American History

» Brian Tubbs - Once again....

In response to Daniel Flynn on Howard Zinn posted by pink101:
You sidestep and ignore the POINTS made by Flynn - and instead just dismiss him as a "right wing nut." I frankly am not that familiar with Flynn's politics. I know he's conservative, and that he has written against the "Blame America First" crowd that lurks in left-wing circles. But, beyond that, i'm not that familiar with him. He may be a "right-wing nut" (whatever that means) or he may not be. Frankly, it seems to me that any conservative who disagrees with you strongly is a "right-wing" nut in your eyes.

Pink, you show little to no ability to reason things out in a fair-minded way, to debate things in a cordial and constructive way - that is, unless it's with people you generally agree with.

I cited SPECIFIC charges raised by Flynn against Zinn, and you have NOTHING to say against them, except that Flynn is a "right-wing nut." That's not a response. It's little more than a juvenile, mean-spirited shove. Is that the best you can do?

BOTTOM LINE....your hypocrisy and inconsistency stinks to high heaven! You get all over me for apparently dismissing people like Zinn for being socialists (how many times have I heard you ask something to the effect of 'do socialists not have reasonable things to say?' or 'should we ignore people just because they're socialists'?) and yet YOU will dismiss people (without engaging their specific points) for being (in your words) "right-wing nuts."

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» Brian Tubbs - Power

In response to response to Brian posted by iowarch:

Steve, very thoughtful post. I will continue this with you. I have little to say to Pink anymore on this subject.

Your points on power are well-taken. It is a dynamic in government, one recognized by America's Founding Fathers. James Madison and Alexander Hamilton had a lot to say about it in The Federalist Papers.

I also agree with you on unions. That's precisely what happens with many labor unions.

I'll deal with Cuba, Venezuela, and Vietnam later in separate threads. Too much to get into now. But, I will say this...I cringe when liberals (or anybody for that matter - but it's usually liberals) will excuse or acknowledge with a slight frown nasty repression in socialist or communist countries, but rant and rave over comparatively minor offenses done by the United States. It's a flagrant double standard.

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» pink101 - Once again....

In response to Once again.... posted by BrianTubbs:
.
From your next post: Steve, very thoughtful post. I will continue this with you. I have little to say to Pink anymore on this subject.
.
Heh heh heh.
.
You sidestep and ignore the POINTS made by Flynn - and instead just dismiss him as a "right wing nut."
.
I thought I made it quite clear that I don't see Zinn as some kind of a hero that I want to champion. In fact, in response to your statement that my credibility was somehow non-existent, I wrote that "my credibility is not based on the idea that Zinn is not guilty of bias." We all are biased to some degree or another. Zinn's bias runs in a direction with which you disagree. So? Is it the firing squad for Zinn? You are being divisivie, Brian, trying to create sides for your team and "my" team and I don't have one. I understand that to be a common strategy that is gaining so much populariry during these times when conservatives are pushing so hard to kick against social progress in an effort to return us to less egalitarian times. People get all bound up in winner and loser games. I don't see understanding historical perspectives as being a winner or loser situation. Everyone has a right to have their ideas on the table here.
.
You have dissed Zinn on your statements that he is a socialist and that he focuses on an historical perspective that is opposed to yours. Does that make your perspective any better? Does it make yours the only one worth consideration?
.
:)
.
.
My purpose is not to protect Zinn on every comment he makes--not at all; but, it certainly now appears with what you see to think was your "coup de gras" post that your purpose is to dismiss him as a person who should be givenj any credance whatsoever. It appears as though you want to destroy him as a historian of worth.
.
I'll wager you are also anti-labor union as well.

-- posted by pink101

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» pink101 - American South

In response to American South posted by BrianTubbs:
.
You're full of it, Pink. ... you just called me a racist. ... you keep dragging me back into this CARICATURE you have for me and any other southern-born conservative. I'm sick of it.
.
What? You're the one who is running Zinn down for his ideas that are so unpopular in the South. Does the idea of Southern Conservative Prejudice include racism? Or is it the bias that engenders racism? Or is it something else?
.
Adults learn how to discuss controversial issues without having to get emotionally involved. What's wrong with looking at the issues involved here in a way so as to flesh them out?
.

-- posted by pink101

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» Brian Tubbs - Clarification for EVERYONE

In response to Once again.... posted by pink101:
Pink, I've said this a number of times throughout this thread, but I will say it again.

I am NOT against Howard Zinn because he brings out the side or the perspective of the 'have-nots' or the disadvantaged among us. On the contrary, I appreciate that.

Moreoever, I am absolutely 100% in FAVOR of having a "People's History" type textbook or curriculum ALONGSIDE a more traditional textbook. That is a GOOD thing. I want to make that very, very clear.

I think of economics. There are two approaches to studying it - micro and macro. Microeconomics is a more bottom up approach, whereas macro is top down. History benefits from remembering both the top and the bottom - as well as the middle (where most of us are).

My beef with Zinn is NOT about his focus on the poor or the downtrodden or the disadvantaged. My beef with Zinn is HOW he does what he does, not the fact that he does it.

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» pink101 - Clarification for EVERYONE

In response to Clarification for EVERYONE posted by BrianTubbs:
.
My beef with Zinn is HOW he does what he does, not the fact that he does it.
.
I'm reading three history books at the present time by three different authors; Fischer, Jacoby, and Zinn. They all seem to do things pretty much the same way using a time line.
.
What is there about the "HOW he does what he does" that causes you to have such a strong beef with him. There are over a hundred posts in this thread, and you--mostly--seem opposed to Zinn in a very strong way to diss him as an historian. To me, he seems to give a pretty clear view from an ordinary person's point of view. Most people are ordinary and only a very few are special.
.
From post # 9, Brian's:
.
"Zinn makes no real effort - NONE - to present the various sides. He is more advocate than historian, cheering the labor classes and the under classes along all the way through the book. It's the People vs. the Government, the People vs. Big Business. And, of course, his idea of the "People" is completely and TOTALLY class-based and/or race-based.

"Yes, Pink, that's a skewed portrait of America. It IS most certainly a misrepresentation, and a dangerous one at that."
.
heh heh heh. Come on, Brian, that would be funny if it weren't so sad. At the present time, the "upper crust" is dealing some crippling blows at the growing lower class in America. These "free trade" policies are aimed directly at America's lower social strata and that fight has been going on for a long, long time. That's a major problem with the "main man" idea of history as it attempts to discount the efforts put out by people who work just to stay alive. And, the instances of that struggle are not few and far between. Today, I heard that upwards of one million--that's 1,000,000--mortgage foreclosures will be accomplished in the near future as home owners are evicted for not being able to make payments on their homes. I suppose it is their fault for having bought a home that now is worth less than they owe on it? Men and women who took home $50,000.00 to $75,000.00 a year have lost their jobs as a result of union busting strategies. They cannot afford the life style they had built. Now, they're taking jobs at poverty levels doing menial tasks and "Guest Worker" programs are promoted to continue the union busting activities of big money. Zinn makes sure the reader gets a good handle on the situation the working man, woman and child struggled with for so long.
.

.

-- posted by pink101

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» pink101 - That On Which We Stand

In response to Clarification for EVERYONE posted by pink101:
.
I can go further along these llines in opposition to what Brian calls the "main man" approach to American History.
.
Here is a paper from the John Glenn Institute at Ohio State University: http://glenninstitute.osu.edu/washington...
.
As the reader delves into this paper, they can see some of the effects of what the author calls the "herofication" of American History.
.
It is easy to find writers who oppose one side or the other in some sort of a argument that is created to change the focus of any issue. But, the claim made in the Howard Zinn quotation in the paper's first paragraph sticks: ""We can reasonably conclude that how we think is not just mildly interesting, not just a subject for intellectual debate, but a matter of life and death."
.
The history of humanity is the groundwork under our feet and on which we stand as individual persons. To not be aware of our under standings is what Zinn is talking about when he says that it is a life and death situation. What is there about that the elistists do not want us to grasp?
.
.

-- posted by pink101

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» Brian Tubbs - Clarification for EVERYONE

In response to Clarification for EVERYONE posted by pink101:

What is there about the "HOW he does what he does" that causes you to have such a strong beef with him.

I've answered this question so many times, and have provided (via Praeger and Flynn and Kazin) so many examples - that you have ignored other than to diss THEM (or at least Praeger and Flynn) as "right-wing nuts." What's the use of answering you anymore in this? When I do provide specific charges, you sidestep or ignore them or brush them off. If you're not going to specifically engage the criticisms raised, then what's the use of my continuing this?

There are over a hundred posts in this thread, and you--mostly--seem opposed to Zinn in a very strong way to diss him as an historian.

Once again...you box me into a caricature, a strawman. You don't pay me the respect of letting me speak for myself. You refuse to engage the specifics, and instead slam the generalities.

To me, he seems to give a pretty clear view from an ordinary person's point of view. Most people are ordinary and only a very few are special.

That's how you're determined to see him, never mind the facts. Never mind that Zinn's conception of "ordinary person" excludes conservatives (including lower to middle class conservatives, and there are quite a few), Protestant Christians, etc., etc. Zinn is extremely selective in who he chooses to see as an "ordinary person." And it would appear - so are you.

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» Brian Tubbs - Elitists?

In response to That On Which We Stand posted by pink101:

What is there about that the elistists do not want us to grasp?

You and Zinn push class and groups to the EXTREMES. On the one hand, you and Zinn pretend to be concerned with the "ordinary peoples" of society and on the other, you lambaste the "elite."

Who are the "elitists," Pink? The rich? How you define "rich"?

Am I an "elitist," Pink? My two kids have qualified for a state-funded insurance program, because our income is at or below the official poverty line. Now, we live in a small church parsonage, and make enough via my pastorate to put food on the table. But we are definitely - most definitely - at the LOWER end of the middle class. In addition, my father died at 49 of a heart attack, my mother had MULTIPLE health problems in her decline until her recent death, and my sister is mentally disabled. Don't rhetorically maneuver me into some kind of "elitist" mold. You don't know me well enough to do that!

It's just possible, Pink, that a majority of "ordinary people" do NOT see the world in the same way that you and Howard Zinn do. Ever consider that?

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds

» pink101 - Clarification for EVERYONE

In response to Clarification for EVERYONE posted by BrianTubbs:
.
You don't pay me the respect of letting me speak for myself.
.
I am more than happy to respond to your direct statements and questions. I just don't like to have to respond to Praeger or Flynn to give you an answer. Be specific.
.
It's just possible, Pink, that a majority of "ordinary people" do NOT see the world in the same way that you and Howard Zinn do. Ever consider that?

.
Sure. I was raised to be a dyed in the wool Republican; but, I learned to experience my life first hand. I'm very happy you bring this question up. It is of great historical consequence to us here in American society. Maybe we could address that as a thematic approach?
.:)

-- posted by pink101

Permalink Print Discussion Email Discussion How to subscribe to feeds