{"id":29708,"date":"2018-07-20T03:37:52","date_gmt":"2018-07-20T10:37:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.jewishindependent.ca\/?p=29708"},"modified":"2018-07-18T13:44:44","modified_gmt":"2018-07-18T20:44:44","slug":"grouchy-historians-lessons","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.jewishindependent.ca\/index.php\/2018\/07\/20\/grouchy-historians-lessons\/","title":{"rendered":"Grouchy Historian\u2019s lessons"},"content":{"rendered":"

The gruff yet endearing Jewish character actor Ed Asner is instantly recognizable to many people for his portrayal of the equally gruff yet amiable Lou Grant in the classic 1970s television sitcom The Mary Tyler Moore Show<\/em> and its spinoff drama Lou Grant<\/em>. Fewer people realize that the Emmy Award-winning actor is also a well-known political activist, whose views became more prominent in the 1980s during his two terms as president of the Screen Actors Guild. Asner, now 88 and far from retirement \u2013 he just performed here in April in a one-man stage play \u2013 has written The Grouchy Historian: An Old-Time Lefty Defends Our Constitution Against Right-Wing Hypocrites and Nutjobs<\/em> (Simon & Schuster, 2017) with Ed Weinberger, longtime screenwriter for The Mary Tyler Moore Show<\/em>.<\/p>\n

In this compelling read, Asner attempts \u2013 in his own words \u2013 to \u201creclaim the [U.S.] Constitution\u201d from far-right conservative pundits. Making no secret of his ideological perspective, Asner argues, \u201cThe constitution is the cornerstone of the Republican party\u2019s agenda, along with small government, less regulation and making sure the rich pay less taxes than the rest of us.\u201d Yet, he maintains, the constitution was written to form a robust central government \u2013 giving sweeping powers to Congress (not the states) \u2013 secured by an equally strong executive branch. He further asserts, \u201cNothing in the constitution suggests, let alone enforces, the concepts of limited government, limited taxes and limited regulations.\u201d Far from hating taxation, the framers of the constitution, writes Asner, desperately needed taxes because \u201c[t]hey had a war to pay off.\u201d<\/p>\n

Asner notes that John Adams had wanted the presidential role to have even more powers by not requiring the \u201cadvice and consent\u201d of the Senate to make federal and cabinet appointments, \u201ca clear signal that Adams, like [Alexander] Hamilton, believed in a strong central government headed by an executive with vigorous powers.\u201d<\/p>\n

About the constitution\u2019s founders and framers, Asner says they were \u201cpetty, flawed, inconsistent and all too human,\u201d but, he concedes, they were highly educated \u201celoquent orators and brilliant writers,\u201d who, \u201c[u]nlike the current right-wing doomsayers and fearmongers, they were all, truly, apostles of optimism.\u201d<\/p>\n

Asner spends several chapters discussing God and the constitution \u2013 notably God\u2019s absence from the preamble, as well as the Presidential Oath of Office \u2013 and speculates why the framers took their approach. He points out George Washington was a Grand Master Mason on whose Bible he took his oath of office, noting, \u201cMasonic Bibles do not acknowledge the divinity of Jesus Christ.\u201d As for Benjamin Franklin, Asner says, \u201cyou can quote endlessly about Franklin\u2019s faith in Christian ethics, but none about his faith in Jesus the Christ.\u201d Regarding Adams, Asner mentions that, as a member of the New England branch of the Unitarian Church, Adams and fellow \u201cUnitarians did not believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ, the infallibility of the Bible, the Holy Trinity or Original Sin.\u201d In other words, Asner takes a swipe at the Christian right who claim Christian origins for the American constitution. Asner points out that the entire career of James Madison Jr., as \u201ca politician, lawmaker, intellectual \u2013 was devoted to the separation of church and state.\u201d Yet Asner defends First Amendment rights for freedom of religion.<\/p>\n

Not only does Asner explore in great detail the actual writing of the constitution and the financial backgrounds of all 55 delegates to the Constitutional Convention, but he does so in the gruff and thorough style of newsman Lou Grant. About these delegates \u2013 whom he claims conservative legal theory holds were \u201cinfallible patriots\u201d who behaved \u201csolely to establish national unity, economic development and the civil liberties of all citizens\u201d \u2013 Asner concludes, \u201cOne thing is for certain: they are not the saints living in the imagination of the right wing, acting out God\u2019s will.\u201d<\/p>\n

Asner notes that more than 40 delegates held government bonds, more than 15 were slave owners, and several were land and debt speculators. Most participated in more than one category, like Washington, who was not only \u201ca slave owner [but] a money lender, a land speculator and the largest holder of government IOUs in the country.\u201d Asner points out that small farmers, shopkeepers, labourers, Revolutionary War veterans and slaves, among others, were not at the convention. Hence, he paints a picture of a small group of \u201ccapitalist elites\u201d with personal interests \u2013 two notable exceptions being Madison and Hamilton \u2013 who framed the constitution. In reaching his conclusions, Asner draws on the ideas of American historian Charles A. Beard\u2019s admittedly controversial early 20th-century economic views of the document.<\/p>\n

