Nina's Reading Blog

Comments on books I am reading/listening to

Archive for the ‘History’ Category

The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America

Posted by nliakos on December 30, 2018

by Richard Rothstein (Liveright Publishing Corporation, a Division of W. W. Norton & Co., 2017)

Color of law refers to an act done under the appearance of legal authorization, when in fact, no such right existed. It applies when a person is acting under real or apparent government authority. The term is used in the federal Civil Rights Act, which gives citizens the right to sue government officials and their agents who use their authority to violate rights guaranteed by federal law.  <https://definitions.uslegal.com/c/color-of-law/> 

In this book, Richard Rothstein argues that segregated neighborhoods all over the United States resulted not from de facto segregation (incidentally, due to the decisions of millions of individual private home-buyers), but from de jure segregation: racist governmental policy. As such, it violates African-Americans’ constitutional rights under the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments, and we now have the exceedingly difficult task of remedying the situation.

Chapter 1, “If San Francisco, Then Everywhere?” – examines how the federal government segregated the northern California city of Richmond during the Second World War. It looks in particular at the life of Frank Stevenson of Louisiana, who came to northern California to work in the shipyards and other war industries. Richmond, supported by the FHA, built whites-only housing for war workers; African-American workers were not permitted to take advantage of this housing and instead were forced to find shelter wherever they could. This usually meant sub-standard housing, over-crowding, and very long commutes.

The story of Ladera, where my aunt and uncle raised my two cousins, illustrates what happened in many places. A cooperative of mostly white Stanford faculty purchased a tract of land next to the campus, intending to develop it with affordable housing. But because there were a few African Americans in the cooperative, banks refused to lend them the money to develop the land because the FHA refused to insure the loans. The cooperative eventually admitted defeat, and the land was sold to a private developer, who built the whites-only subdivision where my relatives lived.

Chapter 2, “Public Housing, Black Ghettos”, tells the sorry story of public housing projects, originally conceived during the New Deal to house white people. Public housing was segregated from the beginning, and black people were only allowed to live in segregated housing, which was never adequate and, being separate, was never equal (after Brown v. Board of Education, the general counsel of the Housing and Home Finance Agency claimed that the decision was not applicable to housing).  As the suburbs were developed and white people moved out of public housing projects, black people were slowly permitted to move in; the projects were never built in majority-white communities to begin with, as it was easy for anyone who disapproved to stop construction. So after a while, public housing only existed in black communities, and only served black people–and served them poorly, with few services and poor upkeep.

Chapter 3, “Racial Zoning”, describes the development of Jim Crow in the South following the end of Reconstruction, as well as the increasing mistrust and hatred of African Americans which developed in other parts of the country. Woodrow Wilson, who grew up in the racist South, then segregated the federal workforce when he became president in 1913. Examples of early government-sponsored housing segregation include Baltimore, Atlanta, St. Louis, and many others. During this period, blacks were not permitted to live on majority-white blocks, and whites were forbidden to buy on majority-black blocks, so over time, these blocks, and later neighborhoods, became more and more segregated. Then the resulting majority-black neighborhoods were rezoned for industrial use, and they turned into undesirable, unhealthy, over-crowded, poorly served places–slums, where African-Americans were stuck.  The 1917 Supreme Court case, Buchanan v. Warley, ruled against racial zoning laws (not because the justices found segregation to be wrong but because they believed white owners should be able to sell to whomever they pleased) but was widely ignored.

Chapter 4, “Own Your Own Home”, examines the push by the Hoover administration to get white Americans to buy homes in the newly developed suburbs rather than rent them, subsidized by HOLC (Home Owners Loan Corporation), FHA, and VA loans, which were unavailable to African-Americans. Not only that, but the FHA refused to insure loans in African-American or integrated communities. If they could qualify for loans at all, African-Americans were eligible only for installment plans known as contract loans, which did not let the borrower accumulate equity and enabled the lender to evict a family for missing even a single payment. In this way, white people were on their way to accumulating wealth as their property values rose; African-Americans were excluded not only from white neighborhoods but from this opportunity to increase their worth. The discriminatory policies were clearly laid out in the FHA underwriting manual. Rothstein points out over and over that these and other indications of racist guidelines in government agencies constitutes a clear violation of African-Americans’ constitutional rights under the 13th and 14th amendments.

Chapter 5, “Private Agreements, Government Enforcement”, considers federal government tolerance of exclusionary practices such as restrictive covenants, which prohibited sales of homes in certain neighborhoods to people of color. Though these covenants were already illegal, neighborhood associations, realtors, and local governments figured out ways to get around the law. Those blacks who bought in segregated white areas were forcibly evicted. In 1948, another Supreme Court ruling, Shelley v. Kraemer, held that the enforcement of restrictive covenants by state courts to be unconstitutional. As with Buchanan, this decision was widely ignored as government at all levels continued to turn a blind eye to violations. For example, if covenants did not contain explicitly racial language but effectively excluded African-Americans from moving into majority-white areas, the FHA continued to approve loans for white buyers and to finance new segregated developments, while “redlining” other neighborhoods zoned for African-Americans where loans would never be approved.

Chapter 6, “White Flight”, is about the self-fulfilling prophecy that people of color moving into an area inevitably caused property values to decrease, and how unscrupulous speculators called “blockbusters” callously and deliberately panicked white homeowners into selling their properties at below-market prices so that the speculators could later sub-divide the properties and rent or sell them to African-Americans at inflated prices (because housing was at a premium in African-American neighborhoods, they routinely paid higher prices for comparable dwellings). If property values fell, it was due to the FHA’s prejudicial policies. Rothstein writes, “In the end, whites fled these neighborhoods, not only because of the influx of black families, but also because they were upset about overcrowding, decaying schools and crime. . . . But black contract buyers did not have the option of leaving a declining neighborhood before their properties were paid for in full–if they did, they would lose everything they’d invested in that property to date. Whites could leave–blacks had to stay.” (p. 97)

In Chapter 7, “IRS Support and Compliant Regulators”, Rothstein says that the IRS was complicit in the segregation of America because it continued to grant tax-exempt status to institutions (churches, universities, hospitals. . .) that “promoted residential segregation”. In addition, government regulators tolerated racial discrimination in the banks and businesses that they supervised. Many examples are given of church officials and others who actively promoted racial segregation, but the IRS routinely ignored these cases. Banks had discriminatory loan policies through much of the twentieth century, but the FDIC under Eric Cocke and others declined to intervene. Some discriminatory activities have persisted into the present century; for example, the preponderance of subprime mortgages in African American communities, which were the hardest-hit when the housing bubble burst in 2008. Homeowners of color who lost their homes were forced back into slums. Rothstein writes that “borrowers should have been more careful before accepting loans they could not understand or reasonably repay, but they were victims of a market that was not transparent–in some cases deliberately not so.”

Chapter 8, “Local Tactics”, focuses on “the extraordinary creativity that government officials at all levels displayed when they were motivated to prevent the movement of African-Americans into white neighborhoods.”  They denied access to public utilities, suddenly decided to zone housing sites for parks, built highways through and around African-American neighborhoods to isolate them, condemned properties, manipulated zoning designations, and more. Examples in California, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Michigan, Florida, New Jersey, Texas, Georgia, and North Carolina support this claim.

Chapter 9, “State-Sanctioned Violence”, describes how white mobs rioted, burned crosses, vandalized homes, threatened bodily harm, firebombed homes and otherwise violently resisted African-American encroachment into segregated white areas while police looked on or actively aided and abetted the perpetrators. Rothstein pointedly remarks, “During the mid-twentieth century, local police and the FBI went to extraordinary lengths to infiltrate and disrupt liberal and left-wing political groups as well as organized crime syndicates. That they did not act similarly in the case of a nationwide terror campaign against African Americans who integrated previously white communities should be deemed, at the least, complicity in the violence.” (p. 148)

Chapter 10, “Suppressed Incomes”, considers all the governmentally-supported ways in which African-American incomes were kept low, resulting in less accumulation of wealth and a resulting inability to buy into the housing market. These included denial of access to free labor markets in the post-Reconstruction South, exclusion from most labor unions and subsequent inability to apply for many categories of jobs because they were not union members, discriminatory hiring practices during both the Second World War and the New Deal (e.g., the TVA, NRA, and CCC), keeping workers of color in menial positions without possibility of advancement (even when they had acquired skills in the  military that should have made them eligible for higher level jobs), lack of enforcement by the National Labor Relations Board and the Fair Employment Practices Committee (whose first chairman, Mark Ethridge, was an avowed segregationist–kind of like putting Scott Pruitt in charge of the EPA).  In some cases, African-Americans fought back, but the discrimination was so widespread that it was very difficult to make real progress against it. Furthermore, HUD over-assessed the value of African-American homes and under-assessed the value of white ones, effectively subsidizing the white homeowners on the backs of the black ones; and blacks routinely paid higher rents than whites, with the result that they needed more wage-earners per unit to pay the high rents, another factor in over-crowding.

Chapter 11, “Looking Forward, Looking Back”, contrasts the relative difficulty of desegregating public transportation and accommodations, workplaces, and voting with the more complex task of desegregating neighborhoods: “Ending de jure segregation of housing requires undoing past actions that may seem irreversible.” Reasons for this include multi-generational poverty (the concept of American upward mobility is a myth, but even more so in the African American than in the general population), injustices in the tax code (e.g., homeowners get tax breaks, but renters don’t), and federal subsidies for low-income housing that perpetuate segregation.

Chapter 12, “Considering Fixes”, suggests more or less feasible ways to get ourselves out of the mess we have created with de jure segregation (“Many of our serious national problems either originate with residential segregation or have become intractable because of it.”). First, Rothstein considers it imperative that all Americans understand the role that governments (federal, state, and local) have played in this debacle, starting from the history books our teenagers learn about our history from, two popular examples of which barely mention the government’s role in creating and sustaining our uniquely American form of apartheid. Other suggestions include a ban on zoning ordinances prohibiting apartment buildings in suburban neighborhoods, encouraging “inclusionary zoning” ordinances such as the one we have here in Montgomery County, Maryland; loss or decrease of homeowner tax deductions in communities that are not actively working to encourage integration; increased housing subsidies for lower income families that choose to move to integrated areas; and expanding the Section 8 voucher program. (“The housing subsidy that the federal government gives to middle-class [mostly white] homeowners is an entitlement; any homeowner with enough income to file a detailed tax return can claim a deduction both for property taxes and mortgage insurance. The government does not tell homeowners that only the first few who file can claim the deductions and the rest are out of luck because the money has been used up. But that is how we handle the Section 8 subsidy for lower-income [most African American] renters.” (p. 209) But Rothstein does not minimize the difficulty in setting right this enormous wrong that has been done in our name, by our elected and appointed officials, to a group of citizens whose only fault was to be of African descent.

