Interview with Michael LeMay, Author of Transforming America: Perspectives on U.S. Immigration

What prompted you to write Transforming America: Perspectives on U.S. Immigration? What "message" do you want to communicate?

I have previously authored eight books on the subject which I have been researching and writing about since 1980. In part I was prompted by a request from ABC-CLIO to consider doing a series of books. I was especially intrigued by the approach of many authors with different academic affiliations and disciplinary perspectives, and the opportunity to engage not only well-established scholars, but also to mentor and encourage younger scholars just beginning their publishing careers. I think the most important message for readers of this set of three books is that immigration is a very complex process, and immigration policy is a thorny and at times difficult policy arena within which to enact legislation to cope with it. I think, also, readers will begin to appreciate how and why it is challenging to “get it right” in enacting immigration laws, which inevitably have unforeseen and unanticipated consequences.

What was the highlight of your research? In the course of your research, what discovery surprised you the most? What surprises readers/others the most about your research?

I think for most readers, and to a great extent even for me, the most surprising aspect of my research relates to how intractable immigration policy remains to be; and how decade after decade, immigrant group after immigrant group, the issues and controversies tend to be the same despite many changes in the law dealing with the issues.

How did your research change your outlook on immigration?

I think the greatest lesson from my research pertaining to my own outlook on immigration is that as a scholar I must be extraordinarily careful not to fall into the trap of thinking I know what is best for policy and thereby to become a policy advocate; to prescribe policy options rather than to describe and analyze them. This realization as to the complexity of the issue that emerges from these volumes, and from my research, is a humbling experience. Even a long-time “student” of the subject learns something new every time one studies it, and learns to appreciate the fact that even a scholar who is relatively an “expert” on the issue does not have all the answers.

How have people reacted to your book and/or the ideas you set forth? Is it what you hoped for, or is there more work to be done?  

I have not yet had reaction to this latest series of books. In the past, with regard to other books on the subject I have authored, I am gratified that they have been well received by other scholars and academicians, and that students have reacted to me by expressing how interesting the books have been—how engaging the topic is to them. Many have expressed sentiment to the effect that after reading one of my books on the topic, they appreciate how the “bumper sticker” or “sound bite solutions” to the problem so often offered by politicians, will simply not work. The issue is too complex to be resolved by any approach or idea that can fit on a bumper sticker!

What's next for you?

I hope to polish and revise a manuscript dealing with immigration policy and the rise of public health in the United States. My next research and writing project will be to explore other policy areas to which immigration policy is so inextricably related. I would like to expand to book length a few of the topics I covered in a relatively brief essay in this three-volume set. I would like to do a book-length treatment of immigration and industrialization. I would like to do a book relating the experiences of “exceptional immigrants” whose contributions have made “American exceptionalism.”  I would also like to co-author, with a particular industry expert or insider, the relationship between specific immigrant persons and groups and the development of their industry: for example, the wine industry, the brewery industry, the timber industry, the canning industry, and so on.

Michael LeMay is Professor Emeritus from California State University-San Bernardino, having retired as a full professor, former chair of his department, as Assistant Dean. He has previously sole-authored numerous books, for example: The Perennial Struggle, 3e. Upper-Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 2009; Illegal Immigration. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, 2007; Guarding the Gates: Immigration and National Security. Westport, CT.: Praeger Security International, 2006. 

Interview with Dale McGowan, Author of Voices of Unbelief

Are there various kinds of unbelief, such as atheism, agnosticism, and humanism? How do they differ, or are they fundamentally the same?

They are most often different aspects of a single person's unbelief. "Atheist" describes my opinion that God does not exist; "agnostic" adds that I (like most atheists) am not certain; and "humanist" describes the philosophy of mutual care and responsibility that flows from the idea that we are on our own. It's like a religious believer describing herself as a theist, a Christian, and a Lutheran. Each emphasizes a different aspect of belief or a different degree of detail.


Is unbelief any more common today than in the past?

It's hard to know whether unbelief itself is more common, but saying it out loud certainly is. Much of Europe has gone from majority religious to majority nonreligious in three generations. In Scandinavia and the UK, the numbers run as high as 2-to-1 nonreligious. In the U.S., nonreligious identification has grown from 8 percent in 1990 to 20 percent today.


Is unbelief something negative—that is, a lack of belief—or is it more a matter of belief in something other than traditional religion?

It's negative only in the way "nonviolence" is. In renouncing one thing, it affirms others. In the case of nonviolence, what remains is peace and tolerance. In the case of unbelief, what remains is the natural universe. As an unbeliever in religion, what I believe is that this natural universe is all there is, and that we can and should build meaningful lives within that reality.


Do you think that unbelief is a type of religion? Does it meet any of the needs fulfilled by traditional religions, and does it have an organized structure?

Unbelief itself is too minimal to qualify as a religion by almost any definition. It's simply the belief that no God exists. Even belief in God isn't really a religion, just a basic assumption from which religion begins. Likewise, unbelief serves as a starting point for humanism. And though most humanists do not consider it a religion, others (including Ethical Culturists) point to their own humanist communities as the fulfillment of the same human needs satisfied by religions. Community, meaning-making, ritual, and connection to something greater than ourselves—in this case, humanity—are all elements of religion, and humanism can provide a satisfying basis for them.


How do you see unbelief figuring in today's political climate?

In most of Europe it has become normalized and destigmatized, even asserting itself (through organizations like the British Humanist Association) in the major social debates of our time. In the U.S., unbelief still bears an exceptional stigma. This is certain to change rapidly now that one in five Americans identify as nonreligious. There has even been conjecture that the nonreligious are on the cusp of asserting the same dominance over Democratic politics that the Religious Right asserted over the Republican Party in the 1980s and 1990s.


