I don't rely on any historian...I just take the pieces that remind me of modern things, and screenshot them! :-)
-
-
Replying to @Noahpinion
Danger here is Hofstadter's description of radical right is superficially plausible but series students of subject (not just historians but political scientists) have strongly challenged.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
You mean his description of "pseudo-conservatives", or the "paranoid style"?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Noahpinion
Both. Michael Rogin's "Intellectuals and McCarthyism" has some good criticism. In a more popular vein,
@notjessewalker's book on conspiracy theories also good.1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
But Hofstadter is great for screenshots. He was such a fantastic stylist.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
That's what makes him dangerous.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
I also like Hofstadter because he was writing in another era, so he's likely to be compromised less by modern politics and more by his own era's politics.
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Thing is, he's *very* compromised by his own era's politics.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @notjessewalker @Noahpinion and
What do you make of The American Political Tradition? That "young man's book" pushes against the orthodoxy of the time, in ways that are interesting for often not being where mainstream historiography winded up going.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @joelschlosberg @Noahpinion and
I last read that book about 35 years ago, so I'll have to punt on that one.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
It's my favorite Hofstadter book -- really top-notch writing and great insights.
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.