Rothstein ends the last chapter as he began the first one: with the family of Frank Stevenson. He muses, “What might have become of these Stevenson grandchildren if their parents had grown up and attended school in an integrated Milpitas, not in a de jure segregated Richmond? . . . How much farther on the socioeconomic ladder would they have been able to climb if they had grown up in a well-educated household as a result of [their mother] and her sisters being permitted to attend a high school that was designed for students ‘who can profit from the academic program’, rather than one that instead offered manual training? How different might the lives of the Stevenson grandchildren have been were it not for the federal government’s unconstitutional determination to segregate their grandparents, and their parents as well? What do we, the American community, owe this family, in this and future generations, for their loss of opportunity? How might we fulfill this obligation?”

In the Epilogue, Rothstein opines that as a nation, we (whites) have deluded ourselves into thinking that we are not responsible for these patterns of segregation. He observes what might have been had government acted differently and promoted integration rather than segregation. He believes that before we can begin to remedy the problem, we must first accept responsibility for it.

Finally, in the “Appendix: Frequently Asked Questions:, Rothstein responds to some of the questions he has been asked since he began his research into this topic. For example, How can you hold people today accountable for what happened in the past? Why do you want to force people to integrate? Shouldn’t African Americans take responsibility for their own success? What about Hispanics and other minority groups who have suffered from racial prejudice? To each question, he gently but firmly reiterates his position that a great wrong has been done; we are responsible for that wrong whether or not we participated actively in it; and it is up to all of us to fix it as best we can.

This is an important book. Every American should read it! Certainly, it should be in the library of every Member of Congress, every Supreme Court justice, every federal and state judge, every state senator and delegate, every county executive and council member, and every mayor and city council member. To say nothing of the President, Vice President, and Cabinet members. (Not that this President would every read a book.)

N.B.: The current issue of the SPLC’s Teaching Tolerance magazine features an interview with Richard Rothstein entitled “Segregation by Design”. You can read it here.

Advertisements

Posted in History, Non-fiction, Politics | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Until We Are Free: My Fight for Human Rights in Iran

Posted by nliakos on November 30, 2018

by Shirin Ebadi (Random House 2016)

Judge, lawyer, human rights activist, and Nobel Peace Prize winner Shirin Ebadi tells the story of her attempts to get the Iranian government to uphold their own laws, first in Iran (even after many of her compatriots had fled abroad), and subsequently from outside the country, where she now lives in exile. Believing that her status as a Nobel Prize winner will keep her safe, she takes many risks to help those who had been unjustly arrested or imprisoned. In response, the government targeted her sister, her husband, and her two daughters; her daughters had to leave Iran, and her husband left her (a heart-breaking tale of persecution, entrapment, blackmail, and imprisonment that eventually broke his spirit). Ebadi refused to give in, knowing that if she allowed herself to be silenced by threats to her family, the threats would only escalate. She and her husband lost their property in Iran, the place Ebadi still sees as her home and which she swears she will return to some day. And they lost their 35-year marriage.

Along the way, we get some basic information about Iran’s recent history and politics. Ahmedinejad, Rafsanjani, Rouhani, and others are differentiated and fleshed out a little. We are also introduced to some of the many courageous activists working within and outside of Iran to resist against the excesses of the regime, such as Noushin Khorasani,  and Haleh Esfandiari. And there is the Ministry of Intelligence  officer Mr. Mahmudi, Ebadi’s “nemesis”, who hounds her and her family mercilessly, trying to get her to stop speaking truth to power, as they say.

Sometimes she begins a paragraph by describing a particular day, a place, the weather; the reader tensely awaits something awful, like an attack on her life or the arrest of one of her daughters. These things usually don’t materialize. But the cloud under which she herself lived in Iran and the arrests of so many of her colleagues and staffers, as well as the description of her husband’s treatment in prison, is horrible enough and constitutes the most powerful aspect of the book in my view.

Ebadi discusses elections,  women’s rights, the plight of the Baha’i religious minority, the so-called Arab Spring, Iran’s support of Shi’a rebels in countries such as Syria and Yemen, and more, and describes how her views on Iran’s right to develop its nuclear power program changed after she spoke at length with Rebecca Johnson and other anti-nuclear activists at an international conference she attended in Belfast.

For American readers, it is a chilling reminder of what can happen under a dictatorship that cares nothing for the basic human rights of the people, where there are no free media or elections, no women’s or individuals’ rights, no freedom of expression–none of the freedoms and rights we in the U.S. take for granted, but which Donald Trump and others would like to take from us.

