You can’t wag your finger and lecture people into bevaving more humbly. All you can do, I think, especially for a teacher, is demonstrate such behavior yourself and hope your example inspires others. UPDATE: More from Robbie at Urban Grounds.

I doubt you’ll see him working in any Austin soup kitchens Thursday.

I agree Jensen is wrong, but IMO Robbie you’ve taken the wrong lessons from his arguments, or perhaps we just disagree WHY he’s wrong. I had my own response here. Best,

With that said, I have even less guilt (if it’s possible to have less than none) for what a bunch of white folks did to a bunch of Indians long before I was born.

You are either disingenuous or not very reflective about our debt to our ancestors. Pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock and found abandoned fields and abundant forests that had been left by God for them. In fact, the Wampanoag tribe that had planted those fields and hunted those forests had been devastated by plague introduced by Europeans. Even with the head start the Europeans still barely survived.

All of which is to say, that you live on ground that Europeans only conquered through the accident of fate that Europe had smallpox while North America had no similarly devastating disease. As a result, your ancestors were able to come to an empty continent to become farmers or tradesmen or whatever giving them a life better than the ones they left behind.

Are you honestly not thankful of the sacrifices they made for you ‘before you were born’?
Are you really not aware that their opportunities were made possible through the suffering of the people who lived here before them?

Believe me, I’m not going to spend Thanksgiving wearing a hairshirt but as I celebrate the gifts I have been given by my ancestors I hope to be mindful of the way that the suffering of others helped their own journeys.

“Just 1 day after Islamist terrorists killed more than 3000 innocent US citizens, this coward is blaming the US.”

Where does he say that? Maybe you could point it out for me.

“I don’t have any pangs of guilt for what white people did to slaves more than 140 years ago”

The genocide he refers to is that of the Native Americans, not slaves from Africa.

Of course, many of your political persuasion aren’t going to let little things like the facts get in the way of salvaging the rusting ideal of American exceptionalism. Ironically, it is the pro-war right wing who has made the largest contribution to the steep decline of American credibility and relevance (in exchange for the rise of Iran and China – thanks a lot,) through their reckless pursuit of a permanent American hegemony in the Middle East.

President Clinton said this about the elections just last week: “America rejected shorthand, people are thinking again.” Good news for the reality-based community. Maybe not so good for the pro-war gang.

Preston — I didn’t say I wasn’t cognizant of nor thankful for the history of our nation and how it was settled. I just said that I don’t feel any sense of guilt over it.

the rusting ideal of American exceptionalism…

I’m sorry and a bit sad (for you) that you feel that way. I do believe in American exceptionalism…we are the most giving and benevolent nation on this planet, and we have done more to advance the welfare of this planet’s citizens than any other nation ever has.

As Annie wrote sometime back:

i believe in American exceptionalism. i don’t think America needs to be more humble. If my country has ever flipped anyone off in the past, that’s something i want to see more of. Look at the scoreboard. Was America “scratching its nose” with the middle finger when we saved the world from tyranny three times in one century? Like the song says, fuck yeah! Was it arrogance when our fifth president declared “hands off this hemisphere” to the superpowers of his day? Or when T.R. said “let’s build that fucking canal!” (paraphrasing). Or when Jack promised we’d walk on the moon within the decade? Sure it was. And so what?

Many people on the left make the common mistake of evaluating the events of the past through the fogged lens of current perspective and social mores.

It seems obvious to us today that slavery was and is an inhumane, despicable practice. Considering that slavery has existed since the dawn of man and has only in the past few hundred years been deemed socially unacceptable, the weight of time gives lie to the obviousness of the sentiment.

It seems incomprehensible to us today that others would simply move in and take over a previously undiscovered land already occupied by an indigenous population and then would have the audacity to fight when the indigenous population resisted the invasion. That’s just the way the world worked back then. Even the individual Indian tribes merrily engaged themselves in wiping each other out from time to time. It is a historically recent social invention that it is “morally wrong” to invade and conquer lands in furtherance of the “empire”.

We can sit on our moral high horse all day long and sneer at the actions of those before us, but we cannot change what happened and passing judgment does nothing to right the percieved wrongs. The best we can possibly do is ensure that everyone, regardless of background, has an equal opportunity to avail themselves of the potential for success prevalent in a free society. Punishing the sons for the sins of the fathers is ineffective, counterproductive and downright stupid.

