Podcasts about Richard Hofstadter

This week we're looking at how folks who associated themselves with the magical and morbid QAnon memes about the “coming storm” that would destroy the Deep State have become that storm, mainly by talking about it, and are now in the position to congeal an even Deeper State characterized by more repression and control. They're doing it both as conspiracists and as conspiracy theorists would predict: as rich guys pretending to be oppressed. This opens up the question of “Have we been here before in the US, and what happened?” The parallels are uncanny. In the late 1920s, Henry Ford had his car dealers stick copies of The Dearborn Independent newspaper in the glove compartments of new cars. That was the rag in which he published excerpts of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Today another auto baron, Elon Musk, busts out seigheils and posts Nazi memes whenever he likes. But only one of them got a White House office. Show Notes CDC Statement on Measles Outbreak US Health Secretary Kennedy calls for end to deadly Texas measles outbreak Copy of STORM is HERE Data  LIVE: Kash Patel's confirmation hearing for FBI director  Kash Patel Wants to Work From Home for FBI. But Who Does He Live With? | The New Republic  Kash Patel privately agreed to hire an experienced deputy FBI director. Then Trump picked a loyalist | The Independent  How Dan Bongino Went From Infowars to FBI Deputy Director | WIRED  How Trump's Justice Department has gutted the government's ability to chase public corruption | CNN Politics  123: The Red-Pilled "Academic" Who Named Our Podcast — Conspirituality  Darkness Over All: John Robison and the Birth of the Illuminati Conspiracy — The Public Domain Review Conspiracy Theories Abounded in 19th-Century American Politics | Smithsonian  Wealthy bankers and businessmen plotted to overthrow FDR. A retired general foiled it.   Medical Mystery: What killed ‘Red Scare' Sen. Joseph McCarthy?  FBI director considering having UFC train agents in martial arts, say people familiar with plan | Reuters  What We Know About the CIA's Midcentury Mind-Control Project | Smithsonian  FBI Records: The Vault — COINTELPRO On campaign trail, RFK Jr. pushes 'bonkers' theory about CIA's 'takeover of the American press' - ABC News   Richard Hofstadter's “The Paranoid Style” Can't Help Us Now  Rehabilitating McCarthyism  JFK, Richard Hofstadter, and the ‘Paranoid Style in American Politics' Ford's Anti-Semitism | American Experience | Official Site | PBS Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

"Siamo la sola nazione industriale dove la legge consente a un gran numero di abitanti di possedere fucili e pistole", diceva un grande storico americano del secolo scorso. E provava a spiegare ragioni e conseguenze di questa singolarità cercando ovunque, dalla tradizione politica alle figure dello spettacolo. Forse a cinquanta anni di distanza le sue pagine sono utili a capire qualcosa della cultura profonda di un popolo che ha scelto due volte Trump. La Repubblica dei fucili di Richard Hofstadter, Luiss University Press Questo e gli altri podcast gratuiti del Post sono possibili grazie a chi si abbona al Post e ne sostiene il lavoro. Se vuoi fare la tua parte, abbonati al Post. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The human rights/public health crisis known as US border policy serves as further proof of what Richard Hofstadter termed in 1964 the “paranoid style in American politics.”  To his credit Mr. Washington's work attempts explain the recent phenomenon of closed or militarized borders here and around the world.  Closed borders, Mr. Washington explains, are responsible for untold human suffering that cannot be legitimately explained as efforts to protect our economy, government budgets, our environment and our sense of sovereignty or nationalism.  They do not limit migration, protect communities from crime and violence or dystopian-level anarchy, are counterproductive in addressing racism/modern-day Jim Crowism and the climate crisis and fail to serve any ethical purpose.  Information on “The Case for Open Borders” is at: https://www.haymarketbooks.org/books/2199-the-case-for-open-borders. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.thehealthcarepolicypodcast.com

Adam Gopnik revisits two famous American essays from the 1960s and finds a remarkably contemporary vision - and one 'that seems to have an application to our own time and its evident crisis.' He couples Richard Hofstadter's 1964 essay, 'The Paranoid Style in American Politics' with Daniel Boorstin's 1962 classic on 'image' and America's tenuous relationship with facts. 'It is the admixture of Hofstadter's political paranoia with Boorstin's cult of publicity,' writes Adam, 'that makes Trump so very different from previous political figures.'Producer: Adele Armstrong Sound: Peter Bosher Production coordinator: Gemma Ashman Editor: Tom Bigwood

In this episode I look at the late 19th Century Darwinian Conservatism of Herbert Spencer, William Graham Sumner, and reactions by William James and others as described in Richard Hofstadter's Social Darwinism in American Thought.

01:00 Virtually You: The Dangerous Powers of the E-Personality, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=121464 15:00 NYT: Harris vs. Trump Is Taking Shape. And Then There's Vance., https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/29/opinion/kamala-harris-trump-2024.html 22:00 Decoding Kamala Harris, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=156656 32:00 Secret Service incompetence in Trump shooting 36:00 Dooovid joins to talk about conspiracy theories 39:00 Richard Hofstadter, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Hofstadter 55:00 Does Dooovid fear white identity? 59:00 Jury reaches partial verdict in Samantha Woll murder trial 1:04:45 White Dudes for Kamala 1:07:30 Professor Ashley Jardina's book on white identity, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xn0-e7U3VWc 1:09:00 Vox: White identity politics is about more than racism, https://www.vox.com/2019/4/26/18306125/white-identity-politics-trump-racism-ashley-jardina 1:13:00 August 5, 2019: Ashley Jardina

News of Kate Middleton's cancer diagnosis arrived after months of speculation regarding the royal's whereabouts. Had the Princess of Wales, who had not been seen in public since Christmas Day, absconded to a faraway hideout? Was trouble at home—an affair, perhaps—keeping her out of the public eye? What truths hid behind the obviously doctored family photograph? #WhereisKateMiddleton trended as the online world offered up a set of elaborate hypotheses increasingly untethered from reality. On this episode of Critics at Large, the staff writers Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz discuss how a particular brand of “fan fiction” has enveloped the Royal Family, and how, like the #FreeBritney movement, the episode illustrates how conspiracy thinking has become a regular facet of online life. The hosts discuss “The Paranoid Style in American Politics,” an essay by the historian Richard Hofstadter, from 1964, that traces conspiratorial thought across history, as well as Naomi Klein's 2023 book “Doppelganger.” How, then, should we navigate a world in which it's more and more difficult to separate fact from fiction? Some antidotes may lie in the fictions themselves. “The rest of us who are not as conspiratorial in bent could spend more time looking at those conspiracies,” Cunningham says. “To understand what a troubling number of our fellows believe is a kind of tonic action.”Read, watch, and listen with the critics:“Don't Blame ‘Stupid People on the Internet' for Palace's Princess Kate Lies,” by Will Bunch (the Philadelphia Inquirer)“Doppelganger,” by Naomi Klein“The Paranoid Style in American Politics,” by Richard Hofstadter (Harper's Magazine)“The Parallax View” (1974)“Cutter's Way” (1981) “Reddit's I.P.O. Is a Content Moderation Success Story,” by Kevin Roose (the New York Times)New episodes drop every Thursday. Follow Critics at Large wherever you get your podcasts.

In 1963, the historian Richard Hofstadter gave a famous lecture at Oxford (later an essay in Harper's) arguing that a “paranoid style” was a recurrent strain in American politics. Hofstadter cited examples ranging from the Anti-Masons of the 1830s to MCarthyism. Today, pundits often turn to the concept of a “paranoid style” when trying to explain Trumpism. Why has Hofstadter's idea been so influential? And does it really explain anything at all? Adam discusses these questions with Nick Witham, the author of Popularizing the Past, a brilliant new study of Cold War-era historians who shaped an understanding of American history far beyond the groves of academia. The Last Best Hope? is the podcast of the Rothermere American Institute, University of Oxford. Presenter: Adam Smith. Producer: Emily Williams. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this lively and far-reaching text, Nick Witham (University College London) tells the stories of five postwar historians who changed the way ordinary Americans thought about their nation's history. For decades, critics of the discipline have argued that the historical profession is dominated by scholars unable, or perhaps even unwilling, to write for the public. In Popularizing the Past: Historians, Publishers, and Readers in Postwar America (University of Chicago Press, 2023), Witham challenges this interpretation by telling the stories of Richard Hofstadter, Daniel Boorstin, John Hope Franklin, Howard Zinn, and Gerda Lerner - writers who, in the decades after World War II, published widely read books of national history. Witham compellingly argues that we should understand historians' efforts to engage with the reading public as a vital part of their postwar identity and mission. Not just a matter of writing style, popular accessibility was also a product of an author's frame of mind, the editor's skill, and the publisher's marketing acumen, among other factors. Rooted in extensive archival work, Popularizing the Past persuasively demonstrates the cross-influences of popular history writing and American popular culture. James West is a historian of race, media and business in the modern United States and Black diaspora. Author of "Ebony Magazine and Lerone Bennett Jr.: Popular Black History in Postwar America" (Illinois, 2020), "A House for the Struggle: The Black Press and the Built Environment in Chicago" (Illinois, 2022), "Our Kind of Historian: The Work and Activism of Lerone Bennett Jr. (Massachusetts, 2022). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

In this lively and far-reaching text, Nick Witham (University College London) tells the stories of five postwar historians who changed the way ordinary Americans thought about their nation's history. For decades, critics of the discipline have argued that the historical profession is dominated by scholars unable, or perhaps even unwilling, to write for the public. In Popularizing the Past: Historians, Publishers, and Readers in Postwar America (University of Chicago Press, 2023), Witham challenges this interpretation by telling the stories of Richard Hofstadter, Daniel Boorstin, John Hope Franklin, Howard Zinn, and Gerda Lerner - writers who, in the decades after World War II, published widely read books of national history. Witham compellingly argues that we should understand historians' efforts to engage with the reading public as a vital part of their postwar identity and mission. Not just a matter of writing style, popular accessibility was also a product of an author's frame of mind, the editor's skill, and the publisher's marketing acumen, among other factors. Rooted in extensive archival work, Popularizing the Past persuasively demonstrates the cross-influences of popular history writing and American popular culture. James West is a historian of race, media and business in the modern United States and Black diaspora. Author of "Ebony Magazine and Lerone Bennett Jr.: Popular Black History in Postwar America" (Illinois, 2020), "A House for the Struggle: The Black Press and the Built Environment in Chicago" (Illinois, 2022), "Our Kind of Historian: The Work and Activism of Lerone Bennett Jr. (Massachusetts, 2022). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

In this lively and far-reaching text, Nick Witham (University College London) tells the stories of five postwar historians who changed the way ordinary Americans thought about their nation's history. For decades, critics of the discipline have argued that the historical profession is dominated by scholars unable, or perhaps even unwilling, to write for the public. In Popularizing the Past: Historians, Publishers, and Readers in Postwar America (University of Chicago Press, 2023), Witham challenges this interpretation by telling the stories of Richard Hofstadter, Daniel Boorstin, John Hope Franklin, Howard Zinn, and Gerda Lerner - writers who, in the decades after World War II, published widely read books of national history. Witham compellingly argues that we should understand historians' efforts to engage with the reading public as a vital part of their postwar identity and mission. Not just a matter of writing style, popular accessibility was also a product of an author's frame of mind, the editor's skill, and the publisher's marketing acumen, among other factors. Rooted in extensive archival work, Popularizing the Past persuasively demonstrates the cross-influences of popular history writing and American popular culture. James West is a historian of race, media and business in the modern United States and Black diaspora. Author of "Ebony Magazine and Lerone Bennett Jr.: Popular Black History in Postwar America" (Illinois, 2020), "A House for the Struggle: The Black Press and the Built Environment in Chicago" (Illinois, 2022), "Our Kind of Historian: The Work and Activism of Lerone Bennett Jr. (Massachusetts, 2022). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

In this lively and far-reaching text, Nick Witham (University College London) tells the stories of five postwar historians who changed the way ordinary Americans thought about their nation's history. For decades, critics of the discipline have argued that the historical profession is dominated by scholars unable, or perhaps even unwilling, to write for the public. In Popularizing the Past: Historians, Publishers, and Readers in Postwar America (University of Chicago Press, 2023), Witham challenges this interpretation by telling the stories of Richard Hofstadter, Daniel Boorstin, John Hope Franklin, Howard Zinn, and Gerda Lerner - writers who, in the decades after World War II, published widely read books of national history. Witham compellingly argues that we should understand historians' efforts to engage with the reading public as a vital part of their postwar identity and mission. Not just a matter of writing style, popular accessibility was also a product of an author's frame of mind, the editor's skill, and the publisher's marketing acumen, among other factors. Rooted in extensive archival work, Popularizing the Past persuasively demonstrates the cross-influences of popular history writing and American popular culture. James West is a historian of race, media and business in the modern United States and Black diaspora. Author of "Ebony Magazine and Lerone Bennett Jr.: Popular Black History in Postwar America" (Illinois, 2020), "A House for the Struggle: The Black Press and the Built Environment in Chicago" (Illinois, 2022), "Our Kind of Historian: The Work and Activism of Lerone Bennett Jr. (Massachusetts, 2022). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

