Thanks for the American history lesson. But what is American history but
this. No, Pound was not Howard Zinn. And for all of my admiration of
Howard Zinn, he was not Pound. CP

En Lin Wei wrote:
>
> Part one of two posts:
>
> Pound and Adams
>
> A number of people are suggesting that Pound’s inclusion of the John Adams
> materials in the Cantos indicates the poet's support for some aspects of
> democracy.  Interpretation of this act of inclusion depends a great deal on
> how you interpret  John Adam's role in earliest days of the Republic.
>
> John Adams was the least democratic of the early political figures in
> American history, an advocate, insofar as it was possible, of a return to
> the aristocratic forms of England.  It is no coincidence that Pound (the
> champion of Mussolini’s Fascism and Hitlerian racial doctrine) would also
> choose to  support Adams out of all America’s earliest intellectuals and
> politicians, and devote more Cantos to him by far than to any other American
> figure.
>
> President Adams  did his utmost to eject immigrants who had come to the US
> from Ireland, Scotland, France, Poland, and other parts of Europe (deeming
> them subversive); he set up "surveillance committees" to spy on harass, grab
> hold of, beat (and in some cases, kill) political opponents; tried to make
> the US a one-party state by breaking up the opposing party of the
> republicans (liberal party of the day, to which Jefferson belonged), and by
> jailing journalists, such as B.F. Bache, whose newspaper, the "Aurora," led
> in criticizing the government.
>
> Here is one of the many editorial letters printed in the Aurora, which
> roused the ire of the Federalist Party (of which Adams was the head, during
> his presidency).
>
> TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
>
> SIR . . . You had an active part in bringing about that glorious revolution
> that made us an independent nation. ---But, . . . your ideas of government
> and policy have become warped . . . . You left this country [to get help
> from France during the American revolution], sir, with the warm affections
> of the people of America and with violent prejudices in your favor.
>
> The first public act which induced them to doubt the sincerity of your
> principles was your book, entitled:  "a Defence of the Constitutions of
> America."  In his book, an aristocratical form of government . . . you
> boldly avow   . . . is the only one conducive to the happiness of the people
> . . . .You may remember the universal acclamation   that you were an enemy
> of equal rights, and sorry am I to acknowledge that your subsequent conduct
> has evinced the truth of this assertion.
>
> VALERIUS
> [Aurora, Apr. 26, 1798]
>
> Like Adams, Pound believed that aristocratic, fascist, and authoritarian
> forms were best suited for the government of humankind (or aristo-democratic
> forms, for those who prefer that term, which amounts to the same thing).
>
> In the Adams Cantos, Pound neglects virtually all the issues that Adams
> faced which should be of interest to the modern democratic reader.   The
> issue, for instance, of Adams striving, against all reason, to put the US on
> a war footing vis-a-vis France (using as an expedient the XYZ affair) is
> ignored by Pound.  This is surprising, since Pound's interest in economics
> and politics supposedly sprang from his opposition to the carnage of World
> War I.  Yet the considerable amount of historical material concerning Adams
> reputation as a "war hawk" (term used by Jefferson) is neglected.
>
> Note the picture of the political climate given in this letter by Jefferson
> at the height of Adams' presidency.  Observe the attention given to a number
> of issues which have a modern political philosophy-- citizen's rights, the
> protection of immigrants rights, safeguards for what was then the minority
> party, First Amendment rights, guaranteeing a free press, etc.   Pound and
> the fascists he  supported cared for none of these issues, preferring
> authoritarian government, hostile treatment of minorities and immigrants of
> the wrong race, and a one-party state, which could shut down any press
> establishment at will.  Contrast Pound's attitude with the concerns
> expressed in Jefferson's Letter (in spite of the fact that Pound professed
> an admiration for Jefferson).
>
> [The names Gallatin and Volney refer to politically active immigrants on the
> Whig -- or republican -- side, which at that time was the liberal, or left
> party in American politics, as opposed to the Federalists.  Bache is the
> editor of the Aurora].
>
> By Jefferson-- A Letter to James Madison, April 1798:
>
> One of the war party, in a fit of unguarded passion, declared some time ago
> they would pass a citizen bill, an alien bill and a sedition bill;
> accordingly, some days ago Coit laid a motion on the table of the House for
> modifying the citizen’s law.  Their threats point a Gallatin, and it is
> believed they will endeavor to reach him by this bill.  Yesterday Mr., H.
> laid on the table of the Senate a motion for an alien bill giving power to
> send away suspected aliens.  This is understood to be meant for Volney
> [...]. But it will not stop there when it gets into a course of execution.
> There is now only wanting to accomplish the whole of declaration before
> mentioned, a sedition bill which we shall certainly soon see proposed.  The
> object is the suppression of the Whig presses.  Bache's had been
> particularly named . . . . If these papers fail, republicanism will be
> entirely brow beaten . . . At present, the war hawks talk of septembrizing
> [massacring], Deportation, and the examples for quelling sedition by the
> French executive.  All the firmness of the human mind is now in a state of
> requisition.
>
> (continued in next post)
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com