Anyone saying “a ha! Sean Wilentz is a lib, checkmate” is either uninformed or trying to trick you. Wilentz is a clintonian liberal (Seinfeld voice: not that there’s anything wrong with that) but his opposition to 1619 is not at all in conflict with his ideological stance
-
-
Replying to @MattZeitlin
Exactly so. And his Clintonianism is very deeply ingrained in his work (pre-dating even his support of the Clintons). Chants Democratic is a major work, but also one that completely marginalizes blacks in Jacksonian America to concentrate on the white working class.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
i think his kind of consensus-y neo-schlesingerism has become a bit underrated in recent years and may have a revival, but it's definitely where he comes from and it's highly contested (as i'm sure he would admit)
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @MattZeitlin
I've been thinking a lot about this and I honestly prefer Schlesinger to Wilentz. When push came to shove -- during Vietnam & Watergate -- Schlesinger was able to rethink his priors (The Imperial Presidency is proof of that). Wilentz can't do that.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HeerJeet
your own publication had a not-entirely-negative review of his biography https://www.thenation.com/article/the-power-historian/ …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
That's a great review from @davidimarcus. I was also hoping to review that book but got swamped. Might revisit some of these issues when I review the Library of America's Hofstadter anthology.
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.