In this lively and far-reaching text, Nick Witham (University College London) tells the stories of five postwar historians who changed the way ordinary Americans thought about their nation's history. For decades, critics of the discipline have argued that the historical profession is dominated by scholars unable, or perhaps even unwilling, to write for the public. In Popularizing the Past: Historians, Publishers, and Readers in Postwar America (University of Chicago Press, 2023), Witham challenges this interpretation by telling the stories of Richard Hofstadter, Daniel Boorstin, John Hope Franklin, Howard Zinn, and Gerda Lerner - writers who, in the decades after World War II, published widely read books of national history. Witham compellingly argues that we should understand historians' efforts to engage with the reading public as a vital part of their postwar identity and mission. Not just a matter of writing style, popular accessibility was also a product of an author's frame of mind, the editor's skill, and the publisher's marketing acumen, among other factors. Rooted in extensive archival work, Popularizing the Past persuasively demonstrates the cross-influences of popular history writing and American popular culture. James West is a historian of race, media and business in the modern United States and Black diaspora. Author of "Ebony Magazine and Lerone Bennett Jr.: Popular Black History in Postwar America" (Illinois, 2020), "A House for the Struggle: The Black Press and the Built Environment in Chicago" (Illinois, 2022), "Our Kind of Historian: The Work and Activism of Lerone Bennett Jr. (Massachusetts, 2022). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/communications

In this lively and far-reaching text, Nick Witham (University College London) tells the stories of five postwar historians who changed the way ordinary Americans thought about their nation's history. For decades, critics of the discipline have argued that the historical profession is dominated by scholars unable, or perhaps even unwilling, to write for the public. In Popularizing the Past: Historians, Publishers, and Readers in Postwar America (University of Chicago Press, 2023), Witham challenges this interpretation by telling the stories of Richard Hofstadter, Daniel Boorstin, John Hope Franklin, Howard Zinn, and Gerda Lerner - writers who, in the decades after World War II, published widely read books of national history. Witham compellingly argues that we should understand historians' efforts to engage with the reading public as a vital part of their postwar identity and mission. Not just a matter of writing style, popular accessibility was also a product of an author's frame of mind, the editor's skill, and the publisher's marketing acumen, among other factors. Rooted in extensive archival work, Popularizing the Past persuasively demonstrates the cross-influences of popular history writing and American popular culture. James West is a historian of race, media and business in the modern United States and Black diaspora. Author of "Ebony Magazine and Lerone Bennett Jr.: Popular Black History in Postwar America" (Illinois, 2020), "A House for the Struggle: The Black Press and the Built Environment in Chicago" (Illinois, 2022), "Our Kind of Historian: The Work and Activism of Lerone Bennett Jr. (Massachusetts, 2022). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

“Only recently have scholars outside the historical profession identified progressivism for what it was and continues to be: a fundamental rupture with the roots of American order.” So writes the political scientist and theorist Bradley C. S. Watson in his 2020 book Progressivism: The Strange History of a Radical Idea (U Notre Dame Press).  Watson provides an intellectual history of how historians such as Richard Hofstadter tended to underplay what a radical break the Progressive Movement was from American constitutionalism. The book shows that only in recent decades have political theorists entered the fray and rendered clear how dire the ramifications for American society and culture the views on the Constitution of such figures as Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson were and what a massive break they were from the legacy of the founders and such advocates of natural rights as Abraham Lincoln. Anyone interested in how American political history was written in the period of roughly 1940-1980 should read this book. So should anyone interested in the differences between the views of historians and political scientists on the same developments. And this is not just a matter of the mindsets of various fields of scholarship. These debates shaped public policy and affected a host of issues such as the rise of the administrative state and the role of expertise in governance, the place of religion (Christianity first and foremost) in American life and the ideology-dependent staffing of the ranks of college social science departments, government entities and other key institutions. All of these developments filtered out to the rest of society. Watson helps us understand what the Progressives (including politicians, academics and theologians such as Walter Rauschenbusch) of the period of roughly 1900-1930 actually said and wrote versus what historians in the decades shortly thereafter said they said. Let's hear from Professor Watson himself. Hope J. Leman is a grants researcher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

“Only recently have scholars outside the historical profession identified progressivism for what it was and continues to be: a fundamental rupture with the roots of American order.” So writes the political scientist and theorist Bradley C. S. Watson in his 2020 book Progressivism: The Strange History of a Radical Idea (U Notre Dame Press).  Watson provides an intellectual history of how historians such as Richard Hofstadter tended to underplay what a radical break the Progressive Movement was from American constitutionalism. The book shows that only in recent decades have political theorists entered the fray and rendered clear how dire the ramifications for American society and culture the views on the Constitution of such figures as Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson were and what a massive break they were from the legacy of the founders and such advocates of natural rights as Abraham Lincoln. Anyone interested in how American political history was written in the period of roughly 1940-1980 should read this book. So should anyone interested in the differences between the views of historians and political scientists on the same developments. And this is not just a matter of the mindsets of various fields of scholarship. These debates shaped public policy and affected a host of issues such as the rise of the administrative state and the role of expertise in governance, the place of religion (Christianity first and foremost) in American life and the ideology-dependent staffing of the ranks of college social science departments, government entities and other key institutions. All of these developments filtered out to the rest of society. Watson helps us understand what the Progressives (including politicians, academics and theologians such as Walter Rauschenbusch) of the period of roughly 1900-1930 actually said and wrote versus what historians in the decades shortly thereafter said they said. Let's hear from Professor Watson himself. Hope J. Leman is a grants researcher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

“Only recently have scholars outside the historical profession identified progressivism for what it was and continues to be: a fundamental rupture with the roots of American order.” So writes the political scientist and theorist Bradley C. S. Watson in his 2020 book Progressivism: The Strange History of a Radical Idea (U Notre Dame Press).  Watson provides an intellectual history of how historians such as Richard Hofstadter tended to underplay what a radical break the Progressive Movement was from American constitutionalism. The book shows that only in recent decades have political theorists entered the fray and rendered clear how dire the ramifications for American society and culture the views on the Constitution of such figures as Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson were and what a massive break they were from the legacy of the founders and such advocates of natural rights as Abraham Lincoln. Anyone interested in how American political history was written in the period of roughly 1940-1980 should read this book. So should anyone interested in the differences between the views of historians and political scientists on the same developments. And this is not just a matter of the mindsets of various fields of scholarship. These debates shaped public policy and affected a host of issues such as the rise of the administrative state and the role of expertise in governance, the place of religion (Christianity first and foremost) in American life and the ideology-dependent staffing of the ranks of college social science departments, government entities and other key institutions. All of these developments filtered out to the rest of society. Watson helps us understand what the Progressives (including politicians, academics and theologians such as Walter Rauschenbusch) of the period of roughly 1900-1930 actually said and wrote versus what historians in the decades shortly thereafter said they said. Let's hear from Professor Watson himself. Hope J. Leman is a grants researcher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

“Only recently have scholars outside the historical profession identified progressivism for what it was and continues to be: a fundamental rupture with the roots of American order.” So writes the political scientist and theorist Bradley C. S. Watson in his 2020 book Progressivism: The Strange History of a Radical Idea (U Notre Dame Press).  Watson provides an intellectual history of how historians such as Richard Hofstadter tended to underplay what a radical break the Progressive Movement was from American constitutionalism. The book shows that only in recent decades have political theorists entered the fray and rendered clear how dire the ramifications for American society and culture the views on the Constitution of such figures as Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson were and what a massive break they were from the legacy of the founders and such advocates of natural rights as Abraham Lincoln. Anyone interested in how American political history was written in the period of roughly 1940-1980 should read this book. So should anyone interested in the differences between the views of historians and political scientists on the same developments. And this is not just a matter of the mindsets of various fields of scholarship. These debates shaped public policy and affected a host of issues such as the rise of the administrative state and the role of expertise in governance, the place of religion (Christianity first and foremost) in American life and the ideology-dependent staffing of the ranks of college social science departments, government entities and other key institutions. All of these developments filtered out to the rest of society. Watson helps us understand what the Progressives (including politicians, academics and theologians such as Walter Rauschenbusch) of the period of roughly 1900-1930 actually said and wrote versus what historians in the decades shortly thereafter said they said. Let's hear from Professor Watson himself. Hope J. Leman is a grants researcher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

“Only recently have scholars outside the historical profession identified progressivism for what it was and continues to be: a fundamental rupture with the roots of American order.” So writes the political scientist and theorist Bradley C. S. Watson in his 2020 book Progressivism: The Strange History of a Radical Idea (U Notre Dame Press).  Watson provides an intellectual history of how historians such as Richard Hofstadter tended to underplay what a radical break the Progressive Movement was from American constitutionalism. The book shows that only in recent decades have political theorists entered the fray and rendered clear how dire the ramifications for American society and culture the views on the Constitution of such figures as Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson were and what a massive break they were from the legacy of the founders and such advocates of natural rights as Abraham Lincoln. Anyone interested in how American political history was written in the period of roughly 1940-1980 should read this book. So should anyone interested in the differences between the views of historians and political scientists on the same developments. And this is not just a matter of the mindsets of various fields of scholarship. These debates shaped public policy and affected a host of issues such as the rise of the administrative state and the role of expertise in governance, the place of religion (Christianity first and foremost) in American life and the ideology-dependent staffing of the ranks of college social science departments, government entities and other key institutions. All of these developments filtered out to the rest of society. Watson helps us understand what the Progressives (including politicians, academics and theologians such as Walter Rauschenbusch) of the period of roughly 1900-1930 actually said and wrote versus what historians in the decades shortly thereafter said they said. Let's hear from Professor Watson himself. Hope J. Leman is a grants researcher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

“Only recently have scholars outside the historical profession identified progressivism for what it was and continues to be: a fundamental rupture with the roots of American order.” So writes the political scientist and theorist Bradley C. S. Watson in his 2020 book Progressivism: The Strange History of a Radical Idea (U Notre Dame Press).  Watson provides an intellectual history of how historians such as Richard Hofstadter tended to underplay what a radical break the Progressive Movement was from American constitutionalism. The book shows that only in recent decades have political theorists entered the fray and rendered clear how dire the ramifications for American society and culture the views on the Constitution of such figures as Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson were and what a massive break they were from the legacy of the founders and such advocates of natural rights as Abraham Lincoln. Anyone interested in how American political history was written in the period of roughly 1940-1980 should read this book. So should anyone interested in the differences between the views of historians and political scientists on the same developments. And this is not just a matter of the mindsets of various fields of scholarship. These debates shaped public policy and affected a host of issues such as the rise of the administrative state and the role of expertise in governance, the place of religion (Christianity first and foremost) in American life and the ideology-dependent staffing of the ranks of college social science departments, government entities and other key institutions. All of these developments filtered out to the rest of society. Watson helps us understand what the Progressives (including politicians, academics and theologians such as Walter Rauschenbusch) of the period of roughly 1900-1930 actually said and wrote versus what historians in the decades shortly thereafter said they said. Let's hear from Professor Watson himself. Hope J. Leman is a grants researcher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy

“Only recently have scholars outside the historical profession identified progressivism for what it was and continues to be: a fundamental rupture with the roots of American order.” So writes the political scientist and theorist Bradley C. S. Watson in his 2020 book Progressivism: The Strange History of a Radical Idea (U Notre Dame Press).  Watson provides an intellectual history of how historians such as Richard Hofstadter tended to underplay what a radical break the Progressive Movement was from American constitutionalism. The book shows that only in recent decades have political theorists entered the fray and rendered clear how dire the ramifications for American society and culture the views on the Constitution of such figures as Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson were and what a massive break they were from the legacy of the founders and such advocates of natural rights as Abraham Lincoln. Anyone interested in how American political history was written in the period of roughly 1940-1980 should read this book. So should anyone interested in the differences between the views of historians and political scientists on the same developments. And this is not just a matter of the mindsets of various fields of scholarship. These debates shaped public policy and affected a host of issues such as the rise of the administrative state and the role of expertise in governance, the place of religion (Christianity first and foremost) in American life and the ideology-dependent staffing of the ranks of college social science departments, government entities and other key institutions. All of these developments filtered out to the rest of society. Watson helps us understand what the Progressives (including politicians, academics and theologians such as Walter Rauschenbusch) of the period of roughly 1900-1930 actually said and wrote versus what historians in the decades shortly thereafter said they said. Let's hear from Professor Watson himself. Hope J. Leman is a grants researcher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/politics-and-polemics

“Only recently have scholars outside the historical profession identified progressivism for what it was and continues to be: a fundamental rupture with the roots of American order.” So writes the political scientist and theorist Bradley C. S. Watson in his 2020 book Progressivism: The Strange History of a Radical Idea (U Notre Dame Press).  Watson provides an intellectual history of how historians such as Richard Hofstadter tended to underplay what a radical break the Progressive Movement was from American constitutionalism. The book shows that only in recent decades have political theorists entered the fray and rendered clear how dire the ramifications for American society and culture the views on the Constitution of such figures as Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson were and what a massive break they were from the legacy of the founders and such advocates of natural rights as Abraham Lincoln. Anyone interested in how American political history was written in the period of roughly 1940-1980 should read this book. So should anyone interested in the differences between the views of historians and political scientists on the same developments. And this is not just a matter of the mindsets of various fields of scholarship. These debates shaped public policy and affected a host of issues such as the rise of the administrative state and the role of expertise in governance, the place of religion (Christianity first and foremost) in American life and the ideology-dependent staffing of the ranks of college social science departments, government entities and other key institutions. All of these developments filtered out to the rest of society. Watson helps us understand what the Progressives (including politicians, academics and theologians such as Walter Rauschenbusch) of the period of roughly 1900-1930 actually said and wrote versus what historians in the decades shortly thereafter said they said. Let's hear from Professor Watson himself. Hope J. Leman is a grants researcher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

