When you're calling the leading figures in a field not your own "older historians with a minority view," maybe you've outrun your own credentials.https://twitter.com/jasonintrator/status/1208570808836251650 …
-
-
Replying to @baseballcrank
This narrative is simply wrong. It is just not the case that "the leading figures in US history" are all critical of the 1619 project. That is why I mean by a conspiracy theory. Some leading figures disagree with some things in the 1619 project. Others don't.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @jasonintrator
The idea that one makes a majority by counting the people who haven't weighed in is an obviously intellectually dishonest position. McPherson & Wood are titans in their fields.
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @baseballcrank
So is Eric Foner? Also, this seems to me to some extent a generational dispute between eminent US historians.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jasonintrator @baseballcrank
Kevin Kruse, Khalil Muhammad, Bryan Stephenson, Matt Desmond all are superstars.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Kruse has been noticeably reticent in defending the other pieces in public. Desmond's analysis simply does not withstand elementary economic analysis.
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.