Tag Archives: race in america

THE BROWNSVILLE AFFAIR

Posted on by

0

ANN J. LANE

Upon leaving the Presidency Theodore Roosevelt wrote a thoroughly enjoyable, well written Autobiography. The text gives a gleaming glow and presentation of the man, except

Roosevelt failed to mention the incident at Brownsville, Texas, 1906. Newly arrived companies of African-American soldiers were accused of shooting up the town, and killing a bartender. It did not matter no one could identify who the shooters were, or that witnesses failed to see or identify the shooters/rioters. It did not matter that those companies of soldiers did not have access to weapons on their base. None had revolvers. Rifles were locked up.

Roosevelt discharged, without honor, all the newly arrived African American soldiers despite knowing of these facts supporting non-participation by these soldiers.

The Brownsville Affair should be read along side of Roosevelt’s Autobiography to determine how rashly, imperial, erratic, and simple-minded that President was. Roosevelt had not been educated to understand the rules of evidence: What is proven; what is not proven. Instead, he accepted myths, fantasies, fancies and fears of Texas white people about those soldiers. He supported the conventional wisdoms common amongst all whites. Suspicions of assaults, rape, discourtesies, proud men seeking social equality and sneakiness and deception: Keys to guns were left untended and obviously the soldiers had access and used the rifles, although there was not time to do everything. All whites knew the soldiers were quick-change artists, like actors. They could be in two places at once.

Roosevelt did not, but should have, asked himself, What would Abraham Lincoln do? Lincoln would have required evidence, not guesses, speculation and fantasy, and Lincoln would have known the prejudices and Southern hatred for African-American soldiers would sully truth.

The Brownsville Affair has been a guide for racially-related incidents since 1906. Take George Floyd’s murder. Chauvin the cop said he was threatened by the bystanders on the curb, pleading that Chauvin get off Floyd’s neck. How was Chauvin threatened? Some of the bystanders were African Americans. Some of the bystanders were taking photos and making film. Some were asking questions. Some were reporting the incident to the police department. BUT without the cameras and film and the audio, would that trial have turned out the same way?

It is disappointing to read of an incident in 1906, and realize the similar or same language and prejudices are within America and Americans today. It is time to change. If no one believes it, read, The Brownsville Affair.

GRANT AND TWAIN

Posted on by

0

Mark Perry

I recommend Grant and Twain. The text presents facts and analyses for a fuller understanding of their friendly coordination and of the author’s premise.

I believe Grant read or heard and understood the whole of Huckleberry Finn. Grant and Clemens wanted to see the end of racism (our term today), and wanted African-Americans to have equal standing in the country. Each believed, Clemens less so, that the Civil War would alter the minds of Americans and were horrified that the slaughter had not accomplished that change. The end of the Grant presidency stopped the hope that minds of Americans would shift. Slavery’s end as an economic force were manifested in further political, social and economic repressive measures.

Upon moving to New York, Grant and Clemens talked much about African-Americans, their plight and changing the minds, behaviors, and manners of Americans. Clemens had already begun Huckleberry Finn. Clemens had a manuscript typewritten, in all capital letters, the only typing available at the time. He tried to correct that typewritten manuscript before printing. He gave up. Too many hands without minds – Clemens was lucky the novel survived.

Since the Civil War and its politics, military successes and economics all failed to change the attitudes and manners of Americans toward African-Americans, Grant and Clemens used what was left: sociology, cultural anthropology (not yet disciplines) and religion. Huckleberry Finn uses these disciplines, and since the novel remains, its words and influence can be recognized and used again. With complete reading comprehension, the novel becomes a book around civil rights and identifies the forces opposing such a quest in the whole of Southern Society and its religious practices.

If Grant needed clarification, Clemens explained the intricacies. Grant likely made many comments and suggested facts. Grant and Twain mentions how changed Clemens found the South, somewhat presented in Life on the Mississippi. It seemed he did not remember much. Grant’s more recent, intense experiences and observations were helpful.

Clemens’ problem was how to market Huckleberry Finn, not as a diatribe against Christianity or religion. Such a novel might not be sold today. Religion and references to the Bible occur throughout, subliminal and counter-directional. They hold the novel together and make the entirety understandable. What better irony than (1) to present a novel full of religion and Christian issues, (2) the Bible was and is the most widely read book in the English language and (3) no one makes the connection, despite an obvious red flag: “spiritual gifts.” (Chapter 3) They refer to the first words of 1 Corinthians 14, which refers to the previous chapter 1 Corinthians 13. a seminal chapter of each Christian sect.

Chapter 31 has always been significant in Huckleberry Finn. Hearn’s Huckleberry edition lays the foundation for a cultural/sociological approach to the novel. 1 Corinthians 13 is an

unforgettable chapter, and later in another hardbound edition of the novel, I read to Chapter 3: Faith and charity were described; I did not recognize hope. Later in the paragraph was “spiritual gifts,” and Huck’s dismissal: “too many for me.” Yet by Chapter 31 Huck acted accordingly to spiritual gifts especially charity, although Southern Society will send him “to Hell.”

Clemens had written the perfect novel, displaying that an author need not pound an offensive premise into a reader’s head, again, again and again. The premise of the novel was there but disguised. Clemens deploys facts making the reader believe the book is about something else: a crude, greedy, non-charitable, vulgar and lewd society, including frequent use of offensive language. Readers gloss over orgies and obsequies (Chapter 25) and the Royal Nonesuch. (Chapter 22) Acceptance of such behaviors and attitudes are not surprising in the ante-bellum South. Americans see them all the time in organized religion and Christianity today.

Clemens told all this to Grant. Grant may have supplied the line: “If that line don’t fetch them, then I don’t know Arkansas.” Grant certainly knew Arkansas well. He laughed at it all. And what of the Bible, the words of Jesus and of Christianity. Forget them.

Grant read and approved of Huckleberry Finn. The evidence is Clemens’ NOTICE:

PERSONS attempting to find a motive in this narrative will be prosecuted; persons attempting to find a moral in it will be banished; persons attempting to find a plot in it will be shot.

BY ORDER OF THE AUTHOR,
PER G.G. CHIEF OF ORDANCE

Clemens have disclaimed, this book is not about anti-Christian practices as they are proselytized and practiced in the South, but, indeed, the novel levies on Southern religion and Christianity concertedly. And the GG of the Preface, obviously is General Grant who never was a Chief of Ordnance. The Ordnance had changed from war and the military supplies and methods to ideas and arguments explaining social and cultural ways and their iniquitous outcomes.

.
It was GG who backed up and gave heart to the wary Clemens writing a novel to lob disparaging shells into Southern Civilization [and it turns out the United States as a whole].

A copy of HUCK VERITAS, criticism of Huckelberry Finn, follows.