“Only recently have scholars outside the historical profession identified progressivism for what it was and continues to be: a fundamental rupture with the roots of American order.” So writes the political scientist and theorist Bradley C. S. Watson in his 2020 book Progressivism: The Strange History of a Radical Idea (U Notre Dame Press).  Watson provides an intellectual history of how historians such as Richard Hofstadter tended to underplay what a radical break the Progressive Movement was from American constitutionalism. The book shows that only in recent decades have political theorists entered the fray and rendered clear how dire the ramifications for American society and culture the views on the Constitution of such figures as Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson were and what a massive break they were from the legacy of the founders and such advocates of natural rights as Abraham Lincoln. Anyone interested in how American political history was written in the period of roughly 1940-1980 should read this book. So should anyone interested in the differences between the views of historians and political scientists on the same developments. And this is not just a matter of the mindsets of various fields of scholarship. These debates shaped public policy and affected a host of issues such as the rise of the administrative state and the role of expertise in governance, the place of religion (Christianity first and foremost) in American life and the ideology-dependent staffing of the ranks of college social science departments, government entities and other key institutions. All of these developments filtered out to the rest of society. Watson helps us understand what the Progressives (including politicians, academics and theologians such as Walter Rauschenbusch) of the period of roughly 1900-1930 actually said and wrote versus what historians in the decades shortly thereafter said they said. Let's hear from Professor Watson himself. Hope J. Leman is a grants researcher. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Systematic Theology and the Life of the Mind Few mistakes are more crippling to Christian witness within the Christian community than anti-intellectualism. Few theological errors violate more theological doctrines more radically. In his Pulitzer-Prize-winning work, Anti-Intellectualism and in American Life, historian Richard Hofstadter defined anti-intellectualism as a “resentment of the life of the mind, and those who are considered to represent it; and a disposition to constantly minimize the value of that life.” I agree, but will add a few nuances to this: An anti-intellectual demeans or even rejects the worth of reasons, arguments, and evidence in the shaping of individual beliefs and overall worldviews and holds in contempt or derision those who insist that the intellectual should be fed not starved. Few who read this message are in danger of anti-intellectualism, but many outside the Christian academy are in cognitive jeopardy. But this argument will further the defense of the sanctified intellect so that the mission of God will go forth in even greater power. Recommended Reading: Harry Blamires, The Christian Mind Os Guinness. Fit Bodies, Fat Minds. James Sire, Habits of the Mind P. Moreland, Love Your God With all Your Mind. Discover more Christian podcasts at lifeaudio.com and inquire about advertising opportunities at lifeaudio.com/contact-us.

Episode 404 - should we do an "error: podcast not found" gag? Probably not worth the effort - not when the actual episode is doing double duty as a Conspiracy Theatre Masterpiece Theater (sort of) and a Back to the Conspiracy (sort of). Yes, we're looking at Richard Hofstadter's essay "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" from 1965 - one of the works that kicked off the philosophical literature a few decades later. We start, as you'd imagine, with a sketch based on the 1995 horror film "The Mangler". — You can contact us at: podcastconspiracy@gmail.com Why not support The Podcaster's Guide to the Conspiracy by donating to our Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/podcastersguidetotheconspiracy or Podbean crowdfunding? http://www.podbean.com/patron/crowdfund/profile/id/muv5b-79

In the antebellum South, democracy was racialized; as the vote was extened to every white man, it was granted in return for the political support of forced labor slavery. In part two of our six part episode on Abraham Lincoln and the Emancipation Proclamation, we review this process, and the social context in which Lincoln made his emancipation decision. We probe attitudes towards democracy, the religious concept of perfectionism, and the idea of social degradation, especially in the context of slavery. We ask the question: How could so many people support an economic institution that was leading to dehumanization and social decline? Part 2: Democracy, Perfectionism and Degradation Audio Clips: Barack Obama, Speech on the Constitution, March 8, 2008: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWe7wTVbLUU Music Clips: “We're Coming Father Abraam” (date unknown): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rS5fDOiQJA0 “Tyler and Tippecanoe (1842), Sing Along with Millard Fillmore (1964): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XngBpgpAeQY “Draw Me Nearer,” Rittersville Sunday School (1890?): https://cylinders.library.ucsb.edu/search.php?nq=1&query_type=call_number&query=cylinder13081 “Roll Jordan Roll,” Fisk Jubilee Singers (1927): https://cylinders.library.ucsb.edu/detail.php?query_type=mms_id&query=990025338180203776&r=2&of=2 Bibliography Merle Curti, The Growth of American Thought (Harper, 1951) Marvin Meyers, The Jacksonian Persuasion (Vintage, 1957) Alan Taylor, The Internal Enemy: Slavery and War in Virginia, 1772-1832 (Norton, 2013) Sydney E. Ahlstrom, A Religious History of the American People (1973; Yale, 2004) Vernon Louis Parrington, Main Currents in American Thought: Volume 2 - The Romantic Revolution in America, 1800-1860 (1927; University of Oklahoma,1987) Joshua Rothman, Flush Times and Fever Dreams: A Story of Capitalism and Slavery in Jacksonian America (University of Georgia, 2012) Richard Blackett, Building an Antislavery Wall: Black Americans in the Atlantic Abolitionist Movement, 1830-1860 (Louisiana State University Press, 1983) Richard Hofstadter, The American Political Tradition and the Men who Made it (Vintage, 1973) Robert V. Remini, Andrew Jackson and the Course of American Freedom, 1822-1832 (Harper, 1981) Robert V. Remini, Andrew Jackson and the Course of American Democracy, 1822-1845 (Harper, 1984)

In this episode, I cover Richard Hofstadter's "The Paranoid Style of American Politics" If you want to support me, you can do that with these links: Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/theoryandphilosophy paypal.me/theoryphilosophy Twitter: @DavidGuignion IG: @theory_and_philosophy

Who are “the Nephilim,” you ask, and why did they create the Federal Reserve? We are so glad you asked and we're going to tell you—by way of reviewing a most ambiguous Bible story and tracing some of the surprising ways this story is being received today. Genesis 6:1–4 (NRSVue): https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+6%3A1-4&version=NRSVUE Numbers 13:31–33: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers+13%3A31-33&version=NRSVUE 1 Enoch (see esp. ch. 15): https://www.ccel.org/c/charles/otpseudepig/enoch/ENOCH_1.HTM Book: The Roots of the Federal Reserve: Tracing the Nephilim from Noah to the US Dollar: https://www.amazon.com/Roots-Federal-Reserve-Tracing-Nephilim/dp/1942790198 Beautiful Jekyll Island, Georgia, where Nephilim may infect the soil today: https://www.southernliving.com/travel/georgia/jekyll-island Popular book on Amazon in the category “Christian Mystical Spirituality”: Judgment of the Nephilim: https://www.amazon.com/Judgment-Nephilim-Ryan-Pitterson/dp/0999208306 Richard Hofstadter, “The Paranoid Style in American Politics”: https://harpers.org/archive/1964/11/the-paranoid-style-in-american-politics/ Gary Wayne, The Genesis 6 Conspiracy: How Secret Societies and the Descendants of Giants Plan to Enslave Humankind: https://www.amazon.com/Genesis-Conspiracy-Societies-Descendants-Humankind/dp/1632692902

How did conspiracy theory grow from a fringe belief to a quasi-religious movement capable of toppling democracies? Ian and Dorian chart the rise of the tinfoil mindset in a wild historical ride that takes in the Illuminati, 9/11, Karl Popper, Watergate, Hitler, QAnon, Oliver Stone's JFK, and Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn's secret society. And chillingly, they explain why the tinfoil fringe isn't just on the fringe any more.  Help Ian and Dorian DO THEIR RESEARCH by supporting Origin Story on Patreon: www.Patreon.com/originstorypod –––––––– Conspiracy Theory: A Reading List From Dorian: Voodoo Histories by David Aaronovitch. Sharp and readable overview of the history and psychology of conspiracy theories. The United States of Paranoia by Jesse Walker. A provocative history which argues that paranoia permeates mainstream American politics, not just the fringes. Among the Truthers by Jonathan Kay. A reporter's journey through contemporary conspiracy theories. The Paranoid Style in American Politics by Richard Hofstadter. This brilliant diagnosis of the conspiracist mentality still holds up. The Hitler Conspiracies by Richard J Evans. Evans uses case studies including the Reichstag fire and the stab-in-the-back myth to illustrate the importance of conspiracy theories to the Nazi era. Very good on The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and the difference between event theories and systemic theories. The Crying of Lot 49 by Thomas Pynchon. The classic novel of American paranoia and the only Pynchon novel you can read in less than a week. The Coming Storm. Superbly reported BBC podcast series, presented by Gabriel Gatehouse, explores the 90s roots of QAnon. On JFK the movie: JFK: The Book of the Film by Oliver Stone and Zachary Sklar. The heavily annotated screenplay plus reams of press coverage of Stone's movie, much of it hostile. Reclaiming History by Vincent Bugliosi. Elephantine takedown of every single JFK conspiracy theory. There are no survivors. Christopher Hitchens on JFK and conspiracy theories in general. And from Ian: Conspiracy Theories by Quassim Cassam. The case for a political analysis. Worthwhile, but flawed. The Psychology of Conspiracy Theories by Jan-Willem van Prooijen. Decent little overview of the psychological work into the area. Also worthwhile, also flawed. –––––––– “The very fact that it's not proper scholarship makes conspiracy theory so much more exciting to read — and satisfying to write.” – Dorian “JFK is the most powerful argument I've seen yet that you should be able to sue for libel after you're dead.” – Ian “According to Hitler, the fact that the Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion had been called fake proved they were true…” – Dorian “Certain people believe that the CIA invented conspiracy theory in order to discredit people who criticised the Warren Commission. So that means that conspiracy theory is a conspiracy theory…” – Dorian –––––––– Written and presented by Dorian Lynskey and Ian Dunt. Audio production by Jade Bailey and Alex Rees. Music by Jade Bailey. Logo art by Mischa Welsh. . Group Editor: Andrew Harrison. Origin Story is a Podmasters production Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

He did much of the research for What it Took to Win: a History of the Democratic Party, in the Manuscript Reading Room at the Library of Congress. “I don't believe in heaven, but, if there's a heaven for historians, this would be right in the center of it.” Plus some thoughts on the late Richard Hofstadter and the early Bob Dylan.

The History Of Trump's Paranoid Style Of Politics. Friend of the show, author Dan Singal, joins Steve Williamson and Karen McClelland to discuss the rural/urban divide and how Trumpism came about. He explains the phenomenon by referencing Richard Hofstadter, perhaps … Continue reading →

Join the editors as they continue their discussion of the role of myth in political life, examining the "QAnon" conspiracy theory. What does Q tell us about myth and its role in politics? Is there precedent for conspiracy theories like Q in the American past? How is Q different from past conspiracy theories? Next week, we will conclude our discussion of the role of myth in political life by discussing the possibility of a global myth, whether myths are ultimately natural or socially constructed, and what policies might make American myths more believable. -- To comment on this episode or sign up for our newsletter, click here.https://spectacles-insight.captivate.fm/listen (To listen to written articles from Spectacles read aloud, click here.)Further Reading"https://www.propublica.org/article/heeding-steve-bannons-call-election-deniers-organize-to-seize-control-of-the-gop-and-reshape-americas-elections (Heeding Steve Bannon's Call, Election Deniers Organize to Seize Control of the GOP — and Reshape America's Elections)," by Isaac Arnsdorf, Doug Bock Clark, Alexandra Berzon and Anjeanette Damon, for ProPublica. "https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/06/qanon-nothing-can-stop-what-is-coming/610567/ (Qanon Is More Important Than You Think)," by Adrienne LaFrance in The Atlantic. "https://harpers.org/archive/1964/11/the-paranoid-style-in-american-politics/ (The Paranoid Style in American Politics)," by Richard Hofstadter in Harper's Magazine. Table of Contents00:00 - Introduction 00:32 - Q Excerpts 02:57 - Recap of Last Week 04:39 - Today's Topic 05:50 - What is Q, basically? 09:33 - Connection to Election Fraud Conspiracy 12:34 - Q As Myth, Religion 17:48 - Q As Reactionary Myth, Fantasy 21:26 - Q's Roots in American Covenantal Myth 23:53 - History of American Paranoia 31:15 - American Tension b/t Universality, Particularity 35:20 - The Power of The Internet 42:39 - The Balkanization of American Narratives 43:13 - Next Week's Topic 43:54 - Signing Off

In the words of Richard Hofstadter, “Third parties are like bees: once they have stung, they die." What Hofstadter, a towering public intellectual who died in 1970, meant was that in American politics, third parties succeeded not by winning elections, but by pushing the major parties to reform, to adopt ideas circulating on the margins and bring them into the mainstream. Whether third parties are a help or a hindrance, there is an immovable reason why they have struggled to maintain relevance in U.S. history. Two political scientists, Lee Drutman of New America and Norm Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute, discuss why third parties fail, and whether we could use some new parties today.

Many people say it's irrational to believe in conspiracy theories. But is that really true? We are joined by Dr M R. X. Dentith—Associate Professor in the International Center for Philosophy at Beijing Normal University—for the first instalment of a two-part interview on the subject of Conspiracy Theory Theory. Focusing upon the essential (and approachable) book edited by Dr Dentith entitled "Taking Conspiracy Theories Seriously" (Rowman and Littlefield, 2018), in this first instalment we lay the groundwork for the conversation and then go on to discuss the first section of the volume entitled, "The Particularist Turn in the Philosophy of Conspiracy Theories". M R. X. Dentith, PhD (Auckland), is the author of The Philosophy of Conspiracy Theories (Palgrave, 2014), the first single-author book-length treatment of the philosophical issues surrounding conspiracy theory, and editor of Taking Conspiracy Theories Seriously (Rowman and Littlefield, 2018), an edited collection of the most recent work on conspiracy theory theory. They have been a Fellow in the Institute for Research in the Humanities (ICUB) at the University of Bucharest and the New Europe College in Bucharest, and they are currently Associate Professor in the International Center for Philosophy at Beijing Normal University. Their current research project focuses on conspiracy theory, conspiracy theory theory, and secrecy. For show notes please visit https://themindrenewed.com

Many people say it's irrational to believe in conspiracy theories. But is that really true? We are joined by Dr M R. X. Dentith—Associate Professor in the International Center for Philosophy at Beijing Normal University—for the first instalment of a two-part interview on the subject of Conspiracy Theory Theory. Focusing upon the essential (and approachable) book edited by Dr Dentith entitled "Taking Conspiracy Theories Seriously" (Rowman and Littlefield, 2018), in this first instalment we lay the groundwork for the conversation and then go on to discuss the first section of the volume entitled, "The Particularist Turn in the Philosophy of Conspiracy Theories". M R. X. Dentith, PhD (Auckland), is the author of The Philosophy of Conspiracy Theories (Palgrave, 2014), the first single-author book-length treatment of the philosophical issues surrounding conspiracy theory, and editor of Taking Conspiracy Theories Seriously (Rowman and Littlefield, 2018), an edited collection of the most recent work on conspiracy theory theory. They have been a Fellow in the Institute for Research in the Humanities (ICUB) at the University of Bucharest and the New Europe College in Bucharest, and they are currently Associate Professor in the International Center for Philosophy at Beijing Normal University. Their current research project focuses on conspiracy theory, conspiracy theory theory, and secrecy. For show notes please visit https://themindrenewed.com

The three decades that followed World War II were an exceptionally fertile period for American essays. The explosion of journals and magazines, the rise of public intellectuals, and breakthroughs in the arts inspired a flowering of literary culture. At the same time, the many problems that confronted mid-century America--racism, sexism, nuclear threat, war, poverty, and environmental degradation among them--proved fruitful topics for America's best minds. In The Golden Age of the American Essay: 1945–1970 (Anchor Books, 2021), Phillip Lopate assembles a dazzling array of famous writers, critics, sociologists, theologians, historians, activists, theorists, humorists, poets, and novelists. Here are writers like James Agee, E. B. White, A. J. Liebling, and Mary McCarthy, adroitly pivoting from the comic indignities of daily life to world peace, boxing, and restaurants in Paris. Here is Norman Mailer on Jackie Kennedy and Vladimir Nabokov on Lolita. Here is Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "Letter from Birmingham Jail," alongside Richard Hofstadter's "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" and Flannery O'Connor's "Some Aspects of the Grotesque in Southern Fiction." Here are Gore Vidal, Rachel Carson, James Baldwin, Susan Sontag, John Updike, Joan Didion, and many more, in a treasury of brilliant writing that has stood the test of time. Zach McCulley (@zamccull) is a historian of religion and literary cultures in early modern England and PhD candidate in History at Queen's University Belfast. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

The three decades that followed World War II were an exceptionally fertile period for American essays. The explosion of journals and magazines, the rise of public intellectuals, and breakthroughs in the arts inspired a flowering of literary culture. At the same time, the many problems that confronted mid-century America--racism, sexism, nuclear threat, war, poverty, and environmental degradation among them--proved fruitful topics for America's best minds. In The Golden Age of the American Essay: 1945–1970 (Anchor Books, 2021), Phillip Lopate assembles a dazzling array of famous writers, critics, sociologists, theologians, historians, activists, theorists, humorists, poets, and novelists. Here are writers like James Agee, E. B. White, A. J. Liebling, and Mary McCarthy, adroitly pivoting from the comic indignities of daily life to world peace, boxing, and restaurants in Paris. Here is Norman Mailer on Jackie Kennedy and Vladimir Nabokov on Lolita. Here is Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "Letter from Birmingham Jail," alongside Richard Hofstadter's "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" and Flannery O'Connor's "Some Aspects of the Grotesque in Southern Fiction." Here are Gore Vidal, Rachel Carson, James Baldwin, Susan Sontag, John Updike, Joan Didion, and many more, in a treasury of brilliant writing that has stood the test of time. Zach McCulley (@zamccull) is a historian of religion and literary cultures in early modern England and PhD candidate in History at Queen's University Belfast. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

The three decades that followed World War II were an exceptionally fertile period for American essays. The explosion of journals and magazines, the rise of public intellectuals, and breakthroughs in the arts inspired a flowering of literary culture. At the same time, the many problems that confronted mid-century America--racism, sexism, nuclear threat, war, poverty, and environmental degradation among them--proved fruitful topics for America's best minds. In The Golden Age of the American Essay: 1945–1970 (Anchor Books, 2021), Phillip Lopate assembles a dazzling array of famous writers, critics, sociologists, theologians, historians, activists, theorists, humorists, poets, and novelists. Here are writers like James Agee, E. B. White, A. J. Liebling, and Mary McCarthy, adroitly pivoting from the comic indignities of daily life to world peace, boxing, and restaurants in Paris. Here is Norman Mailer on Jackie Kennedy and Vladimir Nabokov on Lolita. Here is Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "Letter from Birmingham Jail," alongside Richard Hofstadter's "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" and Flannery O'Connor's "Some Aspects of the Grotesque in Southern Fiction." Here are Gore Vidal, Rachel Carson, James Baldwin, Susan Sontag, John Updike, Joan Didion, and many more, in a treasury of brilliant writing that has stood the test of time. Zach McCulley (@zamccull) is a historian of religion and literary cultures in early modern England and PhD candidate in History at Queen's University Belfast. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

The three decades that followed World War II were an exceptionally fertile period for American essays. The explosion of journals and magazines, the rise of public intellectuals, and breakthroughs in the arts inspired a flowering of literary culture. At the same time, the many problems that confronted mid-century America--racism, sexism, nuclear threat, war, poverty, and environmental degradation among them--proved fruitful topics for America's best minds. In The Golden Age of the American Essay: 1945–1970 (Anchor Books, 2021), Phillip Lopate assembles a dazzling array of famous writers, critics, sociologists, theologians, historians, activists, theorists, humorists, poets, and novelists. Here are writers like James Agee, E. B. White, A. J. Liebling, and Mary McCarthy, adroitly pivoting from the comic indignities of daily life to world peace, boxing, and restaurants in Paris. Here is Norman Mailer on Jackie Kennedy and Vladimir Nabokov on Lolita. Here is Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "Letter from Birmingham Jail," alongside Richard Hofstadter's "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" and Flannery O'Connor's "Some Aspects of the Grotesque in Southern Fiction." Here are Gore Vidal, Rachel Carson, James Baldwin, Susan Sontag, John Updike, Joan Didion, and many more, in a treasury of brilliant writing that has stood the test of time. Zach McCulley (@zamccull) is a historian of religion and literary cultures in early modern England and PhD candidate in History at Queen's University Belfast. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

The three decades that followed World War II were an exceptionally fertile period for American essays. The explosion of journals and magazines, the rise of public intellectuals, and breakthroughs in the arts inspired a flowering of literary culture. At the same time, the many problems that confronted mid-century America--racism, sexism, nuclear threat, war, poverty, and environmental degradation among them--proved fruitful topics for America's best minds. In The Golden Age of the American Essay: 1945–1970 (Anchor Books, 2021), Phillip Lopate assembles a dazzling array of famous writers, critics, sociologists, theologians, historians, activists, theorists, humorists, poets, and novelists. Here are writers like James Agee, E. B. White, A. J. Liebling, and Mary McCarthy, adroitly pivoting from the comic indignities of daily life to world peace, boxing, and restaurants in Paris. Here is Norman Mailer on Jackie Kennedy and Vladimir Nabokov on Lolita. Here is Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "Letter from Birmingham Jail," alongside Richard Hofstadter's "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" and Flannery O'Connor's "Some Aspects of the Grotesque in Southern Fiction." Here are Gore Vidal, Rachel Carson, James Baldwin, Susan Sontag, John Updike, Joan Didion, and many more, in a treasury of brilliant writing that has stood the test of time. Zach McCulley (@zamccull) is a historian of religion and literary cultures in early modern England and PhD candidate in History at Queen's University Belfast. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/literary-studies

The three decades that followed World War II were an exceptionally fertile period for American essays. The explosion of journals and magazines, the rise of public intellectuals, and breakthroughs in the arts inspired a flowering of literary culture. At the same time, the many problems that confronted mid-century America--racism, sexism, nuclear threat, war, poverty, and environmental degradation among them--proved fruitful topics for America's best minds. In The Golden Age of the American Essay: 1945–1970 (Anchor Books, 2021), Phillip Lopate assembles a dazzling array of famous writers, critics, sociologists, theologians, historians, activists, theorists, humorists, poets, and novelists. Here are writers like James Agee, E. B. White, A. J. Liebling, and Mary McCarthy, adroitly pivoting from the comic indignities of daily life to world peace, boxing, and restaurants in Paris. Here is Norman Mailer on Jackie Kennedy and Vladimir Nabokov on Lolita. Here is Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "Letter from Birmingham Jail," alongside Richard Hofstadter's "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" and Flannery O'Connor's "Some Aspects of the Grotesque in Southern Fiction." Here are Gore Vidal, Rachel Carson, James Baldwin, Susan Sontag, John Updike, Joan Didion, and many more, in a treasury of brilliant writing that has stood the test of time. Zach McCulley (@zamccull) is a historian of religion and literary cultures in early modern England and PhD candidate in History at Queen's University Belfast. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/literature

The three decades that followed World War II were an exceptionally fertile period for American essays. The explosion of journals and magazines, the rise of public intellectuals, and breakthroughs in the arts inspired a flowering of literary culture. At the same time, the many problems that confronted mid-century America--racism, sexism, nuclear threat, war, poverty, and environmental degradation among them--proved fruitful topics for America's best minds. In The Golden Age of the American Essay: 1945–1970 (Anchor Books, 2021), Phillip Lopate assembles a dazzling array of famous writers, critics, sociologists, theologians, historians, activists, theorists, humorists, poets, and novelists. Here are writers like James Agee, E. B. White, A. J. Liebling, and Mary McCarthy, adroitly pivoting from the comic indignities of daily life to world peace, boxing, and restaurants in Paris. Here is Norman Mailer on Jackie Kennedy and Vladimir Nabokov on Lolita. Here is Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "Letter from Birmingham Jail," alongside Richard Hofstadter's "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" and Flannery O'Connor's "Some Aspects of the Grotesque in Southern Fiction." Here are Gore Vidal, Rachel Carson, James Baldwin, Susan Sontag, John Updike, Joan Didion, and many more, in a treasury of brilliant writing that has stood the test of time. Zach McCulley (@zamccull) is a historian of religion and literary cultures in early modern England and PhD candidate in History at Queen's University Belfast. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/book-of-the-day

The three decades that followed World War II were an exceptionally fertile period for American essays. The explosion of journals and magazines, the rise of public intellectuals, and breakthroughs in the arts inspired a flowering of literary culture. At the same time, the many problems that confronted mid-century America--racism, sexism, nuclear threat, war, poverty, and environmental degradation among them--proved fruitful topics for America's best minds. In The Golden Age of the American Essay: 1945–1970 (Anchor Books, 2021), Phillip Lopate assembles a dazzling array of famous writers, critics, sociologists, theologians, historians, activists, theorists, humorists, poets, and novelists. Here are writers like James Agee, E. B. White, A. J. Liebling, and Mary McCarthy, adroitly pivoting from the comic indignities of daily life to world peace, boxing, and restaurants in Paris. Here is Norman Mailer on Jackie Kennedy and Vladimir Nabokov on Lolita. Here is Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "Letter from Birmingham Jail," alongside Richard Hofstadter's "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" and Flannery O'Connor's "Some Aspects of the Grotesque in Southern Fiction." Here are Gore Vidal, Rachel Carson, James Baldwin, Susan Sontag, John Updike, Joan Didion, and many more, in a treasury of brilliant writing that has stood the test of time. Zach McCulley (@zamccull) is a historian of religion and literary cultures in early modern England and PhD candidate in History at Queen's University Belfast. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/journalism

On this episode of Mythic Existence, we dive into the folklorist’s perspective on conspiracy theories. My research for this episode is mostly informed by a book that recently came out called COVID 19 conspiracy theories: QAnon, 5G, the New World Order and Other Viral Ideas, as well as Richard Hofstadter’s seminal work The Paranoid Style in American Politics. We are going to hope to deconstruct why conspiracy theories exist, why they are appealing, and to whom. Conspiracy theories often feed in to confirmation bias. This manifests itself in a number of ways –through the desire to understand ambiguous phenomena, the wish of having a larger role in the world than you really do, or ethnocentric biases. That doesn’t mean that there aren’t actual conspiracies going on, but its best to think critically. So, sit back and get ready for another episode of Mythic Existence.

Robert Welch founded the Johh Birch Society in the late 1950s as a bulwark against communist advancement in America. We dive into the history and beliefs of the "Birchers." We also read The Paranoid Style in American Politics by Richard Hofstadter. We use these readings as a jumping off point to discuss conspiracy theories on the Right and Left.

