What Do You Hear When I Speak

“Steinbeck was a communist.” It’s a throwaway line until you realize how much heat a single label can carry and how fast it can rewrite what we think the other person meant. We’re two friends who disagree for a living, a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist, and we use a John Steinbeck debate to test whether curiosity can beat reflex, and whether listening can beat the urge to score points.

We talk The Grapes of Wrath, the Dust Bowl, “Okies” migrating to California, and why communities almost always tense up when outsiders arrive and local culture shifts. From there, we zoom out to the Red Scare, McCarthyism, and how “communist” can be a real historical ideology or a lazy modern insult depending on who’s talking and what they’ve lived through. We also explore how pop culture reframes words like “commune,” why guilt by association is so tempting, and what it takes to separate empathy from ideology without pretending politics is simple.

The real lesson is communication under pressure. We name the moment when we “hear” a jab that wasn’t actually said, how past arguments prime that reaction, and why a short pause can keep a friendship from turning into a fight. If you care about bridging political polarization, practicing nonviolent communication, or just staying close to people who think differently, this one is for you. Subscribe, share with a friend who loves a good argument, and leave a review telling us: what label do you wish people would retire?

©NoahHeldmanMusic

https://livingoncommonground.buzzsprout.com

Transcript

A Divided Life And A Premise

SPEAKER_00 0:02

Does it feel like every part of your life is divided? Every scenario, every environment, your church, your school, your work, your friends, left, right, conservative, liberal, religious, secular. It seems you always have to take a side. This is a conversation between a progressive Christian and a conservative atheist who happen to be great friends. Welcome to Living on Common Ground. Do you think if we met today, we would still be friends? I don't know.

SPEAKER_05 0:35

But we're friends now.

SPEAKER_02 0:42

Man, so what? We want a few games. And y'all fools think that's something? Man, that ain't nothing, y'all. And you know what else? We ain't nothing either. Yeah, we came together in camp. Cool. But then we're right back here and the world tells us that they don't want us to be together. We fall apart like we ain't a damn bit of nothing, man.

Catching Up On Travel And Plans

SPEAKER_04 1:16

Well good. Um all right. So Steinbeck.

SPEAKER_03 1:24

What okay. That's that's quite the transition. Sorry.

SPEAKER_04 1:29

No, I do want to know how you're doing. How are you doing? Because I feel like I haven't really hung out with you a lot lately.

SPEAKER_03 1:34

I'm good. I'm busy. It's been it's been busy, but um all uh good busy. Yeah. It's been working and um uh just a lot of travel for work, but uh no, but it's it's been good. Yeah, we've been uh but I'm just super super happy about the sun being out again.

SPEAKER_04 1:52

It's beautiful. Yeah. I'm uh I'm getting ready to head to Cincinnati on Thursday. Yeah, I got that speaking engagement at University of Cincinnati.

SPEAKER_03 2:04

And then Oh yeah, that's right. That's right.

SPEAKER_04 2:06

Yeah, yep, and then we've got uh we have postponed the live recording for Friday. So when we reschedule that, we'll let everybody know. Yep.

SPEAKER_03 2:16

Um and then uh we have And we'll try to give plenty of plenty of notice.

SPEAKER_04 2:22

Yeah. Yeah, and we need to we probably you and I probably need to do a better job of telling our friends to show up. Yeah.

SPEAKER_05 2:33

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04 2:34

Yeah, and then schedule it. Yeah, we will. And then uh next week is Holy Week, so there's a lot going on. We've got um the normal Bible studies that I do on Wednesday, then Thursday night we're doing that Seder meal. Friday night will be the Tenebrae service, and then we have Easter. And then the day after Easter, I head to the woods for two weeks. So You must be very excited about that. I am. I've um I spent Is that how long you went the last time? Yeah. Two weeks? Mm-hmm. Yeah, I ended up getting done quicker because I like by the end of it, I'm covering sixteen miles a day. You know, in the be in the beginning I hit ten miles and I'm exhausted. But you know, but after after a while you get stronger after a while. Yeah. More used to it. Yeah. So I spent um Monday evening plotting my course.

SPEAKER_03 3:35

That's fun. Yeah, that must be fun.

SPEAKER_04 3:37

It was, it was a lot of fun. And then uh the last time was what, four years ago? Uh it was in twenty-two. Twenty two, right?

SPEAKER_03 3:48

Yeah, it was right before we came.

Falling Back In Love With Steinbeck

SPEAKER_04 3:50

Yeah. Yeah. So I know that's crazy to think about that. So all right, now. The earlier, okay, so I've been reading a lot of Steinbeck, right?

SPEAKER_03 4:04

And um I've always told me that you were reading Grace of Wrath. Are you reading other stuff?

SPEAKER_04 4:08

Oh yeah. So, you know, um in high school you get assigned Steinbeck, right? And um, and of course I'm many, many years removed from high school. But even but in high school, I wasn't really crazy about reading. You're more removed than I am. Yeah, thank you. Ten years, right? Huh? And uh sure by a lot, uh, especially when you're thinking in terms of high school. So um uh I got assigned Grapes of Wrath and um and I did the Cliff Notes version just just so I could make sure that I didn't fail the exam, you know? Um but then a couple years ago I picked up of Mice and Men and I and I read it, and I was like, man, that was that was really, really good. And so um this year I have read Tortilla Flat. I have read um that one I've never read. Oh, it's they're they're short. They're like Yeah, you know I know I gotta read that one. Yeah, it's it's fantastic, it's very humorous. I read Um The Pearl, which is even shorter. I read um uh let's see, Canery Row, which is really good, and then I um read uh let's see. Um it's it's his big East of Eden. I was gonna say it's kind of like his epic. Uh I read East of Eden this year, and now um I'm about three quarters of the way through Grapes of Wrath, finally, instead of just reading the cliff notes. And um and so anyway.

SPEAKER_03 5:54

I'm realizing right now that there's several of his works that I've not read that I need to read. Oh I've got a list of I have not read Canary Row, and I really should. I did, I I read I mean, this is this this is gonna sound like someone saying Paris is a beautiful city. Um I uh I really love Monterey, um, the Monterey area, and I did an internship in that area, and uh so it's it it feels a little bit more um close to home. But there's a few of those titles that you mentioned that I haven't read.

What People Mean By Communist

SPEAKER_04 6:25

Yeah, I've I like them a lot. Yeah, I I love Steinbeck, and then on my uh I'm hoping to get read next. So I want to I want to finish Grapes of Wrath this week, and then next week I want to read um hold on, I've got it right here. Uh The Winter of Our Discontent and uh which is another Steinbeck. So anyway, um so I think what was it Sunday? I said something, and you were like, you said that Steinbeck was a communist. And um and my response was no, he's an American icon. And um and then we had I had a lot of fun with the I don't think those two things are mutually exclusive. Sure. Okay, well that's good too. But um and then I think I I enjoyed what I what I perceived as friendly banter back and forth about that. Um and it made me it made me laugh, even though you couldn't you couldn't see me laughing and smiling because it was over the phone and it was over text messages. But I enjoyed it so much that I wanted to talk a little bit about Steinbeck, and I'm gonna convince you that he's not a communist.

SPEAKER_03 7:47

And then I I know if you look it up, it'll say that he said that he wasn't a communist. Blah blah blah. Well, I okay.

SPEAKER_04 7:58

But then I want to use a com go ahead. No, no, no, no, go ahead. You don't find being a communist.

SPEAKER_03 8:04

I I so especially when you're talking about the early 20th century. Um I mean it it's not Chris and I were talking about this so when when uh let me back up for a second. When Obama was running for president and then and then especially in the his first term there was a lot of talk about him being a communist, right? Like people would say that. They'd say Obama's a communist. I I mean I um the the people in my circles would say that also. And I know it's it's kind of thrown around like a um uh epithet, right? Like it's um like it's just a pejorative.

SPEAKER_04 8:54

Yeah, I've been accused of being a communist.

SPEAKER_03 8:57

Well yeah, sure. And and I and and to be clear, I think Obama definitely is was uh very much a socialist, but whatever. Anyway, um which which I don't find a whole lot of difference. But anyway, I know it's thrown around just as like name calling, right? It's just name calling. It can be. But um especially when you're talking the the early 20th century, it was a legitimate um uh ideology. And and there was a lot of people who were who who were communists all the way through and and I would say um actually it's making a big comeback, um, has been for the last 15, 20 years or so, um, and and especially in the last 10 years, of people who just out and out are very, very comfortable commun calling themselves communists. So I don't I mean it all the way to the to the where where you start to see it it's very subtle, you start to see it um being favorably spoken about in popular media. And I'll give you an example. I don't know if you watched the um the show The Last of Us that was based off the video game.

SPEAKER_05 10:18

Yeah.

SPEAKER_03 10:18

Um on HBO. So when the main characters, um Joel and and the the girl that he's um that he's protecting, I can't remember her name. Um when they get to they they're traveling and they get to this um kind of uh village place that uh where he meets up with his brother.

SPEAKER_04 10:44

Yep.

SPEAKER_03 10:45

Um he's talking to the leader of this settlement, and um she says, like, you know, we do this and then we do this. Here's the rules, this is what we do, and this is what you have to do, and blah, blah, blah. And he goes, Oh, so you're like communists. And his brother goes, No, we're not communists, because again, he's responding in the way that we recognize as like it's just an epithet. And um, and the leader, she goes, No, this is a commune. Yes, we're communists. And the point that I'm making is the writers of the show did that on purpose. I guarantee you, that they're sympathetic. That this, they're they're painting it in. Actually, this is what real communism is. Real communism is where everyone's happy with each other, right? Sure. Anyway, my point is just that um it is it's not just a name calling. I think um, you know, again, especially and and then we we started talking about like um uh we I'd mentioned the red scare and um and which I want to talk about that too. Anyway, so you give me your argument why why he was not a communist.

SPEAKER_04 11:59

Okay. So I I took it very seriously. Um because I uh well, first of all, I do believe that it's a label that's thrown at people. Um and uh but I I will concede everything you just said about communism, right?

SPEAKER_03 12:14

So like uh the problem is It's certainly a label that's thrown at people, just like fascism is a label that gets thrown at people.

