7. Radosh: "Judis is anything but a historian. Those of us who labor in that profession – as does this writer – seek to explore the past..."
-
-
Replying to @HeerJeet
8. "order to unearth the truth, and to understand what happened within the context of the period. That is not what Judis does in his book."
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HeerJeet
9. "Rather, Judis is an example of the kind of “historian” who uses history to “prove” a preconceived viewpoint."
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HeerJeet
10. What makes this laughable is idea that Radosh's own historical writing (some of which is excellent) isn't fueled by present politics.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HeerJeet
11. Radosh's early work grew out of New Left, his middle period work out of Cold War liberalism, his latest out of Israeli nationalism.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HeerJeet
12. Which is not to say Radosh isn't a good historian -- he often is (although I haven't read most recent work). But so is Judis.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HeerJeet
13. Unless they are antiquarian drudges, all historians are shaped by present politics.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
14. Judis is a journalist by profession but his histories don't suffer from shallowness of journalistic histories. They are serious books.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
15. Judis' biography of William F. Buckley is one of the essential books on the American right, much cited in the academic literature.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HeerJeet
16. Fact Radosh resorted to churlish craft pride shows how few arguments he has against Judis.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
17. To top this all off -- Radosh once praised historical scholarship of ... Michelle Malkin's defense of internment of Japanese-Americans.
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.