I write this prior to seeing what my neighbors and friends will have contributed to the Herald’s special (Sunday, Aug. 15) on the 25th anniversary of Local P-9’s strike against what was then the George A. Hormel Company. I also do not now know what will be readers’ reactions. However, I can anticipate both because I’ve been listening to them for, well, 25 years. I seek now to offer some reflection not on the strike but memories of and attitudes toward the strike that I sincerely hope will be helpful to both our thinking and feeling.

The 1985-1986 strike, the “corporate campaign” that preceded it, and the immediate aftermath are historical facts. These realities simply cannot be denied, and to do so is to live in a harmful state of denial. Denial of facts and realities are always harmful, because denial is a lie, while God created humans to live as truthful rational beings. Jesus himself asserted, “You will know the truth and the truth will set you free.”

If individuals here succeed in putting the truth completely from their own minds, history will not. Facts are persistent and often unpleasant and inconvenient. Labor history and also management history are critical academic disciplines. Around the world are historians and historically knowledgeable others who know more about this strike than do many of us who want to forget it. Moreover, they sustain a more objective understanding of it than many of us are even willing to learn. They do, because it is taught and studied in both disciplines. How embarrassing so many with only academic interest should know and understand more about a bread-and-butter and life issue that impacts everyone who lives in these parts.

What happened back then does, in fact, impact everyone living here now. The various ways people in and around Austin think, feel, and behave have been conditioned by what happened and what did not happen during and because of the strike. Not just the strike itself, but what led up to and followed on the strike. It’s ingrained in Austin culture.

As I understand the Herald’s editorial purpose, it was not to uncover previously unknown facts or even to rehearse those already reported as news. The editors rightly asked for memories. Memories themselves are not facts, but how facts are remembered. Having said this, however, the fact of memories are themselves facts. This is how people remember historical facts. These are usually honest, however mistaken they might be. We need to know what these memories are to recognize how they shape how people here think, feel, and behave today.

These memories—hopes and fears, triumphs and defeats, satisfactions and disappointments—actually have more impact on today’s Austin than do the historical facts.

If a union member feels other members betrayed him, the significant fact is the perception of betrayal not whether betrayal was a fact. This person lives as a victim of betrayal and must be understood in terms of his or her self-perception.

I do not think that Austin generally has learned the lesson of the strike or reactions to the strike. How can we, when we won’t even allow ourselves to think about it, and we become angry when someone but mentions it?

One of Austin’s weakest qualities is a general unwillingness and inability to confront other people on issues and to do so constructively. The oft-heard self-description “I’m just not a confrontational person,” is a boast when it should be a confession. Neither combativeness nor obsequiousness are healthy.

The point of the Herald’s effort was to encourage people to learn and respect others’ memories as well as our own. If we do not, we can’t understand ourselves.