"The colonists sought independence because they wanted to preserve slavery" is nowhere close to mainstream scholarship.
-
-
Replying to @CathyYoung63 @HeerJeet
"I piss on mainstream scholarship. Mainstream scholarship is shit".. (Bro will say it more politely, but that is indeed what he believes)..
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @omarali50 @CathyYoung63
Books published by well regarded scholarly press, blurbed by the top scholars in the field, and respectfully reviewed by the top journals in the discipline are part of mainstream scholarship.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet @omarali50
Can you point me to some examples of respectful reviews of "Slave Nation"? Because the only one I found in a major academic publication is basically a diplomatic way of saying "this book's main thesis is nonsense."pic.twitter.com/BnT1nKeNxM
3 replies 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @CathyYoung63 @omarali50
This review does not say the thesis is nonsense - It disagrees with part of thesis and accepts part of it. "The authors are very well read and make a good, though circumstantial, argument for the second proposition, adducing several factors to support it."
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet @omarali50
Well, it says that the thesis stated as fact in the Hannah-Jones article -- that the preservation of slavery was a key motive for the American Revolution -- is baseless and contradicted by some key facts. That's the first proposition.
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @CathyYoung63 @omarali50
It doesn't say "baseless" -- you keep putting your own hostile, polemical spin on these things. It says: "The first I find less convincing" That's very different. Review also adduces type of evidence (private journals of slavers) that would make thesis stronger if revisited.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet @omarali50
In context, "less convincing" is pretty clearly a polite euphemism for "baseless."
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @CathyYoung63 @omarali50
You should try to read people with an eye to what they are actually saying, not what you want them to be saying.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet @omarali50
What they're actually saying is that (1) there is no evidence to support the thesis, and (2) there is evidence to support the contrary conclusion.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
It doesn't say "no evidence" it says insufficient evidence (and adduces sources that should be consulted & arguments that should be overcome if thesis is to be accepted). Nor is there any contrary conclusion -- the two arguments go hand in hand, as you refuse to recognize.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.