But Woods cites Fischer right on page 3!
So the latest person on stage at the Hate Tom Woods Club is David Greenberg at Slate, who says that The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History is really "History for Dummies meets John T. Flynn." But his first substantive point of complaint is that Woods doesn't cite David Hackett Fischer though Woods's analysis of British immigration follows Fischer's thesis. Greenberg says: "Woods does not cite Fischer."
So Tom is stealing other people's ideas without attribution? Well, let's see. Actually, the bibliography cites Fischer (p. 250), which would be enough evidence to counter Greenberg's claim. Even more, had Greenberg made it past page 2 and gotten to page 3--I know that's a lot to ask when you are on deadline--he would have found a direct citation to Fischer on religious liberty, right in the heart of his discussion on demographics and the first citation in a popular book in which the editors clearly discouraged footnotes. The rest of his "review" shows no evidence at all that he even read in the book. What a world.
Coda: Tom will be at the Institute this summer, teaching a course from June 20 to 24.
Comments (4)
Given what generally passes for intelligent discourse in the social sciences and humanities, and increasingly so even in the natural sciences, I am not surprised by the reception Professor Woods’ book has generally received from both the Left and Right. While history is certainly not a logical or experimental science and historical events are subject to interpretation, the glossing over or outright omission of certain pertinent facts by mainstream historians and journalists displays bias and a disregard for objective research. I often wonder how some of these individuals can sleep at night. But when an academic researcher or journalist is not driven first and foremost by a desire for truth and understanding, I guess it is not hard to explain. Keep up the excellent work Professor Woods!
Published: March 14, 2005 3:19 PM
I would urge everyone to keep in mind that, to the best of my knowledge, not one of the individuals who author negative reviews of Dr. Woods' book can point to a single fact in the book and say "this is incorrect."
Published: March 14, 2005 3:30 PM
Interestingly, it seems that Tom Wood's book is even popular among the Bush-supporters. Out of curiosity, I clicked on a banner ad for some "Red State USA Cap" and then found that in the list of "Customers who bought this item also bought" alongside books from Sean Hannity, Newt Gingrich and Ann Coulter were "The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History by Woods, Thomas". They probably just buy the vook for its title without being aware of the antiwar message it contains.
http://www.nrbookservice.com/BookPage.asp?prod_cd=c6296&sour_cd=NRB038401
Published: March 14, 2005 3:31 PM
In his review, David Greenberg also accuses Woods of ignoring the 'millions of slaves' brought to [our] colonies before he brings up the civil war, and therefore ignored important social and cultural aspects of our country's history.
First of all, which side is he arguing? Conventional PC history shows little overall impact of slavery on American history before the Civil War anyway. So he's pointing out that more attention to missing, un-PC facts would be a good thing, despite his apparent disdain for Thomas' contribution.
Second, though 'millions' of individuals may have been removed from Africa, only a small fraction ever made it to the future US colonies. Wikipedia alleges between 10-16 million removed from Africa between 1500 and 1900, but only 4.4% came to the British colonies which eventually formed the US, while the rest either died or were sold elsewhere, mostly in Brazil and the Spanish colonies. Doing the math (and giving the benefit of the doubt on the total number removed), that's a likely maximum of 704,000 slaves who ever came to the US or the British colonies it was formed from. Not exactly a morally inspiring number for true believers in individual liberty, but far short of the 'millions' Greenberg thinks were imported.
Why nitpick him on this point? Because he was doing the same to his subject, without doing his homework. To quote Mr. Greenberg from his review, 'Everyone knows that getting facts wrong can produce mistaken interpretations.' Good point, David. Thanks.
Nice post on his failure to dig as deep as page 3 of the work he was reviewing. If this is Greenberg's professional product, I wonder what kind of grades he got for his school work?
Published: April 8, 2008 7:01 AM