Lydia Hamilton Smith will be on C-SPAN 2

My Friends,

I am pleased to tell you C-SPAN’s recording of my talk on Lydia Hamilton Smith and my biography of her (An Uncommon Woman: The Life of Lydia Hamilton Smith, Penn State Press November 2023) will be airing on C-SPAN 2 on March 23 at 3:05pm. It will be available on YouTube shortly after that. Here’s the link: https://www.c-span.org/video/?533508-1/an-uncommon-woman. If you don’t have time to read the book, this presentation will tell you most of what you need to know about this inspiring woman of color.

Pace.

Why evangelical Christians should not vote for Donald Trump

(Note: This article was published in the Sunday, January 21, 2024, edition of our local paper, LNP/LancasterOnline. The Sunday edition has the largest circulation of any of the paper’s editions, 47,000. Maybe this message will reach a few people, at least.)

This segment is entitled: Why Evangelical Christians should not vote for Donald Trump

I came to faith at the age of 10, thanks to my saintly, evangelical Christian mother and the wonderful congregation at New Holland Methodist Episcopal Church.

To keep me on the straight and narrow, my mother (who never drank, smoked or swore) convinced me to attend a conservative Christian school in upstate New York. Most students were from churches that adhered to literal interpretations of Scripture. I was one of the few who came from more liberal churches. To my mother’s list of prohibitions, my school added: no playing pool, no movies, no tight pants, no dancing, no hard rock, no gambling, no interracial dating.

Early my first year, I ran for class president. On election eve, my opponent stopped by my room to say, “Don’t worry about the election tomorrow, ’cause you’re going to lose.” “Why?” I asked. “Because you’re not spiritually prepared to be freshman class president.” I lost.

It took only a little while for me to understand that my brand of Christianity was too liberal for my classmates. They saw my path to faith as too vague. Liberal Christianity, they told me, leads people to things like situational ethics, in which the end sometimes justifies the means in matters of morality and behavior. God sees only black and white, they said, with no room for gray. An act, a thought, is either right or wrong, based on God’s laws. I didn’t share those views then and I don’t now. But I respected the sincerity with which my evangelical friends expressed their beliefs and I admired the strength of their faith. That’s why I was absolutely stunned when so many evangelicals lined up behind a blatantly immoral man like Donald Trump, and voted in 2016 to put him in the White House.

I’ve spent the last eight years, trying to understand it. Here’s what I think I’ve learned so far.

Much of the blame, I believe, must be laid at the feet of evangelical ministers such as Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell Jr., Franklin Graham, Paula White and the many local pastors who echo their views, who are hungry for political power. With a few exceptions, these leaders have played on dissatisfaction among many evangelicals over cultural changes like legalized abortion and protections for members of the LGBTQ+ community. These ministers of the Gospel have fanned the flames of moral and religious resentment to convince evangelical believers that the only way to reverse the trends is to trade the gentle, loving Jesus for the macho version — a Jesus who’s mad at liberal culture and is not going to take it anymore. That Jesus, many evangelicals have come to believe, will use anyone and anything to restore the Christian nation they imagine once existed. That anyone arrived in the form of Donald Trump.

And Trump was only too pleased to serve their purposes, as long as they voted for him. Trump has an undeniable, almost uncanny, ability to play on the discontent of many Americans — especially evangelical Christians — to win their unflagging support, by promising to fix all of the things they’re upset about. Many evangelicals are so desperate to see their values rescued that they’re willing to believe Trump is a hard-charging messiah, tasked by God to restore the nation, by whatever means necessary. (See the many right-wing memes depicting Trump with Jesus’ hand on his shoulder, or sitting by Jesus’ side.) In other words, the ends now justify the means — the very moral thinking my evangelical classmates condemned so thoroughly.

These fed-up evangelicals have become blind to the danger Trump poses. Unlike any other presidential candidate, Trump has no moral or religious compass to prevent him from abusing any segment of our society he feels inclined to punish or destroy. Shortly after he took office, 27 mental health professionals warned us that he is a malignant narcissist who should never be allowed anywhere near the levers of national power. To help us understand the seriousness of the matter, the experts listed the characteristics and behaviors a malignant narcissist exhibits: exaggerated sense of self-importance; lack of empathy; manipulative behavior such as charm, flattery or deceit; aggression, including emotional abuse, verbal abuse or even physical violence; a belief that other people are conspiring against them; and deriving pleasure from the pain of others. Anyone who’s been paying attention should have no trouble seeing Trump’s very unchristian behavior in the list.

Some evangelical Christians, especially those inclined toward Christian nationalism—the belief that ours is meant to be governed as an explicitly Christian nation—aren’t willing to acknowledge Trump’s problematic conduct because they are single-minded and rigidly partisan. (Take for example Pennsylvania state Representative Stephanie Borowicz, who was recorded saying she won’t work with Democrats on legislation because what they stand for is ”vile, perverse…the opposite of God’s word.”

My evangelical mother’s faith was built on morality, goodness and kindness. Her faith never would have permitted her to vote for a man who ignores God’s laws and condemns so many of God’s children. The rub, for all evangelicals who long for change, is that you can’t employ a faithless autocrat to achieve your ends without turning your back on the fundamental principles of true Christian faith. My mother would have prayed for Donald Trump’s soul, but she would never have voted for him. May we all do the same.

Pace.   

How to peel MAGA folks away from Donald Trump

Thoughtful people have been struggling to understand why Americans–the MAGA faithful–started believing in Donald Trump the moment he descended the golden escalator at Trump Tower in 2015, when he declared Mexican immigrants rapists, along with other sordid comments, as he threw his hat in the ring for president. The Trump congregation now includes assorted conspiracy theorists, racists, white supremacists, and an estimated thirty percent (30%) of people who identify themselves as Evangelical Christians. Trump’s thirty percent slice of the American electorate has remained surprisingly consistent since he took that first escalator ride. Among the staunchest supporters for the blatantly irreligious Trump are televangelists, like Franklin Graham (son of Billy), Jerry Falwell, Jr.(son of Jerry), and Paula White (mother of the prosperity gospel), plus many a local, conservative, evangelical pastor. And that support has intensified since 2015. Praise for Trump has metastasized from, “He tells it like it is” and “He’s a Godly man who’ll get our country back from the gays and the immigrants,” to high profile preachers now telling their followers Trump is the new King Cyrus (a Persian king credited in the Old Testament with freeing Hebrew people from captivity in Babylon). Some even claim he’s the new Messiah, sent by Jesus himself to rescue good, evangelical Christians from degenerate liberals, gays, minorities, immigrants, etc.

Many non-MAGA people find Trump’s “deification” surprising, given the steady exposure of his sins (or crimes), both large and small, sexual and financial, committed before, during, and after his time in the White House. They ask , “How can good evangelical Christians, or just good, old, moral Americans stay loyal to Trump in the face of such degeneracy?”

I can answer that question in two words: cognitive dissonance. Social scientist Leon Festinger introduced cognitive dissonance to Americans in the 1950s, after he managed to infiltrate and observe a UFO doomsday cult. (He shared his observations and conclusions in a very readable book: When Prophecy Fails.) The cult in question was run by a woman named Mrs. Keech, who claimed special knowledge (presumably from aliens) that the earth was about to be destroyed, and only the members of the cult would be carried to safety when the alien spacecraft arrived. Of course, Mrs. Keech was wrong. From his vantage point inside the cult, Festinger predicted that, when faced with the fact that the prophecy was false, cult members would simply drift away. To his surprise, the opposite happened. The members revised their understanding of the prophecy, now choosing to believe that what the aliens meant to say, through Mrs. Keech, in the first place was that they would rescue the whole Earth, not just members of the cult. Festinger used the term cognitive dissonance to describe our basic human tendency to reduce or eliminate psychological discomfort by changing what we think, our attitudes. He concluded that to rationalize, or change beliefs and attitudes, was an easier route to resolve the stress associated with cognitive dissonance than a complete dismissal of the original prophecy. (See: “Cognitive Dissonance Theory” at Communication Research.net)

So, that’s why the most cogent, sincere, well-reasoned, truthful, impassioned arguments fail to lure the true MAGA believers away from their faith in this false god, Trump, even though he has been shown to be a liar, a rapist, and a crook. It’s easier for Trump cult members to inflate their already high opinion of Trump and harden their negative attitudes toward those trying to expose him (calling them things like “fake news”), than to admit they were wrong, like Mrs. Keech and the doomsday cultists. What can we do to help these people (we all have them in our families, I think) escape the clutches of a malignant, narcissistic, would-be dictator? My suggestion is: MAGA-ites fell down the Trump hole because they had concerns about social and political changes in our country and Trump said he could undo all of those things and “Make America Great Again.” He said it over and over and over, and he’s still saying it (only now he often adopts the messiah mantle placed on him by Graham, Falwell, and White). Cognitive research tells us that people who are told the same lie over and over, even if they know it’s a lie up front, eventually tire of the cognitive dissonance the lie creates in their heads, and begin to drop their guard and think it’s true. That’s Trump’s trick and he’s been using it since he rode that escalator into public life. If it worked for him, why can’t it work for those of us trying to combat his corrupt, mendacious presence? The best thing we can do (maybe the only thing) to free the MAGA faithful (including some of the rosy-cheeked, now slightly wrinkled kids I went to school with) is to tell them the truth about Trump and what’s happening in this country over and over and over again, and hope cognitive dissonance begins to break down their resistance to it, fed by Trump’s lies, and let the truth in. I don’t think we have any choice but to try. Keep the faith.

Pace.

Here’s a story every American should know!

Just a quick note: My new biography of Lydia Hamilton Smith, housekeeper, confidante (and, I believe much more) of Lancaster, PA congressman Thaddeus Stevens will be officially released by Penn State Press and LancasterHistory on November 21. The title is: An Uncommon Woman: The Life of Lydia Hamilton Smith. It’s available from Amazon Books and other national booksellers. Here’s the blurb from Amazon: Lydia Hamilton Smith (1813–1884) was a prominent African American businesswoman in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, and the longtime housekeeper, life companion, and collaborator of the state’s abolitionist congressman Thaddeus Stevens. In his biography of this remarkable woman, Mark Kelley reveals how Smith served the cause of abolition, managed Stevens’s household, acquired property, and crossed racialized social boundaries. https://www.amazon.com/Uncomm…/dp/0271096756/ref=sr_1_6…

It’s an inspiring story, one I think every American should know. MK

In Defense of My Tiny Lawn

With the fabric of humanity fraying along so many seams across the planet these days, it would not be unreasonable to question taking time to defend my lawn. But here goes.

I have enjoyed lawn work since I was eleven, when my mother first hired my brother and me out to cut grass for our school librarian. That gig grew into my own summer lawn service. I cut grass, edged and weeded for the librarian, my dentist, my neighbor and others. I always tried to use a reel-type push mower; I had learned that reel-type mowers are better for the grass (which is a plant) because they cut the grass blades cleanly, rather than shredding them like motorized, rotary style machines do. I have tended my own lawn over the past forty years, not only because I enjoy the work, but also because I thought green spaces, like lawns, were good for the environment.

When we left Maine for Pennsylvania, to live closer to my daughter and our grandchildren, I traded my nearly third of an acre lawn for no lawn at all. The front “yard” of the house we bought had been turned into a flower bed, and the backyard was a brick patio. After a few years of withdrawal, I decided to remove some of the bricks and plant a lawn out back. It’s about five feet square, truly a tiny lawn. Here’s how it looks today.

My vision was a lawn as green and even and weedless as a golf green. And I ordered this tiny reel-type push mower (eight inch blade) to cut it with: (Yes, it’s called a “Lawn Shark” :–)

Recently, I reclaimed an overgrown two by eight foot patch near the alley out back, and planted grass seed there. Here’s how it looks, so far.

I was enjoying my tiny lawn(s), still thinking any lawn was a positive thing, when I started seeing articles condemning lawns, in general. Here’s an excerpt from a piece in Discover magazine (emphasis mine): “Lawns are so ubiquitous that Lerman says the U.S. claims an estimated 163,800 square kilometers of lawn space across the country, including parks and golf courses. That’s basically the combined land mass of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont and Massachusetts. But cultivating your own minuscule patch of turf comes with a number of ecological and environmental consequences. The unsustainable risks range from a depletion of water aquifers to the devastation of local ecosystems. A perfect lawn can also contribute to rising carbon dioxide emissions. [Link: https://www.discovermagazine.com/environment/your-perfect-lawn-is-bad-for-the-environment-heres-what-to-do-instead]

I thought I was living an environmentally conscious life all these years. Have I, instead, been helping destroy our earthly home, by growing lawns? I understand the larger concerns about how we use our precious soil. But tending my tiny lawn brings me pleasure, and serves as a source of humor for some in my family, who probably think Grandpa is getting a little eccentric. For those reasons, and because I’m not sure tearing out the grass and putting the bricks back down would make much of a difference in the great environmental sweep of things, I will keep tending my little patch of green, at least until the anti-lawn police catch up with me.  

Not teaching our children about Black history and human sexuality is child abuse

(Note: This post is probably longer than some readers have time for. If you’d rather listen to it, you can find it on my podcast, Nailing It Down, button above)

If the term “child abuse” seems a little strong, let me explain. My argument begins the moment a child is born. The moment they enter the world, a child possesses inalienable human rights that cannot be taken away. A short list would include: the right to nourishment, housing, health care, education, work, and freedom—freedom to live their lives without fear and freedom to be the person they understand themselves to be. Children raised in a society that values human rights become mature, educated, capable, empathetic human beings, able to embrace their neighbors and their world.

Unfortunately, adults in many cultures deny children their full human rights. That has been happening in the United States for centuries, and it’s happening right now, as some parents, pastors, and politicians battle to prevent children from learning the full story of the Black experience in this country and the facts about human sexuality. Denying children a proper understanding of their developing sexuality may leave them confused and disturbed about who they really are. Refusing to tell them the truth about  African American history will produce yet another generation of morally stunted adults, trained to perpetuate the bigotry and discrimination practiced by earlier generations of Americans. Preventing children from realizing their full potential as a human being is nothing less than child abuse.  

Responsibility for “educating” a child falls first, of course, on parents, but in time, all of us—teachers, pastors, community leaders, neighbors—will touch that child’s life and influence the sort of person that child becomes. With some parents, pastors and politicians across the country hell-bent on banning books, educational curricula, and essential facts about Black history and human sexuality to prevent children from learning the truth (and in the process stunt child development), the community’s responsibility to meet children’s true educational need is greater and more urgent than ever. I don’t mean to step on anyone’s religious toes, but here are some thoughts, observations, and facts that I’d share with our kids, if I could.

Let’s start at square one—the moment of birth. Children should know that they are born good, not guilty of original sin that makes getting saved from banishment to hell an urgent need. Some Christians have drilled the concept of original sin into their children for many years. It’s based on the story of Adam and Eve disobeying God in Genesis (Genesis 3, in the Hebrew Bible). It’s regrettable that some Christians have terrified their children with that concept. The people whose ancestors wrote the book of Genesis don’t haunt their kids with Original Sin. Etz Hayim, a 1985, English translation of the Torah, offers this comment on Genesis Chapter 3: “…we note that neither here nor anywhere else in the Hebrew Bible is their [Adam and Eve’s] act characterized as sin, let alone the Original Sin.” (p.18)

There is evolutionary evidence that human beings are, in fact, born good. Anthropologist Richard Leakey reported that sixty thousand years ago, human relationships were regulated by sympathy and gratitude, fairly modern sounding emotions, and that those feelings had merged to create a highly successful survival strategy he called “reciprocal altruism.”Reciprocal altruism simply means that our ancestors were willing to act for the benefit of others without expecting something in return. Leakey argued vigorously against aggression and killing as the marks of our innate human nature. For him, wars and violence are political acts that arose as agriculture led us into a materialistic culture that did not exist in our cooperative, altruistic, hunter-gatherer days. Surely, teaching a child their innate human nature is good should be a more positive contribution to their development as a person than threatening them with the fires of hell.

          There are a number of facts about human sexuality that, if shared with children, would help them grow into the person they’re meant to be. For instance, every child should know that they are free to discover their own gender identity. Unfortunately, much of American society, especially conservative Christians, have long believed that gender identity can be assigned to a child based on the body parts they arrive with. As these people see it, you are either a boy or a girl, any other gender identities are perversions condemned by society with the blessing of the Almighty. That’s what I grew up with. My mother, and most of the adults in my world, detested homosexuality, and taught me to do the same. My mother was so frightened by homosexuality that she stopped hugging me when I was seven or eight years old (because a prominent pediatrician at the time said overbearing mothers made their sons gay.) I was in college before I learned that gender identity can fall all along the line between boy and girl. It saddens me to think how many jokes I made and laughed out at the expense of LGBTQ people in my little home town, good people who remained closeted their entire lives, fearing abuse if they dared to publicly claim who they really were.

          Much of the book and curriculum banning going on today targets the LGBTQ community. What must that feel like to a child who arrives with male or female external parts, but gradually comes to know their true gender identity lies elsewhere. Parents, pastors, and politicians who persecute LGBTQ children with ignorant bathroom and locker room restrictions and bans on transgender medical care are, in my opinion, engaging in child abuse. I wish I could tell them and their children what medical science today knows about finding our gender identity and sexual orientation (who we’re physically attracted to). What a difference it must make for a child to grow into adulthood in an understanding home. What torment it must be for children to work on establishing their gender identity in a home where parents find the answers to questions about sexuality in the Bible, a book that, in part, promotes empathy and justice, but was written by men who knew less than a fraction of what we know today about human development.

          Speaking of ignorance, there are lots of things our children should be taught about the experience people of African ancestry have had since they were first enslaved in American more than four centuries ago. Parents, pastors, and politicians, especially those professing religious faith, who oppose teaching Black history because it might make little white children feel ashamed should be ashamed themselves. Children born with an empathetic human nature should know that what we call “racism” today first reared its ugly head among white men in ancient Greece and Rome, long before Jesus was born. These men, including Hippocrates, the patron saint of medicine, were the respected thinkers of their day. Yet they decided, without evidence, that white men were superior to people of color, especially Africans. They convinced themselves that Africans were suited only for servitude (enslavement). By the Fifteenth Century (1400s), their ideas had spread to the rest of Europe. That’s when white men, with the blessing of both the Catholic Church (Pope Nicholas V) and Protestant church (Cotton Mather), dragged African people from their homes and hauled them onto the shores of the “New World,” where they built a nation based on laws that reduced people of color to property and denied their humanity and their inalienable rights entirely. Of course, North America wasn’t new at all. Indigenous peoples, who would be abused by white men nearly to the point of extinction, had flourished on this land for thousands of years before white men “found” it. It took a bloody civil war to legally end enslavement, but that didn’t abolish the insidious white supremacy on which it was based.

          Parents, pastors and politicians who don’t want children to know the suffering and abuse African Americans have endured on these shores for nearly half a millennium are guilty of abusing all of our children, Black and white alike. Where these book and curriculum bans succeed, they strike a blow for the same bigotry and hatred of people of color that I grew up with. The dominant racial message communicated to me in my virtually all-white community was that Black people are lazy and threatening. Adults in my world used the N-word. My father joked about the Black man who lasted less than a week at the farm implement plant in my home town because he refused to work as hard as the white men around him. I remember when, on a visit to Washington, D.C., we took a wrong turn, and ended up in a predominantly Black neighborhood. What was a seven-year-old white boy to do when his mother took one look at the people of color outside the car and immediately told her children to roll up their windows and lock their doors. I was out of high school before I realized the harm those attitudes had done to me as I strove to become a mature, empathetic human being. I am still working at it. Of course, any pain I experienced trying to shed those deeply embedded racist attitudes pales by comparison to the harm those attitudes have inflicted on children of color in every generation of American children to this day.

          If we teach our children that they, and every other person on this planet, inherited human rights—the right to live their lives and pursue their dreams without fear—the moment they’re born, if we tell them they are born good, that they are evolutionarily equipped to empathize with all of their sisters and brothers on the planet, and equally equipped to engage in reciprocal altruism with those around them, if we give them room to realize their own gender identity and sexual orientation, and teach them that we are all equal and deserving of justice, they will, I believe, be better able to realize their full potential as a human being.

          If we stay close to these children—at home, at school, as they enter the adult world—we can shield them from the abusive bigotry and dehumanizing attitudes our culture has poured into their developing, impressionable minds for so very long. If we accomplish that, if we manage to raise a generation of young people who fully embrace—for themselves and everyone else—the human rights they were born with, the rights granted them by the universe, we can break the vicious hold of prejudice and ignorance that has inflicted so much abuse on our children. I used to think the path to a better society, a better nation, a better world, lay through the graveyard, as we buried all the bigots of past generations. But I eventually realized that wouldn’t fix things as long as the racists and homophobes and sexists were still cramming their fetid attitudes into the minds of their own young. As a people, as a species, we must commit ourselves to telling our children the truth about everything: Black history, human sexuality, and human nature. If we do that, I firmly believe, the truth will set them free to be.   

They could have at least bought me a cup of coffee!

Quick folo to the previous post about thin blue line flag decals on our local city police cars. I recognize the symbol originally was meant to show support for police officers and their families as they take on a dangerous and generally thankless job of protecting all of us. But I do believe the January 6 crowd besmirched the symbol by waving it as they attacked Capitol Police and attempted to overthrow democracy. I concluded my last post by suggesting my city cover up the TBL decals now on patrol cars with an American flag decal…a symbol I think most of us accept as a symbol of democracy and freedom. (I know, we are far from perfect, but we’re working on it, aren’t we?) So, having expressed myself in a letter published in our local paper, I just received a plain brown envelope with my address printed on the front, no return address, and postmarked in NYC (I do not live in NYC). Inside, taped inside a piece of paper (with nothing written on it) was a brand new Thin Blue Line flag decal. It’s actually a very nicely made decal, not sure what I can do with it. I’m sorry the gifter didn’t feel free to identify him/herself. I would have been happy if the sender had stood behind their act and maybe offered to share thoughts and feelings about symbols and the power they have over people’s attitudes. And not to sound unappreciative, but I’d rather they sent me a gift card for some Dunkin Donuts coffee. Especially if the decal was meant to somehow express disagreement with my comments in the paper, some coffee and conversation would have taken us farther toward an enhanced sense of community than the anonymous gift of a now controversial symbol. And so it goes…

Pace.

Black Lives Still Matter — LA boots white supremacy from its police department

In case you missed it, the Los Angeles police chief has banned all Thin Blue Line flags, patches and decals from city police stations, uniforms, and official vehicles. I took advantage of that development to write another letter to my local paper, encouraging police in my city to replace Thin Blue Line decals on our patrol cars. Symbols have power. Explanation below…

To the Editor:

Re: the article on LA Police Chief Michael Moore banning the Thin Blue Line flag from city police stations, uniforms, or vehicles. Chief Moore said he imposed the ban because a symbol originally intended to show support for officers who work to protect us has been “hijacked” by violent, white supremacist groups “to symbolize their undemocratic, racist, and bigoted views.” The only “official” place I’ve seen the Thin Blue Line flag in Lancaster is in decal form on most of the city’s patrol cars. After violent insurrectionists (some police officers among them) carried Thin Blue Line flags as they attacked our Capitol on January 6, I wondered if their hatred and bigotry had seeped into our city. I asked then Lancaster Police Chief John Bey how Thin Blue Line decals ended up on city police cars, and whether they reflected the presence of white supremacist attitudes within the ranks of city police. He didn’t know who authorized the decals, but he raised the second question in a meeting of his command officers, and told me he could state flatly that white supremacist attitudes have not permeated the Lancaster Police Department. I am grateful to Chief Bey for his reassurances. But given the potential for heated disagreements over what message the symbol now sends, I think LA’s ban makes sense. I think the easiest way to prevent such disagreements in Lancaster would be to replace the now controversial Thin Blue Line decal with the official American flag.

Pace.