(Name-mce) ListServ 'White History 101' from The Nation

[Paul C. Gorski]

Interesting article...

Enjoy,

Paul

**************************

   White History 101
   by Gary Younge


Whatever happened to James Blake? He is probably the most famous bus
driver ever. And yet when he died at age 89 in March 2002, the few papers
that bothered to note his passing in an obituary ran just a few hundred
words of wire copy and moved on.

Given that February is Black History Month, it is worth taking a moment to
ask how such a crucial figure could be so cruelly forgotten.

Blake was the Montgomery driver who told a row of black passengers: "Y'all
better make it light on yourselves and let me have those seats." Rosa
Parks was one of those passengers. She made her stand and kept her seat.
The rest, as they say, is history.

Well, black history anyway. We know how African-Americans boycotted city
transit for thirteen months until the segregationists caved in. We know
how the boycott launched the career of a previously unheard-of preacher
called Martin Luther King Jr. and made Parks an icon. In schools,
bookstores and on TV there is an awful lot of talk about them in February.
But nary a word about Mr. Blake. That's because so much of Black History
Month takes place in the passive voice. Leaders "get assassinated,"
patrons "are refused" service, women "are ejected" from public transport.
So the objects of racism are many but the subjects few. In removing the
instigators, the historians remove the agency and, in the final reckoning,
the historical responsibility.

There is no month when we get to talk about Blake; no opportunity to learn
the fates of J.W. Milam and Roy Bryant, who murdered Emmett Till; no time
set aside to keep track of Victoria Price and Ruby Bates, whose false
accusations of rape against the Scottsboro Boys sent five innocent young
black men to jail.

Wouldn't everyone--particularly white people--benefit from becoming better
acquainted with these histories? What we need, in short, is a White
History Month.

For some this would be one racially themed history month too many.
Criticisms of Black History Month from cynics, racists and purists are
about as predictable as the arrival of February itself. But for all its
obvious shortcomings, Black History Month helps clear a space to relate
the truth about the past so we might better understand the present and
navigate the future. Setting aside twenty-eight days for African-American
history is insufficient, problematic and deserves our support for the same
reason that affirmative action is insufficient, problematic and deserves
our support. As one means to redress an entrenched imbalance, it gives us
the chance to hear narratives that have been forgotten, hidden, distorted
or mislaid. Like that of Claudette Colvin, the black Montgomery teenage
activist who also refused to give up her seat, nine months before Rosa
Parks, but was abandoned by the local civil rights establishment because
she became pregnant and came from the wrong side o!
 f town.

The very notion of black and white history is both a theoretical nonsense
and a practical necessity. There is no scientific or biological basis for
race. It is a construct to explain the gruesome reality that racism built.
But, logic suggests, you cannot have black history without white history.
Of course, the trouble is not that we do not hear enough about white
history but that what masquerades as history is more akin to mythology.
The contradictions of how a "free world" could be founded on genocide, or
how the battle for democracy during the Second World War could coincide
with Japanese internment and segregation, for example, are rarely
addressed.

"I am born with a past and to try to cut myself off from that past is to
deform my present relationships," writes Alasdair MacIntyre in his book
After Virtue. "The possession of an historical identity and the possession
of a social identity coincide."

The purpose here is not to explore individual guilt--there are therapists
for that--but collective responsibility. When it comes to excelling at
military conflict, everyone lays claim to their national identity; people
will say, "We won World War II." By contrast, those who say "we" raped
black slaves, massacred Indians or excluded Jews from higher education are
hard to come by. You cannot, it appears, hold anyone responsible for what
their ancestors did that was bad or the privileges they enjoy as a result.
Whoever it was, it definitely wasn't "us." This is one more version of
white flight--a dash from the inconveniences bequeathed by inequality.

So we do not need more white history, we need it better told.Settlement,
slavery and segregation--propelled by economic expansion and justified by
white supremacy--inform much of what the United States is today. The
wealth they created helped bankroll its superpower status. The poverty
they engendered persists. But white history does not mean racist history
any more than black history means victim's history. Alongside Blake, Milam
and Bryant, any decent White History Month would star insurrectionist John
Brown; the Vanilla Ice of the Harlem Renaissance, Carl Van Vechten; civil
rights workers Michael Schwerner and Andrew Goodman, murdered near
Philadelphia, Mississippi, during the Freedom Summer of 1964; and Viola
Liuzzo, murdered during the Selma to Montgomery march. It would explain
why Ronald Reagan kicked off his presidential campaign in Philadelphia,
Mississippi, why George W. Bush chose Bob Jones University to revive his
presidential hopes. It would tell the story of ho!
 w Ruby Bates recanted her rape accusation in a bid to save the Scottsboro
boys from the noose and how the Blakes never did reconcile themselves to
the event that brought them infamy. "None of that mess they said was
true," said his wife, Edna. "Everybody loved him. He was a good, true man
and a churchgoer."

It would offer white people options and role models and all of us
inspiration while relieving the burden on African-Americans to recast the
nation's entire racial history in the shortest month of the year. White
people, like black people, need access to a history that is accurate,
honest and inclusive. Maybe then it would be easier for them, and the rest
of us, to make history that is progressive, antiracist and inclusive.



This article can be found on the web at:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070305/younge



Visit The Nation
http://www.thenation.com/

Subscribe to The Nation:
https://ssl.thenation.com/


-- 
Paul C. Gorski
EdChange Workshops & Consulting: http://www.EdChange.org
Multicultural Pavilion: http://www.EdChange.org/multicultural
Social Justice Store: http://www.cafepress.com/edchange
Multicultural Poster Store: http://www.EdChange.org/posters
Social Justice Bookstore: http://www.EdChange.org/transformations
Personal Page: http://home.earthlink.net/~gorski