12 January 2009

Sparking Debate On Revisionist History

My earlier posts on Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States (here, here, here, and here ) set off quite a debate in the Civil War blogosphere. To think that I, a mere amateur historian, could elicit such a response from my academic friends is quite amazing. Despite what you may read, the argument is not really settled, and probably won't be. It was gratifying, however, to find that practically no one in the CW blogosphere finds Zinn's work worthy of serious study. Thank God for that.

The discussion was a little rough and tumble at times, and I, like the immortal Stonewall Brigade was vastly outnumbered and outgunned - but that's ok. For as with the immortal Stonewall Brigade's Valley campaign, I prevailed on my main points:

1. Zinn's work is admittedly politically motivated, leftist, revisionist history.

2. The book is widely used throughout academia (we just can't say, for sure, how it's used.)

All in all, a worthy effort. I'll now leave Zinn to his wacky conspiracy obsessed followers until I hear from the publisher regarding my inquiry.

No comments: