Guest Post: The Lesser Known History of Thanksgiving in America

For a time, peace and plenty resulted not in a grateful America but in a complacent one.

by James R. Harrigan

On October 3, 1789, George Washington signed the first Thanksgiving Proclamation of the newly constituted American Republic. He called upon the American people to enjoy “a day of Public Thanksgiving and Prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God.”

The Early Days of Giving Thanks
It had been a long and difficult road to Independence, and America was still reeling from the failed Articles of Confederation and the fight to adopt the new Constitution. Washington had seen the struggle first-hand, and he knew, perhaps more than anyone, that America was nothing less than a series of miracles. And he saw to it that the nation gave thanks.

This was not the first celebration of Thanksgiving in America; the Pilgrims’ 1621 celebration with the Wampanoag in Plymouth holds that honor. Nor was this even Washington’s first Thanksgiving; he had proclaimed a Thanksgiving in December 1777 in the wake of the Continental Army’s victory over the British at Saratoga. This was, though, the first Thanksgiving of the American Republic. It was the first national Thanksgiving.

Washington went on to declare another observance in 1795, and his successor, John Adams, followed suit in 1798 and 1799. But as America’s position in the world was steadily established, and as the debate on the separation of church and state began to take shape, Thanksgiving was all but forgotten on the national stage.

A condition of peace and plenty resulted not in a grateful America but in a complacent one. The War of 1812, though, reminded Americans that their collective place in the world was more tenuous than they had realized. And at the close of the war in 1814 James Madison proclaimed “a day of public humiliation and fasting and of prayer to Almighty God for the safety and welfare” of the United States. Madison declared another Thanksgiving in 1815.

And then nearly half a century passed.

The Birth of Thanksgiving As We Know It
Once again things were calm, and once again national Thanksgiving observances fell by the wayside. The Founding Generation, America’s finest generation, had passed, and with them the possibility of a national gratefulness seemed to pass as well. Just as the War of 1812 had reminded the nation of its precariousness, though, the Civil War shattered the illusion of American harmony. Abraham Lincoln had warned the nation in 1858 that “A house divided against itself cannot stand,” and by 1863 the divided country was indeed in danger of falling.

Americans turned to Lincoln, and Lincoln turned to God. Even in the midst of the bloodiest war ever fought on American soil, Lincoln saw America’s blessings. “The year that is drawing toward its close,” he said, “has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added which are of so extraordinary a nature that they can not fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever-watchful providence of Almighty God.”

At America’s lowest ebb, the nation’s most dedicated servant chose to give thanks rather than bemoan his own, and America’s collective, lot, and there were indeed reasons to be thankful. As Lincoln said,

Peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and harmony has prevailed everywhere, except in the theater of military conflict, while that theater has been greatly contracted by the advancing armies and navies of the Union.”

And this was the birth of Thanksgiving as we have come to know it. In the worst of times, in conditions so dire that the continued existence of the Republic was unsure, Lincoln taught us to look beyond ourselves…to be truly thankful for the blessings that we have received. And so it has been for 143 years.

As we celebrate Lincoln’s holiday on the last Thursday in November, take a moment to contemplate the series of miracles that brings and keeps us together. Take a cue from Washington and sense the magnitude of the achievement of the generation that built this country, oftentimes through little more than force of will. Take a cue from Lincoln and appreciate the blessings that we do enjoy rather than pining for things we don’t. Take a cue from the best America has produced and say a prayer of thanks.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Reprinted from Vision and Values.

James R. Harrigan is CEO of FreedomTrust.

This article was originally published on FEE.org. Read the original article.

From the Archives: Civil liberties lawyer John Whitehead recalls Beatles' social, political impact

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on February 13, 2014. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site was scheduled to go dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

Civil liberties lawyer John Whitehead recalls Beatles' social, political impact

Sunday, February 9, will mark the 50th anniversary of the Beatles' first appearance on American television. That evening in 1964, the Fab Four – John, Paul, George, and Ringo – were guests on The Ed Sullivan Show. In the studio audience were hundreds of screaming teenagers but across the country, 73 million viewers tuned in, almost twice as many as had previously watched a single television broadcast.

Charlottesville civil liberties attorney John Whitehead reminisced on February 7 about that night and what followed that decade in an interview on WCHV-FM's “Inside Charlottesville.” On Friday afternoon's program, host Coy Barefoot asked him to recall the beginnings of Beatlemania and its subsequent impact on society.

Taken by surprise
Whitehead, founder of the Rutherford Institute, began by noting that, according to their photographer, when the Beatles landed in New York on February 7, 1964, “and they heard all this yelling and stuff, they thought the President had landed, or some dignitary. They didn't realize [until] they went down the ramp that all those 5,000 teenagers” who crowded the runway “were there for them. They were taken totally by surprise.”

They should not have been so surprised, however, because the Beatles' popularity had preceded them to America.

“They had the top five tunes in the Top 40” in February 1964, Whitehead explained. “No one's ever duplicated that, which is amazing. I think that seven out of the top 10 songs were Beatles songs when they landed in the country.”

So many people were indoors that Sunday to watch the band on Ed Sullivan, he said, the country experienced its lowest crime rate in something like ten years. George Harrison later quipped that “even the Kremlin was tuned in,” Whitehead recalled. “It was amazing.”

The Sixties begin
Reflecting on the Beatles' later impact on politics and society, he suggested that “the Sixties, in my opinion, started that night on The Ed Sullivan Show.”

That performance began “all that upheaval” that continued with the worldwide broadcast over the BBC of “All You Need Is Love” (with 400 million viewers) and culminated with “the summer of love” and Sgt. Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band in 1967.

The Beatles, he said, “captivated the world with peace, harmony, and love, which was their great message.”

He added that John Lennon “took off on his own and started his worldwide campaign for peace, and anti-war.” In reaction to that, he said, “the FBI went after him, collected 400 pages” of intelligence on Lennon's activities “and tried to intimidate him and get him deported. Richard Nixon considered John Lennon his number one enemy at that time. It was really weird.”

Horrified parents
Asked by Barefoot where he was that night 50 years ago, Whitehead recalled that he “watched the show” and his “parents were horrified.”

Years later, he continued, shortly before his mother passed away, “I asked her, what was the worst thing that ever happened to America? She looked at me and said 'The Beatles.'”

His mother was not alone. He also remembered attending a conference in “1983 or 1984” when a prominent minister took the stage and said to the audience of 10,000, “I want to tell you what has really destroyed America: The Beatles.”

Whitehead looked around at the young people around him and they all had the same puzzled looks on their faces. The minister “never explained what he meant” but he was probably referring to “the youth rebellion” of the 1960s.

That rebellion, Whitehead went on, “was focused.” It “brought down a crooked president” and the protesters “stopped the Vietnam War.”

Youth in rebellion
He expressed his admiration for the youth rebellion of that era.

“I'd like to see all that again, folks. I've often said, if you've got a picket sign and you're out there active, I don't care what you believe. I may not like what you're saying, [but] I'll go to my death to defend it," Whitehead said. "I just like activism."

John Lennon, he pointed out, “epitomized” the spirit of youthful rebellion and was even vilified by some on the Left for his idealism.

When Lennon released the song “Revolution” (on The White Album) and said “if you want destruction, count me out,” Whitehead remembered, “The Village Voice actually criticized him for being too peaceful.” Lennon's response was along the lines of, “What do you want to do, kill people? Why would we destroy anyone if we want peace?”

It's that kind of idealism that Whitehead would “like to see all that again but I don't see a lot of it.”

Expressing some frustration, he added: “Here's the thing. A guy like Lennon, the other Beatles -- they took their fame and tried to advance an agenda, a very positive agenda, but I'm looking around for entertainers today like that. Justin Bieber? I don't know.”

John Whitehead, author of A Government of Wolves, has also published an essay, “50 Years After the Beatles: Isn’t It Time for Another Political & Cultural Revolution?,” on the Rutherford Institute's web site.

SUGGESTED LINKS

Charlottesville civil liberties lawyer assesses 2012-13 Supreme Court term
Rutherford Institute asks local lawmakers to speak out against drones
Charlottesville lawyers compile rules against ‘politically correct’ Xmas
Rutherford Institute endorses Charlottesville marijuana resolution
Attorney General Cuccinelli calls Charlottesville ABC sting operation 'overkill'

Original URL: http://www.examiner.com/article/civil-liberties-lawyer-john-whitehead-recalls-beatles-social-political-impact

From the Archives: African ambassador calls for 'peace, love, and understanding' in D.C. speech

Publisher's note: This article was originally published on Examiner.com on February 22, 2015. The Examiner.com publishing platform was discontinued July 1, 2016, and its web site was scheduled to go dark on or about July 10, 2016.  I am republishing this piece in an effort to preserve it and all my other contributions to Examiner.com since April 6, 2010. It is reposted here without most of the internal links that were in the original.

African ambassador calls for 'peace, love, and understanding' in D.C. speech

Recalling the Nick Lowe song from the 1970s, “What's so funny about peace, love, and understanding?,” the Gabonese Ambassador to the United States argued in a recent speech that peace, love, and understanding are necessary components of contemporary international relations.

Ambassador Michael Moussa-Adamo's remarks to the Universal Peace Federation and The Washington Times Foundation were published on February 20 by Sub-Saharan Monitor, a newsletter about African politics and culture. The occasion for the speech was World Interfaith Harmony Week.

Lowe's song (made famous by Elvis Costello), the Ambassador said, asks “why peace and love and understanding are remarkable concepts rather than mundane ones.”

'Inhumane acts'
He conceded that “if one picks up a daily newspaper, the front page headlines do not talk about peace or love or understanding. Instead, we read about war and terrorism and murder and sexual assault. We read about human beings performing inhumane acts against other human beings.”

While newspaper headlines and the evening news on TV may give people cause for pessimism, he said, a more nuanced approach to current events suggests reason for optimism.

Referring to Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker's 2012 book, The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined, Ambassador Moussa-Adamo noted that “we live in the most peaceful era of human history. Not only are there fewer wars now than there were even in the recent, 20th-century past, but there are fewer violent crimes such as assault and murder.”

He added that this is true not only in the industrialized, Western democracies like Europe and North America, but also in so-called developing countries of Latin America, Africa, and Asia.

Nonetheless, he said, statistics that say violence is reduced to record low levels is small comfort to the victim of terrorism or sexual assault.

'Interfaith harmony'
The Ambassador asked, “What can we do to promote interfaith harmony and the triplet: peace, love, and understanding?”

He said there were three action items:

“First, we must learn how to agree to disagree...

“Second, we must sit down and reason together....”

And third, “We must not be afraid to dream.”

In concrete terms, the Gabonese ambassador said that “we must invest in education, especially but not exclusively in education for girls. It is proven that, in societies where girls and women are able to learn in school, their societies are healthier, more affluent, and more peaceful. Those who oppose education for girls oppose progress for everyone, including themselves.”

'Gabon Emergent'
He referred to Gabonese President Ali Bongo Ondimba's program called “Gabon Emergent,” which posits that the country “must move beyond its reliance on a few natural resources – mostly oil, timber, and minerals – and create the conditions for a diversified economy that includes services like banking and insurance, high technology, and green industries.” The aim is to create jobs and new businesses and increase commercial engagement with overseas partners like the United States.

Concluding his remarks, Ambassador Moussa-Adamo said that “we must continue to pursue justice and peace through interfaith dialogue. Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists – even agnostics and atheists – must continue to talk to each other, to share what we have in common, to analyze what divides us, and work toward a world dominated not by conflict and pain but by peace, love, and understanding.”

Michael Moussa-Adamo has served as Gabon's Ambassador to the United States since September 2011.

SUGGESTED LINKS

South African author Greg Mills offers solutions to African poverty
Virginia Congressman Robert Hurt discusses Africa policy, Ebola threat, and AGOA
Omidyar Network's Karol Boudreaux offers optimistic view of African economies
Virginia Senate hopeful Robert Sarvis talks about U.S. policy toward Africa
Index of Economic Freedom shows global progress for 2015, while USA loses ground

Original URL: http://www.examiner.com/article/african-ambassador-calls-for-peace-love-and-understanding-d-c-speech

Cheapening the Nobel Peace Prize

Is lutefisk hallucinogenic?

That's the question that first sprang to mind when I heard on NPR this morning that the Norwegian Nobel committee had awarded its peace prize to freshman President Barack Obama of the United States, a person who has been in office for too short a time (not even 9 months) to accomplish anything of lasting significance in the pursuit of international peace.

The Bloomberg news service inadvertently expressed the same sort of incredulousness with this headline:

Nobel Peace Prize Awarded to U.S. President Obama (Correct)

The deadline for submitting nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize was February 1 -- just days after President Obama's inauguration. Did he really do so much in a fortnight that he bested other contenders with far more experience and a longer record of achievements?

The last U.S. President to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize was Jimmy Carter (in retirement), which will no doubt lead to more and more explicit comparisons between him and Obama -- in terms of their naivete and their mismanagement of U.S. foreign policy.

Both Obama and Carter share a Wilsonian idealism -- that is, they lack a sense of Realpolitik -- that is also appropriate, since Woodrow Wilson won his Nobel Peace Prize for his work on the Versailles Treaty after World War I.

And we all know how well that turned out.

Be sure to visit my CafePress store for gifts and novelty items!
Read my blog on Kindle!
Follow my tweets on Twitter!

Mr. Smoot, Meet Mr. Hawley

The Washington Post reports that the threat of trade protectionism is rising again as governments -- even industrial democracies -- retrench in the face of shrinking GDPs.

Egged on by fremescence around the globe, decisions aimed at reducing international trade will have, as they did in the 1930s, counterproductive results. The damage done by policies that restrict or deter trade among businesses and consumers across national boundaries will prolong the current recession.

Annys Shin wrote in the business section of Friday's Post:

In the latest WTO report, Director-General Pascal Lamy said that in just the past two months there has been "significant slippage" among the world's industrialized and developing nations toward protectionism. The report includes a lengthy list of examples.

"The danger today is of an incremental build-up of restrictions that could slowly strangle international trade and undercut the effectiveness of policies to boost aggregate demand and restore sustained growth globally," Lamy said.

A growing number of countries have raised tariffs, imposed import restrictions or reinstated subsidies. They have also been quick to defend home industries by filing complaints with the WTO over dumping -- the practice of flooding another country with goods at below-market prices. The WTO report also portrayed bailouts as potentially bad for trade because propping up operations of uncompetitive or insolvent firms "denies market share to more efficient producers including foreign suppliers."

A news release from the World Trade Organization that was supposed to be issued on March 25 but was prematurely published by a Dutch media outlet on March 23, addressed the issue of how economic decline follows protectionist trade measures:

“For the last 30 years trade has been an ever increasing part of economic activity, with trade growth often outpacing gains in output. Production for many products is sourced around the world so there is a multiplier effect — as demand falls sharply overall, trade will fall even further. The depleted pool of funds available for trade finance has contributed to the significant decline in trade flows, in particular in developing countries,” said Director-General Pascal Lamy.

“As a consequence, many thousands of trade related jobs are being lost. Governments must avoid making this bad situation worse by reverting to protectionist measures which in reality protect no nation and threaten the loss of more jobs. We are carefully monitoring trade policy developments. The use of protectionist measures is on the rise. The risk is increasing of such measures choking off trade as an engine of recovery. We must be vigilant because we know that restricting imports only leads your trade partner to follow suit and hit your exports. Trade can be a potent tool in lifting the world from these economic doldrums. In London G20 leaders will have a unique opportunity to unite in moving from pledges to action and refrain from any further protectionist measure which will render global recovery efforts less effective,” Mr. Lamy said.

Fortunately, some are fighting back against this incipient trend. In an online petition being circulated by the International Policy Network, the Atlas Economic Research Foundation and its Global Initiative for Free Trade, Peace and Prosperity, concerned citizens are speaking out and calling attention to the economic facts.

The petition says, in part:

... the fact that protectionism destroys wealth is not its worst consequence. Protectionism destroys peace. That is justification enough for all people of good will, all friends of civilization, to speak out loudly and forcefully against economic nationalism, an ideology of conflict, based on ignorance and carried into practice by protectionism.

Two hundred and fifty years ago, Montesquieu observed that “Peace is the natural effect of trade. Two nations who differ with each other become reciprocally dependent; for if one has an interest in buying, the other has an interest in selling; and thus their union is founded on their mutual necessities.”

Trade’s most valuable product is peace. Trade promotes peace, in part, by uniting different peoples in a common culture of commerce – a daily process of learning others’ languages, social norms, laws, expectations, wants, and talents.

The petition looks to the lessons of history:

Perhaps the most tragic example of what happens when that insight is ignored is World War II.

International trade collapsed by 70 percent between 1929 and 1932, in no small part because of America’s 1930 Smoot-Hawley tariff and the retaliatory tariffs of other nations. Economist Martin Wolf notes that “this collapse in trade was a huge spur to the search for autarky and Lebensraum, most of all for Germany and Japan.”

The most ghastly and deadly wars in human history soon followed.

By reducing war, trade saves lives.

Trade saves lives also by increasing prosperity and extending it to more and more people. The evidence that freer trade promotes prosperity is simply overwhelming. Prosperity enables ordinary men and women to lead longer and healthier lives.

There is more there to read and support, expressed more eloquently and completely than I can do. To sign the petition, go here: http://tinyurl.com/c5vb2l. Do it now.

Peace and prosperity depend on the ability of free people to trade among themselves without interference.

Read my blog on Kindle!