Did you discover anything surprising when writing Voices of Unbelief?

Two things never cease to surprise me: that everyday people in times that were very unfriendly to religious doubt mustered the courage to voice their honest opinions, and that any of those opinions actually made it through to us. From inquisition transcripts to letters to the editor of a 1903 newspaper in Kentucky, it's these regular folks who continue to surprise and impress me the most.

Voices of Unbelief
Documents from Atheists and Agnostics
Dale McGowan, Editor
September 2012
Greenwood

Voices of Unbelief: Documents from Atheists and Agnostics is the first anthology to provide comprehensive, annotated readings on atheism and unbelief expressly for high school and college students. This diverse compilation brings together letters, essays, diary entries, book excerpts, blogs, monologues, and other writings by atheists and agnostics, both through the centuries and across continents and cultures.

Unlike most other anthologies of atheist writings, the collection goes beyond public proclamations of well-known individuals to include the personal voices of unbelievers from many walks of life. While readers will certainly find excerpts from the published canon here, they will also discover personal documents that testify to the experience of living outside of the religious mainstream. The book presents each document in its historical context, enriched with an introduction, key questions, and activities that will help readers understand the past and navigate current controversies revolving around religious belief.

Features

• Documents include book and diary excerpts, letters, blogs, and video and radio scripts, bringing historical settings and individual lives into focus
• A chronology helps place the writings and writers in history and in relation to each other

Highlights

• Presents annotated documents by atheists and agnostics across 3,000 years and four continents
• Brings suppressed medieval voices into the conversation
• Widens the cultural scope beyond Europe and America by including documents from nonbelievers in China, India, Africa, and the Arab world
• Offers an accessible approach that will appeal to general readers as well as high school and university students

Interview with Kim Kennedy White, Editor of America Goes Green

What prompted you to write America Goes Green?  What "message" do you want to communicate?

I’ve been interested in environmental issues for years and was heavily influenced by my hometown and my family. I’m from Boulder, Colorado, where opportunities for green living are easily accessible (unlike some other parts of the country).  My grandparents lived through the Great Depression and were frugal, leaving very little to waste.  And like many of my ancestors, we typically use and reuse items to death before buying new or gently used things.  I’m also inspired by my husband, who has an incredible eye for seeing the possibilities in seemingly useless items.

Another major influence was the time I spent living in Eugene, Oregon during graduate school. In volunteering at a local community center, I came to know so many amazing people who lived “off the grid,” dumpster-dived for usable materials, survived on the streets, and spent their lives treading lightly on the earth that went beyond recycling – from clothes, food, and various earth-loving spiritual traditions, to the companies they support (or don’t support).  It opened my eyes to different ways of thinking and living that minimizes our negative impact on the environment.

The overall message of America Goes Green is that environmental concerns and efforts, no matter how big or small, are critical to our survival and are underway across the country.  This work provides detailed information and resources on all things “green,” and will hopefully inspire readers.  Every American can do simple things that improve their personal life, their community, and our country, and that serve as a model for the international community.  Small changes make a difference.

What was the highlight of your research? In the course of your research, what discovery surprised you the most? What surprises readers/others the most about your research?

In my initial research for the project, I was surprised by just how pervasive eco-conscious activity is throughout American culture that goes well beyond recycling. Green concerns and eco-friendly efforts have impacted nearly every industry in some way.  The incredible wealth of knowledge and commitment demonstrated by the 150+ contributors who participated in this project attests to the tremendous impact of green culture in the United States, particularly over the past 40+ years.

How did your research change your outlook on eco-friendly culture?

We’ve become an even greener family, and I realize that eco-friendly living is really a way of thinking.  It’s a mindset about your lifestyle and your choices in addition to your actions.  We’re not perfect, and we can always continue to make green improvements. Americans, compared with the rest of the world, still bear a heavy carbon footprint.

How have people reacted to your book and/or the ideas you set forth? Is it what you hoped for, or is there more work to be done?

People have been very supportive and believe that it’s important and timely information that needs to get out there to readers.  Lots of books are available on a wide range of environmental topics, but this one comes from a cultural point of view.  Our culture is constantly shifting, and “green” and “eco-friendly” concepts are now part of our language.

What's next for you?

I’m not sure what my next project will be yet.  I’m particularly interested in the environmental issues that impact those already struggling with poverty and other hardships, especially native peoples in the United States.

Kim Kennedy White, PhD, is an acquisitions editor for ABC-CLIO's The American Mosaic database and coeditor of ABC-CLIO's Folklore: An Encyclopedia of Beliefs, Customs, Tales, Music, and Art

Interview with Francine Gachupin, Co-author of Health and Social Issues of Native American Women

What prompted you to write Health and Social Issues of Native American Women? What "message" do you want to communicate?

Native American women are remarkable contributors to tribal societies and native family structures.  Their dreams and hopes for the safely, well-being and happiness of their families and communities are often at the forefront of their daily activities and yet, many of them struggle with a plethora of issues.  Our book highlights some of the challenges faced by Native American women and underscores their incredible strength and resiliency.  

What was the highlight of your research? In the course of your research, what discovery surprised you the most? What surprises readers/others the most about your research?

The highlight of the book and the research within its chapter is the Native American women authors.  The book is the voice of the women themselves, for many of the chapters are on topics of the lives lived by the women themselves.  The book is a culmination of challenges surpassed and accomplishments achieved.  

How did your research change your outlook on the topic?

The book is tangible proof that Native American women can succeed and do well for themselves, their families, and their communities without compromising their traditional beliefs, values and identity.  Each of the chapters provides valuable resources and overview of approaches to problems, that unfortunately, are too commonplace.

How have people reacted to your book and/or the ideas you set forth? Is it what you hoped for, or is there more work to be done?

The book is relatively new and so far, the reaction from people has been very positive.  The book provides a good foundation and more work does need to be done to provide similar background and context for other issues related to health and social issues for Native American women.

What's next for you?

My personal professional goal has always been to provide tribes with technical assistance in addressing health disparity issues for their respective tribes and I continue to work and strive to provide accurate and timely data to tribes.

Francine C. Gachupin, PhD, MPH, CIP, is operations manager of the Human Research Protection Office at the University of New Mexico, Albuquerque. She has extensive experience working with American Indian tribal communities focusing on chronic disease surveillance, public health practice, epidemiology and research. Gachupin obtained her doctorate from the University of New Mexico and her master's degree in public health from the University of Washington.

Interview with Jennie Joe, Co-author of Health and Social Issues of Native American Women

What prompted you to write Health and Social Issues of Native American Women? 

The idea and encouragement to undertake this book project emerged out of a series of discussion with the publisher. There was a general agreement that there was a need to capture some of the critical health concerns and social issues experienced by contemporary Native American women. In particular, concerns and issues that can be casted through the lens of Native Women scholars.

What "message" do you want to communicate?

One of the aims of the book was to provide a meaningful context for the issues discussed, including relevant history and the impact of colonization. The intent was also to illustrate interventions or solutions being undertaken to address these concerns. 

What was the highlight of your research? In the course of your research, what discovery surprised you the most? What surprises readers/others the most about your research?

We hope the readers see the emphasis placed by the contributors on personal and cultural resiliency and endurance as an integral part of survival for many Native American women. 

How did your research change your outlook on the topic?

We tried to avoid adding to existing negative stereotypes but to focus on issues of importance to Native American women and their ability to tap into their socio-cultural strengths to manage multiple problems encountered.

How have people reacted to your book and/or the ideas you set forth? Is it what you hoped for, or is there more work to be done?

The reaction has been positive so far. We hope our colleagues will continue to add to knowledge through their work and publications.

What's next for you?

Maybe a look at cross-cultural comparison with women from other cultures and/or a focus on intergenerational changes faced by Native American families as they adapt to a rapidly changing world.  

Jennie R. Joe, PhD, MPH, MA, is professor emeritus in family and community medicine at the University of Arizona, Tucson. She received her doctorate from the University of California, Berkeley. Her scholarly activities and work is in the area of cross-cultural health with an emphasis on health concerns of Native Americans. Some of her national and international work is with the Institute of Medicine and aboriginal health programs in Canada. 

ABC-CLIO Commemorates Native American Heritage Month

To commemorate Native American Heritage Month and honor the history and legacy of Native American pioneers, ABC-CLIO’s American Indian Experience database is proud to present a new primary source collection of narratives highlighting Indian Removal and migration to Oklahoma. 

Starting in 1830, with the passage of the Indian Removal Act, Eastern tribes forcibly relinquished their lands and removed west of the Mississippi. This forced relocation is widely known as The Trail of Tears. These forced removals—or the many Trails of Tears—occurred mostly between the 1830s and 1860s, impacting an estimated 50,000 to 100,000 Native people, who settled lands in Indian Territory roughly located in present-day Oklahoma. The Dawes Act, enacted in 1887, further redistributed and divided lands, diminishing tribal sovereignty and permanently impacting tribal lifeways, the effects of which are still felt in Native communities today.

Collected in the 1930s by the Indian-Pioneer History project, the Indian Removal and Migration Narratives document the removal experience and the legacy of migration. These histories feature details of the westward removal journey, as family members struggled to stay together and survive the many environmental and man-made challenges of the arduous trek. The stories further illustrate how generations of Native Americans adapted to new land and to new resources in Oklahoma, forging necessary alliances to survive. Each narrative is presented with both the original primary source document and its transcription and is enriched by supplementary reference materials that offer students opportunities for further study. 

To sign up for a FREE 60-Day trial of this database, please visit: 
http://www.abc-clio.com/Previews/index.aspx

The Significance of a Mormon Presidential Nominee

The 2012 presidential election was particularly significant in regard to the relationship between religion and politics because Mitt Romney became the first Latter Day Saint to earn the nomination of a major party. Mitt Romney is the most prolific Mormon politician of the 21^st century. Romney family history has deep roots within the Mormon tradition. Miles Romney, an Englishmen, converted to Mormonism in 1837 after encountering a missionary and moved to Nauvoo, Illinois, where Mitt Romney’s great grandfather, Miles Park Romney, was born. The Romney’s headed west after Smith’s assassination and Miles helped to settle towns in Utah and Arizona, prior to fleeing to Mexico after being pursued by local authorities for being a polygamist. Mexican law did not prohibit polygamy like American law did. George Romney, Mitt’s father, was born in Mexico to Anna and Gaskell Romney, who deviated from precedent and did not engage in plural marriage. The Romney’s left Mexico to escape the 1912 revolution and eventually settled in Salt Lake City. George Romney worked as CEO of General Motors, served three terms as Republican governor of Michigan in the 1960s, where Mitt was raised, and unsuccessfully sought the Republican presidential nomination in 1968.

