What Historical Literature Must I Read?

Uncle-Tom's-CabinAs you can see from the attached flyer, Uncle Tom’s Cabin is referred to as “the greatest book of the age.” If this is truly the case, how come I was not forced to read this in school? I often find that I have skipped over significant historical literature during my educational upbringing. That being said, while never having read Uncle Tom’s Cabin, I am familiar with the themes and general overview. Another example of historical literature that I have not read would be The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. I once read in a Reddit discussion board that one could not be a true historian if they had not read this historical work. What do you think, is that true?

This is not to say that I am not (somewhat) well-read. I have read the Diary of Anne Frank and the Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass. I have read the works of Walt Whitman, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry David Thoreau, Edgar Allan Poe, and Nathaniel Hawthorne. I have studied Supreme Court opinions, correspondences from America’s Founding Fathers, and the documents that gained our country freedom and established her government. I steadily read more and more, but I find that there is so much to read, sometimes I need direction.

I often ponder, “What pieces of historical literature must I read?”

I would love to use this post as a conversation platform. I genuinely am interested in your responses. To truly appreciate and have a comprehensive understanding of history, what historical literature do I need to read?

History from the Web

History-from-the-WebPart of why I write at Hankering for History is that I love sharing. I don’t just like sharing what I’ve learned, but also what I run across on other websites. Whether it’s a video clip, an article, breaking-news, or someone selling history doodads online, I want you guys to know about it as well. It’s time, for History from the Web!

I was sent an article from a reader which I couldn’t help but sharing–World War II’s Strangest Battle: When Americans and Germans Fought Together. This interesting tale is the only recorded time that American and German  troops fought together in World War II. It is a wild–and almost unbelievable–story that you have to check out for yourself.

Espionage-and-Sedition-Acts

In research for an essay comparing and contrasting the Executive branches during the American Civil War and World War I, I ran across this insightful timeline. This timeline provides an easy to interpret look at civil liberties–or lack thereof–during periods of war, in American history. In past years we have dealt with loss of privacy, the violation of our constitutional rights, and unwarranted pat-downs from TSA agents. We try to tell ourselves, “This is for our own good. I am willing to endure ‘naked body scanners’ if it means that I can safely fly from point A to point B.” I am guilty of this as well, but it is good to look back over our shoulders (every once in a while) and see the correlations as history unfolds.

In a “too soon” moment, a German opera house has announced that it will be cancelling its Nazi-themed production of a Wagner opera. This opera, having run for less than a week, was cancelled because of the audiences’ complaints about scenes portraying the gassing of Jews. It was reported that the “scenes were so upsetting that some audience members sought medical help following early performances.” So, if you are a fan of Richard Wagner and his operatic masterpiece Tannhäuser, this bit of historical news might be right up your alley.

The last bit of history from the web is an article from DuckRabbits. In his article, Ancient Aliens (and a defense of mythology), the author gives his opinion about History Channel’s Ancient Aliens. The article covers the theory of ‘ancient aliens,’ as well as the possible misinterpretations of gods and angels–you know, the gods and angels that were really aliens… It is a well written article and a great defense of mythology.

 

Remembering Memorial Day (Guest Post)

Memorial-DayEach Memorial Day thousands of Americans take time from their hectic schedules to have a cold one, grill on the barbeque, enjoy friends and family, and launch the beginning of summer. However, many people are not aware of just what Memorial Day is all about and what is behind this holiday.

A few years after the end of the Civil War, a group called the Grand Army of the Republic (GAR) felt that there should be recognition to the fallen Union soldiers of the Civil War. The group created Decoration Day, where they would decorate the headstones of the fallen soldiers of the Civil War with flowers. It was not until after World War I that all veterans, those which had died in service to their country, were included in the Decoration Day ceremonies. Decoration Day continued as the name of this day of remembrance of those until sometime after World War II when it was renamed to Memorial Day as we know it. Memorial Day was celebrated on May 30th until 1968, when the government passed the Uniform Holiday Bill, which set the day of the holiday as the last Monday in the month of May.

For the last forty-five years, we have taken this day and remembered those that have fallen from the days of the Civil War, both World Wars, the conflicts in Asia, and the modern conflicts of today. However, sadly I feel we have forgotten the true meaning of this day. Even as a member of the military I think, sometimes, we are more concerned about our three-day weekend and often forget about those that have fallen. It is not about the time off, but a time to reflect on those that have gone before us.

One experience of mine that I believe puts Memorial Day truly into perspective was a visit to Normandy, France, with my family. I was given the name of the cemetery caretaker by a friend and was told to look him up when I arrived to the cemetery. Upon my arrival to the cemetery, I located the administration building and the man to whom I was told to meet and introduced myself. He seemed elated that I came by and you could tell by the enthusiasm in his voice and his body language that he enjoyed giving my family and me the history of the cemetery and the area around Normandy. After our conversation, he said he had a request of me and my family and asked if we would accompany him to the front of the cemetery as he played Taps over the loud speakers.

I was honored that he asked this of us. We followed him to the front of the cemetery, however, were not ready for the flood of emotion that was about to occur. We had never visited Normandy so this was the first time we had gazed upon the awe-inspiring site of those that had given the ultimate sacrifice. I have to say, in my career, this is the most surreal event I’ve experienced in my twenty-three years of service. The cold wind whipped at our faces from the English Channel, the notes of taps began to play, and my family and I observed the sea of marble crosses. My mind began to meditate on those that lay before me who had not returned home from the shores where I stood, at attention and saluting. As I looked at my family, I could see that my young son and daughter had placed their hand over their heart, since in their minds when dad saluted this was what they were supposed to do, and tears were running down my wife’s cheek. It was at this point in my life I finally understood the quote “All Gave Some, But Some Gave All”.

Normandy-Cemetery

Normandy American Cemetery

The song ended and the caretaker asked me to hold on, he wanted to retrieve something for me. As he returned, he had in his hand, an American and French flag. He handed the flags to me and told me that they are normally reserved for distinguished visitors and family members of the fallen; however, he wanted me to have them to remember our trip to Normandy. We exchanged farewells and continued with our tour of the cemetery. I will never forget that day at Normandy. Today those flags continue to travel with my family and I from assignment to assignment in the Air Force. I will always have a deep respect for my brothers and sisters who have lost their lives for freedom when Memorial Day comes around.

Finally, As you go out and enjoy the festivities of this Memorial Day weekend, remember that it is more than just a summer day celebration, but a day to commemorate and remember those that have given the ultimate sacrifice to this country that we call home. If you are interested in more history about Memorial Day, check out the links below!

United States Department of Veterans Affairs – Memorial Day History

TimeandDate.com – Memorial Day in United States

 

Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren

Chief-Justice-Earl-Warren

Chief Justice Earl Warren

Recently I was asked to “choose the Supreme Court Justice who initiated the most change in U.S. Constitutional doctrine and who left the largest impression on the American people.” Let me tell you, choosing just one justice was no easy task. The following is an excerpt from a paper that I wrote that briefly explains why I believe that Supreme Court Justice Earl Warren is the best answer to this question.

If one looks at the history of this country, it is broken down by three major events. 1)The birth of America came after the Revolutionary War, which led to the forming of a new government; 2) then the South seceded from the Union leading to the American Civil War, which in turn led to the freedom of slaves and the passing of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteen Amendments, as a result it pushed a reunited America into the Reconstruction Era; and lastly, 3) the National Civil Rights Movement gathered steam in the mid-to-late 1950s, ushering in the nation’s hope to truly ensure, as the Declaration of Independence puts it, that “all men are created equal.“

While it is certainly noticeable that the first two events were wars, which led to the destruction of several major cities and the death of thousands, the third event was predominately peaceful. Could it be that cooler heads prevailed, or was it that great men helped ensure that the National Civil Rights Movement was a success? Often civil rights activist such as Martin Luther King, Jr. and Rosa Parks, and politicians such as President Lyndon B. Johnson and Robert Kennedy steal the spotlight for their parts in this time period of turmoil and social change, yet the branch of the government that continually looks out for the minority is overlooked. How quickly we forget that the Judicial branch was established to protect vulnerable minorities against the tyranny of the majority. That being said, the efforts of Chief Justice Earl Warren, during this era of dramatic social and economic change, makes him—in my opinion—the Supreme Court justice who made the largest impact on U.S. Constitutional doctrine.

Warren-court

Warren Court (1953)

Now, it should go without saying that the Supreme Court is made up of nine members, so Chief Justice Warren hardly carried the entire load by himself. There is no doubt that as a legal scholar, Justices Hugo Black, Felix Frankfurter, and William Brennan surpassed Warren by leaps and bounds. However, first and foremost a politician, Chief Justice Warren had leadership skills that allowed him to bend the Supreme Court to his will. Examples of this shine through in all of the segregation cases that came before the Court. In every case regarding segregation, Warren was able to procure a unanimous vote. In Brown v. Board of Education (1954), Warren worked with all of the justices until his opinion was endorsed by each justice of the Court. This unified front was needed to fully support the desegregation of school in America and to bring an end to Plessy v. Ferguson (1896).

After the success of Brown v. Board of Education, the court shifted its focus from property rights to individual rights. Over the next decade, the Warren Court would work closely with criminal proceedings to ensure fairness across the board. In 1961, in Mapp v. Ohio, the Court refused to allow evidence that was seized in an illegal search. In 1963 the Court would decide for two landmark cases—Griswold v. Connecticut and Gideon v. Wainwright. In Griswold v. Connecticut, the Court held that Connecticut’s law prohibiting the use of contraceptives violated the right to marital privacy, and it was unconstitutional. In Gideon v. Wainwright, the Court unanimously held that state courts were required to provide counsel in criminal cases in which the defendant was unable to afford their own.

While the Court did look out for the rights of the individual, not all criminal cases which reached the Court were in favor of the defendant. In Terry v. Ohio (1968), the police were extended the power, by the Court, to stop and frisk individuals which were believed to be carrying weapons.

hated-earl-warren

Of course, not all of the Warren Court decisions were appreciated. Engel v. Vitale (1962) enraged a large portion of the country, and decades later this decisions is still frowned upon. In Engel v. Vitale, the Court outlawed the mandatory school prayer laws in place, in the state of New York. The following prayer landed this case in Supreme Court: “Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our country. Amen.” This case would open the floodgates to a slew of First Amendment cases.

In Melvin Urofksy’s A March of Liberty: A Constitutional History of the United States, Urofsky states that “the Warren Court produced a string of great cases matched by no other court in our history, not even that of John Marshall” (Urofsky 920). It would appear that this is true not just for the length of time that Warren was Chief Justice, because even though he retired from the Court in 1969, the Warren Court—in essence—remained in place in 1986, until the appointment of William Rehnquist as Chief Justice.

Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952)

After decades of the President of the United States usurping powers well outside the realm of those enumerated power vested in the United States Constitution, the Supreme Court finally pushed back in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer (1952). Even though most of the Supreme Court justices sat by and allowed the Executive branch to grow exponentially through legislation and Executive Orders issued during World War II, the New Deal, and the Fair Deal, these same justices saw an opportunity to suppress, what Justice Robert H. Jackson compared to, the “unlimited executive power…[that which was] exercised by [King] George III.”

Executive-Order-10340

On April 8, 1952, President Harry S. Truman issued Executive Order 10340: Directing the Secretary of Commerce to Take Possession of and Operate the Plants and Facilities of Certain Steel Companies. This presidential order granted the Secretary of Commerce the power to take possession of certain steel companies—specifically those that were about to start union strikes. President Truman believed that, in the interest of the public, he could seize any private property that he deemed necessary to support war efforts in Korea. Although there were legislative solutions in place to prevent issues such as the ensuing United Steel Workers Union strike, President Truman sidestepped these solutions—as they were slower—and took unconstitutional powers to continue the manufacturing of steel.

Ironically, the strike was caused because President Truman did not impose price control as the government had previously done during World War II; instead, he created the Federal Wage Stabilization Board on December 22, 1951. Its priority was to work with unions to keep labor disputes at bay, leaving both management and the unions happy. Logically, this would achieve the president’s goal of keeping consumer prices down during the crisis abroad. As the Federal Wage Stabilization Board was unable to mediate in the case of the United Steel Workers Union, President Truman seized the production facilities to keep them open. President Truman believed that the Taft-Hartley Act, which was passed to restrict the activities and powers of labor unions, and Section 18 of the Selective Service Act of 1948, which under article H specifically gave the president the authority to “take immediate possession of the plant…to insure compliance…” of steel manufacturing facilities, were both too risky as they were dependent upon cooperation from Congress. Truman saw this as an avenue which he was unwilling to go down.

Steel-Workers-Strike

On April 4, 1952, the steel Union announced that effective April 9th, at 12:01 a.m., a nation-wide strike would commence. Before the strike could even begin, however, Truman issued Executive Order 10340 and seized the steel plants. The steel plant operators were not happy with this order from the president; however, they complied. To quote Justice Hugo Black’s opinion of the Court, the complaint from the operators of the seized steel factories was that “the seizure was not authorized by an act of Congress or by any constitutional provision.” It was argued by the government that historical precedent and the emergency situation in Korea gave the president the powers to seize the steel plants. The government listed the following seizures, all of which were—at the time—necessary for public safety: the seizure of Smith & Wesson during World War I and the seizure of Montgomery Ward in World War II.

Justice William O. Douglas delivered an excellent concurring opinion which highlighted the reasons as to why Truman’s seizure of the steel manufacturing plants was unconstitutional. Justice Douglas started out in agreement with Truman, that there was indeed an “emergency;” however, “the emergency did not create power; it merely marked an occasion when power should be exercised. And the fact that it was necessary that measures be taken to keep steel in production does not mean that the President, rather than Congress, had the constitutional authority to act.”

Moreover, he further explained that powers to act in the way Truman did are left only up to Congress. The Constitution clearly states in Article 1, Section 1: “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives.” Furthermore, the Fifth Amendment states that no “private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” The president has no power to raise revenues and as Douglas put it, “[t]he branch of the government that has the power to pay compensation for a seizure is the only one able to authorize a seizure…” In addition to this, in a rather brazen manner, Douglas further acknowledged that while Truman is the “Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy” he is not the “Commander in Chief of the country, its industries, and its inhabitants.”

Justice-William-Douglas

Justice William O. Douglas

On June 2, 1952, the Supreme Court handed down a decision that shocked not only President Truman, but the nation. Truman had been so confident in his decision, and the legality of his decision, that when a reporter asked him if the President could also seize the newspapers and the radio stations, Truman replied back, “under similar circumstances the President of the United States has to act for whatever is for the best of the country.” However, the Supreme Court decided that this was not the case and in a 6-3 decision, the Court declared that “[t]he Executive Order was not authorized by the Constitution or laws of the United States, and it cannot stand.”