 

Posted in Autobiography, History, Memoir | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Notorious RBG: The Life and Times of Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Posted by nliakos on November 19, 2018

by Irin Carmon and Shana Knizhnik (Dey St., an imprint of William Morrow Publishers, 2015)

Having recently seen the documentary based on this sort-of-biography (three times! And I could easily see it again), I decided it was high time I read the book. The book did not disappoint. It’s not exactly a biography in the sense that it’s not a chronological narrative of RBG’s life. Instead, the chapters each focus on a different aspect of that life, such as her family background, her education, her marriage,  her early work as a professor and ACLU lawyer leading the Women’s Rights Project (WRP), her friendships, her appointment to the Supreme Court in 1993, her best-known opinions and dissents (helpfully annotated for better appreciation), and so on. There are plenty of photos of the justice as a child, a (beautiful) young woman, and an older woman, as well as images of drawings and other art depicting her, documents and letters, memes, even a couple of pages of various women (and one baby) dressed up to look like her, with her iconic glasses and lace collars and (sometimes) a crown. It was an entertaining and informative read (even though not much was new to me, as I had seen the CNN movie and read so many reviews and articles about her). I guess RBG is such a hero, and her story is so amazing, that I never tire of hearing it/reading about it/watching it. A new biography by Jane Sherron de Hart has just come out, so I will probably eventually read that as well. (The WaPo review of that one indicated that RBG’s official biographer is still at work on the official one.) And there’s a biopic called On the Basis of Sex, directed by Mimi Leder with Felicity Jones as a young RBG, that also came out this year. Lots to put on my to-read and to-watch lists!

Posted in Biography, History, Non-fiction | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Poison Squad: One Chemist’s Single-minded Crusade for Food Safety at the Turn of the Twentieth Century

Posted by nliakos on November 15, 2018

by Deborah Blum  (Penguin 2018)

The “one chemist” of the title is consumer advocacy pioneer Dr. Harvey Washington Wiley, who headed up the Bureau of Chemistry at the Department of Agriculture from 1882 to 1912. Wiley fought to protect American consumers from mislabeled, adulterated, dangerous foods and medicines for his entire adult life. But The Poison Squad is not just about Wiley; it is also the story of his many allies (e.g., Willard Bigelow, lead chemist for Wiley’s early research into common food additives like sodium benzoate; and Henry J. Heinz of ketchup fame, who was an early advocate of preservative-free foods) and enemies (e.g., John Queeny, founder of Monsanto and a staunch defender of the unlabeled use of saccharin in food; and James Wilson, Secretary of Agriculture and Wiley’s boss, who often caved to industrial demands and suppressed Wiley’s findings and reports). (Blum helpfully provides a 9-page alphabetical cast of characters at the beginning of the book–I wish that all non-fiction writers did the same!) Scientists and journalists, novelists and cookbook authors, politicians and suffragists and consumer advocates on the one side, and industrialists, bureaucrats, different politicians and even presidents on the other–a great battle was waged for many years over the regulation of America’s food and drug supply. Interestingly from our perspective, around the turn of the 20th century, Democratic and Republican roles were reversed. The Democrats were the bad guys, supporting industry demands to be able to freely adulterate foods to cheapen production and increase profits, while the (progressive) Republicans were on the side of consumer safety.

Though the politics has changed, that battle continues today. Just one example is saccharin, one of the deleterious additives targeted by Wiley a century ago, which is still readily available on supermarket shelves now despite the finding that it “has a physiologic effect . . . in every place, in every cell.” (It was briefly banned in the 1980s but was unbanned in 2000.) Despite convincing scientific evidence, the food industry has continued to fight for the right to poison the public, as long as it increases their profit margin.

Wiley focused both on banning harmful substances in food, drinks, and medicines, and on truthful, complete labeling and advertising, so that consumers could know what they were buying and ingesting. He was also a dedicated feminist. He married late in life (not for lack of trying, but his wife, Anna Kelton, refused him when he first proposed, when she was in her late twenties and he about twice that). He was an enthusiastic supporter of his wife’s political activism in the suffragist movement. (Favorite quote, when Anna was arrested and jailed for political activity: “He had fought all his life for a principle and hardly could deny her the same privilege.”

Wiley was uncompromising in his zeal to clean up the food supply and get rid of false claims about medicinal properties. Time and time again, he courageously stood up to his boss (and to his boss’s boss, the President) and to his numerous detractors and opponents. One cannot help but admire him.

Reading about the long years of struggle before the first Pure Food and Drug Act (1906) and the ensuing struggle over writing and enforcing the regulations, I was reminded of the seemingly never-ending struggle for gun control legislation. The National Rifle Association plays the role of the food industry executives who shamelessly attacked those who were trying to protect the public. Organizations like MomsRising and Every Town for Gun Safety and individuals like Jim Brady and Gabby Giffords and the Marjorie Stoneman Douglas students play the roles of Harvey Wiley, Alice Lakey, Sinclair Lewis, Lincoln Steffens and so many others who refused to admit defeat despite numerous losses. The only way to combat this incessant greed, it would seem, is to persist, no matter how long it takes. Once the legislative battle is won, however imperfectly, we must gear up for the regulatory battle. And with Donald Trump in the White House, even regulations that have long been in place to protect consumers are being rolled back to the detriment of consumer safety and to the delight of the  industrialists (such as gun manufacturers and food/beverage/drug industry tycoons). The fight against the food and drug industries is never over, as Blum shows in her Epilogue. We must be forever vigilant.

This book is a fascinating and educational read. I highly recommend it, but I would advise you not to read it over lunch!

Posted in Biography, History, Science | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Fear: Trump in the White House

Posted by nliakos on October 7, 2018

by Bob Woodward (Simon and Schuster 2018; Nook format)

By the time I read this, there were no surprises, but Woodward includes minute details from conversations (via extensive interviews) between with a conversation between David Bossie and Steve Bannon about the possibility of Donald Trump running for President (Bannon scoffed: “Of what country?”), jumping six years ahead to 2016 and the campaign and election, and ending up several months into 2017 , for no particular reason that I can see except that while every single day has brought new horrors from this White House, Woodward had to stop writing and publish the book at some point, or he would still be writing. He probably is still writing (Volume II).

