UNDERSTANDING

 A different kind of progressive, I understand why a dear friend who made a good living and amassed a small fortune crawling around in attics in Arkansas Augusts resents paying taxes when he believes a large portion of them go to support able-bodied people who won’t work. I understand. I know that his beliefs don’t take into account the many truths and complexities of socioeconomic factors in America. I know he doesn't know the truth about taxation.

But I understand his feelings and we talk. What I can’t understand is mean-spirited people who, in the advancement of mythology or politics—yes I repeat myself—refuse to consider the despair of a young woman who finds that the man who impregnated her with the promise of eternal love and support has eschewed the responsibility of fatherhood and fled.

I don't understand the cruelty of men who would pass laws mandating that a woman die rather than receive the medical care prescribed by her doctor.

I don't understand the mendacity of lawmakers who give the male of the species a free ride in the whole abortion issue.

I just don't understand. Do you?

PROGRESS

 America seems to me to be entering a dark minefield. The fate of our country depends on passing through it in operatable condition.

In WWII, the American response to crossing a minefield was to halt progress while trained experts located and cleared a path, all the while under sniper fire.

The Russian Army used a different method. They simply marched troops through the field setting off mines until a path was clear. Their logic was the loss of troops by this method was about equivalent to the loss of troops through sniper fire and the method didn't require a halt.

I'm not sure what method is best for those of us who love our country. I do know that  one side in the battle3 has no scruples about dignity or goodness while the other does. Thus the choice may be either to halt while the evil strongholds are eradicated one by one, or to assume the standards of the opposition.

What do you think?

Civil War Writings

 I’m not expert on the Civil War. I don’t even consider myself particularly knowledgeable about that sad affair. But I have been interested in it since I was introduced to it as, I think maybe, an eighth grader. Over the many years I’ve probably read close to 200 or volumes about the war and its many battles, leaders, and settings.

From my latest binge, I’ve had an epiphany, helped by some recent volumes. A thought emerged that if one were to review the most famous works on the subject of the first 100 years after the war, and those written during the last 57 or so, one would hardly recognize it as the same historical event. It represents a bold example of a refutation of the well-known saying that the history of wars is written by the victors. 

Immediate histories of the Civil War came from the losers, or at least those who harbored a fascination with the losers. I’m not sure what this means or even if it is true. I do believe that if one were to look at the first period, it would be hard to find an account of how R.E. Lee’s army, during its two incursions into the north, captured free Americans and transported them to be sold as slaves to southern plantation owners. 

I’m currently reading “The Myth of the Lost Cause and Civil War History,” edited by Gary W. Gallagher and Alan T. Nolan. Hope for some edification. Stay tuned.