As a candidate for president in 2012, Mitt Romney’s campaign team chose to downplay the nature of his Mormon heritage. While not completely ducking the issue of his faith, Romney took very few opportunities to highlight his cultural and spiritual roots in the Mormon faith. Much of this has to do with tensions in the Republican Party between Evangelical voters and Mormonism. This decision to avoid Romney’s religion met with little opposition in the election campaign of Barack Obama. The incumbent’s campaign team certainly had the option of highlighting a faith that has historically ruffled mainstream America’s feathers. Add to this the potential conflict within the Republican Party, and the Democrats could have played up Romney’s religion much bigger than they did.  This perhaps speaks to the successful execution of the Romney team’s plan to downplay the religion card.  However, taking into account the many potential strengths a Mormon candidate can draw on from his or her faith; this may have been a mistake.  As discussed in greater detail in our book, Mormons in American Politics, several theological and social developments within the Church of Latter Day Saints have provided for much greater political benefits in identifying with the Mormon faith.  It is a uniquely American religion with familiar Christian overtones.  It is an adaptable faith that has grown into modern, conservative, American cultural values.  It is a growing faith with vibrant new members and strong financial resources. The identity politics of modern American elections will allow future Mormon candidates to make use of these unique features.  Whether or not the time was right this particular presidential election for a Mormon candidate to feature his or her religious faith as a prominent part of the campaign, it will not be long before that becomes the norm.  At least for now, the history involved overshadows the promising political gains. This history is not lacking in drama either.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints began in 1830 in Palmyra, New York with just six members, under the leadership of Joseph Smith, the founding prophet. Membership grew to over 26,000 people by the time Smith was killed in 1844. Mormons have become the fourth largest church in the United States and the country’s wealthiest relative to size. Today the church has a global membership of over 14 million, the majority of whom live outside the United States. Early Mormons were theologically and socially different than their neighbors. They lived in theocratic communes and engaged in plural marriage, the practice of men having several wives.  Persecution typically intensified along the Mormon trail as their communities quickly grew in number and began to influence politics and business. And so the Mormons fled the United States under the leadership of Brigham Young after an imprisoned Joseph Smith was murdered by an angry mob. They landed in Utah, where the nation and the federal government persecuted the religion. Mormon leaders were deemed too theocratic and the practice of polygamy was viewed as a threat to American morality and culture. The Mormon Church eventually ended the practice of plural marriage in 1890 under the threat of having their temples and property seized by the federal government. This issue maintained national prominence after statehood was attained in 1896 because of widespread opposition to Mormon apostle Reed Smoot being seated as a U.S. Senator from Utah. It took four years of hearings and deliberations, but Smoot was finally seated and became an instrumental figure in the normalization of relations between Mormons at Americans at large. A century later, Harry Reid, a Mormon and U.S. Senator from Nevada, was elected Majority Leader, a position he has held since 2004. The Mormon Church is the most persecuted religious group in American history, but through many years of adaptation and growth the Church is poised to take its place in positions of political power for years to come.

Luke Perry, PhD, is associate professor of government at Utica College, Utica, NY. Perry holds a doctorate in political science from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst. 

Christopher Cronin, PhD, is assistant professor of government studies at Methodist University, Fayetteville, NC. Cronin holds a doctorate in political science from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst.

Interview with Steve Littleton, Co-Editor of Voices of the American Indian Experience

What prompted you to write Voices of the American Indian Experience? What "message" do you want to communicate?  Why is this subject important?

When Jim first approached me with this project idea, I was enthusiastic about the opportunity to research and organize materials written by Native Americans into an accessible resource for students and researchers. By combining familiar materials, such as court cases and legislation, with less well-known first person accounts and personal narratives, the reader is able to gain a much broader understanding of the Native American experience as it evolved from contact to today. These documents illustrate both the triumphs and tragedies that are part and parcel to human history.

What was the highlight of your research? In the course of your research, what discovery surprised you the most? What surprises readers/others the most about your research?

These narratives comprise a landscape of memories that are at once both universal and unique. Wherever Euro-Americans were, Native Americans were, and in many ways they have contributed, and continue to contribute, the best of their culture to ours. They fought in the civil war, they played college basketball, they loved, they dreamed, and above all, they fought, and continue to fight, to save their culture, to preserve their sovereignty, and for the right to represent their own history. This book documents the ways of life, beliefs, hopes, and dreams that show how the American Indian adds depth to the American experience. 

 

How did your research change your outlook on the subject?

I think that the most interesting part of this research was coming to appreciate the intricacies of Native American culture and history. One thing I have learned is that they see and understand history in a very different way from Euro-Americans, and it was an interesting challenge to try to bridge the gap and make the work as a whole understandable to a broad audience, while maintaining a healthy respect for the uniqueness of the Native American historical memory.

Steven A. Littleton is a former park ranger-interpreter at Little Bighorn Battlefield National Monument in Montana. He is currently a doctoral candidate in history of the American West at Northern Arizona University in Flagstaff, AZ.

Interview with Dave Pruett, Author of Reason and Wonder: A Copernican Revolution in Science and Spirit

What prompted you to write Reason and Wonder: A Copernican Revolution in Science and Spirit? What “message” do you want to communicate?

Humans have two very different ways of making sense of the world. Let’s call them head knowledge and heart knowledge. Many, particularly in the West, struggle to effectively integrate these seemingly disparate modes of knowing. Because of the dynamics of my upbringing as the son of a very rational father—a physician—and a very intuitive and religious mother, that struggle was acute. On the one hand, I majored in engineering, loved mathematics and science, was a child of the space race, and eventually worked for NASA for a decade. On the other hand, I have a “poet nature” and over the years had learned to listen carefully to the still small voice of intuition. Well into my thirties, these two aspects often seemed in conflict. The journey that culminated in Reason and Wonder was initially a journey for personal integrity.  But along the way, I came to suspect that the roots of the conflict were societal and universal. At the societal level, the tension between the rational and the intuitive plays out as the conflict between science and religion that has dogged humankind since Descartes and Copernicus.

Reason and Wonder has many subtexts.  But the primary one is that science and faith don’t have to be adversarial.  They can be complementary.  The individual who embraces both is more whole, and the society built upon the wisdom of both is saner.

What was the highlight of your research? In the course of your research, what discovery surprised you the most? What surprises readers/others the most about your research?

Reason and Wonder represents a radical departure from my conventional academic research in applied mathematics. History was never my strong suit, yet I had to awaken an inner historian to complete Reason and Wonder. What surprised me most was that, with enough digging, Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, Newton, Darwin, Einstein, and other iconic scientists—the patriarchs of our scientific legacy—came alive. They’ve become my friends and mentors. I have the utmost respect for what these men (and women, e.g., Rosalind Franklin) accomplished for science and humanity, often under the most taxing or even crippling personal circumstances.

Reason and Wonder is a patchwork quilt of individual stories stitched together to tell the big story of the cosmos and of our place as humans in it. What readers seem to appreciate most is the richness and wonder of that story.

How did your research change your outlook on the subject?

It is too often assumed in our polarized society that one must choose between science and faith, a choice that Nobel laureate in chemistry Ilya Prigogine calls “tragic.” Therefore, it surprised me, and it may surprise the reader, how key to their discoveries were the religious impulses of the greatest scientists our species has produced. Einstein may have put it best: “The most beautiful emotion we can experience is the mystical,” he said. “It is the source of all true art and science.”

How have people reacted to your book and/or the ideas you set forth? Is it what you hoped for, or is there more work to be done?

This is my first book for the general public. It took twelve years, six full revisions, and two good editors before it was deemed ready for public consumption. And even then, I had to read the final print edition from cover to cover before I felt confident that I’d succeeded in telling a coherent story. Public reaction thus far has confirmed my highest hopes.  People from many walks of life have found the story compelling, the prose “elegant,” and the science accessible. I’m beginning to think Reason and Wonder has very broad appeal, broader than anticipated. There seems to be something for every inquisitive reader, anyone who wants to better understand her or his genealogy in a cosmic sense.

What’s next for you?

Giving birth to Reason and Wonder was a long, slow process.  It began with a vague sense of direction, gradually took shape, and then attained clarity.  For me, writing is perhaps what sculpting is for an artist: the belief that somewhere inside that block of marble rests an object of beauty.  On many occasions I nearly gave up.  The encouragement and contributions of numerous friends, students, and acquaintances ultimately brought the book to fruition. The process doesn’t end with publication. The story has been written, but its healing message still needs to be heard. That’s my job for the present.  Perhaps I have another book in me.  Perhaps not.

Dave Pruett, a former NASA researcher, is an award-winning computational scientist and professor of mathematics at James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA.

Interview with Douglas R. Page, Co-author of Plural Marriage for Our Times

What prompted you to write Plural Marriage for Our Times: A Reinvented Option? 2nd Edition? What "message" do you want to communicate?

My involvement co-authoring this book came about because I wrote an article about changing family structures for a local parenting magazine in Massachusetts, called baystateparent.

As I was researching the article, I realized, given the popularity of the show “Sister Wives,” that we needed something about plural marriage, often referred to as polygamy.  I conducted a “Google” search for polygamy experts and came across Phil Kilbride’s CV. 

I called Phil’s office and left a message. A day or two later, I called him back and we talked at length about his research into plural marriage, the first edition of his book, and where marriage and divorce stand today. 

I was very impressed with Phil. He had great energy and loved the topic. I also came away with the impression that this was a man who loved to teach.

The article appeared in the February 2011 edition of the magazine and I sent Phil a link to the article so he could read it. 

And read it, he did!

He also printed it out and used it in some of his classes, he told me. At about the same time, he contacted me and inquired if I’d be interested in joining him as the co-author on his book. 

Part of my interest in this topic stands from the fact that I witnessed my parents’ divorce when I was 21. Theirs was a marriage that, on the surface, seemed perfect. There was never an argument, and they appeared to love one another dearly. Little did I know that there were some long-simmering problems between them.

Their divorce left an indelible mark on me. I’ve been married now for more than 20 years, but I continue to think about my parents’ divorce. Divorce is one the most detrimental events any child can experience, especially when they’re young but even when they’re into their adult years.  For any child, I believe, divorce is as traumatic an event as the death of a parent. 

And so when Phil mentioned his thesis—allow adults a plural marriage option instead of forcing them to divorce when things aren’t going well in the marriage—I thought he was onto something.

Our opinions and thoughts on marriage and divorce often come from wives, husbands, marriage counselors and the clergy.  But the voices of the people most impacted by divorce – children – are rarely heard from if ever at all. In fact, if you think about it, they’re pretty silent.

Phil had also experienced divorce. I’m not sure how long he and Janet were married but their union produced a daughter. And while I never met Phil face to face, based on our many telephone calls, I came away with the impression he was upset about the breakup. I think what bothered him the most was that he felt he’d let down his daughter. I’m also under the impression that, in spite of their differences, Phil and Janet made their daughter their priority and made it known that she was very much loved and accepted by both of them.

We live in a society that’s very different from the one I knew as a kid back in the 1960s and 1970s. It’s easy to look around a high-income suburb in the United States and see society as it’s always been—filled with stay-at-home moms, dads at the office and rarely a fractured family.

But if you travel not far from where I live in Massachusetts, to, say, Framingham, or parts of South Boston, you see a very different society, one that’s often filled with young, single mothers and, sometimes, a father no where to be seen. 

Or, sometimes, we read about, as we did earlier this year in The New York Times, women in their 20s giving birth even though they have no intention of marrying their child’s father. 

If the children of these unions never see their mothers marry, will they marry themselves? What impression will they have of love and commitment if their mothers and fathers remain single? 

This is what we need to consider. How will today’s babies born to mothers and fathers who remain single view childhood, marriage, love and commitment? 

