Well said, Dr. Levin. I think part of the issue is that people seem to believe that this position of the confederate flag, albeit its many alterations, is emblematic of history itself, but that is the furthest thing from the truth. These positions were established deliberately, with a clear goal: the maintenance and continuation of white supremacy.
Thanks for taking the time to comment. We need to be cognizant of the distinction between history and memory whenever talking about the Civil War and especially in connection wit the battle flag. Regardless of how one identifies with the flag, we all have an obligation to acknowledge its connection to the history of white supremacy, beginning with the Civil War itself.
"It would be very interesting to see how Mr. McCullough would answer that same question today."
Actually, that's all that really matters here, not what he thought or said almost 30 years ago. How many people would what they said then judging them today? it's totally unfair to judge someone by the standards you hold today for what they did then. This seems to me unnecessary McCullough-bashing on your part.
Thanks for joining me on this new platform. I am sorry you read this as McCullough bashing. I didn't intend for that at all. I am willing to wager that any number of prominent people would fall short if we had video of them in 1993. My own views on Confederate monuments have evolved significantly over the past few years.
McCullough the sophist: "they were our fellow Americans." NO - THEY - WERE - NOT ! They renounced their citizenship and took up arms against the USA. They were traitors: homicidal, slavery-defending, bs-bellowing traitors. And so are those who still wave the flag of treason and murder.
And here we can see that McCullough's book sales are ever highest in his thoughts.
I thought for a brief moment I was going to get to say something nice about McCullough. I never have and still haven't. Pop historians are a curse on the profession.
Congratulations for leaving the first comment on this new platform. I am not sure McCullough's status as a "pop historian" has anything to do with this. No doubt, there are probably plenty of academic historians who wouldn't want a video of their thoughts on Confederate iconography from 1993 published on YouTube. I suspect that McCullough's thoughts on this issue have evolved over the years.
Appreciate your reply. Please accept my best wishes on the new substack site. I hope that Mr. McCullough's views have, as you speculate, evolved ... but confess that I am skeptical. FWIW and in the interest of fairness, I did a search and was unable to find any sort of retraction or modification on his part.
You are right about "change over time," but one would think that if he'd changed ... or cared, he'd make a frank apology and retraction.
Well said, Dr. Levin. I think part of the issue is that people seem to believe that this position of the confederate flag, albeit its many alterations, is emblematic of history itself, but that is the furthest thing from the truth. These positions were established deliberately, with a clear goal: the maintenance and continuation of white supremacy.
Hi Conor,
Thanks for taking the time to comment. We need to be cognizant of the distinction between history and memory whenever talking about the Civil War and especially in connection wit the battle flag. Regardless of how one identifies with the flag, we all have an obligation to acknowledge its connection to the history of white supremacy, beginning with the Civil War itself.
"It would be very interesting to see how Mr. McCullough would answer that same question today."
Actually, that's all that really matters here, not what he thought or said almost 30 years ago. How many people would what they said then judging them today? it's totally unfair to judge someone by the standards you hold today for what they did then. This seems to me unnecessary McCullough-bashing on your part.
Best
Rob
Hi Rob,
Thanks for joining me on this new platform. I am sorry you read this as McCullough bashing. I didn't intend for that at all. I am willing to wager that any number of prominent people would fall short if we had video of them in 1993. My own views on Confederate monuments have evolved significantly over the past few years.
McCullough the sophist: "they were our fellow Americans." NO - THEY - WERE - NOT ! They renounced their citizenship and took up arms against the USA. They were traitors: homicidal, slavery-defending, bs-bellowing traitors. And so are those who still wave the flag of treason and murder.
And here we can see that McCullough's book sales are ever highest in his thoughts.
I thought for a brief moment I was going to get to say something nice about McCullough. I never have and still haven't. Pop historians are a curse on the profession.
Hi Kenneth,
Congratulations for leaving the first comment on this new platform. I am not sure McCullough's status as a "pop historian" has anything to do with this. No doubt, there are probably plenty of academic historians who wouldn't want a video of their thoughts on Confederate iconography from 1993 published on YouTube. I suspect that McCullough's thoughts on this issue have evolved over the years.
Thanks for taking the time to comment.
Appreciate your reply. Please accept my best wishes on the new substack site. I hope that Mr. McCullough's views have, as you speculate, evolved ... but confess that I am skeptical. FWIW and in the interest of fairness, I did a search and was unable to find any sort of retraction or modification on his part.
You are right about "change over time," but one would think that if he'd changed ... or cared, he'd make a frank apology and retraction.
I looked as well and was unable to find anything.