Some right wing pseudo historian that is popular among social conservatives and evangelicals
Nope. Never heard of him. -M.H.-
Thanks. Have you heard of this clown, David Barton?
I think Dick Fraser (not a Spartacist but a friend of theirs) was the best analyst. So the PRL memorial bulletin, collecting all his key writings, that the Spartacists published, is the first thing that comes to mind. Naturally you should read other stuff, particularly Malcolm X's and Frederick Douglass's autobios, W.E.B. Du Bois's books, but that's what comes first to mind. For an analysis of the civil rights movement and so forth that is perhaps a bit more mainstream, my best recommendation is not any particular book, but rather the famous video documentary series, "Eyes on the Prize," in all of its excellent dozen parts or so, from Rosa Parks and Emmett Till up through the black nationalist period as well (though I haven't seen those parts, I have to assume they are as good as the five or six parts on the civil rights movement I've seen). Most of the books about the civil rights movement have a much too worshipful attitude to MLK. -M.H.-
Do you have any suggestions for a good study into the history of African Americans in the United States and the racial struggle? My grandfather is wanting me to read David Barton's Setting the Record Straight: American History In Black and White, which I hear tries to water down the struggle of black people historically in the US, so I'm going to need something sufficient to combat it with. Any help would be appreciated. Also, my friend Ghost Bebel was wondering if Dog Days: James Cannon vs. Max Shachtman In the Communist League of America was a worthy buy.
I've heard about Rude, vaguely positive if I recall right, but haven't read him. The number of excellent books about the French Revolution is close to infinite, and the number of bad ones downright infinite. I'd start with Soboul myself. People have been writing about the French Revolution for the last 200 years. Don't, by the way, make the common assumption that recent books are necessarily better than those written two centuries ago that Marx used as his sources. He didn't write anything about the Revolution itself, as others had done the job already. Whatever you do, stay away from the current "ideological" school, Francois Furet and his many successors. You would be frankly better off even reading classic reactionary accounts like Macauley's famous book written in 1837, which is hardly any more reactionary and anti-revolutionary than many of the current historians, but has a much better understanding of what was actually going on. -M.H.-
What about George F. E. Rude? I was recommended his work a while back. Is it quality?
Don't mind being asked historical quesions at all. For a start on the French Revolution, I guess I'd recommend Albert Soboul's books, though always remembering that he was a member of the French Communist Party. For a more leftist (though not necessarily correct either) view read Daniel Guerin's book. Basic difference between the French and American Revolutions can be put simply. The American Revolution was just a political and anti-colonial revolution, the French (like the English Civil War) was a full-blown social revolution). Don't mind being asked questions like this at all. -M.H.-
Thanks for your input. Do you have any recommendations for where to start reading about and researching the French Revolution? Also, for future reference, do you mind at all when people ask your opinions on historical events/figures? I ask because I am an aspiring historian myself and you seem like an authority on the subject. One more question: in your opinion, what distinguishes the French from the American revolution as the model to follow or draw influence from?
Dear Lizard, Allegedly, when Chou En-Lai was asked about the French Revolution, his answer was "too early to tell." I don't know where to start. The French Revolution was THE great bourgeois revolution, and there are lots and lots of people to admire in it. In fact most of its leaders are admirable in one way or another, to varying degrees, from Robespierre to Hebert to the far left, the Enrages. Even Napoleon had his good points, as well as very bad ones. Isaac Deutscher called him the Stalin of the French Revolution, which is really a very precise comparison. It's also where the communist movement first began, Gracchus Babeuf's "Conspiracy of the Equals," from which all modern communist movements are directly descended, by way his successor Buonarotti and the German "League of the Just" which changed its name to "Communist League" after Marx joined. Until the Russian, the French Revolution was THE great popular revolution which leftists took as their models. -M.H.-