Net als jij doen we bij Het Redelijke Midden graag ons eigen onderzoek. Daarom duiken Annelot en Farah samen met wetenschappers Suzanne van Geuns en Boris Noordenbos in de wereld van complotdenkers. Wat We Leren Had Je Nooit Voor Mogelijk Kunnen Houden. Van Corona tot de pastelkleurige complothel van Instagram, van hagedismensen tot praten met familie over vaccinaties: we helpen je er in een uurtje doorheen. Friedepiepel! SHOWNOTES Klik hier (https://www.vn.nl/auteur/lex-boon/) voor de volledige serie die Lex Boon voor Vrij Nederland schreef over de kleurplaat met Adolf Hitler erop die Farah aanraadde Suus stelt dat de NPO van wisselende kwaliteit is en wil daarom graag dat je wél naar Klassen (https://www.npostart.nl/klassen/VPWON_1304701/overview) kijkt en níet naar Waarom Werken Vrouwen Niet (https://www.npostart.nl/waarom-werken-vrouwen-niet/KN_1717390) Volgens Boris is Behind The Curve op Netflix (https://www.netflix.com/title/81015076) de moeite waard als je meer wilt weten over mensen die denken dat de aarde plat is Annelot raadt je aan eerst naar dit podcastinterview met Kate Manne (https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/this-conversation-will-change-how-you-understand-misogyny/id1081584611?i=1000428850914) te luisteren en dan meteen haar nieuwste boek Entitled (https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/608442/entitled-by-kate-manne/) aan te schaffen Nancy L. Rosenblum en Russell Muirhead schreven een boek over hoe complotdenkers democratie ondermijnen en wat we daaraan kunnen doen (https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691188836/a-lot-of-people-are-saying) Dit artikel van Susannah Crockford (https://religiondispatches.org/q-shamans-new-age-radical-right-blend-hints-at-the-blurring-of-seemingly-disparate-categories/) gebruikt de ‘viking’ die het Capitool aanviel om uit te leggen hoe extreemrechts complotdenken en ‘new age’ spiritualiteit samengaan Toen we Suus naar de link vroegen van Crockfords artikel, kwam ze ook nog met dit artikel (https://religiondispatches.org/how-positivity-can-lead-to-conspiratorial-thinking/) over de relatie tussen positief denken en complotten aanzetten en zei ze “doe deze er anders ook even bij, is leuk!” In Republic of Lies (https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250159052) legt Anna Merlan uit hoe falende politieke systemen complotdenken bevorderen In dit boek (https://books.google.nl/books?id=g6G4DgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=nukhet+varlik&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjIzMnemLXuAhVD_aQKHd5tBLYQ6AEwAnoECAYQAg#v=onepage&q=nukhet%20varlik&f=false) claimt Nükhet Varlik dat epidemieën in het westen vaak worden gekoppeld aan een oosterse identiteit. Hier vind je een subreddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/QAnonCasualties/) voor de familieleden en vrienden van Qanon-aanhangers Dit artikel over paranoia (https://harpers.org/archive/1964/11/the-paranoid-style-in-american-politics/) van Richard Hofstadter werd in 1964 gepubliceerd maar wordt nog steeds veel gelezen Jeet Heer bekritiseerde het stuk (https://www.thenation.com/article/culture/richard-hofstadter-library-america-review/) onlangs in The Nation Volgens Arundhati Roy is de pandemie een portaal (https://www.ft.com/content/10d8f5e8-74eb-11ea-95fe-fcd274e920ca) en moeten we goed nadenken over wat we er wel en niet meer doorheen willen slepen Boris schreef een boek getiteld Post-Soviet Literature and the Search for a Russian Identity (https://www.palgrave.com/gp/book/9781137596727) maar als je geen tijd hebt om dat te lezen mag je hem ook mailen op b.noordenbos bij uva punt nl

On this edition of Parallax Views, Donald Trump recently opined, in a now infamous with Laura Ingraham for Fox News, that Democratic Party Presidential candidate Joe Biden was being controlled by "people in the dark shadows". This, of course, should come as no surprise given that conspiratorial mutterings about globalist elites hellbent on destroying the United States of America has become a hallmark of Trump's base. In fact, one can find ideations of a paranoid variety amongst rather visible elements of the American right-wing going back to the day of Senator Joe McCarthy and the Red Scare as well as in right-wing media outlets and organizations like WorldNetDaily and the John Birch Society. Even prior to Trump, figures like Alex Jones and Jerome Corsi promoted what historian Richard Hofstadter referred to as "The Paranoid Style in American Politics". In the 1990's, the militia and "Patriot" movement were driven by fears that the Clinton administration, specifically after Ruby Ridge and Waco, would usher in draconian martial law with the help of agencies like FEMA or, in some theories, the United Nations. Interestingly, then First Lady Hillary Clinton was roundly mocked at this time for offering a paranoid alternative to the right's vision of dystopia being ushered in by her husband. There existed, she said, a "vast right wing conspiracy" to undermine Bill Clinton's Presidency. This, of course, was roundly mocked as the delusional rantings of a "moonbat" or "wingnut". But was Clinton's accusation completely unfounded? Has the American right-wing been projecting when it lobs allegations of unpatriotic and sinister plots against Democrats and the Left? Veteran journalist Anne Nelson makes the case in her new book, Shadow Network: Media, Money, and the Secret Hub of the Radical Right, that the American Right, specifically through a sorely underdiscussed and shadowy organization, has been engaging in a certain kind of subterfuge that isn't far off from being a "vast right wing conspiracy". In this explosive new book Nelson, whose journalistic exploits includes covering the U.S. support of right-wing death squads in El Salvador during the Reagan Presidency, details the under-the-radar machinations of the Council for National Policy. Modeled as a conservative equivalent to the Council on Foreign Relations, a favorite target of right-wing paranoia, the CNP claims 501(c) 3 status. But, as Nelson notes, the CNP operates in a completely different way than the CFR. According to Nelson, it acts as a network that connects the right's ideologues to the money people that can fund their movements. Anne Nelson joins us on this edition of Parallax Views to tell the whole story of how this organization has sought to undermine democratic processes in the USA for decades. Among the topics covered: How three figures, Paul Weyrich, Morton Blackwell, and Richard Viguerie came together to help form the CNP with evangelical pastor and bestselling author of the Left Behind series Tim LaHaye as its President; Weyrich's curious comments on voting and the electoral majority; Viguerie's book Takeover: The 100-Year War for the Soul of the GOP and How Conservatives Can Finally Win It and the comments contained within it concerning Hillary Clinton's accusations of a "vast right wing conspiracy". - Putting the CNP in context; the war between supporters of the Barry Goldwater campaign and "Rockefeller Republicans" in the era before the CNP's founding; the Southern Baptist Church purges that preluded that CNP's founding; the arch-conservative Phyllis Schlafly, now the subject of the FX TV drama Mrs. America. - The Democratic Party's failures, including the neglect of "Fly Over Country" and the decay of the New Deal Coalition, that Anne criticizes in the book for leaving the CNP with a base to propagandize. - How the CNP ties into the U.S. support of death squads in El Salvador. - The CNP and the media; how the decline of media, journalism, and newspapers has created a fertile environment for the CNP's propaganda efforts; the deleterious effects of Ronald Reagan rolling back the Fairness Doctrine. - How connected are the Koch Bros. to the CNP?; how much of the CNP's agenda is driven by its financial backer's desire profits rather than religious beliefs of its idealogues? - The CNP vs. the CFR; the CNP's 501(c) 3 status - The CNP in the era of Donald Trump; the CNP's initial support of Ted Cruz over Donald Trump; the deal that the CNP cut with the Trump Presidency; the CNP's connections to the coronavirus pandemic through "America's Frontline Doctors" and Dr. [CENSORED] as outlined in her new Washington Spectator piece "Anatomy of Deception: Team Trump Deploys Doctors to Push Fake Cure for COVID" (see: hydroxychloroquine). All that and more on this edition of Parallax Views!  This Episode Brought to You By:The War State:The Cold War Origins of the Military-Industrial Complex and the Power Elite, 1945-1963byMichael SwansonofThe Wall Street Window

Olá, neste episódio falaremos sobre um conjunto de teorias sociais defensoras da tese de que as sociedades humanas se encontram em um contínuo processo de desenvolvimento, que consiste na passagem de estágios mais simples, ou “primitivos”, para estágios mais avançados. Uma dessas teorias é o “darwinismo social” que foi cunhada pelo historiador britânico Richard Hofstadter, já no século XX, visando descrever os ramos do evolucionismo social, que passam a se sustentar em uma interpretação da Teoria da Evolução de Darwin, em que se pretendia fazer uma leitura da sociedade pelo viés das ideias do naturalista britânico. A outra teoria, conhecida como racismo científico, que consiste no determinismo biológico e propõe a raça como fator determinante para estabelecer diferenças e hierarquias entre os grupos humanos.

On this edition of Parallax Views, populism has become a dirty word since the election of Donald J. Trump to the U.S. Presidency in 2016. But is Trumpism really representative of populism? And is populism really just the reign of the violent mob or the ignorant masses over more benevolent and enlightened souls? Thomas Frank, co-founder of The Baffler and the noted author of such books as What's the Matter With Kansas? and Listen, Liberal!, argues otherwise in his sweeping defense of populism The People, No: A Brief History of Anti-Populism. In examining the history of anti-populism in American thought from the late 1800s to today, Frank concludes that populism is pro-democracy while it's polar opposite, anti-populism, is, in fact, elitist. Thomas Frank joins us to discuss this fascinating history. Among the topics covered:- How populism became a dirty word- The early populist William Jennings Bryan, his accomplishments, and his eventual fall from grace- The populism of FDR- Demagogues of the 1930s like the anti-semitic radio personality Father Charles Coughlin and why he does not consider them populists- Pop culture that dealt with populism in that era, specifically the films of Frank Capra and the Orson Welles class Citizen Kane (which just happen to be Donald Trump's favorite movie; does Trump miss the message and is it really and anti-populist movie?)- The early 20th century progressive historians like Charles Beard and how the consensus historians of the mid-20th century, particularly Richard Hofstadter, thought to push back on their work vis-à-vis anti-populism- How Hofstadter and other anti-populists consensus historians were reactions to Joe McCarthy and the Red Scare's attacks on intellectuals of the time; Hofstadter's The Age of Reform, a key anti-populist text, and how, despite being debunked and refuted, still maintains an influence today.- The professionals and intellectuals of managerial class that were flattered by the work of Hofstadter and the consensus historians; the displacement of the old elite by the "Meritocracy" or new meritocratic elite.- How the new elites never considered their own pathologies and the potential of elite failure.- The consensus historians concepts of pluralism and representative democracy; Edward Shils' belief that "there must be affinity among the elites"; the so-called "end of ideology" and associated ideas like Francis Fukyama's "the end of history"- Interrogating the concept of meritocracy and "hereditary meritocracy"; the 2019 college admission bribery scandal (or "Collegegate") that was exposed by the FBI's Operation Varsity Blues and what it says about contradictions of the meritocracy espoused by the new elites.- The Best and Brightest by David Halberstam, the classic work on elite failure in the Vietnam War era.- Being part of the "liberal intelligentsia" after the success of What's the Matter With Kansas? and the mis-readings of What's the Matter With Kansas?- The cultural of liberal scolding and Frank's discomfort with its popularity; liberal and elite misanthropy; are people like Frank catching elites with their pants down by exposing the misanthropy underlying their supposedly compassionate image.- What does the future hold? Will the pessimism toward "the people" by elites continue or will a new zeitgeist emerge to challenge our current cultural moment?

The one where we discuss “The Paranoid Style” by Richard Hofstadter, take some shots at Mel Gibson and learn a few things about personality disorders. Brought to you by Charlton Heston. Visit our website: www.paranoidplanet.ca

In the next episode of Paranoid Planet, we'll talk about “The Paranoid Style” by Richard Hofstadter, we'll take some shots at Mel Gibson, and we'll learn about personality disorders with Dr. Royce Lee. Until then, don't get too paranoid.

