of that journey.
As for the title: although the author is not related to Julius and Ethel, his last name happens to be Rosenberg and thus the sub-title "A Rosenberg Remembers".
Prof. Rosenberg
PhD, US History
Addendum:
For the reader interested only in the heart of the essay (and is willing to skip the personal "mea culpa" context) I suggest you start with Section 4: "Milestones".