Howard Zinn

Howard Zinn was a national treasure. He was a historian who wrote the immensely popular A People’s History of the United States. When I read it years ago, it took me a long time, because I kept giving my copy away: “Here, you really need to read this!”

I’m not sure how many copies I went through, but it was a few. And it’s that good. It is American history told from the positions of the slaves, from the factory worker, from those who suffered racist policy.

Some might roll their eyes and assume this is just a bunch of leftist mumbo-jumbo. It is not; it is careful scholarship. The version of history we are accustomed to is told from the perspective of power. Many Americans know we lost 58,000 service personnel in Vietnam; most do not know, or even consider the fact, that Vietnam lost 2-3 million people.

Yes, change has occurred. We have rethought Christopher Columbus. But most of our thinking is oriented toward power. An educated population is a threat. Therefore a palatable version of the country’s history is presented in the classroom. Is this a conspiracy? Teachers are presenting sanitized versions of the history under the watchful eye of secret police? No.

It starts when we’re children. A certain way of thinking is absorbed by children. This thinking was provided them by adults. Why do you think America got “sucked into” Vietnam? Because that is what was drilled into your head. Because we do not want to think of our country committing crimes. And that is the issue.

We conflate the population with the machinery of state. We look at the flag, thinking “I am America.” Children in droning unity, hands over hearts, say the pledge of allegiance every morning. “[W]ith liberty and justice for all.”

“I am America.” The flag means “me.” If the flag does something bad, I did something bad. If the flag kills innocent people, I killed innocent people. “And I’ll be damned if someone’s gonna accuse me of bad things. I am a good person! And therefore American must be good!”

Tribal thinking runs deep in American culture. If people get angry about police brutality? The Thin-Blue Line flags come out, saying “Leave White people alone!” If gay people, who have been treated like dirt for forever, have a pride parade? We begin seeing straight-pride parades cropping up. Black Lives Matter? All Lives Matter.

Why cannot people get on the side of those being abused and oppressed and killed? Why does the switch get flipped to a tribal reaction? “No one criticizes White people!” The thinking here is “I am White, I must be the one being criticized.” “I don’t have privilege!”

Zinn even goes through the history of how the power elite saw common cause being found between Black slaves and White indentured servants. Can’t have that. Solidarity? That had to be prevented. And it was. Many racist concepts used by White people today can trace their genesis to this chapter in America’s past.

Reading Zinn’s book can, dare I say, help encourage you to become a better person. We all need to be better people.

Why do I get the feeling someone just read that and thought, “I don’t!”

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2026/aug/06/howard-zinn-the-peoples-historian-book
 

Groceries

 

I guess I’ll just keep saying it. The nation is not divided, and most Americans want the same thing.

The polling data reveal that about two-thirds of Americans are in agreement on just about all political issues.

According to this Guardian article:

“When asked to describe what a better life in three to five years would look like, 60% of Americans said they wanted greater financial security … with 90% of respondents listing [groceries] as their top cost-of-living concern….”

Most Americans are in-sync with the Progressive Caucus. Most Americans are “liberal.” Most Americans are progressive.

Yet, they vote for the wealthy being handed free money. They vote for the working class and working poor getting squeezed.

The current president has spent $40 billion on the war with Iran. He seems disinterested with the plight of the working class and working poor.

According to the Silver Bulletin, “21 percent of Americans strongly approve of the job [Trump’s] doing.”

Almost 60 percent disapprove.

Why, might we ask, did you vote for him? You’re disappointed now?

Did something change?

https://t.ly/qhjlh

Frozen Binomials!

 

I have recently become obsessed with pairs of words that appear in a specific order, called frozen binomials. There are lists of them online; I just wanted to do my own. I have come up with an inventory of frozen binomials, which is in no way comprehensive.

I did not include sequential pairs, e.g., search and destroy. One searches then destroys. Same with smash and grab, catch and release, divide and conquer.

I also did not include smaller-to-greater pairs, e.g. nickel and dime.

Friend Michael did a few during a brief phone call.

Feel free to suggest some I missed—of which there are many.

• Apples and oranges
• Biscuits and gravy
• Black and white
• Bread and butter
• Brick and mortar
• Brother and sister
• Cars and trucks
• Cats and dogs
• Cinnamon and sugar
• Coffee or tea
• Cook and clean
• Cookies and milk
• Cops and robbers
• Country and Western
• Cowboys and Indians
• Cuts and bruises
• Dollars and cents
• East and west
• Fire and brimstone
• Frankincense and myrrh
• Fruits and vegetables
• Good and evil
• Ham and eggs
• Hammer and chisel
• Hammer and nails
• Hammer and tongs
• Hands and knees
• Hit or miss
• Horse and buggy
• Hot and cold
• Hugs and kisses
• Ketchup and mustard
• Left and right
• Lemon and lime
• Loud and clear
• Man and wife
• Meat and potatoes
• Moan and groan
• Mr. and Mrs.
• North or south
• Oil and water
• Paper or plastic
• Peanut butter and jelly
• Pen and pencil
• Pipes and cigars
• Piss and moan
• Pots and pans
• Salt and pepper
• Sand and surf
• Shoes and socks
• Sick and tired
• Soap and water
• Song and dance
• Stars and stripes
• Sticks and stones
• Surf and turf
• Tea or coffee
• This or that
• Thunder and lightening
• Tooth and nail
• Up and down
• Vinegar and oil
• Vitamins and minerals
• Wear and tear

Intelligence

 This keeps coming up lately. I continue to bump into the subject of intelligence and IQ. In personal conversation, in shows I am watching, etc.

I wrote this essay last year and wanted to share it again (see below).

As I tell my students, IQ is three inches on a twelve-inch ruler. It generally means you’re good at math, chess, standardized tests, and so on. There is then intellectual intelligence. This means you can read Plato and have something to say about it; you can navigate concepts and come up with insights.

There are other types of intelligence, such as moral intelligence. One can have more than one. For instance, one can have a high IQ and a high moral intelligence.

This is not a case where everyone gets a trophy. Intelligence is biological. Some people are tall. Some people are strong. Some people are good looking. And some people are “smart.” Some people are not tall. Some are not good looking. Take my meaning?

But do not despair: Everyone is good at something. All have talents and abilities, and some things just come easy.

IQ is not the measure of intelligence. It is a measure of intelligence. In this culture, if you do well on the SAT, you’re smart. Congratulations! Those clowns in MENSA would love to have you. The rest of us are dummies? [wrong-answer buzzer]

And I find this interesting: What makes one smart is the ability to excel at what is presently being pushed. STEM has basically become a religion. So, to be able to excel at STEM-related subjects is to be smart. What those hippies are doing in the English Department? Poetry has no value, biochemistry does. Therefore, it’s concluded that an aptitude for biochemistry = smart. An aptitude for reading poetry and producing incisive analysis = not smart.

This culture has interesting priorities.

https://www.gregoryharms.com/essays-20251121 

Funeral Parlor Etiquette

 

 

 

Wakes and funerals are hard. Losing those we love is a painful experience for all involved. I have unfortunately been to many, many of them. I could not give you a number. 

And with my extensive experience has come a few observations. I thought I’d share a few (four) etiquette suggestions to help maybe make this difficult experience smoother, easier, and more refined.

1. Please put on a collared shirt and maybe iron it. I know Americans are not fussy about clothing and appearance, but when there’s a dead body in the room, perhaps dial it up a notch. I have seen people at wakes who looked like they were going to a beach party. Make an effort, FFS.

2. Keep the line moving. You’re not there to tell your life story. You’re not at a cocktail party. Share your sadness and move along to paying your respects. This is why you’re there. The world does not revolve around you. And chances are, your conversation is vapid anyway, because you’re trying to be either entertaining or deep. You’re likely neither.

3. Don’t try to be deep. You’re probably not. Please, do not say things like “Everything happens for a reason.” It does not. There is nothing cosmic or preordained about the person being deceased. Does God kill people because he’s bored? I rather doubt it. Of course, some will say “God works in mysterious ways.” When I hear this, I think of Roman statesman Cicero: “Mystery is the wisdom of blockheads.” Just say your sorry, that you feel bad, and keep the line moving.

4. Do not start talking about the person you just lost. The day belongs to the family and the bereaved. No one wants to hear “We just lost my aunt.” Nobody—in that context—cares. Again, just say you’re sorry, that you feel bad, and keep the line moving.