I am quite put off by the frequent use of fucking as both an adjective and adverb. It’s as if the English language has no other modifiers. Just a few examples: Bannon: “I don’t have time for fucking nonsense.” (adjective) Bannon again: “Twelve million fucking dollars in cash out of the Ukraine!” (adjective) and: “Fucking absurd” (adverb).   Trump : “That was the biggest fucking mistake I’ve made.” (adjective) and: “I always knew Gary was a fucking globalist. I didn’t know you were such a fucking globalist, Rob.” (adjective) and: “If it weren’t Sunday, you’d shut the markets down, that’s how fucking hard you fucking go!” (adverbs)  Well, you get the idea. Just the men. Do they really talk like that? Woodward dutifully records every “fucking” that was ostensibly uttered. . . . It reminds me of the Nixon tapes. Presidents and their staffs, unedited.

In fact, I have somewhat more respect for Trump than I did before I read the book. In the reported conversations, he often seems more aware of keeping his campaign promises and the potential consequences of various actions than I gave him credit for. Not all the time, but sometimes.

The book is about 100 pages shorter than one expects, with the last 80 pages or so given over to voluminous notes and an index. I thought I had a few more days of reading, but then suddenly, it was over. The final sentence: ” . . . (John) Dowd had seen the tragic flaw. In the political back-and-forth, the evasions, the denials, the tweeting, the obscuring, crying ‘Fake News,’ the indignation, Trump had one overriding problem that Dowd knew but could not bring himself to say to the president: ‘You’re a fucking liar.'”

As the future unfolds, we will see if this “tragic flaw” will be the undoing of this president. One can only hope.

Posted in Biography, History, Memoir, Politics | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Barracoon: The Story of the Last “Black Cargo”

Posted by nliakos on September 20, 2018

by Zora Neale Hurston (Amistad/HarperCollins 2018; manuscript completed in 1931. Edited by Deborah G. Plant)

Zora Neale Hurston trained as an anthropologist under Franz Boas, “the Father of American Anthropology”, but she is known as a novelist for her masterpiece Their Eyes Were Watching God, among others. In Barracoon, Hurston steps back and lets her subject, Oluale Kossola/Kossula, aka Cudjo Lewis, tell his own life story in his own dialect, spelling his words to reflect his pronunciation and copying his syntax. The effect is of reading a primary source, although I guess the living Kossola was the primary source, making Hurston’s work a secondary source.

Whether primary or secondary, Kossola’s story is unique in that there are no other similar narratives of capture, slavery, liberation, and persecution quite like his. However, it is also representative of the hundreds and thousands of narratives that we will never know, because the people that lived those lives could not write about them, and no one who could write cared to ask them what they had experienced and to set it down for posterity.

Kossola lived in a village in West Africa called Banté until he was nineteen years old, when Glélé, the king of neighboring Dahomey, sent warriors to destroy the village, capture people they could sell into slavery and massacre the rest, wiping out the village. This was done; and Kossola found himself a captive, marched to Dahomey and from there to Ouidah (Whydah) in present-day Benin, where he was confined in the barracoon, the building used to keep the prisoners until a ship arrived and they could be sold. The ship which Kossola was loaded onto, the Clotilda, was built especially for this purpose by William Foster and the Meaher brothers. Transporting captured Africans across the Atlantic Ocean to sell them into slavery had long been illegal, and the Clotilde would be the last ship to complete its journey from Africa to the United States. It was 1860, and the Civil War was about to begin.

Kossola, now known as Cudjo, was enslaved in Alabama by one of the Meaher brothers, Jim, where he worked on a river boat carrying freight between Mobile and Montgomery, loading wood and freight, pumping bilge, and doing whatever needed to be done. He relates, “Oh, Lor’! Oh Lor’! Five year and de six months I slave. I workee so hard!” Cudjo and his fellows were freed by Union troops in 1865. Emancipation for them also meant homelessness and poverty. They were free, but they had no house, no land, no money. Somehow, they formed a community of mostly African-born freedmen and women, and after some years were able to purchase a piece of land from the Meahers (Cudjo commented, “Dey doan take one five cent from de price for us. But we pay it all and take de lan’.”) This became “Affican Town” (Africatown, now the town of Plateau, AL).

Cudjo met and married Seely (Celia), and they had six children together, most of whom died, some in suspicious circumstances, as Reconstruction gave way to Jim Crow in Alabama and the rest of the former Confederacy. Cudjo and Seely bore the grief of losing their children as best they could. Seely passed away in 1908. Their surviving son had married and moved away, so Cudjo spent the rest of his life alone with his memories. As Hurston tells it, he never stopped grieving for his homeland, which he called “de Afficky soil”. African-born people suffered discrimination not only from white people, but also from African-Americans. Though a pillar in his own tiny community, Cudjo never felt accepted in American society, even though he had nothing to return to in Africa, his entire family having been wiped out in the raid on Banté. The reader is saddened by Cudjo’s solitude. When Hurston conducted her interviews, he was in his eighties, already the last surviving person from the Clotilda. Apparently, those who suffered the Middle Passage together formed strong bonds among themselves. Of course, they were separated from each other upon arrival when they were sold to various people, but following the Civil War, Cudjo managed to be reunited with some of the same people he had been with in the barracoon and on the Clotilda, and it was these people who founded Africatown.

The book is 171 pages, of which only 70 are devoted to the narrative of the life of Kossola/Cudjo Lewis. An appendix including descriptions of games and transcriptions of Cudjo’s stories and parables take up another 17 pages. The remaining 84 pages are taken up by a preface by Alice Walker, a lengthy introduction by Hurston, and following the appendix, an afterword, acknowledgments, a list of the founders of Africatown, a glossary, notes and citations, and a bibliography.

Posted in Autobiography, History, Memoir | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Love, Life, and Elephants: An African Love Story

Posted by nliakos on July 25, 2018

by Dame Daphne Sheldrick (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2012)

I had never heard of Dame Daphne nor of the David Sheldrick Wildlife Trust, but apparently, in the community of advocates for African wildlife (and in particular, elephants and rhinos), they are very well known. Following a harrowing accident when she failed to recognize one of “her” grown-up orphan elephants and instead got too familiar with a wild elephant, Dame Daphne decided to write her memoirs: “This will be my legacy. I will set down everything I have learned in my efforts to contribute to the conservation, preservation and protection of wildlife in this magical land.”

A native white Kenyan (her grandparents immigrated from South Africa, though her family originated in Scotland), Daphne grew up on a farm where she already showed an inclination to love and care for the wild animals that were so numerous, in addition to the dogs and cats and other domesticated animals on the farm. At seventeen, she married a man who worked for the Kenyan National Parks as an assistant warden. His assignment to Tsavo National Park put Daphne in close contact with Park Warden David Sheldrick, who was to become her second husband and soulmate.

For me, by far the most interesting parts of the narrative, however, are the parts about the many orphaned animals that Dame Daphne (with her husbands’ and daughters’ help) rescued and returned successfully to the wild. I think it is well known that wild animals who are reared by humans have a hard time surviving with their own kind in the wild; many never make it. But Dame Daphne’s orphans, time and time again, given the freedom to decide when and how they would rejoin their wild cousins (with some limitations due to age), were almost always able to reintegrate successfully (although they were of course subject to the same dangers and risks as their wild cousins once they had reintegrated). One important factor in this success for the many elephant orphans she raised is that when they were no longer dependent on milk, they were given over to the care and tutelage of the elephant cow Eleanor, herself a former orphan, who raised and returned so many orphans to the wild that I lost count.

Along the way, Dame Daphne was the first person to figure out what kind of formula could be used to save infant elephants. She also raised many other kinds of orphaned animals, including rhinos, warthogs, and many different types of antelopes, from the tiny dikdiks to elands and kudu. Amazingly, Eleanor accepted all of these different animals into her motley family. A lot of cross-species friendships were formed–not only humans with wild animals, but rhinos with zebras and water buffalo, antelopes with elephants, and more. There are photos showing Dame Daphne’s young daughters feeding the orphans and riding on a rhino. She tells of welcoming the orphans into her house and sometimes actually in her bed! Having believed all my life that wild animals can never be trusted, I was astonished at how gentle these animals were with Sheldrick and with her children (although they were often mischievous, especially when they were young). Her deep love for all animals and the special bonds she cultivated with her elephants are a joy to read about. Elephants are amazingly similar to humans in so many ways, especially when it comes to their emotional lives. They seem to lack our penchant for violence, though–at least among their own kind.

In addition, she explains the Mau Mau revolution in Kenya in the fifties, the issues related to Kenyan independence in the sixties (included the impact on the National Park system), and the ongoing fight to save African wildlife from poaching. An absolutely fascinating read.

Update: I googled Dame Daphne Sheldrick and discovered to my sadness that she passed away only a few months ago, on April 12, 2018. I also found this documentary, which tells the story of both Dame Daphne and her elephants and of Birute Galdikas and the orphaned orangutans that she raises in Borneo. Unfortunately, the video is full of annoying ads, but if you can ignore them, it’s really interesting to watch.

Posted in Autobiography, History, Non-fiction, Science | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Give Us the Ballot: The Modern Struggle for Voting Rights in America

Posted by nliakos on May 28, 2018

by Ari Berman (Farrar Straus Giroux, 2015)

Despite all the recent GOP squealing about imagined, unproven voter fraud, I guess I thought the problem of voter suppression was mostly solved by the Voting Rights Act back in 1965. Wrong. This carefully documented history of the VRA showed me how the GOP, having lost the battle to legally deprive African-Americans of their right to vote with absurd literacy tests and poll taxes, set immediately to finding other, more creative ways to suppress the minority vote. During the Reagan and G. W. Bush administrations, they received a lot of support from the Executive Branch in their fight for inequality; and Reagan was able to tilt the Supreme Court so far to the right with his conservative appointments that it became more of an adversary than an ally (and still is!).

My state, Maryland, generally makes it easy to register and vote. Marylanders can register to vote at MVA offices and in schools. They can vote early, absentee, or on Election Day, as they choose. Even if their legitimacy as voters is questioned, they can cast provisional ballots, which are counted after being validated. But residents of many other states (in particular, states of the former Confederacy) are not so lucky. For them, ground gained in the late 20th century is being lost in the 21st.

After describing how President Johnson managed to get the VRA passed in 1965, Berman walks his reader through the various reauthorizations of the Act (1970, 1975, 1982, 1992, and 2006) and the landmark Supreme Court decisions which either strengthened or weakened the law:

  • Allen v. State Board of Elections (1969) – this challenge to election laws in parts of Mississippi and Virginia raised the question of whether Section 5 of the VRA might be used to prevent states from setting district boundaries in such a way that African Americans never constituted a majority, effectively barring them from winning elective office, since whites in the south did not vote for persons of color–in other words, rendering racial gerrymandering illegal.
  • White v. Regester (1973) – This decision found that at-large elections discriminated against black candidates, who were more likely to be elected when they ran in smaller districts where they constituted a majority (aka minority-majority districts).
  • City of Mobile v. Bolden (1979) – This decision essentially reversed White v. Regester, reflecting the more conservative makeup of the Supreme Court.
  • Thornburgh v. Gingles (1986) –  prevented minority vote dilution by racial gerrymandering.
  • Crawford v. Marion County Election Board (2008) – allowed states to restrict voting in response to the “threat” (as opposed to the actual existence) of voter fraud
  • Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. 1 (NAMUDNO) v. Holder (2009) – did not actually change the VRA but encouraged further challenges
  • Shelby County v. Holder (2013) – This shameful decision essentially gutted Section 5 of the VRA by invalidating Section 4 (I did not understand well how one thing led to the other), thus removing the teeth from the law; states/counties with a history of vote suppression no longer have to have all changes to their election laws pre-approved by the Justice Department. By making it impossible to prevent abuse, this decision has undone much of the progress made possible by the VRA. As a direct result of this decision, voter turnout in 2014 plummeted; the number of voters turned away at the polls for failure to comply with some obscure procedure (or because the lines were too long) skyrocketed; and the GOP increased its stranglehold on state governments. Shame!

Berman explains the crucial importance of Section 5, which forced sixteen states (or counties within those states), mostly in the former Confederacy, to have any changes to their election laws “precleared” or pre-approved by the Department of Justice, giving the federal government the ability to block so-called second-generation voting restrictions which these states liked to use “to subvert the power of the growing minority vote”. Southerners hated being singled out for preclearance, even though relatively few abuses occurred elsewhere in the country. (Presumably, requiring preclearance in all fifty states would be prohibitively expensive, but it might have shut them up.)

Other concepts discussed in the book include voting rights versus states’ rights (to control their own elections); and simple ballot access vs. the right to be represented by someone like you. (The original VRA focused on access; subsequent reauthorizations added prevention of voter dilution, or representation.) Ballot access can be suppressed with tactics such as literacy tests and poll taxes, which were outlawed in the original VRA; in addition, measures that increase voter access, such as opportunities to vote early or by mail, adequate equipment and staff at the polls, sufficient hours of open polls, convenient locations of polls, use of provisional ballots, same-day registration, and no need for special identification which voters are unlikely to have, can be manipulated or gotten rid of (in areas where there are many minority voters), thus effectively suppressing the minority vote. Representation is mainly a result of racial gerrymandering.

The cast of characters includes the good guys (such as John Lewis, Lyndon Johnson, Martin Luther King, Jr., Coretta Scott King, Lani Guinier, Nicholas Katzenbach, Jimmy Carter, Ted Kennedy, Eric Holder, Barack Obama, James Sensenbrenner, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and a lot of poor, black, and elderly voters) and the bad guys (such as Strom Thurmond, John Roberts, Brad Reynolds, Abigail Thernstrom, Ronald Reagan, George W. Bush, William Rehnquist, Richard Nixon, Hans von Spakovsky, and Brad Schlozman).

I was appalled at the tactics employed by many Republican politicians and others to deprive minority voters of their most precious right in our democracy. I wonder, how did they justify these actions to themselves? Or maybe they truly believe in white supremacy.

During the Reagan administrations, the people appointed to run the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice (Schlozman, von Spakovsky) were precisely the people who did not wish all Americans to have equal civil rights. Talk about putting the fox in charge of the henhouse! I was reminded of the EPA under the leadership of EPA-hater Scott Pruitt, who has turned the Environmental Protection Agency into the Environmental Destruction Agency. In both cases, many career civil servants working in those agencies, who believed in the mission of those agencies, resigned or were reassigned. Ugh.

Berman ends on a hopeful note–young activists inspired to fight on by past activism. But we shouldn’t have to fight this battle anymore. It was supposed to have been fought and won in 1965. I am thoroughly ashamed of my country.

 

Posted in History, Non-fiction | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Washington Schlepped Here: Walking in the Nation’s Capital

Posted by nliakos on April 2, 2018

by Christopher Buckley (Crown Journeys 2003)

Even 15 years later, this little gem will appeal to both visitors to and residents of Washington, D.C.  In a series of four walks, Buckley (who worked for Vice President Bush in the 1980s) regales the reader with fascinating (and often funny) details of the history and background of the various sites, memorials, monuments, government buildings, and more.

Walk One covers Union Station, the Capitol, the Grant Memorial, the National Gallery, and the major Smithsonian museums on the National Mall. Of course, it would take you weeks to really see what’s in all those museums (plus the ones that have been added since the publication of the book, like the National Museum of the American Indian, the National Museum of African Art, the Sackler Gallery (Asian art) and the National Museum of African American History and Culture. So if you were really making the walks, you might want to break this one down into about ten walks. But as someone who has lived in and near DC for many years, I was happy just reading about places I have already visited. Something new I learned: Alexander “Boss” Shepherd was appointed by President Grant to govern D.C. in the 1870s, and it is Shepherd who filled in the stinking open sewer that was Tiber Creek and installed new (covered) water and sewer systems, who paved and lit the streets, and who built parks and planted 60,000 trees, among other achievements. I wonder if Shepherd St. N.W. was named for him. He deserved something grander, if so.

Walk Two: the major memorials and monuments on the west end of the Mall, the Holocaust Memorial Museum, and the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. Interesting factoid no. 1: The Washington Monument was supposed to have been built on a north-south line running from the White House to the Jefferson Memorial, but the ground there would not have supported it, so the site had to be moved slightly south and east. (I wonder how they figured this out, exactly.) Interesting factoid no. 2: Prominent Washington women had chained themselves to some of the cherry trees around the Tidal Basin to prevent their being cut down to accommodate the Jefferson Memorial, so Secretary of the Interior Harold Ickes had tea and coffee delivered to the women  so that they would have to pee, and when they left to pee, the trees were cut down. (Sounds suspect to me: not because tea and coffee don’t make people need to pee, but all at the same time? And they didn’t think to take turns, leaving somebody there guarding the trees?)

Walk Three: the area around the White House, including Ford’s Theater, where Abraham Lincoln was shot. Interesting factoid: Daniel Sickles, a congressman from New York, who lived next to Decatur House on Lafayette Square, killed his wife’s lover, pled (or pleaded, which I understand is more correct) temporary insanity (the first time the insanity defense was used) and was acquitted, and later lost his leg at Gettysburg; it was put on display at the Army Medical Museum, where he used to go and visit it.

Walk Four: Arlington National Cemetery. I learned a lot that I didn’t know, like the re-interment of Pierre Charles L’Enfant, designer of the capital city, who died in poverty and disgrace (after being fired for his “bad attitude”, apparently) and was initially buried in Bladensburg, Maryland. Interesting factoid: Clinton’s Ambassador to Switzerland had to be dug up and re-interred elsewhere when it was discovered that he had not, in fact, been a veteran, as he had claimed. And Joe Louis, the boxer, wasn’t eligible for burial at Arlington either, but Reagan made an exception for him, and so he is there.

 

Posted in History, Travel | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Impeachment: A Citizen’s Guide

Posted by nliakos on January 5, 2018

by Cass R. Sunstein (Harvard University Press 2017)

Constitutional law scholar Cass R. Sunstein has written a book about impeachment for everyone who is feeling the need to understand this process a little better as we head into 2018 after the tumultuous first year of Donald Trump’s presidency. Sunstein never mentions Trump by name, but it is very clear that he is thinking of him.

The book begins with a brief history of impeachment first in English and then in American jurisprudence. Sunstein summarizes the discussions among the framers of the Constitution concerning impeachment (which is front and center in Article 1, Section 2) and trial (Section 3) and then moves to the debate by those who ratified the Constitution in the different states, because those debates (unlike those of the framers) were public and thus representative of what citizens knew about impeachment.  He spends a lot of time examining the concepts of “high crimes and misdemeanors” and what those might be. He presents actual cases of impeachment (of presidents and judges), in particular the most recent cases of Nixon (never actually impeached because he resigned and was then pardoned before he could be indicted) and Clinton (whose impeachment was purely political) and then, in Chapter 7, “Twenty-One Cases,” he presents hypothetical cases of impeachment: first, two sets of “easy cases”, in which impeachment is obviously called for (first set of nine), or obviously not called for (second set of five). The final set of six consists of “harder cases” where the path is not clear, and reasonable people could disagree. In each case, Sunstein explains why the case is obvious or not. I found this chapter very enlightening.

The first easy case (“impeachable”), interestingly, seems very obviously to be based on Donald Trump’s behavior with Russia: A president has admiration and sympathy for a foreign nation that wishes to do harm to the United States. While in office, he reveals classified information to leaders of that nation, with the clear intention of strengthening it and of weakening his own country. The president can be impeached. He may have committed treason. . . . The only thing is that we cannot be sure of Trump’s intention when he shared highly classified information with the Russian ambassador and foreign minister in May 2016. His “admiration and sympathy for” Vladimir Putin was well known; but it is not clear whether he actually understands that Russia “wishes to do harm to the United States”, so his intent is unknowable (or so it would seem to me). (This is like trying to prove corrupt intent in a case of obstruction of justice. Not easy to do.)

There is also a chapter on the 25th Amendment to the Constitution, which provides for the removal of the president from office, temporarily (as when he becomes too ill to do his job, perhaps during a hospitalization and surgery) or permanently, in the case of permanent disability, either physical or mental. The president can temporarily transfer his power to his Vice President; or if the President is incapacitated, his cabinet can transfer the power. Sunstein shows how the 25th amendment differs from impeachment in terms of when it would be applied.

Chapter 9 is a quick-and-dirty guide: “What Every American Should Know”. Some of the information here repeats that which has already been said, but in a more concise form. He also includes information that he has not already presented, such as Can federal courts–or the Supreme Court–stop an unconstitutional impeachment? (No) Must representatives impeach a president who has committed an impeachable offense, and must senators convict him? (Yes?) Can a president be sued for official acts? (No) Can s/he be sued for reasons other than official acts? (Yes) And so on.

It is not impossible that we will witness the impeachment and trial of Donald J. Trump during the next three years. While it is not likely that this will happen as long as the GOP retains control of the Congress, that situation could change; midterm elections are coming up in just over ten months, with the victors beginning their terms at the beginning of 2019. So it is a useful exercise to review the impeachment process, and Sunstein’s guide is a good place to start.

Posted in History, Non-fiction | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »