Vacation!

Well, I wasn't on a real vacation, but with an institution workshop, doctoral prospectus work, and classes kicking off on Wednesday I got behind on posting for the week. The normal chaos will resume on Tuesday with the 15th book from the Historian's Athenaeum.

Tilting at Windmills, Vol. 1, No. 14

The Ignorance of Texans First, Americans Second and Texas Exceptionalism

            Last week in this column I focused on ethnocentrism and how it is a mental disorder. This week I am going to shift from that aspect to the way people form identities. Most of this is in the psychological world and that is not my field, but I want to specifically focus on the way that some people identify with states more than nations. I was engaged in an argument last week with someone who made the claim that more Texans consider themselves Texans first and Americans second. Now on the surface this claim is about identity and in some ways can be seen as possible. However, upon closer examination the claim does not stand. Instead, we find it to be an identity issue.

            Let’s look into this. Do more Texans consider themselves Texans first and Americans second? Since I do not live in Texas I can’t answer that with firsthand knowledge. Therefore I went with primary sources in doing some investigating. What primary sources you might say? The ones that live in Texas! I have quite a few friends in Texas so I asked them. The answer was a resounding, “No, but that depends on who you ask.” They explained that most people in Texas do not see themselves as Texans first. However, a certain group does and the individual I was arguing with is part of that group.

            As we can see by looking at a map, Texas is a pretty big state. There are a lot of people there too, but with Texas having such a strong Hispanic culture and history, the dominant white culture and identity is changing. More births were Hispanic than white since 2007 and it is estimated that the population change will shift to more non-white identities by 2030. This is a trend also seen nationally and I think it is contributing to the Texas first identity situation.

            At the current moment there are two groups of people in Texas who identify themselves as Texans first. The main group is made up of white conservatives. This group tends to hold views that are fact resistant. Their embrace of Texas first is due to their need to have a self-identity separate from others because the majority of America does not hold the factually challenged concepts that these folks have. My friends confirmed this by pointing out that this group not only believes in the Texas first concept, they also are Texas Exceptionalists. 

            What I found surprising was that as the result of a study into this phenomena, another group exists which identifies as Texas first. However, they definitely have little in common with the white conservatives. The concept is branded as Texas Exceptionalism. In many ways it resembles American Exceptionalism, but on a smaller and more xenophobic way. Those that believe in Texas Exceptionalism believe in American Exceptionalism as well. This is no surprise to me because I run into the adherents of the false American history all the time. Their grasp of history is almost always weak and reflects political ideology more than anything else. 

            Texas Exceptionalism is rooted in the idea that the state of Texas is a national leader and that the state can go it alone independent of the United States. I do have to say that Texas might be able to do so if secession were constitutional without the consent of the federal government. However, Texas would lose a lot of benefits and income from the federal government were this to happen. It would also incur a great deal of expenses, number one being the border which would now include a huge stretch along the US. Immigrants going to Texas via the US would not find any hindrance on the US side of the border in New Mexico or Oklahoma. 

            Texas would also find themselves missing about 20% of its income just from military and defense spending. All federal military bases would close and not one cent of US defense spending would be in Texas. While this would be small in the short term, the long term effects would be devastating to Texas. It is the leading state for defense contracts which means a lot of the high tech industry in Texas serves the defense industry. If that industry leaves, the high tech companies will follow because the US will be spending its money within its borders, not that of Texas. Veterans who like to retire in Texas would no longer do so as they would not received healthcare from local federal installations or get jobs in the defense industry. That would result in a net population loss as well as additional federal monies.

            Also, all those Texas exports which are not currently taxed would be subject to taxation as they cross into the US as imports. That’s a little Constitutional information for the exceptionalists who overlook that fact. While Texas does have the 12^th largest economy in the world were it to be a nation, much of that would slowly evaporate. In addition, the volatility of oil prices would be magnified greatly. Texas would have to pay for its own defense forces which would jack up costs. Currently Texas has no state tax, but definitely would have to have an income tax were it to be an independent state. How far would Texas slide were it to be independent is unknown, but it would definitely lost well over half of its state revenue at the very least plus suffer a brain drain as the US extricates itself from Texas entirely. 

            I don’t think the exceptionalists bother to think of things like that. Their ideology is long on conservative ideas and short on reality. Since it is linked to American Execeptionalism, the failure to look at things in the long term and even then only with rose-colored glasses is natural for them. Some of this is borne out by the ludicrous Texas educational standards. Evolution is ignored in favor of creationism in their textbooks while the historical texts ignore the importance of race in the shaping of the US. This would have major repercussions because even if Texas left the US, it would still be more Hispanic than White within a generation. The demographics would change resulting in a political change as well. 

            It is possible for Texas to negate that via discrimination. Its history is loaded with discrimination. The Texas Revolution had its roots in slavery (another historical fact the exceptionalists ignore) as well as the slavery caused Civil War (yet another historical fact exceptionalists reject in favor of fiction). However, before too long the imbalance would shatter Texas and they would possibly end up in a Civil War of their own thus going three for three in rebellions with racism involved in their causes.  Of course Texas Exceptionalists disagree, but then these people think their views on this issue are the dominant ones. This is incorrect.

            Only about 27% of Texans think Texas first, America second. This was borne out in a study last year: http://www.texastribune.org/2014/04/03/polling-center-texan-first-american-second/. Of the group, a sizeable number is Hispanic and younger whites. Those two groups have their own reasons for identifying as Texans first and it does not appear to involve Texas Exceptionalism. So basically as my friends pointed out to me, the main group that see themselves as Texans first is a minority within the state. My friends pointed out that these people include Jade Helm opponents, right wing extremists, and Teabaggers who are often out of touch with the people of Texas themselves. This group has views that most conservative Texans reject. 

            So there is your Texas First, America Second concept. It turns out to be a lot less than some people want it to be. How much of it is bound up in identity politics? I’d say a great deal, but the reasons for doing so different within the group. One thing is pretty sure. Texas is not going to go independent, and the person who said all Texans see themselves as Texans first was wrong as usual. Looking at the group she identifies with, I am not surprised. The United States of America comes first. Let's get that straight.

History According to Jim, Vol. 1, No. 14

     I feel like I should comment on a very popular video that is making the rounds right now on the Internet. Salon featured it August 10th and it has exploded since then with more than four million views that I know of. You can read the article and watch the video here: Was the Civil War about Slavery? 

    The video was produced by Prager University and features Colonel Ty Seidule of the US Army in full dress uniform delivering the commentary in a very forceful way. Prager University is known for their shall we say rather rightwing views on things which makes this video a big surprise in that Colonel Seidule is in it. The colonel states that he was unaware of their political views when he agreed to do the video and that it was part of multiple appearances he made to promote the release of the book, "West Point's History of the Civil War" last fall. Stars and Stripes has an article on this aspect here: Stars and Stripes

     Seidule delivers a no holds barred analysis of why the Civil War was fought. He says it was about slavery and explains why it was. He delivers this commentary in such as a way as to suggest that he is not going to tolerate the lost cause myths built on cherry picked evidence and outright and often deliberate lies. I found the video to be right on target. I especially loved the part where Seidule uses the words United States Army when talking about the US Army during the Civil War. He deliberately uses those words and stresses that it is the same army in existence today and that he is proud to have served in this army.

   Who is Colonel Ty Seidule? He is the Head of the Department of History at the United States Military Academy at West Point. He was assigned to this position in 2013. The colonel has served for about 30 years in the military. Along the way he picked up a MA in History from Ohio State University as well as his Ph.D in History from the same institution. This is not just a regular army officer giving his opinion, but a trained historian capable of researching and developing legitimate interpretations from primary sources. In other words, this guy is a valid historian.

      I wish to point this out because the usual cast of characters will probably do one of two things. They will ignore the video because it doesn't fit in with what they want to hear about the Civil War or they will begin to bring up the same old lies and excuses for the Civil War, none of which stand the test of truth. I've seen some online comments already from people who repeat the usual bull about tariffs and invasions, in other words the same old tired lost cause lies.

     I'm sorry if the truth hurts, but the Civil War was over slavery. If you can't handle that simple truth, then just shut up. Do you have a degree in history? No? Why are you running your mouth then? You've got a man who is a colonel and a holder of a Ph.D in history and you choose to ignore him because he says something you don't like? Tough shit. Unlike politics history is not decided by an election. It is developed through a lot of research. I've seen what passes for research from lost cause and heritage types. My seven year old granddaughter can do just as well as they can.

     I just had a classmate of mine from high school tell me that he was taught in college that the Civil War was over state's rights. That was back in the 80s. I gave him the video, linked him to the secession statements from the states on the Avalon Project, and explained why the interpretation is what it is. He has not replied back yet, so he is probably doing a little digging which is good. A few historians piped in on that FaceBook thread to agree with me as well, one being a former soldier I served with 30 years ago.

     You know what the most interesting thing was about the video and Colonel Seidule? These words at the end of the video:  

"As a soldier I am proud that the United States Army, my Army, defeated the Confederates. In its finest hour, soldiers wearing this blue uniform, almost 200,000 of them former slaves themselves, destroyed chattel slavery, freed 4,000,000 men, women, and children from human bondage, and saved the United States of America."

    I agree with Colonel Seidule. I have a feeling that he would be more than happy to do so again. He would not be alone. Seidule Video 

Blog of the Week, Vol. 1, No. 14

Keith Harris History

     This week we look at the blog feature of Keith Harris History. Oddly enough, this blog is operated by Keith Harris (I know, big surprise right?). Keith has a busy history site where he also operates his web publication The Americanist Independent. Keith is also the author of Across the Bloody Chasm: The Culture of Commemoration Among Civil War Veterans. Obviously Keith stays pretty busy with three things taking place on his blog, but that's not all (The Price is Right flashback)! He also stays busy with an active Twitter feed making Keith one of the few historians I've met who is very social media oriented.

     Keith earned a BA in History at the University of California (Los Angeles) and his Ph.D at the University of Virginia specializing in Nineteenth century American history with a special emphasis on the Civil War, Reconstruction, and the era of Reconciliation. He used to be the host of Cosmic America, a now defunct blog that you can still access at Cosmic America

     Keith tends to focus a bit on social history as well, but remains interested in the Civil War era as well. He began his blog on Keith Harris History on May 30, 2013. Between these two blogs, Keith has a five year plus history of blogging actively. There are commenters that play an active roll on his blog which makes it an interactive blog. His Twitter feed runs on the left sidebar and is interesting in its own right. You can also access the Americanist Independent via the upper toolbar. Those interested in submitting work for publication in the quarterly journal may also do so through the toolbar in the Call for Papers tab. 

     Keith is a consistent poster. Usually there is at least one to two posts a week along with comments from the participants. Keith also has a YouTube channel which you can access via the website or  here: Keith Harris YouTube

      I think Keith has a pretty good product here. He is not a student nor an instructor which sets him apart from most of the bloggers I have covered so far. His interest in history is obvious and I like how he uses technology to disseminate information. He is reaching for a public audience versus an academic one and I think that is one of the best things about the Internet. We historians have a way to transfer information between ourselves as well as to the public without the academic institution being in the middle of the transfer. 

     There is a great deal to be said for this. The question so far is can this be done in such a way as to financially sustain the historian? There are several people actively working on this right now and I'd say Keith is one of them. If you want to visit Keith Harris History, you can do so at Keith Harris History

The Mad Historian's Athenaeum, Vol. 1, No. 14

Howe, Daniel W. What Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815-1848. Oxford: New York, 2007. xviii + 904 ppg.

            Daniel Walker Howe’s entry into the Oxford History of the United States is another tome that meets the high standards of historical scholarship which is so indicative of the series. Howe, Rhodes Professor American History Emeritus, Oxford University and Professor of History Emeritus, University of California, Los Angeles earned the Pulitzer Prize for this outstanding volume. A sweeping coverage of a period of great transformation in American history, this volume continues to show how change has been a continuing theme in American history. This theme is a constant throughout the series. Particular themes that Howe covers in this volume revolve around technological advances and the early years of the Industrial Revolution in America. Religion is given a major examination as the Second Great Awakening transformed the morality of the nation and enhanced a nascent abolitionist movement from a tiny voice in the wilderness that became an exceedingly loud clamor.

            The Era of Good Feelings and Jacksonian Era are both covered in this volume. The developments in the historical field are reflected in this volume as social, cultural, religious, economic, political, and military histories are all given attention. The development of the nation accelerated after the War of 1812 as many of the obstacles to western expansion were removed including any protection for Native Americans who inhabited lands coveted by whites. Howe covers the incredible racism of this tragedy in detail. While advocates of American Exceptionalism will criticize this volume for its treatment of these historical events, Howe draws up the historical record and primary sources in his interpretation of this era. The result is one that rejects American Exceptionalism.

            Howe also goes into some depth in explaining how American politics worked in conjunction with changing economic differences within the country. The differences between North and South are given attention as slavery slowly faded in the North while growing in the South. He also explains how slavery was barely prevented from becoming legal in Illinois when it became a state and why. This establishes the growing schism between sections as political differences began to grow of the issue of slavery. However, as Howe is careful to note, they were kept in check as long as a balance of power was maintained. He ends the volume by covering the Mexican War which was brought on by the annexation of the Republic of Texas. 

            This is important because it was the expansion of slavery that would result in the American Civil War. The annexation of Texas was a deliberate expansion of slavery within the US and the Mexican War was another Southern attempt at expanding slavery which they felt was vital to its continuation as an economic system. Howe’s treatment of this issue again reveals skillful use of primary sources which have given historians a pretty accurate picture of what was going on concerning this period of time. There will be those who disagree with Howe’s assessment, but the facts are as Howe explains. 

            I am happy to include this volume in my library. As with all the volumes of this series, this entry is a good overall view of the time in question and makes for a good reference book. Unfortunately, the sheer magnitude of events precluded Howe from writing a larger book, but that would have taken additional volumes in itself. Howe’s work is a good synopsis for readers interested in examining the overall themes of this time. 

Tilting at Windmills, Vol. 1, No. 13

Combating Ethnocentrism in World Regional Geography

     As a history teacher at a community college I cover a range of courses that have traditionally been aligned with the discipline of history. One of those courses is Geography. I like teaching Geography. I find the world to be a very diverse place where the American point of view is just one lens among many. As the globalization of the world continues to increase, I think it is very useful for people to understand that there is a big world out there and it is not American. In fact, the US is just one nation of many and the idea of American Exceptionalism is a joke. 

     As these students finish their educations and move out into the job market, some will find themselves traveling for business purposes. Knowing something about the areas they will travel or or in some cases even live in will help them succeed in their endeavors. To do this, I teach a real world point of view and at times this clashes with the belief structures of students. My students are mostly younger adults in the first few years removed from high school. Some are older adults. My experiences with older students is that they have more to "unlearn" than others. 

     Let me explain. As an older adult who returned to college I found myself trying to reconcile what I thought I knew with what I was learning about. Most of that had to do with history and how I had constructed a historical interpretation of the past based on what I had learned years before. When I returned to college, that interpretation fell apart under the onslaught of historical information I encountered. I realized I needed to unlearn or just forget what I thought I knew and construct new interpretations built on factual information. 

     Some adults have a lot of difficulty doing that. They resist change, especially when that change is part of their belief structures that they have developed over many years. This is natural. The phenomenon has been observed for years. I see it in some of my students as well. Usually it can be overcome with students by providing them the primary sources so they can see for themselves where the information came from. I rarely have issues with students in history regarding this. Generally, those that resist change don't bother with going to college as an adult because that is an admission of embracing change in the first place.

     However, when I teach Geography I run into a different situation. Some students have a very pronounced ethnocentric point of view regarding their perceptions of the world. They see everything through an American lens. Often that involves stereotypical perceptions and often has roots in American Exceptionalist teachings from years ago. These students find the class difficult because they cannot let go of their older beliefs regarding the world outside of the US. While it is natural for everyone to have some degree of ethnocentric views, some students have constructed their worldviews from an ethnocentric aspect to the point where they just cannot accept the fact that those beliefs are false.

     The ability to understand and embrace different cultures is cultural empathy. This means to accept and understand foreign cultures as well as foreign values. One does not replace ones own culture and values in this way, but instead constructs a worldview that incorporates foreign cultures alongside their own cultural norms. People who employ cultural empathy develop an integrated worldview where multiple cultures exist alongside their own. 

     Rasoal, Eklund, and Hansen have listed five barriers to intercultural empathy. These barriers are a lack of knowledge outside one's own culture, experience with other cultures outside one's own, knowledge regarding other people's cultures, experiences regarding other people's cultures, and an inability to bridge different cultures by understanding the commonalities and dissimilarities. My World Regional Geography courses are the anti-thesis to this ethnocentric disorder. For it is a mental disorder found in cultural psychology. 

      My courses involves students learning about the world and its regions by studying the people that interact with the geography that exists in those regions. Like it or not, mankind's history has been shaped by that interaction to an extremely high degree. People with ethnocentric disorder tend to think that that other factors played stronger roles. Racists almost always display this disorder and often to a high degree. Those who believe in American Exceptionalism often display this disorder, but not necessarily to disabling degrees. Fortunately, very few of my students seem to have this disorder. I think it is due to their youth and that they are still developing their worldview and thus open to learning about the world. 

     Older students may or may not have this disorder. Most are willing to learn quite easily and discard their former worldview and are eager to construct new ones. However, some refuse to do so. I really have no answer for them that they're going to like because I do not have their disorder. I've noticed these students tend to be part of the minority that have difficulty grasping new learning such as multiculturalism. The pedagogy for teaching them is a bit different than that of teaching younger adults. It causes me to have to make adjustments in my teaching to deal with these students and it can be disruptive at times as well. 

     There is a strong element of empathy involved in cultural ethnography as well. This also factors into the way some people cannot embrace other cultures or new ideas. They have either a lack of empathy or lack empathy along some pathways. Psychologists have postulated that people can have a lack of empathy. This is an area of research which has been explored quite well although more research is needed as the ability to measure empathy is not exact. A lack of empathy is noted in many mental disorders. In intercultural ethnography we see four types of empathy involved, Behavioral, Emotional, Relational, and Cognitive. 

     I will wrap this up by saying that I find it interesting that education and psychology are so closely related. I have become a better teacher by using elements of psychology in my pedagogical practices. Dealing with adult students requires a different approach in the classroom. Most of the time this is not a big deal, but there are times when older students present special problems due to their mindset. Understanding that mindset definitely helps me reach out to them. 

Next week we will study a psychological disorder involving geography that I find endemic to a certain type of individual involving the culture wars.