First we need to make a distinction among conservatives. There are those who are beyond reach, who have become part of the clan of Limbaugh-Beck, having lost the ability, or the desire, for any information that would disturb this identity. But there are others, those who still keep an open mind to differing perspectives.
If you can keep a relationship going with those who identify with the right, but with whom you maintain mutual respect, it presents an opportunity that I will describe here.
It began with this email a couple of days ago:
Al
You are the only liberal I know that would take the time to look at another viewpoint. I need your input.
You wanted a more creditable point of view. This is it.
Bill
He continued with this article that starts with the biography of the author:
David Kaiser is a respected historian whose published works have covered a broad range of topics, from European Warfare to American League Baseball. Born in 1947, the son of a diplomat, Kaiser spent his childhood in three capital cities: Washington D.C, Albany, New York, and Dakar, Senegal. He attended Harvard University, graduating there in 1969 with a B.A. in history. He then spent several years more at Harvard, gaining a PhD in history, which he obtained in 1976. He served in the Army Reserve from 1970 to 1976.
He is a professor in the Strategy and Policy Department of the United States Naval War College. He has previously taught at Carnegie Mellon, Williams College and Harvard University. Kaiser's latest book, The Road to Dallas, about the Kennedy assassination, was just published by Harvard University Press.
Dr. David Kaiser
Hmmm. Pretty impressive. I know there are a few conservatives in academia but I hadn't heard of this one. So I read on
History Unfolding
I am a student of history. Professionally, I have written 15 books on history that have been published in six languages, and I have studied history all my life. I have come to think there is something monumentally large afoot, and I do not believe it is simply a banking crisis, or a mortgage crisis, or a credit crisis. Yes these exist, but they are merely single facets on a very large gemstone that is only now coming into a sharper focus.
Something of historic proportions is happening. I can sense it because I know how it feels, smells, what it looks like, and how people react to it. Yes, a perfect storm may be brewing, but there is something happening within our country that has been evolving for about ten to fifteen years. The pace has dramatically quickened in the past two.
We demand and then codify into law the requirement that our banks make massive loans to people we know they can never pay back? Why?
We learned just days ago that the Federal Reserve, which has little or no real oversight by anyone, has "loaned" two trillion dollars (that is $2,000,000,000,000) over the past few months, but will not tell us to whom or why or disclose the terms. That is our money. Yours and mine. And that is three times the $700 billion we all argued about so strenuously just this past September. Who has this money? Why do they have it? Why are the terms unavailable to us? Who asked for it? Who authorized it? I thought this was a government of "we the people," who loaned our powers to our elected leaders. Apparently not.
O.K. He happens to be right about this. The Federal Reserve has great power, far beyond what was ever anticipated and they may keep their decisions from the public, based on the need to prevent over reactions of markets.
We have spent two or more decades intentionally de-industrializing our economy.. Why?
We have intentionally dumbed down our schools, ignored our history, and no longer teach our founding documents, why we are exceptional, and why we are worth preserving. Students by and large cannot write, think critically, read, or articulate. Parents are not revolting, teachers are not picketing, school boards continue to back mediocrity.. Why?
We have now established the precedent of protesting every close election (violently in California over a proposition that is so controversial that it simply wants marriage to remain defined as between one man and one woman. Did you ever think such a thing possible just a decade ago?) We have corrupted our sacred political process by allowing unelected judges to write laws that radically change our way of life, and then mainstream Marxist groups like ACORN and others to turn our voting system into a banana republic. To what purpose?
Hmmm, seems to be a change in tone to some overstatement, "intentionally de-industrializing our economy" Perhaps emerging nations had something to do with this shift of industry? I start to get suspicious.
The rest I will severely edit to give a flavor of what follows:
(Surely you have heard him speak about his idea to create and fund a mandatory civilian defense force stronger than our military for use inside our borders? No?
Oh, of course. The media would never play that for you over and over and then demand he answer it. Sarah Palin's pregnant daughter and $150,000 wardrobe are more important.)
Mr. Obama's winning platform can be boiled down to one word: Change. Why?
I have never been so afraid for my country and for my children as I am now. It is potentially 1929 x ten...And we are at war with an enemy we cannot even name for fear of offending people of the same religion, who, in turn, cannot wait to slit the throats of your children if they have the opportunity to do so.
