[lit-ideas] Re: Christopher Hill and thinking for oneself

  • From: Judith Evans <judithevans001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 14:00:12 +0000 (GMT)

> I distinguish between Journalists and historians. 


you were happy to quote Robert Marquand.  (I think you misunderstood him. His 
'generalization' concerned perceptions and depictions of Muslims.) And why not? 
he seems to be a good and serious journalist. Of course Ferguson is a 
well-known historian, he is also a journalist. That doesn't make his his 
political 'op-eds' worthy of any special attention. Hanson, well, he held a 
chair in Classics and is a columnist (Ferguson is a professional journalist), 
his 'op-ed' work is weak. (I wouldn't say 'weak' of Ferguson - though I usually 
disagree with him too.)


I do know who Andrew McCarthy is. 

 He
> strikes me has having some
> credence when he speaks on subjects within his expertise.

he seems to me to go beyond that, far beyond

Judy Evans, Cardiff 

-- On Tue, 24/8/10, Lawrence Helm <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> From: Lawrence Helm <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Christopher Hill and thinking for oneself
> To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Tuesday, 24 August, 2010, 14:37
> 
> I distinguish between Journalists and historians.  I
> am not of course
> arguing that one rethink everything -- that would be
> absurd.  We are going
> to be held accountable for those we set over ourselves, but
> it is not
> possible to avoid setting some people over us on some
> subjects.   We can't
> investigate everything ourselves.  But we can choose
> wisely, or try to.  And
> we can, if someone chooses to read us, show evidence that
> we are thinking
> for ourselves.  
> 
> Victor Davis Hanson is a reputable historian.  Niall
> Ferguson is also an
> historian-- although I usually disagree with him rather
> than invoke him as
> someone who has said something I agree with.
> 
> Andrew McCarthy is a former Assistant United States
> Attorney for the
> Southern District of New York.  He led the 1995
> terrorism prosecution
> against Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman and eleven others. The
> defendants were
> convicted of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and
> planning a series of
> attacks against New York City landmarks.  He also
> contributed to the
> prosecutions of terrorists who bombed US embassies in Kenya
> and Tanzania. He
> resigned from the Justice Department in 2003.  He
> strikes me has having some
> credence when he speaks on subjects within his expertise.
> 
> 
> Lawrence
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Judith Evans
> Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 2:18 AM
> To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Christopher Hill and thinking for
> oneself
> 
> "Many, as a recent discussion I was in suggested, would
> rather invoke a
> Journalist of the Left or Right than think the various
> issues they are
> concerned with through for themselves."
> 
> You, Lawrence, are not the best person to say this.  Do
> you not, time after
> time, quote/cite/discuss Victor Davis Hanson's and Neill
> Ferguson's
> think-pieces?  You have a blog piece called 'On Trusting
> Bloomberg More Than
> The Evidence'. What evidence do you give? A piece in the
> National Review by
> Andrew McCarthy. (What's his evidence? one word in a book
> subtitle.)  E.g..
> 
> Judy Evans, Cardiff
> 
> 
> 
> 
>       
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub,
> vacation on/off,
> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
> 



------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: