| |
THE MEANING OF MYTH
America’s Founders set the stage for our nation’s story when they declared, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” Thus they created an American Creed, and our story began to unfold, along with our myths.
Don’t think of the word “myth” as an untrue story. In Myths America Lives By, Richard T. Hughes is referring to national narratives that guide us as a people. Every movement in history is animated by stories that catch on, giving meaning and identity to the movement. These stories become the “myths” we live by.
Hughes cites several stereotypical myths as part of our story: The myths of the Chosen Nation; of Nature’s Nation; of the Christian Nation; of the Millennial Nation and of the Innocent Nation. He traced these motifs through our history and used them as a pretext for some serious grievances he has with America's past and present.
THE MYTH OF INNOCENCE
Hughes’ deepest grievance was with the alleged myth of an Innocent Nation, because it blinds us to the arrogance, racism and greed that pervades our history. He wrote; "Those who think themselves innocent almost invariably repress those whom they judge to be defiled." (page 174).
Indeed, the illusion of innocence often lies at the root of humanity’s worst traits. It prevents repentance, which is the soil from which our best virtues rise. Jesus came saying; "Repent, and believe in the good news." (Mark 1:15). He knew that nothing could be better for humanity than to repent--which is to face our lack of innocence. Repentance is the ultimate turning point toward the good.
And this is why I love America. I know of no similarly diverse nation in the history of humanity that has been as tolerant of self-criticism and dissent as has the United States of America. Our country abounds with those willing to die so that this freedom of dissent can continue.
Here is where I part company with Hughes. He thinks America has long been crippled with the illusion of her own innocence. I beg to differ. As with any culture, this illusion has had its moments. But the bulk of our story speaks of those who saw our flaws, spoke out, and worked for reform in greater conformity to our common creeds. Those who fought against our freedom to dissent did not win. Thus, Hughes too can freely critique our lack of innocence in this book under review.
Hughes often confused the quest for innocence (a noble aim) with the claim of innocence (a deception). A few escapist sectarian movements embraced the illusion to some extent but only as isolated entities, not as a nation.
Also, to claim we are “good,” as President Bush did after September 11, 2001, is not an example of the myth of innocence surfacing with “extraordinary power,” as Hughes averred. It was simply time to take a big-picture look at who we are as a nation and claim solid common ground for mutual gratitude and hope.
SELECTIVE PERCEPTION
The USA has long seen hot political campaigns, serious social reform movements and lots of open debate featuring our freedom of dissent. Thus, historians can easily find a wealth of sentiments from all across the spectrum of ideas to express most any point of view possible. Indeed, Hughes selects many choice quotes and anecdotes to paint America’s past in the horrific colors of racism, exploitation, arrogance and greed. He does not aim well for balance.
Hughes is correct that some early explorers measured the Native American cultures unfairly. He wrote, “…early European explorers often stereotyped all Native American populations on the basis of the worst examples they encountered.” (p. 111).
Tragically, this is precisely what Hughes does in this book to whites and Christians. He selects the worst examples in our history to tell our nation’s story in a negative light.
What if I described Martin Luther King, Jr. solely in terms of the plagiarism and womanizing accusations against him? This approach would unfairly side-step the more significant story of his fight for human dignity and freedom for all. In the same manner, Hughes sidesteps the real story of America.
Hughes leaves voiceless the African-American perspectives of people like Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, General Colin Powell, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, Professor Thomas Sowell, scholar John H. McWhorter and many other brilliant voices from that community. Clearly, Hughes is not attempting to deal with the African-American perspective but with a certain political and ideological agenda. His selectivity is not a helpful way to tell our story, even from the African-American perspective.
Instead, he brings in the angry voices of Malcolm X, Eldridge Cleaver and Angela Davis. In real life, both Davis (an anti-American communist) and Secretary Rice faced the same conditions in Birmingham, Alabama, and had personal friends who perished the bombing of a Baptist church there. Hughes features Davis and leaves out the far more influential and far less bitter Secretary of State, Rice.
Billy Graham suffers from Hughes’ selectivity. He comes off as a one-tract-mind anti-communist preacher. The real man, on balance, is far from this. Hughes attempted to portray Graham as a promoter of the myth of innocence, but in truth, no one told America that they were guilty sinners more persuasively and consistently than did Billy Graham.
Hughes also gives no voice to the prophets to the African-American community who call for self-examination, like Bill Cosby in recent times. If honest self examination is healthy for whites (and it is), then it is good for blacks. Hughes made no effort to include voices that cite the failing state of the black family, the rising rate of black out-of-wedlock births and black on black crime. Sincere love calls for these voices.
Instead, Hughes focused on the suffering of African-Americans only insofar as “they suffered at the hands of the rich, the powerful and the privileged.” (p. 9). In my view, this trivializes their suffering for purposes of stoking class envy and marching to an apparent Neo-Marxist mindset. The truth is that African-Americans also suffered profoundly at the hands of poor uneducated people, especially in the South, as well as from each other. Rather than taking the full extent of their suffering seriously, Hughes seemed to be using it to make unbalanced anti-capitalism points.
IS CAPITALISM THE CULPRIT?
Too much abstract historical theory is applied by Hughes to explain human corruption. Hughes tends to blame “isms” for the sins of sinners, apparently forgetting that serious sin can bite hard in the midst of any ol’ “ism” on earth, including communism, socialism, utopianism and even capitalism. Thus, his attempt to draw connections between the atrocities Hughes cited and the various “myths” and “isms” he proposed were problematic. It was not so much “myths” that were behind the atrocities, but plain old selfishness, greed, racism, hate, opportunism and sin. Myths and ideologies are not benign and some are better than others. But they rarely rise above the people who embrace them.
Americans gravitated to capitalism not so much out of mythic impulses, but because they thought Adam Smith made good sense and they found that it worked better than other alternatives. Under regulated capitalism, one's success generally depends on how well he or she serves the needs of people who are willing to pay for goods or services. Transactions are potentially positive mutual responses to someone's ability to meet needs. When strong moral values, born of faith, enter to check the will to exploit or deceive, the brighter face of capitalism can shine. No laws are needed to get people to say to each other; "May I help you?"
CONCLUSION
Many members at my church are African-American and some came straight from Africa. Several Liberian refugees currently in our church family have faced worse atrocities at the hands of fellow Africans than anything Hughes described in his book about American myths. Many have risen at church to express enormous gratitude for this new country of theirs. Here, they work hard and are gratified that our government does not take most of what they earn by hook or crook. At our church, no one seeks to isolate an “African” or and “American” perspective on the gospel. That sort of selectivity is out of place.
My skin crawls to hear of the abuse some of my friends went through in Africa, just as it crawls to hear the stories of abuse in America’s slave-time history. But when I see the gratitude my friends have for America, I take pride and joy that we have overcome much of that history and are doing better at giving meaning to our common Creed of Life, Liberty and the pursuit of mutual happiness as a diverse people.
Joel Mark Solliday, M.Div., is the editor of Campus CrossWalk and the pulpit minister of the Brooklyn Center Church of Christ in Minnesota. He graduated from Pepperdine University where Richard Hughes was his favorite professor (for which Joel remains mighty grateful). He earned his M.Div. at Fuller Theological Seminary. Finally, in Minnesota, at 50, he met and married his lovely wife, Katie.
|
|