These situations—and the many more we wrote about in the book—made Phil and I ask if the current laws prohibiting plural marriage in the United States serve the nation’s children well. As we see it, they don’t. 

Marriage is about more than just love. It’s also about money, jobs, healthcare, property rights, inheritance, living conditions, children, extended family members, religion, schools and likely much more. It’s also about the kind of society we want, not only today but, with our children, well into the future.

So if this book has a message it’s this:  Plural marriage is a way to augment family life in America, care for our kids so they can come to know and understand marriage, help women, especially mothers, and, hopefully, put a dent on the number of fractured families. This is not—let me repeat —not a sexual system.

What was the highlight of your research? In the course of your research, what discovery surprised you the most? What surprises readers/others the most about your research?

There were four things:  First, reading the many legal arguments that will likely be made on behalf of plural marriage, especially when “Sister Wives” reality television star Kody Brown and his wives challenge the constitutionality of Utah’s laws prohibiting polygamy in Salt Lake City’s U.S. District Court in January 2013; second, the material I read and interviews I conducted about African American family life. Many of the problems associated with African American family life can be attributed to slavery and racism; third, the data on marriage and family life from the U.S. Census Bureau, which shows traditional families on the decline; fourth, the fact that many Native American tribes, well before they saw their first European settlers, engaged in a variety of family structures, including plural marriage.

These issues seem to surprise some of the people I’ve spoken to who have read the book.

How did your research change your outlook on the subject?

Phil’s research gave me a better appreciation and understanding of the “wife-in-law” or “husband-in-law” trap that sometimes second wives and husbands experience. I’ve seen some of this with my dad who has remarried twice since divorcing my mother. I’ve also had friends and colleagues share their experiences of being the “wife-in-law” and also have to weigh in on how children are brought up. My father, for that matter, has experience in bringing up the children of his two other wives.

How have people reacted to your book and/or the ideas you set forth? Is it what you hoped for, or is there more work to be done?

So far the reaction has been positive, but I’m sure someone will take us to task over what we wrote. After all, we’ve taken a very provocative yet nuanced stand toward plural marriage. 

Let me also make something clear:  It would have been much easier to write a book that dismisses the arguments for plural marriage.  In other words, intellectually speaking, it would have been, I believe, very easy to say plural marriage doesn’t work in the United States for a variety of reasons and here they are. I believe, and Phil did too, that it was much harder for us to prove our point, which is that plural marriage can be an option. If the U.S. Supreme Court is ever given the opportunity to rule on plural marriage – and let’s say they rule it’s a constitutional right—then it wouldn’t be the first time the United States has changed its marriage laws.

What's next for you?

I’m writing a novel. It has nothing to do with plural marriage. I also continue to write and report for baystateparent magazine and, on occasion, News & Tech, a trade magazine for the global newspaper industry.

Douglas R. Page, MBA, is a freelance writer and reporter. His work has appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle, The Journal-Gazette, News & Tech, and Bay State Parent.

Tragically, co-author Philip L. Kilbride died about two weeks after the book was released. He came down with cancer back in August and died four weeks later in mid-September.He was 70 years old and left behind a wife, and three children. 

Phil’s passing is a profound loss not only for Bryn Mawr College, where he taught for more than 40 years, but also for the worldwide anthropology community. He was a terrific man, great teacher, great dad and, as one of his colleagues said, “intellectually fearless.”

President Obama's Recent Dedication of the Cesar E. Chavez National Monument

In the commentary below, historian Roger Bruns reflects on President Barack Obama's recent dedication of the Cesar E. Chavez National Monument. Notably, Bruns draws out parallels between Chavez's activism on behalf of farm workers and President Obama's work as a community organizer—both of which had roots in Chicago's South Side—as evidence of the labor leader's continuing and inspiring legacy.

On October 8, 2012, President Barack Obama dedicated a new national memorial—the CesarE. ChavezNational Monument in Keene, California, at La Paz, the headquarters of the United Farm Workers (UFW) and final resting place of Chavez, who passed away in 1993. At the dedication ceremony, President Obama said that when Chavez began his farm worker movement, "no one seemed to care about the invisible farm workers who picked the nation's food—bent down in the beating sun, living in poverty, cheated by growers, abandoned in old age, unable to demand even the most basic rights." The president said, "Cesar cared. . . . In his own peaceful and eloquent way he made other people care too." President Obama has an abiding respect for Chavez. The president also shares with Chavez common historical roots.

In the early 1950s, Chavez, a farm worker and Navy veteran, began work with the Community Service Organization (CSO), a Latino civic-action and self-help group that became highly successful in registering new voters and establishing citizen involvement in social issues. The CSO traced its founding to the work of Saul Alinsky, called by many the "Father of Community Organizing." In Chicago's tough neighborhoods of the 1930s, Alinsky, a graduate of the University of Chicago and a man who had grown up in the city's Jewish ghetto, began his life's work of helping ethnic groups, unions, and others organize themselves to take on governments and corporate interests that had wielded power over them. In 1939, Alinsky established in South Side Chicago the Industrial Areas Foundation to help reform declining urban neighborhoods. His approach was to unite and organize ordinary, struggling citizens. He taught such techniques as house meetings, marches, and communication strategies to help them become effective forces for change.

Fred Ross, one of Alinsky's protégés, became the leader of CSO, and it was Ross who became Chavez's mentor. By building Mexican American economic power and voter strength, Ross sought to improve living and working conditions; to promote educational and youth programs and community outreach; and to protest violations of human and civil rights. It was under Ross's tutelage that Chavez learned the techniques of community organizing.

When Chavez decided in the early 1960s to found a labor union to help Mexican American farm workers in California, it was these methods that he used to organize a group of workers long deprived of fair wages and working conditions and even human dignity. His cofounder of what eventually became the UFW was Dolores Huerta, another of Ross's CSO workers.

Although the UFW never ultimately achieved great lasting gains as measured by traditional labor unions, it did, for a time, attract much international recognition for its struggle against agribusiness interests to win union contracts. It helped win the first state law in the country granting agricultural workers the right to organize. It taught organizational techniques and led many Latino voter registration drives and other actions to gain empowerment.

Chavez and his lieutenants struck away at the defeatism and convinced large numbers of people that they could fight back. Not only for farm workers but for other Mexican Americans, the movement became an exciting struggle. People for the first time in their lives joined picket lines in front of grocery stores, passed out leaflets, registered others to vote, sang songs and chants of protest, and gained a new awareness that they could actually make a difference.

The farmworker movement contributed to a more general drive for civil rights among Mexican Americans during the 1960s and 1970s. It helped inspire a new generation of urban Mexican American youths to organize their communities and become active in social and political programs. As the Chicano movement grew, the picture of Cesar Chavez became one that hung on the walls of Latino homes.

In 1985, at a time when the UFW was engaging in boycotts and launching various campaigns to help farm workers, 23-year old Barack Obama took a job in Chicagoas a community organizer in a neighborhood in South Side Chicago, the general area that had been a proving grounds for Saul Alinsky's community organizing methods. Obama worked with the Calumet Community Religious Conference, created by several local Catholic churches to combat the poverty and dislocation resulting from the closing of Wisconsin Steel and other industries. He helped build the Developing Communities Project, an organization devoted to after-school programs, drug prevention, and voter registration.

In his three years as a community organizer, Obama, in these distressed Chicagoneighborhoods, adopted the same methods used by Chavez in the harvest fields of California—the house meetings and other organizational structures that stirred local collaboration and political participation. He taught empowerment techniques to help grapple with problems stemming from racial and religious bigotry, poverty, and homelessness.

Looking back, Obama credits the three years of work in the neighborhoods of South Side Chicago as important as any educational experience in his life. It taught him, he said, to put aside predetermined agendas, to listen to people, and to understand their struggles. Cesar Chavez had often expressed the same feeling.

Unlike Chavez, Obama went on to pursue a career in politics. In 2008, when Obama decided to run for President, he enlisted some individuals with whom he had worked in his days as a community organizer. They taught new campaign workers and volunteers techniques they had used years before in Chicago. Those new team members would form the nucleus of what became the most powerful grassroots organizing group in the history of American politics: Organizing for America. Its members continue to use, along with increasingly sophisticated computer and social media tools, the same basic methods that both Chavez and Obama used as community organizers. And when his presidential campaign of 2008 needed a rallying slogan, Obama looked to the history of the UFW.

In 1972, during a campaign in Phoenix, Arizona, to rally Mexican Americans to fight against Republican legislation denying farm workers the right to organize, Cesar Chavez and his UFW forces had waged a relentless voter registration drive that helped Latinos for the first time to gain a degree of political power in the state. On makeshift tables and even ironing boards, volunteers set up registration sites in heavily trafficked areas across Arizona, especially shopping centers. They marched from door to door. In only four months, 100,000 new voters had put their names on recall petitions and, most importantly, registered to vote. It was during that 1972 campaign that, in response to some who said no se puede("it cannot be done"), Dolores Huerta insisted that from now on they would never say it could not be done. From now on, they would say si se puede ("yes we can do it"). Si se puede became a battle cry for the Arizonafight and others that followed. In 2008, candidate Obama used that same battle cry in his presidential campaign: "Yes, we can!"

In 2010, President Obama declared March 10 to be Cesar Chavez Day. He mentioned the rallying cry: Si, se puede or "Yes, we can," inspires hope and a spirit of possibility in people around the world. His movement strengthened our country, and his vision lives on in the organizers and social entrepreneurs who still empower their neighbors to improve their communities.

In May 2012, President Obama presented Dolores Huerta the Presidential Medal of Freedom. In the East Room of the White House, the president again mentioned the slogan, quipping, "Dolores was very gracious when I told her I had stolen her slogan, Si, se puede—'Yes, we can.' Knowing her, I'm pleased that she let me off easy. Because Dolores does not play."

And so, in 2012, as President Obama dedicated the Chavez Memorial, he reflected upon the power of organizing that had meant so much to Chavez and to him: "Every time somebody's son or daughter comes and learns about the history of this movement, I want them to know that our journey is never hopeless. Our work is never done. . . . I want them to remember that true courage is revealed when the night is darkest and the resistance is strongest and we somehow find it within ourselves to stand up for what we believe in."

Roger Bruns is a historian and former deputy executive director of the National Historical Publications and Records Commission at the National Archives in Washington, D.C. He is the author of many books, including Negro Leagues Baseball (Greenwood, 2012) and Icons of Latino America: Latino Contributions to American Culture (Greenwood, 2008). He is the author of the forthcoming Encyclopediaof Cesar Chavez: The Farm Workers' Fight for Rights and Justice (Greenwood, March 2013).

The Cuban Missile Crisis: Clash of the Superpowers

Fifty years later, the October 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis remains the closest the world has come to full-scale nuclear war. At the time, the event represented the convergence of several trends in U.S. foreign policy, including the Cold War policy of containing global communism; the post–World War II U.S.-Soviet competition for the loyalties of the developing world; and the nuclear rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union. The crisis also represented what many observers believe to be President John F. Kennedy's finest hour. This excerpt from the introduction to Priscilla Roberts's Cuban Missile Crisis: The Essential Reference Guide discusses the ending of the crisis and its impact on the remainder of Kennedy's presidency.

Several tense days ensued, during which Soviet antiaircraft batteries on Cubashot down . . . a U.S. U-2 reconnaissance plane. Seeking to avoid further escalation, Kennedy rejected Taylor’s advice to retaliate militarily and deliberately refrained from action. After some hesitation, Khrushchev decided not to challenge the naval quarantine and acquiesced in the removal of the missiles. Simultaneously, his ambassador in Washington, Anatoly Dobrynin, secretly obtained an unpublicized pledge from Robert Kennedy that his brother would shortly remove Jupiter missiles in Turkey and Italy.

Recently released tapes of conversations among President Kennedy and his advisers reveal that to avoid nuclear war, he was prepared to make even greater concessions to the Soviets, including taking the issue to the United Nations and openly trading Turkish missiles for those in Cuba. In so doing, he parted company with some of his more hard-line advisers. Showing considerable statesmanship, Kennedy deliberately refrained from emphasizing Khrushchev’s humiliation, although other administration officials were privately less diplomatic and celebrated their victory to the press.

Newly opened Soviet documentary evidence has demonstrated that the Cuban situation was even more menacing than most involved then realized. Forty-two thousand well-equipped Soviet soldiers were already on the island, far more than the 10,000 troops that U.S. officials had estimated. Moreover, although Kennedy’s advisers believed that some of the missiles might already be armed, they failed to realize that no less than 158 short- and intermediate-range warheads on the island, whose use Castro urged should the United States invade, were already operational and that 42 of these could have reached U.S. territory. Castro also hoped to shoot down additional U-2 planes and provoke a major confrontation.

The Cuban Missile Crisis had a sobering impact on its protagonists. On Kennedy it had a certain salutary maturing effect, making the once-brash young president a strong advocate of disarmament in the final months before his untimely death in November 1963. His stance induced the Soviet leadership to agree to establish a hotline between Moscowand Washingtonto facilitate communications and ease tensions during international crises.

Priscilla Roberts, PhD, is associate professor of history and honorary director of the Centre of American Studies at the University of Hong Kong. She read history at King's College, Cambridge, where she also earned her doctorate in history. She has published numerous books and articles, among them Window on the Forbidden City: The Beijing Diaries of David Bruce, 1973–1974; Behind the Bamboo Curtain: China, Vietnam, and the World beyond Asia; and Lord Lothian and Anglo-American Relations, 1900–1940.

New October Release from Praeger: Underground Dance Masters

From Michael Jackson's unforgettable moonwalk to the dance moves of today's pop stars like Usher and Justin Timberlake, all aspects of modern pop dance—and consequently pop culture—are derived from the inspired, unsung heroes of an underground urban dance movement that dates back to 1967.

Underground Dance Masters: Final History of a Forgotten Era is a comprehensive history of urban street dance and its influence on dance, fashion, and pop culture. It is the first—as well as the definitive—history of urban dance. The book features famed director/choreographer Kenny Ortega and the collective of legendary dance masters of urban dance. The renowned groups Chain Reaction, Electric Boogaloo, Lockers, Rock Steady Crew, Starchild La Rock, and Granny & Robotroid are recognized for their historical contributions.

Urban street dance—which is now mistakenly referred to across the globe as "break dance" or "hip-hop dance"—was born 15 years prior to the word hip hop ever existed. Unfortunately today, the dance innovators from "back in the day" have been mostly forgotten, except when choreographic echoes of their groundbreaking dance forms are repeatedly recycled in today's media. Those moves were honed by urban dancers from the late 1960s to the 90s on the streets of Reseda, South Central Los Angeles, Oakland, San Francisco, Fresno, and the Bronx.

In Underground Dance Masters, Thomas Guzman-Sanchez, a legendary urban street dancer who was not only witness but a key part of the scene since the early 1970s, sets the record straight, blowing the lid off this uniquely American dance style and culture. This text redefines what is referred to as "hip hop dance" and the origins of a worldwide dance phenomenon. It exposes for the first time the origins of the classic urban dance forms of Funk Boogaloo, Locking, Crossover Locking, Popping, Roboting, Zig-zag, Punking, Posing, Krumping and B-boying—the most important developments in dance history that directly affect today's pop culture worldwide.

Features

• Includes coverage of all of the creators, pioneers and innovators in urban street dance

• Places current dance phenomena in a historical context that stretches half a century

• Includes interviews and photos to further bring the rich history of urban dance to life

To watch a short video on this topic and the forthcoming documentary, visit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75kmV3jSFZ8

Thomas Guzman-Sanchez, a Southern Californianative raised in Reseda, is an OG (original generation) dance master and a cofounding member of the legendary dance group Chain Reaction. Since 1973, he has been an originator and pioneer of the dance forms of Crossover Locking, Zig-Zag, Popping, and Funk Boogaloo, which have influenced millions worldwide in Hip-hop dance. He has choreographed and performed in countless TV shows, videos, commercials, and feature films. This includes choreographing James Brown in the Heroes of Rock’n Roll and a featured dance performance with Gene Kelly in Olivia Newton John’s 1980s classic Xanadu. In 1984, he formed the United Street Force and became the only urban street dance company to have ever performed at the White House. His study, which began in 1993 has been adopted by numerous universities as the accepted authority on Urban Dance Studies in the late 20th century, and he is also a proud member of the advisory board for the American Heritage Dictionary Fifth Edition, responsible for 23 new words and definitions in the new American vernacular. He has taught outside studies for UCLA, Cal Tech and is the 2008 recipient of the Christena L. Schlundt Lecture Award in Dance Studies at U.C. Riverside. He continues touring the world teaching and inspiring young dancers.