SailorCurt:

I agree with you that we cannot impose expections of behavior that have not yet been invented on previous generations. But as was the case of slavery, the taking of land and breaking of treaties with Native Americans was not done without criticism of contemporaries; there were many who recognized the inhumanity of the treatment and were outspoken in their opposition. However, as is often the case, the lure of profit drowned out those voices.

My own critique was more neutral regarding the actions of our ancestors- for the most part Europeans were oblivious that their diseases were wiping out the original inhabitants of the Americas. The epidemics were nonetheless a horrible tragedgy and Europeans benefited from it.

In any case, I don’t think anyone has called for ‘punishment’ just acknowledgement that we continue to enjoy the benefits of previous generations brutality.

Forgive me, I should have been more specific there. There are a couple of different working definitions of “American exceptionalism.”

This is the one I refer to here (thanks Wiki!:)

…Among non-US and U.S. constitutional law scholars alike, the term has also come to describe the belief that the United States should not be bound by international law except where it serves American interests. This position is driven by a (usually implicit) premise that the United States cannot violate international law, especially international human rights norms, because it has long defined those norms and led international efforts to advance human rights. In the wake of the events of September 11, 2001, this strand of American exceptionalism has come under stress as the international community has condemned US human rights practices relating to detainee treatment and other aspects of the War on Terror.
(snip)

Do you agree with that? There’s more:

…Those who use the term in its loose, colloquial sense may claim “American exceptionalism” is common ethnocentrism and little more than crude propaganda, that in essence is a justification for an America-centered view of the world that is inherently chauvinistic and jingoistic in nature, noting that many nations have claimed at the height of their power to have basis for an exceptional nature or a destiny different to all other countries, at different times in history.
(snip)

That’s what I think of when I hear the term – Pat

But as was the case of slavery, the taking of land and breaking of treaties with Native Americans was not done without criticism of contemporaries;

The existence of criticism from the minority does not change the fact that the general social mores of the time existed. Even during the height of the civil war, the majority were not abolitionists and virtually none believed that the newly freed slaves should be instantly elevated to the level of equality. The social mores of the time supported the racist ideal that blacks (and Indians for that matter) were inferior to whites. We now know that they were wrong, but at the time, it was patently obvious to them and any argument to the contrary was dismissed as ridiculous.

for the most part Europeans were oblivious that their diseases were wiping out the original inhabitants of the Americas.

And we should feel some sort of institutional guilt about it? The newly arrived Europeans had absolutely no clue as to the mechanisms of disease or their spread. Pasteur didn’t discover the germ and virus until over THREE HUNDRED YEARS after the first Europeans arrived here and began the plagues of smallpox and measles that decimated the indigenous populations. Even if they had the causes of these epidemics, what was to be done? There were no antibiotics, no vaccines, no medicines to deal with these diseases. Even the Europeans at the time that contracted the diseases either fought them off with their own immune systems…or died.

I don’t think anyone has called for ‘punishment’ just acknowledgement that we continue to enjoy the benefits of previous generations brutality.

Perhaps I engaged in a little hyperbole there. But the fact remains that we have no need to feel guilt or remorse for the actions of our forefathers. The Indians themselves have enjoyed benefits from the occupation of America by Europeans. Their tribal cultures simply were not capable of the technological advances of which they too enjoy the fruits. Your characterizion of the acts of previous generations as brutality is nothing more than a moral judgment.

It is very easy to sit in your climate controlled house after having eaten a multi-thousand calorie meal prepared in 30 minutes or less using energy and food sources that are available to you at no personal physical effort…paid for by a 40 hour work week in another climate controlled building to which you travel in a climate controlled automobile with power brakes and power steering while sipping coffee and talking on a cellphone.

Life back then was brutal. The average life expectancy in 1600 was THIRTY FIVE. The people that colonized and founded our country were not the pampered pansies that their descendents have become. They learned at a very young age that life was hard, life was not fair, life was brutal. Our social mores have changed because life has changed…primarily as a result of the industry and ingenuity of the White European Males that are now being told that they should be remorseful for all the terrible things their ancestors did. Give me a break.

Something I always tried to instill in my kids and a lesson that the “downtrodden” of today could learn from:

We are where we are. How we got here; who did what to us; how unfair life has been to us; what unlucky things happened to get us here…none of that matters. All that matters is that this is where we are. The next step is figuring out where we want to be, figuring out what we need to do to get there, and shutting the hell up and getting it done.

That something happened to you is of no importance to anyone, not even to you. The important thing about you is what you choose to make happen – your values and choices. That which happened by accident – what family you were born into, in what country, and where you went to school – is totally unimportant.
— Ayn Rand

“The worst lesson that can be taught to a man is to rely upon others and to whine over his sufferings.”
–Theodore Roosevelt

SailorCurt, Robbie:
There is a difference between guilt and acknowledgement. Guilt is a useless and paralyzing emotion. Acknowledgement can help us redress injustice if necessary and prevent us from making the same mistakes in the future.

The Indians themselves have enjoyed benefits from the occupation of America by Europeans. Their tribal cultures simply were not capable of the technological advances of which they too enjoy the fruits.
Who is to say that? We know that European culture with the infusion of billions of dollars of American gold, natural resources, and slave labor became an industrial powerhouse. Does it justify theft to say that some of the benefits have trickled down to the victims of those crimes?

Your characterizion of the acts of previous generations as brutality is nothing more than a moral judgment.
What’s your point? Do you have a higher criteria of judgement?

Sailorcurt, you’re apparent belief that no society is responsible for immoral actions that 50.1% support of its citizens is a little troubling.

Happy Thanksgiving people. Translated, that is Giving Thanks. It is not a day of atonement. It is a day where we simply thank others. The pilgrims thanked God for their harvest as did many generations thereafter.

I, for one, also thank God for the blessings he has given me and for the responsibility of being a steward of all that he made for us. I also thank my Norwegian ancestors for taking the risk of coming to America and for making it possible for me to be born in this great land. I thank all those who tended the land before me, including the Native Americans and slaves and for all those who fought for and have died for my freedoms.

I thank my family and friends for loving and nurturing me. I thank those who mentored me and helped me achieve what I have today, and,

Happy Thanksgiving to my friends on this blog. Have a wonderful, thankful, day.

Dianne, perhaps your views and Jensen’s aren’t mutually exclusive? That’s what I meant when I wrote on Huevos Rancheros:

I don’t agree with Jensen we need to “replace” Thanksgiving. I think it’s fine to give thanks. I think giving real, earnest thanks implies the humility that Jensen wishes were more commonly expressed during the holidays. If we are truly thankful, it’s because we know that we do not deserve grace but have been offered it anyway. It’s because no one can repay those old debts, those sins cannot be erased, but they can be forgiven.

Happy Thanksgiving Dianne, Robbie, and everybody else here.

Nicely put, GFB.

Ty grits but I don’t feel as though I have to be forgiven for something I didn’t do, nor did my ancestors since they weren’t even in this country at the time. I do feel compassion for what they endured, but there are so many current atrocities in this world, I think that our focus is better spent on trying to fix them, if we can.

Dianne, how can you reject responsibility for history if you’re grateful for “being a steward of all that he made”? People’s defensiveness on this brings to mind another line in my column responding to Jensen:

You can’t wag your finger and lecture people into bevaving more humbly. All you can do, I think, especially for a teacher, is demonstrate such behavior yourself and hope your example inspires others.

That applies to his critics, too. The roots of todays atrocities lie in yesterday’s, which is why we study history. The issues we’re discussing here constitute this country’s “original sin,” or sins, IMO. They’re obviously very sensitive topics for you and others. I don’t think people should feel “guilt” in the face of history, but the fact that discussing it inspires self-righteous defiance among some, I have to say, I find personally disturbing and also seems to me a poisonous approach. It certainly doesn’t strike me as the attitude of a steward. Regards,

Grits, yes I am a steward for all that God made. Man didn’t make it, God did. It’s our responsibility to care for it, right here and right now. Man destroys it all right and has since the Garden of Eden. That’s original sin.

Now, let’s take a look at something a little more current. Look at the extermination of the Jews during WW II. Look at Rawanda. Look at Darfur. Look at our supposed civilized country where women kill their unborn babies. I can do something about what is happening around me today and if I don’t, well then I should feel guilt, but I can’t do anything about something that happened hundreds of years ago.

So, if you’re personally disturbed by my attitude toward history, then so be it. But, I ask you, what are you doing about the atrocities of the present?

If you’re really out trying to better the world today with as much energy as you scorn victims of past societal transgressions, then fine, more power to you.

What I find odd, and yes, somewhat disturbing, is that atrocities in the past were as bad as the ones that today you think should compel us to action, but you appear to belittle their victims and their effects. War, genocide, slavery scar societies for generations, not just for the moment; 140 years is just a second ago, a mere blink, both God’s eye and in history’s. But you’d flippantly declare, “It’s nothing to me, not my problem,” which frankly doesn’t sound like much of a steward, to me.

I scorn them? I belittle them? And, you quote me as saying It’s nothing to me it’s not my problem?

I take offense at that. I said nothing of the sort. I said I felt compassion for them.

You’re off base buddy.

Above is from me.

How have I failed to acknowledge history? Have I denied that any of the things happened? Have I refused to acknowledge that, by today’s standards, those things were immoral and wrong?

All I am saying is that we CANNOT pass moral judgment on the actions of those that came before us based upon the standards of today. We can say that the world is better today, more just and fair, less brutal, but we CANNOT condemn the actions of people with whom we cannot relate in even the smallest way.

And how, exactly, can we redress the grievances of those long passed? Are you volunteering to give any land you own to a Native American family because your forefathers “stole” it from them? Are you volunteering to move back to Europe?

Does giving people something for nothing better their condition, or only make them dependent upon the givers? Isn’t it more constructive to encourage them to take advantage of opportunities on their own and find their own path in life rather than encourage them to become slaves to the charity and goodwill of others?

How do we, after hundreds of years of interbreeding and societal melding, separate the Native Americans from the rest of American Society? My maternal great-great grandmother was full blooded Blackfoot Indian. I also have ascendants that immigrated to this country in the mid 1700’s. I’m indirectly related to the Thomas Stone that signed the Declaration of Independence. So should I be held accountable for the actions of my European forebears, or be a recipient of “redress” as a descendent of their “victims”?

I am all for acknowledging history and learning from it…but to suggest that we should hold the actions of those in the past to the standards of conduct of today is ridiculous. You ARE insisting that we feel institutional guilt for the actions of our predecessors. To infer that we can somehow “redress” the grievances of the past is to aassign blame and guilt. How else WOULD you describe it.

History happened. It should not be swept under the rug and abandoned. We can learn much from its study and, hopefully, not repeat the same mistakes twice; but we have NO reason to feel any guilt about the actions of those who came before us…actions which we do not understand because the context of our world is so much different than the one in which those actions took place… we have no responsibility to “redress” the grievances of the past other than to do our best to ensure that ALL people, regardless of their ancestry, have equal opportunity to live their life as successfully (or unsuccessfully) as they choose to do so.

You can feel all the “white guilt” you want to. Just don’t try to convince me that I should feel the same because I’m simply not buying it. I am responsible for MY actions, not those of the people before me.

Oh, one more thing: How do I know that the Indians would not have been able to achieve the technological advancements of the Europeans? Because it is a historical fact that tribal cultures have never done so. Perhaps I should have said “PROBABLY would have never been able to achieve…” in order to make it more technically accurate, but the basic fact is that Native American society and technology had not advanced much past the stone age at the time of the “discovery” of the American Continents by Eurpeans and there is no evidence that it was on the verge of doing so.

You charactarize the colonization of the Americas by Europeans as “theft” and “crime” and are, again, guilty of judging perfectly acceptable behavior at the time by current societal norms. And you insist that you are not attempting to assign guilt? Then why the judgmental terminology?

Colonization was not a crime at that time in history. It was normal and expected behavior. What would have been considered a crime is to stumble upon such a rich discovery and NOT take full advantage of it. Right or wrong, that’s just the way the world worked then. You are trying to assign guilt ex post facto on something that, by the societal standards of the time, was perfectly acceptable and respectable.

I would insist that such actions were not just acceptable, but necessary. Failing to participate in the rush to colonize the Americas would have left which ever nation chose that road at a severe financial and military disadvantage and prime for that era’s version of a hostile take-over.

White guilt? Jensen happens to be the beneficiary of white privilege in a white supremacist society. I think his activism is driven by empathy not white guilt. Why can’t it be just be okay to seek justice on behalf of the disenfranchised? What’s so wrong about wanting to be humane in an inhumane society? Unless, he is singlehandedly holding down non-white folks, and singlehandedly preventing them from being fully human, why must he feel guilty?

Conversely, he shouldn’t be the only white person taking an anti-racist stance against injustice. (And I know he isn’t, there are at least one or two others–okay, more than two, but far from enough.) Anti-racist activism should be a collective effort.

I’ve read Jensen’s books and many articles, and I have have listened to his interviews. I don’t know if he adheres to The Affirmations of Humanism: A Statement of Principles but he seems “concerned with securing justice and fairness in society and with eliminating discrimination and intolerance.”

We should all be so concerned.