Episode SummaryHistorian and optimist Eric Foner grew up through McCarthyism and the Civil Rights Movement and learned that one of the best ways to interpret history is that no matter how things are there is an opportunity to make them better. Syd and Eric talk about how the issues of the past are the issues of today, the dangers of romanticizing our history, and how some things never change. Professor Foner gives an unvarnished primer in American History and you might be surprised at how current it sounds, in this episode of The Sydcast.Syd FinkelsteinSyd Finkelstein is the Steven Roth Professor of Management at the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth College. He holds a Master's degree from the London School of Economics and a Ph.D. from Columbia University. Professor Finkelstein has published 25 books and 90 articles, including the bestsellers Why Smart Executives Fail and Superbosses: How Exceptional Leaders Master the Flow of Talent, which LinkedIn Chairman Reid Hoffman calls the “leadership guide for the Networked Age.” He is also a Fellow of the Academy of Management, a consultant and speaker to leading companies around the world, and a top 25 on the global Thinkers 50 list of top management gurus. Professor Finkelstein's research and consulting work often relies on in-depth and personal interviews with hundreds of people, an experience that led him to create and host his own podcast, The Sydcast, to uncover and share the stories of all sorts of fascinating people in business, sports, entertainment, politics, academia, and everyday life. Eric FonerEric Foner, DeWitt Clinton Professor Emeritus of History at Columbia University, is one of this country's most prominent historians. He received his doctoral degree at Columbia under the supervision of Richard Hofstadter. He is one of only two persons to serve as president of the three major professional organizations: the Organization of American Historians, American Historical Association, and Society of American Historians, and one of a handful to have won the Bancroft and Pulitzer Prizes in the same year.Professor Foner's publications have concentrated on the intersections of intellectual, political, and social history and the history of American race relations. His books have been translated into Chinese, Korean, Italian, Japanese, Portuguese, and Spanish. Eric Foner is a winner of the Great Teacher Award from the Society of Columbia Graduates (1991), and the Presidential Award for Outstanding Teaching from Columbia University (2006). He was named Scholar of the Year by the New York Council for the Humanities in 1995. In 2006, he received the Kidger Award for Excellence in Teaching and Scholarship from the New England History Teachers Association. In 2014 he was awarded the Gold Medal by the National Institute of Social Sciences. In 2020 he received the Anisfield-Wolf Book Award for Lifetime Achievement (the award honors literature that confronts racism and explores diversity), and the Roy Rosenzweig Distinguished Service Award from the Organization of American Historians. He is an elected fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the British Academy, the American Philosophical Society, and the American Academy of Political and Social Science. He has been awarded honorary degrees by Iona College, Queen Mary University of London, the State University of New York, Dartmouth College, Lehigh University, and Princeton University. He serves on the editorial boards of Past and Present and The Nation, and has written for the New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, London Review of Books, and many other publications, and has appeared on numerous television and radio shows, including Charlie Rose, Book Notes, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, The Colbert Report, Bill Moyers Journal, Fresh Air, and All Things Considered, and in historical documentaries on PBS and the History Channel. He was the on-camera historian for "Freedom: A History of Us," on PBS in 2003 and the chief historical advisor for the award-winning PBS documentary series on Reconstruction and its aftermath broadcast in 2019. He has lectured extensively to both academic and non-academic audiences. Professor Foner retired from teaching in 2018. Insights from this episode:Details on Reconstruction in America, what it was, what went wrong, and how it changed the world.Strategies for staying objective and finding truth when everyone seems to be living in different realities at the same time in history.How to be hopeful about when current events make the future seem bleak.Benefits of learning history, how it shapes our ideals today, and what our present can teach us about our future.Details about Abraham Lincoln and what his principles and methods can teach us today about developing our own standards.Reasons why books written about history are subjective and need to be more objective.Quotes from the show:“Things are always inevitable after they've happened.” – Eric Foner“I grew up understanding how fragile liberty is in our country, or in any other country.” – Eric Foner“It's not just a historical debate. The issues of Reconstruction are the issues of today.” – Eric FonerOn Reconstruction: “The tragedy was not that it was attempted, but that it failed and that left, for a century almost, this question of racial justice in the United States.” – Eric Foner“History is in the eye of the beholder.” – Syd Finkelstein“Being objective does not mean you have an empty mind … it means you have an open mind. You have to be willing to change your mind.” – Eric Foner“History is an ongoing process of reevaluation reinterpretation. There is never just the end of the story.” – Eric FonerOn Professor Foner's lecture on Reconstruction: “It's a statement about what kind of country should America be.” – Syd FinkelsteinOn what a professor does: “The creation and dissemination of knowledge.” – Syd FinkelsteinOn Abraham Lincoln: “We've had many presidents, including the current one, who can not stand criticism, Lincoln welcomed it. He thought he could learn. He thought his entire life he could learn new things.” – Eric Foner“That's what makes you a historian. You have to be able to weigh evidence, judge evidence, balance things out.” – Eric Foner“The historical narrative is an act of the imagination by the historian … what you leave out is as important as what you put in.” – Eric FonerOn the primary system of voting: “It enables the motivated electorate, which is a small percentage, to have an unbelievable influence.” – Syd FinkelsteinBooks by Eric FonerFree Soil, Free Labor, Free Men: The Ideology of the Republican Party Before the Civil War (1970; reissued with new preface 1995) Tom Paine and Revolutionary America (1976)Nothing But Freedom: Emancipation and Its Legacy (1983)Reconstruction: America's Unfinished Revolution, 1863-1877 (1988) (winner, among other awards, of the Bancroft Prize, Parkman Prize, and Los Angeles Times Book Award) The Reader's Companion to American History (with John A. Garraty, 1991)The Story of American Freedom (1998)Who Owns History? Rethinking the Past in a Changing World (2002) Give Me Liberty! An American History (2004) The Fiery Trial: Abraham Lincoln and American Slavery (2010) (winner, among other awards, of the Bancroft Prize, Pulitzer Prize for History, and The Lincoln Prize) Gateway to Freedom: The Hidden History of the Underground Railroad (2015) (winner of the American History Book Prize by the New-York Historical Society)The Second Founding: How the Civil War and Reconstruction Remade the Constitution (2019)Lectures by Eric FonerDuring the 2014-15 academic year, his Columbia University course on The Civil War and Reconstruction was made available online, free of charge, via ColumbiaX and EdX. They can also be found on YouTube.PART 1: THE COMING OF THE CIVIL WARPART 2: THE CIVIL WARPART 3: RECONSTRUCTIONStay Connected: Syd FinkelsteinWebsite: http://thesydcast.comLinkedIn: Sydney FinkelsteinTwitter: @sydfinkelsteinFacebook: The SydcastInstagram: The SydcastEric FonerWebsite: www.ericfoner.comSubscribe to our podcast + download each episode on Stitcher, iTunes, and Spotify.This episode was produced and managed by Podcast Laundry (www.podcastlaundry.com)

Political organizing during a worldwide lockdown is hard if not impossible, and embattled authoritarian regimes the world over are surely breathing sighs of relief. In the United States, surging unemployment rates continue to break records, and a world-historical depression seems inevitable. Op-ed columnists everywhere from the Wall Street Journal to the Washington Post have taken the opportunity to publicly wring their hands about another impending surge of “populism”—their favored name for a tendency that is said to encompass both the rise of anti-democratic demagogues like Donald Trump and the mass appeal of the progressive Bernie Sanders. Where did this word come from, and how can it mean so many different things? In his May cover story for Harper's Magazine, the historian Thomas Frank tells the story of the term's optimistic invention by members of the People's Party of the late nineteenth century—a mass movement of farmers and factory workers who mounted what Frank calls “our country's final serious effort at breaking the national duopoly of the Republicans and Democrats.” While the Populist movement is seldom remembered today, Frank's excavation of the era's anti-Populist rhetoric shows that the hatred and fear that class-based politics inspired—even including some specific insults—have never really gone away. In this episode, web editor Violet Lucca speaks with Thomas Frank—author of Listen, Liberal and What's the Matter with Kansas?—about the roots of his interest in Populism; the undeniable charm and pernicious wrongness of Richard Hofstadter; what to do with the momentum of the Sanders campaign; and the research that went into Frank's new book, The People, No: A Brief History of Anti-Populism, soon to be available from Metropolitan Books. Read Frank's essay: https://harpers.org/archive/2020/05/how-the-anti-populists-stopped-bernie-sanders/ This episode was produced by Violet Lucca and Andrew Blevins

Eric Foner is one of the most accomplished historians of the 19th century United States. His first book, Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men, about the rise of the Republican Party, is a classic. So too is his 1988 work Reconstruction: America's Unfinished Revolution, 1863-1877, which won the Bancroft Prize. More recently, he has turned his attention to Abraham Lincoln. His 2011 book, The Fiery Trial, about Lincoln's views on slavery, won the Pulitzer and Lincoln Prize.  Eric discusses his early career at Columbia, including his experiences working with the renowned historian Richard Hofstadter, who won the Pulitzer Prize twice in his short life. Dr. Foner also discusses his politics, his views on the current state of the history profession, and the Trump administration.  He is retired from teaching, but Eric shows no signs of slowing down. He is still on a speaking tour for his most recent book, The Second Founding: How the Civil War and Reconstruction Remade the Constitution, which came out in September of 2019.

Robert A. Schneider, a historian of early modern France at Indiana University Bloomington, and the former long-standing editor of the American Historical Review, talks to Lewis Defrates about his paper 'The Rise and Fall of the “Resentment Paradigm” (ca 1935-1975). The paper discusses the work of postwar intellectuals such as Richard Hofstadter, Daniel Bell, Seymour Martin Lipsett and Talcott Parsons, reframing their shared interest in the 'resentment' in the subjects they studied. Rob discusses the tenets this school of thought was built on (modernization theory, psychoanalysis, and consensus liberalism), the way this was articulated through their intellectual work, the repudiation of this work from the 1970s onwards, and the resurgence of an interest in resentment in the past half-decade. The paper encourages to rethink both the history of emotion and the production of knowledge regarding the history of emotions, demonstrating what these intellectuals missed in their pursuit of resentment and how today's academics can avoid these mistakes. If you have any questions, suggestions or feedback, get in touch via @camericanist on Twitter or ltd27@cam.ac.uk. Spread the word, and thanks for listening! See you... soon?

In this episode, Van explores Trump inadvertently brainwashing himself into believing conspiracy theories simply by repeating them. He gets into it over a piece by Mike Fuchs on the real price of corrupt foreign policy and why we should all be worried about Trump meeting with foreign leaders. Also, why cyber is the new go-to for policymakers who feel the need to "do something." What foreign policy has to do with professional wrestling. The one thing Eminem and Trump have in common (not whiteness). And more!Notes and Sources:Michael Fuchs piece in The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/oct/02/trump-foreign-policy-impeachmentMira Rapp-Hooper's piece in Foreign Affairs: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/ukraine/2019-10-03/usurpation-us-foreign-policyAdam Taylor's piece in the Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2019/10/03/foreign-allies-who-gambled-trump-face-big-losses/Jeet Heer's tweet thread: https://twitter.com/HeerJeet/status/1179420012936912898Senator John McCollister's tweet: https://twitter.com/SenMcCollister/status/1179390933391020033Richard Hosftadter's "The Paranoid Style in American Politics": https://harpers.org/archive/1964/11/the-paranoid-style-in-american-politics/Center for a New American Security Arms Control Report: https://www.cnas.org/publications/reports/risk-realismMusic: "Van is Meta" by Tre' Hester

Episode 045: Dr. Tom Nichols, Expertise in EducationFive-time Jeopardy! Champion, professor, and author Dr. Tom Nichols joins us on Vrain Waves to discuss the implications of his work on K12 education. We chat with Dr. Nichols about the importance of relying on experts, cultivating our own expertise, and the cognitive heuristics that get in our way. From his website: “Tom Nichols is a U.S. Naval War College University Professor, and an adjunct at the U.S. Air Force School of Strategic Force Studies and the Harvard Extension School. He is a specialist on Russian affairs, nuclear strategy, NATO issues, and a nationally-known commentator on U.S. politics and national security.” And he agreed to talk to us!! Ben and Becky! We are so excited to share his thoughts with you, our busy listeners - please share your thoughts on Twitter with the #MakeSomeVrainWaves or tweet us @VrainWaves with your favorite takeaways. Thanks for listening!Connect with Dr. Tom NicholsWebsite: Facebook: Death of Expertise | Twitter: @radiofreetom | Book: The Death of ExpertiseConnect with Vrain WavesWebsite: vrainwaves.com | Twitter: @VrainWaves | Becky Twitter: @BeckyEPeters | Ben Twitter: @mrkalbLinks & Show Notes “Nothing builds up resistance to learning like constant praise.” Dunning-Kreuger Effect (05:58) Foreign Affairs Article from Dr. Nichols about his Ukraine example Confirmation bias (08:57) Desirability bias (09:17)Idea of omnicompetence (from Richard Hofstadter’s book: Anti-intellectualism in American Life) (10:02) Original blog post before the book We are a postmodern society (13:47) “Expertise is necessarily exclusive.” / Inequality in expertise (18:02) Is education the solution? (23:43) Your degree is not a validation, it’s a license (28:08)Oxford University Press - 3 anonymous peer reviewers Our responsibility to defer to expertise (30:10) @RadioFreeTom on Twitter Gentle correction from colleagues Anecdata We are inherently bad at statistics (36:03) Kahneman on Thinking Fast & Slow in Scientific American Our interest in learning is at an all-time low (37:30) Dr. Nichols frequently writes for: USA Today / The Washington Post / The AtlanticTakeaways (41:01) Dan Willingham’s Book: When Can We Trust the Experts David Rock: “If you have a brain, you’re biased.”

(https://www.bobmurphyshow.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Marsha-Enright.png) Marsha Familaro Enright founded the Council Oak Montessori School in Chicago, and is currently the President of “The Great Connections,” a gap-year program for students also located in Chicago. She has written on how education would work in a free society, and she warns that government voucher programs may backfire and ruin what independence private schools still retain. . . . . . . Mentioned in the Episode and Other Links of Interest: Marsha Familaro Enright’s essay opposing school vouchers (http://www.thesavvystreet.com/i-run-a-private-school-and-im-against-school-vouchers/) . Marsha Familaro Enright’s personal website (http://marsha-familaro-enright.com/) . The website for The Great Connections (https://thegreatconnections.org/) gap year program. Enright’s essay, (http://marsha-familaro-enright.com/liberating-education-what-education-would-be-like-in-a-fully-free-society/) “What Education Would Be Like in a Fully Free Society.” The collection of essays,  Common Ground on Common Core (http://www.resoundingbooks.org/books/commonground/) . Richard Hofstadter’s book, Anti-Intellectualism in American Life (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-intellectualism_in_American_Life) . The Montessori school (https://counciloakmontessori.org/) Enright founded. A list of the Top 10 Montessori videos (http://www.blog.montessoriforeveryone.com/top-ten-montessori-videos-on-youtube.html) . Maryland barred a school from receiving voucher funds (https://www.baltimoresun.com/education/bs-md-voucher-lawsuit-20190715-rkfgeecdezbafesoxn64b4sc54-story.html?fbclid=IwAR07d28xRIwz1jDBMfds8J6h-KakuztzF-lk5zZTcFj-uEVVg5VBYTCdPb0) over LGBT curriculum. Study concluding (https://www.illinoispolicy.org/nearly-40-of-education-spending-consumed-by-pension-costs/) that 36% of education costs in Illinois consumed by pension funding. How you can contribute (http://bobmurphyshow.com/contribute) to the Bob Murphy Show. The audio production for this episode was provided by Podsworth Media (https://www.podsworth.com/) .

