The "New Bellesiles"
Bellesiles argues that "[c]lass superseded race as the primary area of conflict; abolitionists became social [sic] Darwinists; onetime liberals came to see the wisdom of social control; those who fought for freedom demanded prohibition; elites battled to maintain their power in every corner of the country."
comments powered by Disqus
Michael Green - 8/6/2010
My concern is not whether he appeals to liberal biases, and it disappoints me that that would be the concern here. My concern is whether he is accurate. Arming America was not; he can, correctly, say the NRA was out to get him, but he still seems convinced that he did nothing wrong. If his new book is correctly researched, he is entitled to whatever interpretation he wants, and others are entitled to debate it.
Gary O'Connor - 5/14/2010
Speaking of the Second Amendment, you can get a bobblehead of the author of the Heller opinion (Justice Scalia) and contribute to a worthy cause: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=170484173397&ssPageName=ADME:L:LCA:US:1123
- While French historians take a common view of WW I, British and German don't
- Historian: Proclamation Naming Pa. State Gun Gets Facts Wrong
- Irish slave owners were compensated historian reveals
- Two historians are in a race against time to preserve early church records from destruction
- Yale's Jay Winter sums up what we should remember about WW I