American history is one particular field of academia where you can say virtually anything, and with some creative persuasion, it'll get you tenure and a book deal. Gore Vidal seems to think the Civil War was a holy crusade against slavery; Thomas DiLorenzo says just the opposite. Howard Zinn declares the old Populist movement to have been largely socialist, while paleoconservatives like Justin Raimondo claim it as their own. And regardless of what Noam Chomsky says about American involvement in Guatemala, your high school history textbook knows less than nothing about it.
More and more, the study of history seems to be some sort of intellectual acid trip. Thousands of swirling images set to the backdrop of thousands of disagreeing voices, none of it informative, all of it confusing. What we all need to do is find a well-lit area, put some James Taylor on the 8-track, and take 50cc's of Historical Thorazine.
This site is designed to, as much as possible, divorce the study of American history from the personal prejudices and desire to entertain of its chief scholars. Here's the deal:
Every entry on this site will follow a set format. First, I will give the prevailing "consensus" view of an event or issue in American history, much like the account you would find in a textbook or mainstream scholarly journal. Second, I will analyze the account, noting and explaining any historical inaccuracies or inconsistencies that crop up. Finally, drawing upon the above analysis, I will formulate a complete view of the event or issue that fits all historical facts available.
If you have any questions, comments, or raving hatemail, please send it to
themick@hushmail.com. Particularly cogent intellectual challenges will be posted in the entry they are relevant to; ridiculous idiocy will be included in a forthcoming hatemail section. Either way, keep in touch.