Dust Bowl Migration And Local Backlash

SPEAKER_04 12:21

Yeah. And it's any time that you um okay, so as I as I think about the red scare in particular, and I think about like during the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl and all of that kind of stuff, it is and again reading Grapes of Wrath. Being accused of being a red, right, is a way for those who are experiencing privilege to hold on to their privilege, whether it be economic privilege or anything like that, right? I I I love that we're doing this by video because everyone can see the smirk on your face that I always have to frickin' look at when we're talking across the table.

SPEAKER_03 12:58

I know I feel a face. All right, go ahead. It's okay.

SPEAKER_04 13:00

It's okay. You play poker? Um not well. Yeah, I don't even try. So it but it is. At least that's the way it appears to be, right? Like, and I'm again I'm going back to the early 20th century when we're accusing people of being communists. Um and in the grapes of wrath, just to keep it contextual, you have uh you have these large conglomerates that are buying up farms that are um failing because of the Dust Bowl. And then you've got people migrating out to California, which by the way, that's how I think we originally ended up on this conversation, is because your family, you were the fifth generation from California before you uh you migrated uh over to Tennessee. And um, so what would we call a person in California? Because like in in Steinbeck and in that time, the derogatory term was an oakie, and everybody moving from the Midwest over to California, they were called oakies. So what would be a good derogatory term? No, what would be a good derogatory? What would be a good derogatory term for all of the Californians that are currently fleeing the state?

SPEAKER_03 14:11

Yeah, I don't know. I don't know, but I'm I'm sure there is uh what's what's a good, I mean, like I haven't heard a particular term, except like us Californians call ourselves refugees for sure. I think of myself as an expat. But I don't I haven't heard a uh particular derogatory term. I hear lots of phrases like don't California my Tennessee and um you know just lots of kind of um platitudes. Yeah. Um but go ahead. But I haven't heard a particular term, but I'm I'm open to it. Yeah.

SPEAKER_04 14:46

Well the here's the funny thing, and I know I just jumped topic real quick, and I'll come back around to breath and start. Start podcasts, right? So um, by the way, uh Madison was talking about our podcast with um one of her coworkers in Cincinnati at uh um the uh uh the uh um prosecutor's office, the uh county the district attorney. And um uh he he listened to it and he told her that he did. He did. And he he said he found it very boring because he wanted us to fight. And and he goes, it just sounds like two people that are trying to get along. And um and she goes, Well, that's it's called living on common ground, and um it's not it's not called two guys fighting. So anyway.

SPEAKER_03 15:31

Yeah, but he's a prosecutor, he probably likes that. I yeah, that's what I wanted to do when I went to college was be a prosecutor. I watched Law and Order and I I would skip the first half of the uh the episode with all the detective work, and I would jump directly to the DA, and I wanted to I wanted to I wanted to put all the scumbags behind bars. That's what I wanted to do.

SPEAKER_04 15:49

Yeah, I thought maybe it was just because you uh have a tendency to argue against whatever is being presented, and that would be yeah.

SPEAKER_03 15:56

So I I loved debate, but uh, that was what I realized um when I was on the debate team and the uh the research side of it was giving me panic attacks. And I was like, maybe being an attorney isn't the best uh option for me. That's so funny.

SPEAKER_04 16:12

Well, never let never let facts get in the way of a good opinion. So um let's see what oh, so what I find very funny, I'm gonna go California migrating away and then back to Grapes of Wrath for a second.

SPEAKER_03 16:25

Yep.

SPEAKER_04 16:25

Okay. So I find it very interesting that in our area in Tennessee, that uh people that have been in Tennessee for a long time are not thrilled to see the Californians moving into the area. But the funny thing to me is that the people that have moved here from California, the reason they're moving to California is because they appear to prefer the culture, the the politics, whatever, in this area. And so it's not like they're trying to bring uh California politics into Tennessee. They're actually trying to escape whatever it is that they're trying to get away from in California. And so the response of people in Tennessee to those that are coming from California, it just baffles me. Um because you're basically just getting more of your own.

SPEAKER_03 17:12

Yeah, but I think it's interesting uh it actually, I mean, we don't have to talk about this, but it's a I think it's a it's an interesting microcosm of what uh how culture works anyway. Um I think it's a I think it's to be expected that um you know, I I um there there's a history podcaster who um he would always say natives gonna native. You know, that that's what that's what natives do. Natives are always on the aggregate, um, uncomfortable and distrustful of uh outsiders moving in. And I'm I'm sympathetic to that. I understand it. I don't think that there's anything inherently wrong with it. I I personally myself want to live in a in a way that is welcoming, but that's prejudicial. I I'm fine generally speaking with um you know lots of different types of people. I like it. However, I get it when people have a way of being, right? A culture, a way that we do things, a familiarity, uh, and then uh and then that gets um shifted. I think there's only a certain amount, a certain degree of change the population can take before it is unreasonable to expect it to not react in some way, you know, and and I that's what I that's really what I see because it doesn't, it's not um it's not rational. Because like you said, the people who are leaving California, like us, were leaving because we did not want the culture of California. We and we chose Tennessee partly because we wanted the Tennessee culture. Yeah. Um but having said that, I mean, there's also a whole bunch of other stuff that's built into that, which is like um, you know, housing prices changing, cost of living changing, traffic changing, you know, lots of things that that change as well. And so I understand that. But that I think is relatable to the whole Greats of Wrath conversation, because that was what the Californians were experiencing with this influx of these people who had, you know, very different mannerisms, very different, you know, they were uh by and large, they were very poor, right? So they were um they had a different type of culture, both family and village type culture that um than what they were bringing or than the area that they were coming into. And so yeah, it's disruptive. It always is. It's always disruptive.

