25th Edition
Armchair Historians
While it is generally accepted that the game of basketball was invited by Dr. James Naismith in Springfield, Massachusetts, some historians contend that the first official game was played elsewhere. How do I know this? Because that place was the YMCA in my hometown, Herkimer, NY. The date was February 7, 1891. Just in case you were thinking I was at the game, I was not.
Some businessmen are trying to take advantage of this virtually unknown historical fact to revitalize the local economy, and anyone who has visited Herkimer recently, knows that is desperately needed. And that is an important point when it comes to the question of rewriting history. Is it for a worthy, or even noble cause, or are there ulterior motives, which are less so?
Over the last several years, I’ve read hundreds of history books. It shouldn’t surprise anyone that two history books on the same subject may stress different viewpoints and may even arrive at different conclusions. Researchers frequently discover new facts and storylines about past events. There is nothing inherently wrong with historical revisions that are based on thorough research. And that is another crucial point. Revisions to history should require thorough research in the same way that the original narrative was compiled. In my view, the historians with the most credibility base their opinions and conclusions on exhaustive research, not on selective research done to support a personal agenda. When it comes to the main characters, like our founding fathers for example, individuals should be judged on the body of their work, their accomplishments, failings, and character strengths and weaknesses. In this regard the greatest historians are impartial. They let a person’s body of work stand alone and they let the reader form their own conclusions as to the relative significance of the individual.
It happens often in sports, politics, and business, where the consensus opinion of an individual is based solely on one event. In more cases than not, a lifetime of accomplishment and positive contributions are ignored due to a single mistake or character flaw. Would anyone like to be judged by their worst moment or decision?
Today, there are some who are trying to rewrite the history of our country in a way that diminishes the very notion of what role America has played in history and what role it should assume today. Should we not judge our country on its body of work? And to what standard or country in history should comparisons be made? In other words, has there ever been a country that has accomplished as much as America has in such a brief time? From the Arsenal of Democracy to the beaches at Normandy, from the Gettysburg Address to the Civil Rights Act, and from the light bulb to the Internet, America has been truly exceptional. At the same time, we have struggled and even failed in certain areas. We will always be reminded of the stain of slavery, our mistakes in Viet Nam, our addictions and social decay in recent decades. But judged by our body of work, America does stand alone, it is a global shining light, and all of us have much to be proud of and thankful for. It should surprise no one that thousands of people risk life and limb to come to America, while very few would do the same to live elsewhere.
At the same time, we must never rest on our laurels. We should never be satisfied with who we are today. We should strive for excellence in all we do, and as Coach Lombardi stated, “We should relentlessly pursue perfection.” Not that perfection is attainable, but the pursuit of it keeps us motivated, humble, and requires a work ethic second to none.
Given our unprecedented level of wealth, by any reasonable measure, the biggest risk to our country is complacency. In many ways it seems we have lost our competitive edge, our chip on our soldier that drove us to greatness in the past. We are too comfortable with what we have already achieved.
Our country needs a personal mission statement. It needs to define its non-negotiables. I’m reading a very interesting book called – “The Bill of Obligations,” by Richard Haas. We already have a Bill of Rights, but perhaps it is time for a Bill of Obligations…
Several months ago, the Wall Street Journal had an article naming the “ten worst small towns” in New York State. Herkimer was number three. It was disappointing to read, but I wasn’t surprised. It’s a strange name for a town, isn’t it? It was named after General Nicholas Herkimer, the hero of the Battle of Oriskany, which we were taught was the turning point of the Revolutionary War. As you now know, Herkimer was instrumental in the growth of the greatest game ever invented, basketball. In the 1970s it was a great small town to grow up in. Maybe today it has fallen on hard times, but the body of its work remains significant to the state and even to our country. Not that this armchair historian is biased in any way.
Please help me grow my readership by forwarding this to a friend(s). In the meantime, say tuned for my next newsletter. Thanks
Michael Kayes
*These views are my personal opinions and are not the viewpoints of any company or organization.