And finally, we have elected a man that no one really knows anything about, who has never run so much as a Dairy Queen, let alone a town as big as Wasilla, Alaska. All of his associations and alliances are with real radicals in their chosen fields of employment, and everything we learn about him, drip by drip, is unsettling if not downright scary
(and then he shifts to his Nazi analogy)
And there were the promises. Economic times were tough, people were losing jobs, and he was a great speaker. And he smiled and frowned and waved a lot. And people, even newspapers, were afraid to speak out for fear that his "brown shirts" would bully and beat them into submission. Which they did - regularly. And then, he was duly elected to office, while a full-throttled economic crisis bloomed at hand - the Great Depression. Slowly, but surely he seized the controls of government power, person by person, department by department, bureaucracy by bureaucracy. The children of German citizens were at first, encouraged to join a Youth Movement in his name where they were taught exactly what to think. Later, they were required to do so. No Jews of course,
David Kaiser
Jamestown , Rhode Island
United States
It took about an hour to find out the truth about this essay, that was expressed in this email that I sent back to Bill:
Bill,
I have taken the time and effort to refute this so called scholarly essay, but it only makes sense if you send this back to those who read these distortions. This is addressed to you, and all of those who have read this essay. I trust you, and others who receive this will send it back through the channels that passed it to you.
-----------------
Response to: "Storm Coming" by "Scholar" David Kaiser
First of all this is a fraud, and was not written by the scholar David Kaiser, as the real individual confirms here on his personal blog.
But there are those who continue to spread this kind of venom, perhaps under their own name, or a pseudonym, or simply attaching it to a respected scholar as this was done. And with enough of a deluge of these distortions, it starts to stick.
As a moderate, I have many objections to the actions of our current President, Barack Obama, but they are always based on the actual facts and my own evaluation of them.
Since this is not the first, or the last of such emails, let's do some examination of the content:
A few details show that this is not the work of a scholar, or even someone with a casual respect for the truth, as demonstrated from this quote from the essay:
When Winston Churchill pointed out the obvious in the late 1930s while seated in the House of Lords in England (he was not yet Prime Minister),
Winston Churchill was not a member of the House of Lords in the 30s (and other than a symbolic seat to retired Prime Ministers, never served on this body), Based on the above quote found on this link. he actually fought against the power of that institution.
This is also from the essay
(Surely you have heard him speak about his idea to create and fund a mandatory civilian defense force stronger than our military for use inside our borders? No?
This has been a distortion that is widely repeated.
It is appropriate for serious essays to link sources when one makes an accusation out of respect for the reader who may want to verify the facts and then do his or her own interpretation.
The words candidate Obama used were "civilian national security" force equal to the military. He never said or implied that this would be mandatory or armed. Here is the link to the actual speech
The implication among the right wing extremists, supported by a slight change of wording, is something more pernicious, which is a personal military force. From the context of the actual speech, which anyone who assumes the worse has an obligation to listen to, he was referring to public service such as Americacorp or The Peace Corp.
These are divisive times, and it's easy to take vague remarks and distort them into a pattern of Obama's attempt to become a dictator, something with no evidential support.
This kind of fraudulent distortion harms our country in many ways. In a two party system, both parties must be reasonable enough that productive dialog can take place. When absurd accusations replace rational conversation we are all in trouble.
There is another mid term election in 14 months, when we all get to vote on who controls congress. And two years after that we vote for president. Those who prefer the Republicans can support their candidates and vote for them.
Those who pass on fraudulent essays that claim are from actual scholars are attempting to bestow legitimacy on the worst kind of deceitful fear mongering. They are spreading hate that just could trigger an act of violence that will lead our country into chaos.
This would be a tragedy for all us, no matter what party we identify with.
Bill is an honorable man, when he responded with this email, I believe him.
Sep. 2, 2009
Al
I really appreciate the correct information, the time and effort that you put in to research this.
It's good to know that I can get a fair reading from you on such writings.
I will pass this both backwards and forwards to those who sent or received this fraudulent essay (reprinted below), and encourage them to do the same.
Thanks again.
Bill
Will this change any minds? I don't know. But it is a rare interaction that shows that we have not completely become two tribes staring across an ever widening abyss.
But this only works if somehow a modicum of mutual respect, or perhaps affection, can be maintained no matter how great the political differences.
And for me, it's down to this one man.