In this episode, Neil, Niki, and Natalia discuss the legacy of late bodybuilder Franco Columbu, the candidacy of Kamala Harris, and a proposal to eliminate selective testing for New York City public high schools. Support Past Present on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/pastpresentpodcast Here are some links and references mentioned during this week’s show:  Italian bodybuilding icon Franco Columbu has died. Niki referred to the film Pumping Iron, in which he appeared with Arnold Schwarzenegger. Natalia cited the importance of physician Kenneth Cooper’s 1968 book Aerobics in both mainstreaming the idea of working out and challenging the pre-eminence of weightlifting as a dominant form of exercise. Kamala Harris is running for president, and working to establish an enthusiastic base. Neil recommended Dana Goodyear’s New Yorker profile of Harris. Niki recommended Elizabeth Hinton’s book From the War on Poverty to the War on Crime: The Making of Mass Incarceration in America. New York City is considering scrapping test-based admissions to its selective high schools, causing intense controversy. Neil cited Kyle Smith’s New York Post op-ed defending the system. Natalia and Niki both recommended historian Ellen Wu’s book Color of Success: Asian Americans and the Origins of the Model Minority, and Natalia cited historian Richard Hofstadter’s Anti-Intellectualism in American Life and historian Tom Sugrue’s Twitter thread on the New York City controversy. Niki referred to historian Jean Theoharis’s book The Strange Careers of the Jim Crow North: Segregation and the Struggle Outside the South.   In our regular closing feature, What’s Making History: Natalia recommended a new Luminary podcast about Ivanka Trump, Tabloid. Neil discussed Joshua Sokol’s New York Times piece, “Florida’s Panthers Hit With Mysterious Crippling Disorder.” Niki shared Ben Smith’s Buzzfeed News piece, “A Top White House Reporter is Taking Over the Washington Free Beacon.”

“He knew how to lead by listening and teaching.”– Erwin C. Hargrove, a professor of political science at Vanderbilt University, writing in 1998 about a leader he much admired. I, too, have known brilliant leaders like that; men and women who lead by listening and teaching.Brian Scudamore, Lori Barr, Richard Kessler, Cathy Thorpe, Erik Church, Sarah Casebier, David Rehr, Michele Miller, Brian Alter, Richard D. Grant and David St. James to name just a few. I mentioned one such leader, Dewey Jenkins, in last week's Monday Morning Memo. Another of them, Ken Sim, is currently running for mayor of Vancouver. According to Professor Hargrove, the key to leadership is to hearken to “the better angels of our nature,” a phrase he borrowed from Abraham Lincoln, who used it in his first inaugural address on March 4, 1861. But we didn't listen to Lincoln. We chose civil war just 6 weeks later.The leader that Professor Hargrove admired who “knew how to lead by listening and teaching,” was another American president who encouraged us during a different time of social upheaval – the Great Depression. “In February 1933, a man shot at [Franklin Delano] Roosevelt, who was riding in an open car in Miami, but succeeded in killing Anton Cermak, the mayor of Chicago, who was with the president-elect. FDR was calm and deci­sive, ordering the driver to go immediately to the hospital, paying no attention to his own security, and talking to the wounded man. His calm courage impressed all who saw him.” – Erwin C. Hargrove, The President As A Leader: Appealing to the Better Angels of Our Nature, p. 79 (1998) The Stanford Library review of Professor Hargrove's book ends with this statement: “In harking back to Lincoln's evocation of the better angels of our nature, Hargrove reminds us that we may, even as leaders, be better versions of ourselves.” And the key to becoming that “better version of ourselves” is to become focused listeners and patient teachers. The reason history repeats itself is because we don't pay attention the first time.Anti-intellectualism in American Life was written in 1964 by Richard Hofstadter, a professor of American History at Columbia University. It won him the Pulitzer Prize. It was his second. He won his first Pulitzer for his 1955 book, The Age of Reform. Reading these books has caused me to develop a theory.Can I share my observations with you? Our obsession with the internet has led us to believe that we are smarter and wiser than any previous generation. We quietly assume that anyone over 40 is a dinosaur, and that every famous historical figure was innocently naive. “But they couldn't help it,” we sympathize, “because they didn't know everything like we do now.” We ignore the centuries of experience of previous generations. We are teaching. But we are not listening.And those who teach – without listening – share their own preferences as though those preferences were wisdom. But what do I know? I'm over 40. Roy H. Williams

In this episode, Niki, Neil, and Natalia debate the rise of Sinclair Broadcasting, life coach Tony Robbins’ dismissal of the #MeToo movement, and the fraught history of college early admissions. Support Past Present on Patreon: http://www.pastpresentpodcast.com/episodes Here are some links and references mentioned during this week’s show: Conservative media giant Sinclair Broadcasting Group inspired outrage when a viral video showed anchors reading a prepared script bashing the media. Natalia cited Niki’s S. News article on the role of the FCC in preventing the kind of domination to which Sinclair aspires. Self-help guru Tony Robbins enraged the internet when he maligned the #MeToo movement at one of his stadium-sized seminars. You can watch the full video of his internaction with Nanine McCool here. Natalia cited two classic historical works to understand the history of self-help: Richard Hofstadter’s Anti-Intellectualism in American Life and Christopher Lasch’s The Culture of Narcissism. Natalia also recommended William Davies’ The Happiness Industry and the HBO show “Enlightened.” Natalia recently wrote about how Tony Robbins and other self-help gurus have often stood in the way of social change in a piece for the Washington Post. The Justice Department has launched a probe into colleges offering early admissions. Natalia cited two historians’ book-length works: Jerome Karabel’s The Chosen and Nancy Malkiel’s Keep the Damned Women Out! In our regular closing feature, What’s Making History: Neil discussed the new Little League documentary, Long Time Coming. Natalia discussed Ivanka Trump’s curiously uninformed comments about youth fitness. As a companion piece to Natalia’s What’s Making History, Niki recommended Anastasia Day’s Made by History article, “How the White House Garden Became a Political Football.” Niki discussed two new books on the 14th Amendment by historians, Carrie Hyde’s Civic Longing: The Speculative Origins of U.S. Citizenship and Martha Jones’ Birthright Citizens: A History of Race and Rights in Antebellum America.

Populist anger. Viral conspiracy theories. "Fake news." Anti-immigrant fear and loathing. Belief that an alien religion threatens to destroy our way of life. To say that "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" by Richard Hofstadter is just as relevant today as when first published in 1964 is a painfully obvious truth. As low-level minions of the Illuminati, sinister Hebrew/Papist conspirators Joe & Josh do what they can to undermine American liberties and the Protestant values that underpin them by convincing you it's all in your head. Sort of. Join them as they walk through Hofstadter's history of a fear-mongering racket that will seemingly never die, discuss how the paranoid style has changed - and remained the same - since the 1960s, and explain why the conspiracy theories THEY believe are the exceptions that are actually true. Get the original essay here, sheeple: https://harpers.org/archive/1964/11/the-paranoid-style-in-american-politics/Let us know what you think: essayquestionspodcast@gmail.com

This week I spoke with Payton Cosell Turner and Eliza Wexelman, the rad women behind Girls At Library, the gorgeous and smart online journal dedicated to women who love literature. We debated the merits of print versus e-book, running a bicoastal business, and the importance of constantly re-educating yourself. "I feel like there are people similar to us who are interested in reading but also interested in visuals and creativity and I think just trying to create a place for other women or other readers who wanted to have a resource. It's all the things we wanted in a website." Check out GAL here: http://www.girlsatlibrary.com/ Payton's Twitter: https://twitter.com/pcosellturner Eliza's Twitter: https://twitter.com/elizawexelman Some of the things we talked about: Into the Gloss: https://intothegloss.com/ Graywolf Press: https://www.graywolfpress.org/ My favorite GAL interviews: Audrey Gelman: http://www.girlsatlibrary.com/interviews/audrey-gelman Wesley Pfleeger: http://www.girlsatlibrary.com/interviews/wesley-pfleeger Jeannette Lee: http://www.girlsatlibrary.com/interviews/jeannette-lee Books we talked about: Red Parts, Maggie Nelson: http://amzn.to/2mEiplx Ongoingness: The End of a Diary, Sarah Manguso: http://amzn.to/2l68M37 1919, John Dos Passos: http://amzn.to/2mxxJkO Vanity Fair, William Makepeace Thackeray : http://amzn.to/2l6n2sr Anti-Intellectualism in American Life, Richard Hofstadter: http://amzn.to/2mEgaPq A Little Life, Hanya Yanagihar: http://amzn.to/2mnFKMz *** Want to learn how to podcast? Know nothing? Live in D.C? Sign up for my podcasting 101 course with Lemon Bowl DC on March 16: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/podcasting-101-the-lemon-bowl-tickets-32374692577 *** Subscribe to my newsletter #aznbooks2017 and follow along as I read *only* books by Asian authors during 2017! https://tinyletter.com/aznbooks2017 *** Support The Ladycast on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/theladycast Follow The Ladycast online: 
twitter.com/theladycast Theladycast.com/

I read from an article written by Ray Williams of PSYCHOLOGY TODAY Wired for Success Anti-Intellectualism and the "Dumbing Down" of America Posted Jul 07, 2014 There is a growing and disturbing trend of anti-intellectual elitism in American culture. It’s the dismissal of science, the arts, and humanities and their replacement by entertainment, self-righteousness, ignorance, and deliberate gullibility. Susan Jacoby, author of The Age of American Unreason, says in an article in the Washington Post, "Dumbness, to paraphrase the late senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, has been steadily defined downward for several decades, by a combination of heretofore irresistible forces. These include the triumph of video culture over print culture; a disjunction between Americans' rising level of formal education and their shaky grasp of basic geography, science and history; and the fusion of anti-rationalism with anti-intellectualism." There has been a long tradition of anti-intellectualism in America, unlike most other Western countries. Richard Hofstadter, who won a Pulitzer Prize in 1964 for his book, Anti-Intellectualism In American Life, describes how the vast underlying foundations of anti-elite, anti-reason and anti-science have been infused into America’s political and social fabric. Famous science fiction writer Isaac Asimov once said: "There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." Mark Bauerlein, in his book, The Dumbest Generation, reveals how a whole generation of youth is being dumbed down by their aversion to reading anything of substance and their addiction to digital "crap" via social media. Journalist Charles Pierce, author of Idiot America, adds another perspective: “The rise of idiot America today represents--for profit mainly, but also and more cynically, for political advantage in the pursuit of power--the breakdown of a consensus that the pursuit of knowledge is a good. It also represents the ascendancy of the notion that the people whom we should trust the least are the people who best know what they are talking about. In the new media age, everybody is an expert.” “There’s a pervasive suspicion of rights, privileges, knowledge and specialization,” says Catherine Liu, the author of American Idyll: Academic Antielitism as Cultural Critique and a film and media studies professor at University of California. The very mission of universities has changed, argues Liu. “We don’t educate people anymore. We train them to get jobs.” Part of the reason for the rising anti-intellectualism can be found in the declining state of education in the U.S. compared to other advanced countries: After leading the world for decades in 25-34 year olds with university degrees, the U.S. is now in 12th place. The World Economic Forum ranked the U.S. at 52nd among 139 nations in the quality of its university math and science instruction in 2010. Nearly 50% of all graduate students in the sciences in the U.S. are foreigners, most of whom are returning to their home countries; The Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs commissioned a civic education poll among public school students. A surprising 77% didn't know that George Washington was the first President; couldn't name Thomas Jefferson as the author of the Declaration of Independence; and only 2.8% of the students actually passed the citizenship test. Along similar lines, the Goldwater Institute of Phoenix did the same survey and only 3.5% of students passed the civics test; According to the National Research Council report, only 28% of high school science teachers consistently follow the National Research Council guidelines on teaching evolution, and 13% of those teachers explicitly advocate creationism or "intelligent design;" 18% of Americans still believe that the sun revolves around the earth, according to a Gallup poll; The American Association of State Colleges and Universities report on education shows that the U.S. ranks second among all nations in the proportion of the population aged 35-64 with a college degree, but 19th in the percentage of those aged 25-34 with an associate or high school diploma, which means that for the first time, the educational attainment of young people will be lower than their parents; 74% of Republicans in the U.S. Senate and 53% in the House of Representatives deny the validity of climate change despite the findings of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and every other significant scientific organization in the world; According to the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress, 68% of public school children in the U.S. do not read proficiently by the time they finish third grade. And the U.S. News & World reported that barely 50% of students are ready for college level reading when they graduate; According to a 2006 survey by National Geographic-Roper, nearly half of Americans between ages 18 and 24 do not think it necessary to know the location of other countries in which important news is being made. More than a third consider it "not at all important" to know a foreign language, and only 14 percent consider it "very important;" According to the National Endowment for the Arts report in 1982, 82% of college graduates read novels or poems for pleasure; two decades later only 67% did. And more than 40% of Americans under 44 did not read a single book--fiction or nonfiction--over the course of a year. The proportion of 17 year olds who read nothing (unless required by school ) has doubled between 1984-2004; Gallup released a poll indicating 42 percent of Americans still believe God created human beings in their present form less than 10,000 years ago; A 2008 University of Texas study found that 25 percent of public school biology teachers believe that humans and dinosaurs inhabited the earth simultaneously. In American schools, the culture exalts the athlete and good-looking cheerleader. Well-educated and intellectual students are commonly referred to in public schools and the media as "nerds," "dweebs," "dorks," and "geeks," and are relentlessly harassed and even assaulted by the more popular "jocks" for openly displaying any intellect.  These anti-intellectual attitudes are not reflected in students in most European or Asian countries, whose educational levels have now equaled and and will surpass that of the U.S.  And most TV shows or movies such as The Big Bang Theory depict intellectuals as being geeks if not effeminate. John W. Traphagan ,Professor of Religious Studies at the University of Texas, argues the problem is that Asian countries have core cultural values that are more akin to a cult of intelligence and education than a cult of ignorance and anti-intellectualism. In Japan, for example, teachers are held in high esteem and normally viewed as among the most important members of a community. There is suspicion and even disdain for the work of teachers that occurs in the U.S. Teachers in Japan typically are paid significantly more than their peers in the U.S. The profession of teaching is one that is seen as being of central value in Japanese society and those who choose that profession are well compensated in terms of salary, pension, and respect for their knowledge and their efforts on behalf of children. In addition, we do not see in Japan significant numbers of the types of religious schools that are designed to shield children from knowledge about basic tenets of science and accepted understandings of history--such as evolutionary theory or the religious views of the Founding Fathers, who were largely deists--which are essential to having a fundamental understanding of the world, Traphagan contends. The reason for this is because in general Japanese value education, value the work of intellectuals, and see a well-educated public with a basic common knowledge in areas of scientific fact, math, history, literature, etc. as being an essential foundation to a successful democracy. We’re creating a world of dummies. Angry dummies who feel they have the right, the authority and the need not only to comment on everything, but to make sure their voice is heard above the rest, and to drag down any opposing views through personal attacks, loud repetition and confrontation. Bill Keller, writing in the New York Times argues that the anti-intellectual elitism is not an elitism of wisdom, education, experience or knowledge. The new elite are the angry social media posters, those who can shout loudest and more often, a clique of bullies and malcontents baying together like dogs cornering a fox. Too often it’s a combined elite of the anti-intellectuals and the conspiracy followers – not those who can voice the most cogent, most coherent response. Together they forment a rabid culture of anti-rationalism where every fact is suspect; every shadow holds a secret conspiracy. Rational thought is the enemy. Critical thinking is the devil’s tool. Keller also notes that the herd mentality takes over online; the anti-intellectuals become the metaphorical equivalent of an angry lynch mob when anyone either challenges one of the mob beliefs or posts anything outside the mob’s self-limiting set of values. Keller blames this in part to the online universe that “skews young, educated and attentive to fashions.” Fashion, entertainment, spectacle, voyeurism – we’re directed towards trivia, towards the inconsequential, towards unquestioning and blatant consumerism. This results in intellectual complacency. People accept without questioning, believe without weighing the choices, join the pack because in a culture where convenience rules, real individualism is too hard work. Thinking takes too much time: it gets in the way of the immediacy of the online experience. Reality TV and pop culture presented in magazines and online sites claim to provide useful information about the importance of The Housewives of [you name the city] that can somehow enrich our lives. After all, how else can one explain the insipid and pointless stories that tout divorces, cheating and weight gain? How else can we explain how the Kardashians,or Paris Hilton are known for being famous for being famous without actually contributing anything worth discussion? The artificial events of their lives become the mainstay of populist media to distract people from the real issues and concerns facing us. The current trend of increasing anti-intellectualism now establishing itself in politics and business leadership, and supported by a declining education system should be a cause for concern for leaders and the general population,one that needs to be addressed now.

