Here’s the reading list for this course I am currently teaching. It’s somewhat preliminary: It’s a new course and changes may occur, depending on where our discussions take us. I’ll also certainly add more primary sources. Follow along at #GEST535
We started with a look at some big-picture takes on the History Wars and a broader reflection on an important question: Why is everybody talking about history? #GEST535
This week, we looked at some previous iterations of the History Wars, specifically at the conflict over National History Standards in the 90s, and tried to situate the current anti-“CRT”/ education bills in that longer-term context. #GEST535
In Week 4, a dive deep into the 1619 Project – and would you believe it, we’ll actually read it, discuss it, something that quite a few critics have not done, I’d guess.
In Week 5, a comprehensive look at the reactions to and the debate surrounding the 1619 Project. #GEST535
In Week 6, we’ll talk about how (not?) to bring history into the debate over American authoritarianism and discuss: Did it happen / is it happening here? The Fascism Question. #GEST535
Week 7 will be our last deep dive into the current U.S. history wars – we’re looking at the fight over Confederate monuments and, more generally, the Confederacy in American memory and politics. #GEST535
In Week 8, we’ll move across the Atlantic and start our exploration of the inter- and transnational dimensions of the History Wars. We’ll start in Belgium, where statues are also falling, and events have been very much intertwined with what has been happening in the U.S. #GEST535
In Week 9, we’ll look at the struggle over racism and the colonial legacy in the UK #GEST535
Week 10: Is there something to be learned from the Germans, about how to deal with the “memory of evil,” as Susan Neiman calls it? We’ll focus on her famous book, which will also serve as an entry into the German case. #GEST535
Week 11: If we want to assess whether or not there is something to be learned from the German “Vergangenheitsaufarbeitung,” the process of “working through the past,” we have to understand it first. In this week, we look at German debates before Reunification. #GEST535
In Week 12, we explore the debates over whether or not Germany is a “normal” country, and what that means for the way it handles its history, since Reunification: Collective Memory, the Culture of Remembrance, and “Vergangenheitspolitik” since 1989 #GEST535
And finally in Week 13, we examine the so-called “Catechism Debate” – a fierce fight over how to study, teach, and remember the Holocaust, the legacy of colonialism in German public culture, and the political conflict over national identity and multi-ethnic pluralism. #GEST535
As you can see, we have already started – Weeks 1-3 are in the books. I’ll post some reflections on the questions we discussed and our main observations and takeaways early next week. After that, there will be weekly updates as we make our way through the semester. #GEST535
Please keep your suggestions and observations coming – they are extremely helpful and so very much appreciated. Once again, I will not be able to answer all the questions or react to all the comments, but I am grateful to everyone who follows along. #GEST535
And, as always, here’s the original #GEST535 thread that contains all the general information on the course, the ideas and questions behind it, and links to all the different spin-off threads I’ll be posting throughout the semester:
There has been a ton of attention lately for Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation-led planning operation for a more efficient, more ruthless rightwing regime - peaking in reaction to Trump pretending he doesn’t know anything about it, which is an obvious, brazen lie. 2/
Public attention is necessary: In a very real sense, these plans are on the ballot in November. However, it’s also turned “Project 2025” into a bit of a catchall term - when we should be precise about what it tells us about Trump’s role and about the Right more broadly. 3/
Trump is not the mastermind behind Project 2025. It’s worse: The rightwing establishment has radicalized to the point where their plans are entirely in line with his vengeful desires.
My new piece (link in bio):
🧵1/
I wrote about the relationship between Trump and Project 2025, between the inner circle of MAGA world on the one hand and the institutional and intellectual elites of American conservatism on the other: A radicalizing alliance against democratic pluralism. 2/
Donald Trump lied when he declared he had nothing to do with Project 2025 and knew no one involved in the operation. Not exactly shocking, I know. But there is something more interesting and revealing going on here than just habitual lying. 3/
I took a deep dive into the “Promise to America” Heritage president Kevin Roberts has offered in his foreword to the "Project 2025" report: It perfectly captures the siege mentality, self-victimization, and grievance-driven lust for revenge that are fueling the Right's plans. 2/
Kevin Roberts is not a moderate imposter who pretends to be hardcore so that he can blend in with the MAGAs because that is the direction the wind is blowing. He is a reactionary Catholic and part of the Religious Right – a true believer in the reactionary political project. 3/
An argument I’m trying to make here is that a second Trump term would be worse not only because the radical Right would be better prepared, but also because they would be operating under much more favorable circumstances.
With a much more extreme Supreme Court, for instance.
Back in power, the radical Right could count on a reactionary supermajority on the Supreme Court - something they didn’t have during Trump’s first term.
Today’s disastrous, truly extreme immunity ruling should be an urgent reminder of what an absolute game-changer that is.
Additionally, this would not be the same Right that came to power in 2017. That starts with Trump himself. The idea that he has always been the same, just Trump being Trump, is massively misleading and obscures the rather drastic radicalization of the Right’s undisputed leader.
I wrote a three-part series about the worldview of the people behind “Project 2025,” the policy agenda and detailed plans it has produced, and what all this tells us about the radicalization of the American right.
It is difficult to convey how much establishment conservatism has been taken over by anti-democratic extremism.
“Project 2025” is actually helpful in that sense: Rightwing leaders are maximally clear about the reactionary vision they want to impose on the country. 3/
I got to talk to @chrislhayes about “Project 2025” on his #WITHpod
If you want more, I wrote a three-part series on the Right’s radical plans to use government as an authoritarian tool to impose a reactionary vision on America. Some thoughts:
Part I focuses on the worldview of the people behind “Project 2025.”
They see themselves as noble defenders of “real America” against a totalitarian “woke,” “globalist” assault. “Project 2025” is their declaration of war on multiracial pluralism: 2/
In his foreword to the "Project 2025" report, Heritage Foundation president Kevin Roberts offers his “Promise to America”: It perfectly captures the escalating siege mentality, self-victimization, and grievance-driven lust for revenge that are fueling the Right's plans. 3/