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:
I wrote a long profile of him: He’s one of the architects of Project 2025, an avowed Christian nationalist, and a radical ideologue of the “post-constitutional” Right
Vought is at war with pluralistic democracy (link below):
🧵
Vought will be singularly focused on bending the entire government machine to Trump’s will. He believes that any check on the power of Donald Trump, who Vought literally describes as a “gift of God,” is illegitimate. There is no line he doesn’t feel justified to cross.
Key to understanding Vought’s worldview is the idea that the constitutional order - and with it the “natural” order itself - has been destroyed: The revolution has already happened, “the Left” won. Therefore, conservatives err when they try to preserve what is no more.
Russell Vought will be a key figure in the regime, as competent as he is radical. He’s one of the architects of Project 2025, an avowed Christian nationalist, an ideologue of the “post-constitutional” Right.
Key to Vought’s worldview is the idea that the constitutional order - and with it the “natural” order itself - has been destroyed: The revolution has already happened, “the Left” won. Therefore, conservatives categorically err when they try to preserve what is no more.
Power now lies with a “permanent ruling class” of leftist elites who control all major institutions of life and especially the “woke and weaponized” agencies of the state. In order to defeat them, conservatives must become “radical constitutionalists” - and take radical action.
Lots of talk about the OMB because of the utterly illegal funding freeze it issued.
A reminder that Russell Vought, the guy Trump wants to lead the agency, seeks to “traumatize” civil servants, use the military to suppress protests, and sees Trump as an agent of God’s will. 🧵
Vought will be singularly focused on bending the entire government machine to Trump’s will. He steadfastly believes that any check on the president’s power – on the power of Donald Trump, specifically, who Vought literally describes as a “gift of God” – is illegitimate.
Vought may look like a boring bureaucrat. But he is a committed ideologue, convinced to be fighting a noble war to defend his “real America” of white Christian patriarchal rule, where people like him get to dominate the public square and define who belongs.
Been asked so many times: “What do you think will happen?”
We will know a lot more soon. But I do think it’s helpful to clarify expectations. The baseline, for me: Being lawless does not make Trump omnipotent. Yet the situation is significantly more dangerous than in 2017.
🧵1/
We must resist the temptation to perpetuate Trump’s constant attempts to assert dominance by reflexively despairing over our supposedly hopeless situation. MAGA desires to project power and strength – something we should subvert rather than confirm. 2/
Being lawless does not make Trump omnipotent, and obscuring that distinction is an act of defeatism that only serves the regime. There is a vast gulf between Trump’s authoritarian aspirations on the one hand and the realities of a complex modern state and society on the other. 3/
Sunday reading: Three questions to help us engage Trump’s dangerous outlandishness.
We need to resist the temptation to constantly rage against Trump’s latest antics – while making sure the buffoonery of Trumpism doesn’t obscure how dangerous the situation is (link in bio):
Let’s avoid self-defeating approaches to dealing with Trump. Not much separates raging at his every word from despairing over our supposedly hopeless situation. MAGA desires to project strength – something we should subvert rather than confirm. Let’s not indulge the false bravado
Being lawless does not make Trump omnipotent – and obscuring that distinction is an act of defeatism that only serves the regime. There is a vast gulf between Trump’s authoritarian aspirations on the one hand and the realities of a complex modern state and society on the other.
Navigating the Nonsense and Propaganda of Clownish Authoritarianism
Ignoring what Trump says won’t work. Constant outrage is not a viable strategy either. I suggest we ask three questions that can help us engage Trump’s dangerous outlandishness.
New piece (link in bio):
🧵1/
I wrote about a key challenge of life under clownish authoritarianism: Resisting the temptation to constantly rage against Trump’s latest antics – while making sure the silliness and buffoonery of Trumpism doesn’t obscure how extreme and dangerous the situation is. 2/
Is the “savvy” thing to just ignore his outlandish ramblings? It’s not so easy. The president’s words have power. Let’s not pretend we can neatly separate the “distractions” from “real” politics, as our political reality that has been shaped by Trumpian extremism. 3/