SPEAKER_04 19:56

Yeah, as you were talking, I was thinking about the movie Gangs of New York. Yep. And the response of the natives to the Irish that were coming in.

SPEAKER_03 20:05

Absolutely. Yeah. So happened over and over again to the Irish, the Italians, um, to the Polish, the Germans. Um Everybody loves the Dutch, though. Do they? I think that I do they love the Dutch or did the did the Dutch control the banking system enough during the early years that they got the uh There is no doubt that the Dutch controlled the banking.

Six Reasons Steinbeck Is Not Communist

SPEAKER_04 20:32

I mean, it it just yeah. Who was the first country to give the f newly formed United States a line of credit? Yeah. Um okay. So we digress. I have six points that I have developed here. You have six points? Sure. Is that what you said? I think so. That's hilarious. Okay, give them to me. Okay. So first, I think that it's too easy to just dismiss Steinbeck as a communist. I think that his politics were definitely complicated. Um I think he's undeniably left-leaning. And if you read his stuff, he's deeply simpli sympathetic to the working class, absolutely. But I think that there's a meaningful difference between social conscience and uh being a card-carrying communist. So that's the first one.

SPEAKER_03 21:28

Um you want me to respond when you uh when you say these, or do you want me to win?

SPEAKER_04 21:32

Yeah, no, we're gonna go e I I think that I'm gonna give you a chance to tear each one apart. Let me just finish this one thought. So his politics are rooted in empathy and humanism, not ideological doctrine. Um and I think the reason I wrote this one is because this is the first one that I really sort of um I was probably writing about me, to be honest with you, right? Like, because I get I mentioned I get accused of being a communist, but I don't believe in communism as. An ideology, like as a political system. I don't believe it. Like it just doesn't seem to work. However, I do find that my politics are rooted in empathy and humanism. And then I think that he um he did, I think, come out and at one point say that he distrusted any system, left or right, that treated people as abstractions rather than human beings. So, all right, that's my first thing. Summary statement: Steinbeck's politics were complicated, not communist.

SPEAKER_03 22:33

Um, okay, so first thing I would say is um I never said I was dismissing him because he was a communist. I'm definitely not dismissing him. I wouldn't dismiss anyone simply because they're a communist. Um I think uh I think Marxist theory is a um is a legitimate um framework to to view the world. Um I uh agree with a lot of its um uh axiomatic positions. I just completely disagree with uh its conclusions. Um and uh I think it it leads uh inexorably into a totalitarian state. Um now what I would say is that even though I I really want to quibble a little bit with the kind of prejudicial language of politics being rooted in empathy, that sounds like that sounds like it's the good people. Uh it is okay. It just sounds I mean um I I well what I would say is that that point I think when you say that it's not his politics weren't rooted in a uh particular ideology, that could be legitimate. I could I could um I could grant you that uh that point because real um you know real communism based on theory, it is an abstraction. It is a um a a framework to view history and um uh economies and and that kind of thing. And so it it does view populations as abstractions. That that's I think that's fair. And I think that that is a f actually a fair delineation between especially especially mid-century what you might call democratic socialists and like card-carrying capitalists or capitalists, um communists. Yep. I think that's probably fair. And and there's a um there's a really we've talked about this before, but a really um uh uh distinct example or really acute example of that um during the the 60s, um, when the I think they were called the PL, um, which was a a communist group um you could say infiltrated, but really they got themselves elected legitimately into um SDS, the Students for Democratic Society, which had always been dominated by people that would have been considered who would consider themselves to be democratic socialists, actual socialists, but they were more anti-capitalists, uh anti-capitalists again, anti-communists than the right was. They were they were vehemently anti-communist because they saw communism, communists as coming in and ruining the party, right? They because communists didn't want, and this is probably the best argument you have for the idea that Steinbeck wasn't uh a communist, uh, is that he he actually wanted um increased uh better living conditions for the working class and card-carrying communists, especially during the during the early and and mid-20th century, they worked against uh bettering the living conditions of working class because as the working class gets better working conditions and living conditions and standards of living, the pressure for revolution drops uh population wide. And so they they lose their soldiers that way, essentially. They need them, they need this the the working class to be oppressed and desperate, because desperate people make good soldiers and um in in civil wars. But you know, I okay, so I guess I I give it to you on one on one side, uh, but I I um and maybe I was being hyperbolic, um, but what I will say is that there were he he was on the spectrum of a lot of people who were absolutely communists in all levels of our government, which is what caused the Red Scare. The Red Scare didn't come out of nowhere, it wasn't invented out of whole cloth by McCarthy to just smear political opponents. It it came from legitimate concerns and real infiltration of communists into our government. And I think that we had a it was but it was during a a time period where it was a, you know, we all grew up and came of age, even you, I I would say came of age. Even old me post. Well, I mean, I definitely came of age post-Reagan, right? When the society had soci uh our American society gave up on the idea of things like um uh eliminating poverty, conquering poverty, conquering death. We gave up on that at the end of the 60s into the early 70s during that hangover time. And then in the late 70s was when like everything just is kind of this lull of like, what the hell do we do now? And then the 80s was this time of like with Reagan saying the worst thing that the government could say is I'm I'm the government, I'm here to help, kind of thing, right? Where the whole idea was like, no, the government's not going to do anything. We're we're stepping back and it's gonna be all, you know, we grew up in that, came of age in that world where the idea of like calling a communist, calling somebody a communist, it really was just a you're you're just you're just calling names at that point, right? There's no communists really. I mean, maybe one or two, but there's no communists and definitely no out and out communists. But if you go back to like 1925, I mean, it was a legitimate ideology, just like, pardon me, fascism was a legitimate ideology. They were both legitimate ideologies and and ways of looking at the world and how should we structure it and blah, blah, blah. I'm not saying I agree with either one of them. I'm just saying like that there were definitely people all through our government that had that ideology. Anyway. All right. So sorry, I I kind of rambled.

SPEAKER_04 29:36

In the uh spirit of concession, I also agree with you that um communism as a political ideology always will result in totalitarianism. Um at least that's that's what I took away from when I read um the Communist Manifesto. And the other thing too is that communism. So if the if the um knock on capitalism is that you need to have a sort of the the lower working class, the the people that you can kind of control with wages and stuff like that, then um it that can also be leveled against communism, is that you have to have that that subservient class uh for your purpose of revolution and things like that. So uh they're they're just it's one of those where they're pointing fingers at each other, but they're both just using almost the same people. Okay. So uh you actually raised um my third point, so I'll go down to my third point, which is that uh um this idea of uh um Steinbeck actually wanted to raise up the uh the the living um for the working class, the the um quality of life. The living standards, yeah, quality life for people. Yeah. And so uh what I wrote was his work actually defies the communist label. The Grapes of Wrath is often cited as communist propaganda. And as you read it, you can see like he uh it it's there's a lot of con there's a lot of discussion about being called a red throughout that. Um but I would argue that if you read closely, it's actually deeply American. Um, because the Jodes, the main family in the story, they're not looking for a revolution, even though it there's like suggestions a couple times about how we could do this. Um they're actually just looking for work and dignity and what we often call the American dream. And so the book is a critique, in my opinion, on how capitalism was failing its own ideals, not a call to overthrow it. And I think that that's a very different thing than um a call for communism. So um do you want to say anything about that?

SPEAKER_03 31:48

Yeah, I will say that um oh shoot, it went right out of my head. Um again, in the same way that I would say I don't dismiss somebody because they're a communist, I don't think that saying something is communist propaganda means that it's not American. I think that communist propaganda is wrapped up in late 19th century, early 20th century American i ideology. I think that this part of it, I think that um that uh, you know, here here's a here's a good example. Or uh uh another example. We took our um kids uh a couple years ago to to DC and did um uh did the whole touristy thing. And we did something um and I didn't get all of this done because I didn't plan ahead enough, but it's something that um I got like half of it done that I would recommend for anybody going to DC. If you go to DC, like a month, month and a half before you go, call your congress member, your congressperson, and ask them for a tour. So you can go and you can get like the group tours that they do for free or whatever, you know, through the um the Capitol building and the White House and all of that, and that's fine. But if you call your congressperson, um they'll they have somebody on staff, they'll almost always they'll arrange a private tour. They'll have one of their staff people, um, an intern, come down and give you a tour. And it'll be private and it's great. And you know, we're not like special people. It's not like I'm not a donor or anything, you know. You are a special person. I said but I just we but we got, you know, our family got a um a private tour, and it was fantastic. So I'd recommend anybody do that. Uh, if you're going to DC, um, get that uh private tour. But while we're doing the tour, we we one of the parts of the tour of the Capitol building is the Rotunda. I think I'm getting this right. Um, and that has all of the statues, every state has a statue of a of a person that's supposed to represent who we are as a state is in there. And it has their name and it has um what, you know, I don't know if it has like a little thing about like what they did, but it has the the state and it has their name. It's really interesting, actually, because um you would think, you know, we we've it's not like we don't know how many states we have, right? It's been the same number since the 50s. And so you would think that all of these statues would be put in this room in a like in a really um organized way, but it it's really not. They kind of look like it kind of looks like a uh a room in your house where you just started shoving furniture and it's all kind of like put in different ways, you know. Um but the I noticed as I was looking at all the statues, uh the statue that they have for Louisiana, that Louisiana has that they sent, is Huey P. Long. And for whoever who whoever doesn't know this, Huey P. Long was uh a communist who was he uh FDR at one point called him the most dangerous man in America, right? He set up, he he uh a lot of people thought that he was gonna be president, right? He set up this fiefdom where he um I mean it it was this patronage system where he was in complete control of of the state, but it was for all of his rhetoric was leftist rhetoric, right? It was all for the poor, but it was like extreme power um concentrated. I I could not believe that that is who they picked to have but as their statue, but they did, right? That is who the people of Louisiana at some point um felt that they wanted to represent their state. And so my point is I think that these uh these ideologies, you know, if if we can get our minds or you know, into the experience of somebody living in 1932 or 1938 or whatever, um it's uh it is part of the American story, in my in my opinion. So I guess that's my only quibble is that I don't think that there's a juxta I don't I don't think that there's a contrast, you know, um, between communist and um, you know, what you said, kind of deeply American. To me, I feel like that is part of the American story, is uh is all of this that and and I think that um you know if if the United States exists 250 years from now, I think we'll have more eras where that'll be that'll be part of uh you know our American our American story.

Hearing Something Nobody Said

SPEAKER_04 37:16

I think if we're here 250 years from now, we're gonna have ideologies we're not even aware of. Yeah, sure. Yeah, so this is an interesting thing to me. Um as we're going through this this this uh process, this um this conversation. So okay, here's my observation is that on Sunday I uh reached out to you because I wanted to know about your family's history and how much you actually knew about it because I was curious specifically about the arrival of the Okies during the during the Dust Bowl era. Yeah, right, and and all of that. And I knew that your family would be there during that, and I didn't know how much you knew. All right, so so that sort of began the conversation. Then I mentioned Steinbeck, and then I was reading Grapes of Wrath, and then you say, well, Steinbeck was a communist, and then I respond, I have a response to the con the the the statement that okay, so I have a response to the statement. Steinbeck is a communist. Now, here's the observation I'm beginning to make, and I think it's really important for the overall theme of this podcast, and the overall theme of like why I'm going to Cincinnati this week to go talk on campus and and like why like all everything that we've been writing and talking and all this kind of stuff. I heard you say something that you didn't say.

unknown 38:48

Right?

SPEAKER_04 38:50

Okay, so I carry Oh, oh, oh, oh. On Sunday. On Sunday, I heard you say something that you didn't actually say. I heard you make a negative if you want to use the pejorative, whatever, c comment about Steinbeck. Uh-huh. And and in when I heard that, the reason I heard that was because of I have been accused and the way that those conversations were uh took shape when I was accused of being a communist. And so when I heard you say Steinbeck is a communist, I took those previous conversations where I had been accused of being a communist in a way that was a definitely an attack. There, there's no doubt about it. They were yelling and screaming at me at the time, right? It wasn't like, hey, you might be a communist. It was like you're an effing communist, right? Um and um, and so when you said that, I re-heard that, right? Sure. And so then I go back and and I spend at least an hour, if not more, putting together this. Uh-huh. Okay.

SPEAKER_03 40:06

And then we And this is why I like you, Jeff. You are you, I think you and I would have been good debate partners because you are such a first aft. You're a first affirmative. You go create a case. It's great.

SPEAKER_04 40:18

All right, absolutely. So, so I do all of this, I spend all of this energy, and then we have a conversation and you have an opportunity to clarify your statement, and I'm like, we're not really that far apart. All right. Sure. So that's I think that's kind of what the whole premise is is that we hear each other say things, not just you and I, but in like in our society, we hear each other say things, and we carry so much in our in our intellectual toolbox, like I talk about, right? Um, that we don't we we're assuming that we know what the other person is already saying without taking it the time to actually listen to what they're saying. And so now, like when I hear you say that Steinbeck is a communist, I'm not having the emotional reaction that I had the first time you said it. Right now, just to be just to be completely, I yes, I had an emotional reaction, but because it's you and you're a great friend of mine, I wasn't angry.

unknown 41:23

Right?

SPEAKER_04 41:23

But I did I had to get through it. Yeah you could get through it and still be here. And I could laugh it off, and even like when you said, you know, because I because okay, just for full disclosure, to you, like yesterday you texted me and you were like, hey man, I hope you know I was just joking. That was my assumption from the very beginning, is that you were just trying, you know, you're coming at it from hyperbole. Yes, I do believe that you that you meant what you said, but I do believe that the way you said it and everything like that was just to try to rile me up, right? And it was, I was being flippant on purpose. I also was being flippant. Absolutely, right? But I gave you that benefit of the doubt because you're my friend. If I didn't know you and you had said that to me, it would have landed completely different. Yep. Right. And I still would have gone through this whole process and been like, oh yeah. Well, let me show you six reasons why you're wrong. Um, which I did for you too, right? As my friend. But I also the only reason I did it is because I knew that you and I were going to talk about it today. Um, so I think this is really a really good exercise for for anybody that's listening to sort of see how that actually plays out in real life. Somebody might say something to you, and you initially have this emotional reaction to it. And I think that there's stoicism in that too, right? Like that's the discipline of I forget which one. Anyway, but that you experience the emotion, but you can't respond emotionally. You gotta sort of process it, and then you've got to get engaged in critical thinking, and you've got to figure out how can I have this conversation uh using nonviolent communication and and all of the things. So anyway, all tools.

SPEAKER_03 42:59

So I had this response, this reaction at the end of our last conversation with um with the gentleman that we interviewed. Yes, I actually had that with Steve. Who and who uh just let me preface by saying love the conversation, liked him a lot, good guy. Well, I don't know if he's a good guy, maybe he's not, maybe he's too much.

SPEAKER_04 43:19

He seems to be he seems to be. But I like his book, by the way.

SPEAKER_03 43:22

Yeah. I liked him, I liked the conversation. But there's but I had this this experience, and and I didn't bring it up at the time because it was right at the end. I didn't want to, you know, derail the end it on an you know, whatever. But the comment that he made right at the end about um, you know, we hear all the time now, we hear all the time, I'm gonna okay, let me start over because I'm doing the thing where you change the voice and you know, whatever. You hear all the time now about how empathy is bad. And I'm saying empathy is good, right? That's basically what he's saying. And I had this because I heard that. And I was like, oh, I know what you're referring to. I know what you're referencing. And I don't think that's fair at all. And I wanted to argue. Right? And it seems to me, and I've and I've had arguments in my mind since then a couple of times. Where of course I won and he was like chagrined, you know? And uh just so dumb. And um but it seems to me like it's the exact same thing as what you're talking about here, except you and I like when I said he's a communist, what went through your mind was something like, oh, I know what you're referencing, I know what you're doing. But because we're friends, like you said, you kind of had the emotional wherewithal to like stop, you know, like and also take it in a um uh more favorable kind of uh uh perspective, right? Um assume assume better intent or whatever, you know, just so you could get through it and then and then have this conversation. So I think that's I I I think that's really good and and um it is a a really good uh example of of what you have been trying to talk about with this uh with this project you've been working on. So I think it's good. It's very good.

SPEAKER_04 45:18

That all being said, I did put work into this, so I'm gonna give you the rest of them. All right. Yeah, go for it.

SPEAKER_03 45:23

And I'm not gonna respond because we're coming to the end, so I'm not gonna respond. I'm gonna listen. Yeah, go ahead.

Guilt By Association And Hoover

SPEAKER_04 45:27

Okay. So uh again, this is it was an assumption on my part that when I heard you say that he was a communist, I thought what you were doing was you were referencing the League of American Writers. Because the League of American Writers were uh an organization that included many writers who were simply uh they're progressive or anti-fascist, but it did get the label of being a communist organization. Um however, I wrote that Steinbeck's association with it doesn't make him a communist anymore than signing a petition against poverty makes someone a Marxist. Um and then I put that it's guilty by association was exactly the kind of thinking, and this is where I took a shot, that fueled McCarthyism. So I put that in there. And then um I also wrote that uh um the FBI agreed that he was not a communist because they actually investigated him. Uh and the funny thing is, funny, like tongue-in-cheek, funny, not like haha, is that J. Edgar Hoover um he hated him. He didn't actually like he came, he was very public about how much he disliked Steinbeck, and that he multiply multiple times pushed for investigations, but every time he pushed for investigation, it came up short. Okay, so that was number one, two, three, four, um, number five that I came up with was he was fiercely, actually, I would argue, he's fiercely pro-American. Through our conversation, we've established that one does not exclude the other. Um, from your perspective. This was me writing from what I heard, not what you said, which is, I think, an excellent thing. Um, but I did put that during World War II, Steinbeck worked as a war correspondent and wrote bombs away to support the U.S. American Air Force, um, the U.S. Army Air Force. And then later during the Vietnam era, he supported the war effort, which actually drew criticism from the left. Um, and so he, you know, uh I wrote that. He's very fiercely pro-American. I wrote that uh, again, but this was because I claimed, thinking I was claiming something that stood in contrast to what you were claiming, again, right, which we've established isn't the case. But I wrote that he's an undeniable American icon. He won the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1962, and the Nobel Committee specifically cited his realistic and imaginative writing, combining sympathetic humor and keen social perception. And then I just wrote down three things that I just read like recently, well, going back to last year, but of Meissen Men, East of Eden, and Cattery Row. And these are cornerstones of the American literary canon. Uh, his work is taught in virtually every American high school for a reason. That being said, that his works are also now finding themselves on the list of banned books, um, but not for the reasons that you and I are discussing. Um they seem to be being put on banned books because of his cultural representation, um, which was very accurate at his time, um, that now we find highly offensive. And then I uh ended with this because I thought this was a slam dunk. I want to read you a quote, and I want you to tell me if it's a communist quote, okay? And you may you may even recognize the quote. All right, it's kind of long, so just give me a second. It is not needed nor fitting here that a general argument should be made in favor of popular institutions, but there is one point with its connections not so hacknied hackneyed as most others to which I ask a brief attention. It is the effect to place capital on an equal footing with, if not above, labor in the structure of government. It is assumed that labor is available only in connection with capital, that nobody labors unless someone else owning capital somehow by the use of it induces him to labor. This assumed is this assumed it is next considered whether it is best that capital shall hire laborers and thus induce them to work by their own consent or by them and drive them to it without their consent. Having proceeded thus far, it is naturally concluded that all laborers are either hired laborers or what we call slaves, and further, it is assumed that whoever is once a hired laborer is fixed in that condition for life. Now, there is no such relation between capital and labor as assumed, nor is there any such thing as a free man being fixed for life in the condition of a hired laborer. Both these assumptions are false and all inferences from them are groundless. Labor is prior to and independent of capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is a superior of capital and deserves much the higher consideration. Capital has its rights, which are as worthy of protection as any other rights. Alright. Is that a communist statement?

SPEAKER_03 50:23

You you ask me who said that? Do you know who said it? Sounds a lot like Hitler.

SPEAKER_04 50:28

Interesting. That's very interesting. That that would be your assumption. Um okay, so then you're saying it sounds more fascist. Abraham Lincoln.

SPEAKER_03 50:37

Well, the um uh that isn't that is interesting. Um I mean th the arguments the foundational arguments underlying fascism and underlying communism, um well, I should say, what I should say is underlying national socialism, which which was fascist, uh, which ended up being fascist, uh, and and actual socialism, a lot of the underlying arguments um sound very, very, very similar. Um they kind of they they have a lot of the same axiomatic principles, but um, but uh yeah, I mean that is that's interesting that that's um that that's Lincoln. Well was that um in a uh one of the Douglas debates?

SPEAKER_04 51:29

He was um no, he was actually had already been elected, I think it was 1961, and he was addressing Congress. So um yeah, I found that interesting because then I wrote this because I this was my slam dunk for you, all right, as I was preparing to knock you down. Um well knocked out what I heard you say, which is which is which which is what is so hilarious to me. The effort that I put into this. Um I put this caring about poor people doesn't make you a communist. If it did, we'd have to call Abraham Lincoln a communist for what he said about labor and capital. So there you go. Aren't you impressed with all the work I did? That's ultimately what I was trying to do, is just impress you.

Myths Labels And Moral Boogeymen

SPEAKER_03 52:14

I am impressed. And like I said, I think that you would have uh you would have made a really good uh first affirmative um on a debate team. You would have uh presented the case well, and then um as the first neg came up and tried to destroy it, I would have um I would have been your uh your junkyard dog right behind you, uh making sure that they they embarrass themselves. Um but no, it's that that's good. I'd like to read that speech by um by Lincoln. I mean, you know, here's the thing. This is what I actually think. Myths are good, they're important, they're fundamental, and they are they're like gravity, they just are, they always will be. For a culture to exist, our myths our myths tell us who we are. And it doesn't mean that they're fake, but it also doesn't mean that they are um some sort of you know uh Victorian-era style historiography, uh uh uh his historically accurate kind of thing, right? So Lincoln's a mythological figure. You you don't get to say that Lincoln was fundamentally uh un-American, right? Whatever that means, you don't get to say it. And you don't get to say that he was he was wrong in some way, and you don't get unless unless it's something that we are, unless it has to do with a principle that we've um our decided in our in our modern culture is um is acceptable. So you can now say, you can now say, well, Abraham Lincoln was kind of racist, actually. You can say that because we've all agreed racism is the is the fundamental evil. That's the number one evil that you can't be, right? Ever. And so um which is a mythological position as well, right? Um and and um communism well, let's see, here's so and well, okay, let me let me just finish my thought real quick. Fascism is a mythological evil. It's part of our mythos. We defeated it. We defeated it and they were and they're evil. And you can know that fascism is evil and the and what I consider like a boogeyman, because uh it has in every um description of it or study of it, it has to take on all negative characteristics, even if those negative characteristics would be um conflicting. Um, right? They have to, it has to be stupid and so diabolically um dangerous that it might take over at any time, right? These types of things, right? But that's okay because we are trying as a culture to tell ourselves we are this and we're not that, right? And so um when I, but this is just my personality as a five. I um I have my own mythosis, right? And so I, you know, I think that it is, I think it's not unfair for you to have responded the way you did because I was a little flip. Because when I talk about communists, I do get a little, I get a little strident, right? And uh I do, I'm quicker to throw that around, right? To throw that that label around than I am to certainly to to throw around the the fascist label, right? So I think it's fair. I think your reaction was fair. And also what I'm trying to flesh out here is that when I actually look at these historical figures and these historical times and stuff, I am personally interested in trying to get my head into who they were, how they were, as much as I can. What were what was their actual experience like? And there's I mean like I remember telling one of my friends, um I have great admiration for um communist revolutionaries, some of them, some communist revolutionaries, Che, I have great not reverence, not but there's aspects of that personality that gives itself wholly over to a cause. Man, I get it. It kind of it kind of fires me up, you know? Like we were talking about Malcolm X the other day. Yeah, I was just thinking of the same thing. Yeah. Like to me, Dr. King was someone who is like, I mean, I know he I know he was a regular guy and and had his foibles and and you know negative characteristics also, but like to me, in terms of the civil rights movement, he's like this, he's on a pedestal. He's kind of like a shining star, and it's kind of inspirational, right? Malcolm X, man, he gets me fired up. I like it, you know, I get it. Like, let's go fight, you know, I get it. I'm tired of seeing our our grandmas and grandpas getting beat down and not doing anything, you know. If they won't do anything, we will, you know, that kind of thing. I I get that. So um I guess what I'm saying is like when I when I look through these things, I I'm kind of on two mind of two minds. I can say, you know, this person um, you know, this this person was super uh left-leaning, uh, they were they were a leftist, they were associated with communist, you know, whatever, um, and not think, well, that makes them un-American, you know, even though it's not the American mythos that I want to subscribe to, if that makes sense. Yep.

Common Ground And What Comes Next

SPEAKER_04 58:14

Anyway. So we always end with what was our common ground, but I think today the entire conversation led there. Yeah, I think this is interesting. I think it I I thought it was a really interesting thing. I you do you mentioned something that I would like to explore a little bit more, and that's racism. Just because maybe maybe in a future pod, not today. We're out of time. Yeah. But I read a book recently called Cast C A S T E. And um, I found it fascinating, and so maybe we can talk about that. All right? Sounds good. All right, thanks. See ya.

SPEAKER_00 58:51

Thank you for listening to Living on Common Ground. Please follow wherever you listen to your podcasts and share it with your friends. You can also find a link to our social in the description. The more people we have living on common ground, the better the world will be.