I don't understand this thread. The "history of capitalism" stuff is hotly disputed inside academia. People didn't want to join in public shovel fight because Wilentz & co. had framed debate in gate-keeping polarizing way that could be easily be exploited by right (as it was). https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1377649894803054597 …
-
-
I'm sympathetic to concerns about norms of reflexive deference in progressive spaces. But I do think that, in this instance, the academics were being a bit paranoid. John Clegg wrote a really sharp critique of the 1619 Project's take on capitalism https://jacobinmag.com/2019/08/how-slavery-shaped-american-capitalism … ...
-
...And, so far as I can tell, his argument was neither repurposed by reactionaries for dastardly ends, nor assailed as a failure to "read the room" on progressive Twitter
- Show replies
New conversation -
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.