Asner shows his creativity in a humorous way, like in his \u201cOpen Letter to Senator Ted Cruz, Written in the Style of 1787,\u201d where he states, \u201cI am prompted to write this upon discovery of a foreword you penned to The U.S. Constitution for Dummies<\/em>.\u201d He proceeds to carefully address, in language of the day, five of Cruz\u2019s assertions, after which he closes with \u201cWhilst This Flame Exists Within Me, I Remain Your Most Staunch Adversary.\u201d<\/p>\n

Not many could pull this off as well as Asner. Same goes for his scathing review of the controversial personal and constitutional views of Dr. Ben Carson, neurosurgeon and secretary of housing and urban development. And Asner goes further in his criticism of such contemporary conservative social critics as Ann Coulter.<\/p>\n

Asner critiques the origins of the Bill of Rights using language of the era in the inventive form of a series of letters from Madison to heighten the drama of the time. After all, as Asner correctly notes, \u201cIt is the Bill of Rights \u2013 guaranteeing our freedoms of speech, conscience, religion, and the press \u2013 that is the centrepiece of America\u2019s exceptionalism.\u201d However, he also argues its practical limitations over the centuries through a careful description of a series of legal cases.<\/p>\n

Asner even shares his own set of constitutional amendments, both humorous and real, including his desire for a guaranteed minimum income, which he is careful to note was not just a liberal idea but was also advocated by conservative economist Milton Friedman and nearly implemented by Richard Nixon in the 1960s. Yet, for a self-declared \u201cold-time lefty,\u201d Asner surprises the reader with his qualified defence of the Second Amendment. He devotes an entire chapter to it.<\/p>\n

Asner says he is \u201cnot against guns and the good people who own them.\u201d He even admits to owning a Glock 15 \u2013 obtained for reasons of self-defence after receiving a death threat in 1979 \u2013 and a Beretta Px4, because he \u201cliked its look and the heft of it\u201d in his hand. However, he convincingly argues that American \u201cgun culture\u201d has led to too many deaths. He concedes, \u201cIt\u2019s a bloody trail that leads right back to the Second Amendment,\u201d specifically, \u201cthe right wing\u2019s interpretation of it: an unfettered licence for every American to own, carry, collect, trade and eventually shoot a gun.\u201d He maintains that this item in the Bill of Rights was not the clearest constitutional amendment ever written because, when it states the need for \u201ca well-regulated militia,\u201d that does not automatically imply a concurrent \u201cpersonal<\/em> right\u201d for the individual citizen \u201cto keep and bear arms.\u201d<\/p>\n

Asner takes this view from a close examination of the wording used by the framers of the constitution. \u201cThe only two subjects in the Second Amendment,\u201d notes Asner, \u201care collective<\/em> nouns: \u2018state militia\u2019 and \u2018people.\u2019\u201d Asner asks, \u201cwhere, then, can anyone find an individual<\/em> right to own a weapon except as part of a \u2018well-regulated militia\u2019\u201d? He maintains that, historically, Madison\u2019s intent was to limit the Second Amendment \u201conly<\/em> to state militias\u201d and that the United States was, in fact, \u201cfounded on gun control<\/em>,\u201d with a balance between gun ownership and the desire for public safety. He goes on to outline a very persuasive argument to support his case while emphasizing that \u201ctoday, despite the evidence, the gun lobby has the chutzpah to claim that the Second Amendment belongs to them and them alone.\u201d According to Asner, the issue boils down to whether the Second Amendment represents a fundamental or absolute right that cannot be limited nor regulated \u2013 Asner maintains the former view.<\/p>\n

Ultimately, Asner feels it\u2019s time to return to the kind of America its founders envisioned, including a \u201cgovernment that rules by reason, tempered with compassion and advanced by science,\u201d that guarantees free speech and respects liberties for all while protecting its most vulnerable citizens.<\/p>\n

Whether left, right or centrist, readers will learn much from Asner, who comprehensively studied the topic and arrived at a serious analysis along with amusing takes. Since his voice is heard throughout the book, it\u2019s easy to imagine this tome being transformed into a one-man stage play some day. But no one could do it as well as Asner. As for why an award-winning actor like him would write about the U.S. Constitution, Asner states without equivocation, \u201cWell, why not me? After all, I have played some of the smartest people ever seen on television.\u201d Newsman Lou Grant would be the first to agree.<\/p>\n

Arthur Wolak<\/strong>, PhD, is a freelance writer based in Vancouver and a member of the board of governors of Gratz College. He is author of <\/em>The Development of Managerial Culture and Religion and Contemporary Management, available in hardcover and ebook formats from all online retailers.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The gruff yet endearing Jewish character actor Ed Asner is instantly recognizable to many people for his portrayal of the equally gruff yet amiable Lou Grant in the classic 1970s television sitcom The Mary Tyler Moore Show and its spinoff drama Lou Grant. Fewer people realize that the Emmy Award-winning actor is also a well-known […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":29709,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[784],"tags":[8057,3597,3034],"class_list":["post-29708","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-books","tag-ed-asner","tag-politics","tag-united-states"],"blocksy_meta":{"styles_descriptor":{"styles":{"desktop":"","tablet":"","mobile":""},"google_fonts":[],"version":8}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jewishindependent.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29708","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jewishindependent.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jewishindependent.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jewishindependent.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jewishindependent.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=29708"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.jewishindependent.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29708\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jewishindependent.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/29709"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.jewishindependent.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=29708"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jewishindependent.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=29708"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.jewishindependent.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=29708"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}