This week we discuss the history of conspiracy theories in America with Jesse Walker. What counts as a conspiracy theory? What are the different kinds of conspiracy theories? Are there any theories that have turned out to be true?How do these theories fade in and out of our national consciousness? Are there any uniquely libertarian conspiracy theories? Is there a way to recognize a conspiracy theory when we come across it?Show Notes and Further ReadingWalker’s books are The United States of Paranoia: A Conspiracy Theory (2013) and Rebels on the Air: An Alternative History of Radio in America (2001).Walker mentions reading Robert Anton Wilson and Robert Shea’s Illuminatus! Trilogy when he was young. Here’s a video of Robert Anton Wilson speaking at the Libertarian Party’s nominating convention in 1987.Richard Hofstadter’s 1964 article “The Paranoid Style in American Politics.”Frederic Wertham’s 1954 book warning of the supposed dangers of children reading comic books, Seduction of the Innocent.Arthur Miller’s classic play “The Crucible,” which is a dramatized version of the Salem witch trials (and which was written as an allegory of McCarthyism).Joseph Uscinski and Joseph Parent’s American Conspiracy Theories uses empirical data to analyze trends in conspiracy theories between 1890 and 2010.Movies mentioned in this episode:Invasion of the Body-SnatchersThe Manchurian CandidateThey Live See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Fred Siegel discusses his new book The Revolt against the Masses and the myriad oversights of the historian Richard Hofstadter. First broadcast 11/22/13.

Trump: And the Politics of Resentment[col. writ. 7/31/15] © ’15 Mumia Abu-JamalWhen New York billionaire and GOP Presidential candidate Donald Trump launched into his anti-immigrant tirade against Mexicans crossing the border, he was using a long known political technique of plugging into the live wire of American resentment of the other.Today, it’s Latinos, of course; more precisely, those from the Southern borders: Mexicans, Salvadorans, Guatemalans, Hondurans, and the like.But, since the 19th century, politicians have used these currents of fear to fuel movements against those who came from abroad. In these days though, the targets of nativist’s ire were the Irish, Russian Jews, Italians and other European sites.These forces gave birth to the American Party, a fierce anti-immigrant group that became known popularly as the Know Nothings. They formed a third party during the 1850s, and ran former U.S. President Millard Fillmore as their unsuccessful candidate.U.S. historian Richard Hofstadter (1910-70), in his classic work, ‘The Paranoid Style in American Politics’, argued that much of the energy in the anti-immigrant forces, stemmed from what might be called ‘status anxiety’, or the intense insecurities of people unsure of their place in U.S. society, but who could point to others - immigrants - who held weaker positions in society. Furthermore, these anxiety-ridden groups often have mixed feelings of fear and admiration of social elites; and who is more elite then the super-rich?Witness the spectacle of Donald Trump, who, without question, is perhaps the richest man ever to run for president - and is a billionaire populist, no less!I wouldn’t get too excited about his place in the polls right now. In 2012 the toast of both press and polls was a pizza exec named Herman Cain. We know how that worked out.But most candidates, especially of the GOP, worship at the throne of the wealthy, for they are the ones they serve.The thousands and millions who rage at Latino immigrants also worship the rich.In Donald Trump they have found their voice. And he has found the energies of resentment undeniable fuel for failure.© ‘15maj

Professor Eric Foner is a leading contemporary historian, whose work focuses on American political history, shifting notions of freedom and liberty, and (perhaps most famously) on the period of post-Civil War Reconstruction. He spoke about growing up in a politically-active family (both his father and uncle were blacklisted American historians), and told me about his encounters and interactions with figures from Paul Robeson and W.E.B. DuBois to Richard Hofstadter, Herbert Gutman, and Eugene Genovese. We also talked about the origins of his historical methodology, his thoughts on contemporary politics, and his latest book, Gateway to Freedom: The Hidden History of the Underground Railroad.

Purchase BookIn the conventional wisdom, conspiratorial thinking lurks mainly on the fringes of American politics — the "preferred style only of minority movements," as Richard Hofstadter put it in his influential 1964 essay, "The Paranoid Style in American Politics." In his new book, The United States of Paranoia: A Conspiracy Theory, Jesse Walker begs to differ.Walker insists, contra Hofstadter, that "the Paranoid Style Is American Politics." From the colonial era, through sundry Red Scares, militia scares, and post-9/11 panics, he writes, "the fear of conspiracies has been a potent force across the political spectrum, at the center as well as the extreme." What’s more, some of the most dangerous forms of political paranoia are "the kinds that catch on with people inside the halls of power." Please join us for a lively and timely discussion of political paranoia Right, Left, and Center. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

We discuss 2 essays, "The Paranoid Style in American Politics" by Richard Hofstadter, and "The Paranoid Center" by Jesse Walker. Not addressed: should the paranoid be allowed to make podcasts? Songs: "Too Much Paranoias" by Devo, "A New Face in Hell" by The Fall, "Themselves" by The Minutemen, and "CIA Man" by Sun City Girls. Podcast Theme: "Stop Look and Listen" by Ricardo Ray

Neither Sumner nor Herbert Spencer were social Darwinists - a moniker hung upon them both. What Social Classes Owe to Each Other answers that question with to take care of his or her own self. Minding other people's business is dangerous and wrong. Yet Sumner did think people owed each other compassion and assistance.There is considerable evidence that the entire concept of "social Darwinism" as we know it today was virtually invented by Richard Hofstadter. It certainly didn't apply to Sumner, who was a great libertarian. The description "social Darwinist" was never made of his views during his lifetime.

The vast majority of historians write history. Perhaps that’s good, as one should stick to what one knows. But there are historians who braves the waters of social and political criticism. One thinks of Arthur Schelsinger Jr., Richard Hofstadter, Christopher Lasch, Robert Conquest, Richard Pipes, Eric Hobsbawm, E. P. Thompson, and more recently Tony Judt, Sean Wilentz and Victor Davis Hanson. Today I had the good fortune to speak with a historian who is virtually sure to enter the top rank of historian-public intellectuals, John H. Summers. Indeed, he already has. He’s published numerous probing essays on academic life, anarchism, the Left, sex scandals, anti-Americanism, the fate of newspapers, and, of course, many of the great American public intellectuals (he’s at work on a biography of C. Wright Mills). Summers does what all critics worth their salt do: comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. Just read his remarkably insightful “All the Priviledged Must Have Prizes” about his experience teaching at Harvard. (Also, read the comments attending article, where current Harvard students unwittingly prove Summers’ main points). We must be grateful, then, that the folks at the Davis Group Press have elected to publish a collection of Summers’ finely crafted essays in Every Fury on Earth (2008). The book is challenging, thought-provoking, and courageous. John H. Summers does not blink. You will agree with some of the things he says, and you will disagree with others. That, of course, is the fun of it. BTW: If you have a relative or friend who is an academic, this book would make a perfect holiday gift. If you are an academic, indulge yourself and buy it. Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven’t already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The vast majority of historians write history. Perhaps that’s good, as one should stick to what one knows. But there are historians who braves the waters of social and political criticism. One thinks of Arthur Schelsinger Jr., Richard Hofstadter, Christopher Lasch, Robert Conquest, Richard Pipes, Eric Hobsbawm, E. P. Thompson, and more recently Tony Judt, Sean Wilentz and Victor Davis Hanson. Today I had the good fortune to speak with a historian who is virtually sure to enter the top rank of historian-public intellectuals, John H. Summers. Indeed, he already has. He’s published numerous probing essays on academic life, anarchism, the Left, sex scandals, anti-Americanism, the fate of newspapers, and, of course, many of the great American public intellectuals (he’s at work on a biography of C. Wright Mills). Summers does what all critics worth their salt do: comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. Just read his remarkably insightful “All the Priviledged Must Have Prizes” about his experience teaching at Harvard. (Also, read the comments attending article, where current Harvard students unwittingly prove Summers’ main points). We must be grateful, then, that the folks at the Davis Group Press have elected to publish a collection of Summers’ finely crafted essays in Every Fury on Earth (2008). The book is challenging, thought-provoking, and courageous. John H. Summers does not blink. You will agree with some of the things he says, and you will disagree with others. That, of course, is the fun of it. BTW: If you have a relative or friend who is an academic, this book would make a perfect holiday gift. If you are an academic, indulge yourself and buy it. Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven’t already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The vast majority of historians write history. Perhaps that’s good, as one should stick to what one knows. But there are historians who braves the waters of social and political criticism. One thinks of Arthur Schelsinger Jr., Richard Hofstadter, Christopher Lasch, Robert Conquest, Richard Pipes, Eric Hobsbawm, E. P. Thompson, and more recently Tony Judt, Sean Wilentz and Victor Davis Hanson. Today I had the good fortune to speak with a historian who is virtually sure to enter the top rank of historian-public intellectuals, John H. Summers. Indeed, he already has. He’s published numerous probing essays on academic life, anarchism, the Left, sex scandals, anti-Americanism, the fate of newspapers, and, of course, many of the great American public intellectuals (he’s at work on a biography of C. Wright Mills). Summers does what all critics worth their salt do: comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. Just read his remarkably insightful “All the Priviledged Must Have Prizes” about his experience teaching at Harvard. (Also, read the comments attending article, where current Harvard students unwittingly prove Summers’ main points). We must be grateful, then, that the folks at the Davis Group Press have elected to publish a collection of Summers’ finely crafted essays in Every Fury on Earth (2008). The book is challenging, thought-provoking, and courageous. John H. Summers does not blink. You will agree with some of the things he says, and you will disagree with others. That, of course, is the fun of it. BTW: If you have a relative or friend who is an academic, this book would make a perfect holiday gift. If you are an academic, indulge yourself and buy it. Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven’t already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The vast majority of historians write history. Perhaps that’s good, as one should stick to what one knows. But there are historians who braves the waters of social and political criticism. One thinks of Arthur Schelsinger Jr., Richard Hofstadter, Christopher Lasch, Robert Conquest, Richard Pipes, Eric Hobsbawm, E. P. Thompson, and more recently Tony Judt, Sean Wilentz and Victor Davis Hanson. Today I had the good fortune to speak with a historian who is virtually sure to enter the top rank of historian-public intellectuals, John H. Summers. Indeed, he already has. He’s published numerous probing essays on academic life, anarchism, the Left, sex scandals, anti-Americanism, the fate of newspapers, and, of course, many of the great American public intellectuals (he’s at work on a biography of C. Wright Mills). Summers does what all critics worth their salt do: comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. Just read his remarkably insightful “All the Priviledged Must Have Prizes” about his experience teaching at Harvard. (Also, read the comments attending article, where current Harvard students unwittingly prove Summers’ main points). We must be grateful, then, that the folks at the Davis Group Press have elected to publish a collection of Summers’ finely crafted essays in Every Fury on Earth (2008). The book is challenging, thought-provoking, and courageous. John H. Summers does not blink. You will agree with some of the things he says, and you will disagree with others. That, of course, is the fun of it. BTW: If you have a relative or friend who is an academic, this book would make a perfect holiday gift. If you are an academic, indulge yourself and buy it. Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven’t already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices