Showing posts with label JOSEPH SMITH. Show all posts
Showing posts with label JOSEPH SMITH. Show all posts

Saturday, June 30, 2018

***The 19th Century "Second Great Awakening"- Joseph Smith and the Mormons

Click On Title To Link To Wikipedia's Entry On The Mormons.

DVD REVIEW

American Experience:The Mormons, various commentators, PBS Productions, 2006

At first glance the trials and tribulations, historically and currently of a fundamentalist protestant sect, the Mormons and their various off-shoots, would not seem to be the stuff of a left-wing secular political site. And in the normal course that would be true. However, there several reasons why this particular religious sect interests me. First, from early on I have been interested in that wild and somewhat decisive period in forming the national psyche in American history that goes under the name the “Age of Jackson”. The story of Joesph Smith, his early followers and later converts easily fit into this time in the early decades of the 19th century when a plethora of religious, political and social movements got jump-started by the freer and more democratic style of the Jackson period.

To that end, I have spend a serious amount of space here covering the anti-slavery movement, including the emergence of the abolitionist Underground Railroad and the exploits of the revolutionary abolitionist and hero of the black liberation movement, John Brown, a figure who easily fits into the kinds of individuals who were “making and doing” in that ante bellum period. I have also spend some time discussing the effects of that “burned-over” religious process that goes under the name the Second Awakening on the development of early American capitalism, especially in its upstate New York variant that the founder of this sect, Joseph Smith (and later leader Brigham Young) were immersed in. Additionally I have been interested in the Mormons, as such, more recently because in the 2008 Republican presidential nominating process, one Mitt Romney, ex-Governor of Massachusetts and a prominent Mormon was forced, or felt forced, to deal with the more esoteric aspects of his religion. That he might again surface as a potential candidate only places a greater emphasis on that interest.

Finally, the most important reason to get a better knowledge of this group is that, at least some of its off-shoots, are periodically targeted by various governmental agencies for their practice of polygamy, or as they would have it “plural marriage”. It is a political duty for leftists as, “tribunes of the people” to defend these sects against those governmental incursions. We do this under the umbrella principle that the government should left private consensual practice alone. In short, we stand for the principle of “government out of the bedrooms”. Although personally, having had trouble enough just having two girlfriends at one time in my youth, I do not see how they managed it my hat is off to the likes of Mitt Romney’s great-grandfather and other 19th century leaders. According to this documentary Brigham Young had some fifty wives and fifty-something children. No wonder the Mormons felt they needed to devote some much time to genealogy charts.

This four hour documentary goes into all of aspects of the Mormon story. However, for my purposes the first two hour segment was most important concerning the founding myths and trials and tribulations of the early Mormons as they kept getting banished further westward until they found a final central settlement in Utah. The second two hour segment concerning the assimilation of the more orthodox Mormons into the mainstream of political and social life and their successes at political power and their growth through missionary zeal are less important. We have been there before on this assimilation question for other ethnic and religious groups, notably the Roman Catholics of Irish, Italian and Eastern European heritage so that part was not of pressing concern to me.

I know the land that nurtured Mormon founder Joseph Smith, the farm country of upstate, mid-state New York. Places like Utica, Amsterdam, Rochester and so forth. At least I know the late 20th century version of those places. The seemingly endless rolling hills, the hard scrabble rocky land where there is no give without some Herculean effort. The vast tracts of trees and other obstacles to farming to be uprooted and brought to manageable size. The hard, hard winters that start early and end late. Hell, and that is what it is like now so one can only imagine what it was like for those who in the early 19th early were essentially on the American frontier looking to see if or why their god had abandoned them. There were more seekers, peekers, ranters, panter, shakers and quakers than you could shake a stick at this side of the 17th century English revolution. Put that together with a charismatic, rather mystical and intelligent young man, Joseph Smith, and you certainly have the genesis for some kind of religious movement. Or a political one for that matter. In a latter age that might very well have been the case. Whether, and if, such a plebian movement based on “revealed” truth could survive among the others more secular trends in the labor movement is the real question.

The documentary goes into some detail about Smith’s ability to gain converts (and spin off dissenters) after his conversion experience. It moves on to discuss the creation of the first Mormon communities in upstate New York, the pressure of other Christian denominations to push them out, the success of that effort and the first evacuation of Mormons to Missouri. After some hotly disputed fights from there to Illinois where Smith was assassination by other non-Mormon Christians. Then on to the Brigham Young led treks to the West, the establishment of thriving settlements there, the famous, if shadowy Mountain Meadow massacre by the Mormons on other settlers that, in effect, consolidated Mormon political power in the Utah territories; the fight over polygamy and the eventual entrance into statehood and the assimilation process mentioned above.

I first began looking for Mormon material over a year ago. I started and put down more than one biography about Joseph Smith or Brigham Young. Or histories of the early days (especially that controversial Mountain Meadow incident). The problem is that most of this material is by Mormons or Mormon-influenced authors and I felt I had to discount most of it, especially the "myth of creation” aspects around what Joseph Smith did or did not find out in those lonesome hills of up state New York. This documentary, more so than other PBS documentaries in this “American Experience” series suffer some of that same problem. There are too many “talking heads” identified as historians without being designated as Mormon historians. This is not generally a problem in other PBS productions. Still, if you need a well-produced introduction to this esoteric religion this is a good place to start. And perhaps to finish.

Tuesday, April 18, 2017

*From The Archives- POLITICAL CORRECTNESS AND THE 'G-Y' WORD

Click on title to link to Wikipedia's entry for Mormons.

RUMBLINGS FROM iPOD /MP3 NATION

FORGET DONKEYS, ELEPHANTS AND GREENS- BUILD A WORKERS PARTY THAT FIGHTS FOR A WORKERS GOVERNMENT!


Readers of this space know that this writer centers his commentary on ‘high’ politics, usually lambasting the bourgeois politicians, especially Democratic Party politicians for being eunuchs or worst on the war in Iraq and other pressing social questions. And I am entirely comfortable with that, after all we are all adults in this game and it comes with the territory. While I am waiting to comment on what promises to be another ugly Democratic somersault on the upcoming war budget fight however another little issue has crossed my path. Believe me I enter this dispute with more fear and trepidation that I have ever had in my ‘adult’ battles for it involves the mysterious ways of teenagers. I had enough trouble trying to survive my own teenage years to be wary, very wary, of the trials and tribulations of teens a couple of generations behind me. But here goes.

I have recently read about the case of a Mormon girl out in Santa Rosa, California, Rebeka Rice, whose parents have taken school officials there to court over a reprimand and notation in her record that she received as a freshman in high school a few years ago. The gist of the case is that at that time some fellow students, as is the nature of such things, razzed her about her Mormonism by asking whether she had ‘ten mothers’. In response, Rebeka stated that their comment was ‘so gay’, meaning to her stupid. And she was right, it was stupid. However, in the interest of ‘political correctness’ local school officials, assumingly well trained in how to ferret out real gay-bashing hate speech , and apparently with plenty of time on their hands decided to take a forthright stand for gay liberation over the statement and took the above mentioned action. As is the nature of the times the parents thereafter filed suit. And they were right to do so, as well.

Hello, school officials. Apparently someone has been living in a bubble. Haven’t these august school officials been out to the malls in Santa Rosa lately? As least here I have. And assisted by a foreign language translator, a necessity in such situations, I found out that indeed common usage and understanding by teens is on Rebeka’s side. If one wants to use hate speech toward gays and lesbians there are other more robust forms of expression that I will not bother to repeat here. Moreover, in the present case the school’s hypocrisy trumps its supposed virtue. The local school officials passed on taking action on the really hateful expression in the exchange-the other students’ taut about Rebeka’s religion which is clear and unmistakable. In my teenage days, back in the days when the world was ‘young and gay’, that kind of statement would have been the equivalent of ‘your mama’ or ‘your mother’ and would have been fighting words, with fists flying. But, dear readers, we live in a kinder, gentler more civilized age with the requisite peer counseling, arbitration and, of course, the ubiquitous liberal ‘thought’ police to smooth things over.

Okay, okay. Yes, we live in an age of victimhood. And damn there is more discrimination against gays, lesbians, transsexuals, women, the aged, blacks, Hispanics, the mentally-challenged, immigrants, teenagers and X oppressed groups that we can shake a stick at. But, something is desperately wrong when the everyday language of teens (or any other sub-culture) is subject to official governmental inspection and sanction allegedly in the interest of making bourgeois society ‘nice’. Where did we go off the rails on this part of the ‘culture’ wars? Well, one place to look is the 1960’s. I have written elsewhere about the fun, even for teenagers, of being alive at that time and imbibing in the whirlwind of the changing cultural currents.

But, my friends, we were politically, socially and, in the case of some groups like the Black Panthers and Weatherpeople, militarily defeated by the forces of reaction in this country. A response by some of my generation was either to deny that reality and drop out of the political struggle or turn into ‘cultural guerillas’ and head for the jungles, oops I mean, universities and try to create some kind of politically and morally correct ‘small’ universe there. That is at least part of the genesis of this ‘correctness’ mania.

Unfortunately, moral gestures will not change this sad old world but only by changing the material base of society so that NO ONE has a vested interest in hating anyone. But that requires political struggle against the current forces that want to keep each oppressed group separated in a 'divide and conquer' strategy that works so well for them. If you want to really fight against gay discrimination (and all the other discriminations) then you had better be prepared to do a lot more than play ‘cop’, even if for ‘do-gooder’ motives. In any case, I hope even in a communist future where no one will have a vested interest in ‘razzing’ anyone that the teens then will still have their own ‘tribal’ language as they try to figure out there place in the world. In the meantime-VICTORY TO REBEKA RICE!

Wednesday, May 23, 2007

IN DEFENSE OF MITT ROMNEY'S GREAT-GRANDFATHER-AND GREAT GRANDMOTHERS

COMMENTARY

FIVE WIVES AT THE SAME TIME SHOW REAL EXECUTIVE ABILITY-RIGHT?

In a recent interview on CBS's Sixty Minutes Republican presidential hopeful ex- Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, a professed Mormon, declared that he thought that the fact that his great-grandfather took (or was ordered to take) five wives was ‘terrible’. As the fiercely persecuted Mormons settled in Utah apparently the numerical balance between men and women was off and polygamy was therefore encouraged. Naturally, being a male-dominated religious variant of Christianity that necessary was couched in theological terms, as well. The practice was officially banned by that denomination in 1890. However, the practice, as witnessed by some recent court cases in the West, still flourishes in some areas amount Old Style Mormons.

One can see that for someone who is running on a ‘family values’ platform highlighted by support for the proposition that marriage is between one man-one woman and is touting personal fidelity to one wife and one set of children in order to grab the brass ring of the presidency that such a family history may in fact be 'terrible'. But step back a minute Mitt, aside from being very disrespectful to your family line, what is the harm of having five, or for that matter, ten wives? Or a woman having ten husbands? As long a there is effective consent among and between the parties whose business is it anyway? And why be ashamed of that ‘skeleton’ in the family closet?

We socialists are not as squeamish as brother Romney appears to be about either the details of his family history or about how people arrange their personal lives. There has been a great hue and cry lately in the West over some Old Style Mormon instances of polygamy, including the usual allegations of coercion. Coercion or forcing “shot gun” weddings, singly or in multiples, is not what we mean by effective consent. However, absent coercion it is not the state’s business to interfere. We may have a different take than Mormons on what we think personal relationships will look like under socialism once the nuclear family (or what today stands for that proposition) recedes into the background as the basis unit of society but for now the variety of human experiences in interpersonal relationships is way beyond the scope of what the state needs to interfere in.

I, personally, want to learn more about old Great-Grandpa Romney and Joseph Smith-the founder of Mormonism and a Free Soiler candidate for office before he was murdered in the 1840’s. On the face of it those individuals seem, unlike Mitt, interesting personalities. Certainly everyone must concede that old Great-Grandfather Romney seems more interesting than his progeny. And had to have more real executive ability than latter monogamous Romneys. Hell, I had my hands full when, back in the days, I had two girlfriends at one time. Hands Off the Old Style Mormons! Government Out of the Bedrooms!










COMMENTARY

FIVE WIVES AT THE SAME TIME SHOW REAL EXECUTIVE ABILITY-RIGHT?

In a recent interview on CBS's Sixty Minutes Republican presidential hopeful ex- Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, a professed Mormon, declared that he thought that the fact that his great-grandfather took (or was ordered to take) five wives was ‘terrible’. As the fiercely persecuted Mormons settled in Utah apparently the numerical balance between men and women was off and polygamy was therefore encouraged. Naturally, being a male-dominated religious variant of Christianity that necessary was couched in theological terms, as well. The practice was officially banned by that denomination in 1890. However, the practice, as witnessed by some recent court cases in the West, still flourishes in some areas amount Old Style Mormons.

One can see that for someone who is running on a ‘family values’ platform highlighted by support for the proposition that marraige is between one man-one woman and is touting personal fidelity to one wife and children in order to grab the brass ring of the presidency that such a family history may in fact be 'terrible'. But step back a minute Mitt, aside from being very disrespectful to your family line, what is the harm of having five, or for that matter, ten wives? Or a woman having ten husbands? As long a there is effective consent among and between the parties whose business is it anyway? And why be ashamed of that ‘skeleton’ in the family closet?

We socialists are not as squeamish as brother Romney appears to be about either the details of his family history or about how people arrange their personal lives. There has been a great hue and cry lately in the West over some Old Style Mormon instances of polygamy, including the usual allegations of coercion. Coercion or forcing “shot gun” weddings, singly or in multiples, is not what we mean by effective consent. However, absent coercion it is not the state’s business to interfere. We may have a different take than Mormons on what we think personal relationships will look like under socialism once the nuclear family (or what today stands for that proposition) recedes into the background as the basis unit of society but for now the variety of human experiences in interpersonal relationships is way beyond the scope of what the state needs to interfere in.

I, personally, want to learn more about old Great-Grandpa Romney and Joseph Smith-the founder of Mormonism and a Free Soiler candidate for office before he was murdered in the 1840’s. On the face of it those individuals seem, unlike Mitt, interesting personalities. Certainly everyone must concede that old Great-Grandfather Romney seems more interesting than his progeny. And had to have more real executive ability than latter monogamous Romneys. Hell, I had my hands full when, back in the days, I had two girlfriends at one time. Hands Off the Old Style Mormons! Government Out of the Bedrooms!