Category: History

Don’t Call it a Comeback.

Found while pursuing prospectus research, Yale professor Robert Johnston argues for reviving progressivism as political theory. “As scholars, we rarely know if we are really in the middle of a paradigm shift. The signs are hopeful, though, for in the last few years a series of brilliant books have appeared to make the case for the democratic — and often radically democratic — nature of much of progressive reform.“

After the Fall.

“When Alexis de Tocqueville visited the United States in the 1830s, he was struck by Americans’ conviction that ‘they are the only religious, enlightened, and free people,’ and ‘form a species apart from the rest of the human race.’ Yet American independence was proclaimed by men anxious to demonstrate ‘a decent respect to the opinions of mankind.’…[I]t is our task to insist that the study of [American] history should transcend boundaries rather than reinforcing or reproducing them.” Eric Foner, in a wide-ranging 2003 essay recently posted on HNN, contemplates the direction of American history after 9/11.

Letters to Clio.

If you’re here by way of Ralph Luker’s kind referral at Cliopedia, welcome to GitM. You can find other (US)-history related content at the orals lists and among the writings…The general booknotes and soapbox may also be of interest, although many of those library entries were written way back in the summer of ’97 at the ripe young age of 22, and they show it. And, if you’re looking for other quality blogs by budding Columbia historians, I’d recommend Baldanders, The Naked Tree, Peasants Under Glass, and Pickle in the City, all excellent sites maintained by colleagues in the program.

New School.

Another semester begins here at Columbia today, although the class I’m teaching this term — “The Asia-Pacific Wars 1931-1975” with Prof. Charles Armstrong — doesn’t meet until tomorrow. (I had been slated originally for Anders Stephanson‘s “US Foreign Policy” class, but have moved over to this Pacific-Specific class due to the usual overbooking and underbooking issues…so, while I’m missing out on a few books on progressive internationalism that had caught my fancy, the reading list for this new class seems intriguing in its own right.)

Bobos on Progressivism.

Interrupting my usual enjoyment of the Sunday NYT crossword this past week was the magazine’s cover story, in which conservative media darling David Brooks tried to outline a new “progressive conservatism” for 2008. Given my interest, historical and otherwise, in reviving progressivism in any form, I applaud Brooks for giving it the ole college try here. But this piece suffers from a couple of serious problems.

For one, there’s not much “new” here. Writers like Michael Sandel have already thoroughly outlined this project, the case for a Hamiltonian revival was done better in Michael Lind’s Hamilton’s Republic, and even George Will anticipated much of Brooks’s argument on government, culture, and fostering independence twenty years ago with Statecraft as Soulcraft.

More problematic, Brooks seems totally unacquainted with his own party. “[A]lmost every leading official acknowledges that we should have as much of a welfare state as we can afford.” Oh, really? On education, “[m]ore and more conservatives understand that local control means local monopolies and local mediocrity.” Coulda fooled me. “Most Republicans, happily or not, have embraced a significant federal role in education.” Well, somebody should tell these guys.

I don’t want to harsh on Brooks too much, because at least he’s trying to make the case for something close to a progressive resurgence (“But through much of American history there has always been a third tradition, now dormant, which believes in limited but energetic government in the name of social mobility and national union.”) But first he’s gotta realize that he’s standing on the shoulders of giants here, and should say as much. And, more importantly, if we really wants to see a return to progressivism, he’s probably looking in the wrong party. As Bill Moyers recently and eloquently restated, progressivism was ultimately a reaction against the corporate domination of politics that afflicted the Gilded Age, and somehow that doesn’t seem to bother the current GOP too much. Dubya and Rove apparently aspire to be William McKinley and Mark Hanna respectively, and the closest thing the GOP had to a TR is now gleefully prostrating himself before his corporate overlords. So, we’re probably going to have to search elsewhere for our Teddys, Woodrows, and Crolys these days.

’68 Reasons to Play it Cool.

“When a tree falls in the forest, does it make a sound? If resistance against Bush actually plays into Bush’s hands, is it really resistance?” In the Voice, Rick Perlstein joins the many lefty voices urging caution to protesters during next week’s convention.

Landslide?

“The president — highly intelligent, personally flawed, detested by many, a man who was first elected in a narrow three-way race and then reelected easily — had faced impeachment. In the following election, his vice president, a decent man with decades on Capitol Hill, was beaten by an inexperienced governor from the South. Four years passed. The economy weakened and oil prices soared. Crises in the Persian Gulf and Afghanistan eroded our national confidence. Clearly the president was in trouble. Yet many were not comfortable with his opponent. Yes, he was effective on television. But was he a steady hand? Was he trustworthy? Would the country be safe in his hands? The year was, of course, 1980.” James K. Galbraith makes the case for a decisive Kerry-Edwards victory in November.

Up From Theory.

“The problem of theory was never the philosophy it drew on but the absence of a public forum to criticize it, expand it for intelligent adults, and correct it. The return of the linking intellectuals — adept in philosophical thought but not beholden to the academy — could restore a heritage of speaking to the public about the professors, and, more importantly, could get the professors speaking honestly and intelligibly to us.” Mark Greif, an old college friend of mine, discusses the Death of Theory in The American Prospect. Compared to most other academic disciplines, American historians seem to have side-stepped the worst excesses of echo-chamber theorizing…but it can seem a different world not all that far away.