Conservatism

This blog essay was done in collaboration with friend Michael Slager. I created the armature and he fleshed it out.


[Read time: 3:30]

This article that appeared in the Guardian last week got me thinking. I began pondering conservatism. Now, my area of philosophy that I specialize in is political philosophy. My competence would be in question if I had not read my Edmund Burke—which I have. 

His Reflections on the Revolution in France is the founding text of political  conservatism. And while I do not agree with him to the letter, I do agree with him occasionally; he makes some good and compelling points in that book.

What is called conservatism today bears no resemblance to what Burke was talking about. What is meant by conservative anyway?

This is what had me thinking. What does that mean? More to the point, what do they want?

This is not to suggest that all conservatives are the same. Of course, they are not. To some degree, I am a conservative. I’ve read my Burke, I believe children should have good manners, and so on. So, you can count me among the conservative set.

But is this what is meant? Is this the agenda? Is this what we see on Capitol Hill and the legislative program pushed by congressional Republicans? (And no, I am not in any way suggesting the blue team is wonderful. I feel Clinton, Biden, and Obama should all die in prison, in case you were wondering.)

I think it’s worth taking a look at the major ambitions we see (and hear) over and over again.

One seems to be tax cuts. These apply to corporations and the rich. What does that mean? The top marginal tax-rate cut applies to earners bringing in over $640,000 a year. Savings are usually in the tens of thousands—not much for someone who makes over a half-million a year. Estate tax cuts, on the other hand, apply to multi-million-dollar estates. 

Moreover, the top 10 percent will see total tax savings of $1.4 trillion over a decade. On average, they would gain an additional $13,600 every year. For those in the lowest 10 percent of the income distribution, they lose $1,200 in benefits. One fails to see the fiscal conservatism in funneling resources from impoverished people to the already well-off. 

If we didn’t give $140 billion away to rich people every year in tax cuts (1.4 trillion dollars over a decade) and got back the additional estimated $160 billion in tax money that wealthy people hide every year, we could do the following and have over $100 billion left over.

Four points:
 
1. We could make a huge dent in homelessness. It would cost an estimated $9.6 billion to get individuals and families out of shelters and into stable housing, complete with decent follow-up services.
 
2. Child poverty could be eliminated. It would cost around $180 billion every year to lift all kids currently living in poverty out of it. The benefits would pay for themselves. Alleviating child poverty today would greatly reduce the chances of future homelessness, boost school attendance, decrease lost economic productivity in adulthood, and decrease the chances of health problems. Some estimates put the downstream costs of child poverty at one trillion dollars a year.
 
3. Millions of people are uninsured. Medicaid expansion to the 10 states that did not accept earlier expanded coverage would cost about $30 billion every year and cover approximately 3 million people. Providing preventative care can save billions more in healthcare costs down the line.
 
4. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) makes up about 1.6 percent of the total federal budget. That’s not a lot when one considers it keeps human beings fed. Children can grow and learn well thanks to good nutrition.
 
So, if we add all this up, what are we left with? Handing out free money to the wealthy, and taking away support for social programs relied upon by the working poor. This and contempt for caring of any kind? Global warming? Trans rights? Women’s rights? Rights? 

Is this how these politicians stay in office—and entities like Fox News stay in business? 

Conservatism seems to be based on an ethos and the assumption that “I made something of myself. And anyone with problems I do not have is at fault for those problems.” Is this conservatism?

Corporate power. Wealth. White supremacy. Disgust with anything that smells like sympathy. Have we seen anything like this before in history? I believe we have. And it could happen here tomorrow. This country is ripe for the pickin’.

I suspect most Americans do not know the details. I suspect most Americans are not familiar with what we review in this essay. Like US involvement in the Middle East, I have said for years if Americans could really see what is happening they would not stand for it.

The same goes for conservatism. If Americans actually knew the agony suffered by those with nothing while people with multiple homes buy a new horse, they wouldn’t stand for it.

And like I’ve said before, you can be a White supremacist and support progressive legislation at the same time. Most of the working poor are White. No one’s saying you can’t still be a racist; just be a smarter one.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jul/25/food-stamps-children-trump

"It's just a movie."