Review by Quincy D. Newell
In his wonderful, and still relatively new, book American Heathens: Religion, Race, and Reconstruction in California (University of California Press and Huntington Library, 2012), Joshua
Paddison transports us to post-Civil War California, where the meaning of
citizenship is under debate. Who was
American? Paddison argues that
California stood at the center of the debate because of its multiethnic
society, where “race” included black and white but also Indian and Chinese,
where “religion” included Protestant, Catholic, and several varieties of non-Christian. For those of us dissatisfied with a narrative
of American race relations that concentrates on the black-white binary,
Paddison’s story is a refreshing new take on the postbellum years.
Paddison’s main arguments are, first, “that religion was
central to formations of race and citizenship in the post-Civil War United
States” (4), and second, “that Reconstruction was a multiracial and
multiregional process of national reimagining” that resulted in “a knitting
together of North, South, and West around a newly robust white Christian
identity during the course of” the decade following the removal of federal
troops from the South in 1877 (5).
Paddison tells this story with a remarkable attention to
detail, weaving together tales of individual preachers, converts, and activists
(one of whom, Jee Gam, Paddison has written about here before)
to demonstrate the issues at play and the halting, incremental accumulation of
support for a definition of citizenship centered around race, religion, and
gender: white Christian manhood. This is
not a simple story: as Paddison writes, “the nation’s rejection of Indians and
Chinese immigrants as citizens in the 1880s came not as a result of race
‘trumping’ religion. Rather, one
religio-racial vision—Christian white male supremacy—triumphed over another
that emphasized anti-Catholicism and paternalistic racial uplift” (9).
Paddison focuses on the Indian and Chinese “questions” in
California, which centered around the positioning of non-white, but (at least
potentially) Christian people within American society. These questions found practical application
in proposed legislation on immigration, in the Chinese case, and allotment, in
the case of Indians. A surprisingly wide
array of factions mobilized around these questions, each jockeying for
religio-racial position. Protestant
ministers sought to extend a vision of Manifest Destiny that brought all racial
and national groups into the Christian fold, an optimistic program built, at
times, on a virulent anti-Catholicism.
Meanwhile, Irish-American and Mexican-American Catholics sought to
consolidate their position in the new national order by emphasizing the
unassimilability of Chinese immigrants and Indians, regardless of their
religious affiliations.
Perhaps most striking about this story is the change over
time that Paddison documents. As decades
pass, we see staunch supporters of the Indians and Chinese soften and then
reverse their positions. When these
groups lose their (white, Protestant, male) advocates, Paddison shows, the way
is opened for Congress to pass exclusion acts that severely restrict Chinese
immigration and the Allotment Act, which does much to destroy Indian cultures.
In my view, the most important aspect of Paddison’s book is
the way in which it integrates California into the history of Reconstruction
and thereby refocuses the conversation, insisting that the story cannot be
understood without taking the West into account. Just as California served as a model for the
nation in the story that Paddison tells, Paddison’s nuanced treatment of the
entanglement of race and religion in the political questions of postbellum California
is a model for the rest of us.
No comments:
Post a Comment