The 21st-Century History Wars

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 ImageImage
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 Image
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 Image
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 ImageImage
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 Image
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 Image
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 Image
In Week 9, we’ll look at the struggle over racism and the colonial legacy in the UK #GEST535 Image
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 Image
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 Image
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 Image
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 Image
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:

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Thomas Zimmer

Thomas Zimmer Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @tzimmer_history

Feb 6
This is a crucial observation: In the American political discourse, “working class” is often just shorthand for “white people with certain reactionary cultural sensibilities” - as in: “The working class rebelled against the establishment and voted for Trump.”
It’s really striking how the terms “blue collar” and “working class” almost always refer to either a type of professional occupation or certain reactionary cultural sensibilities of white people and are often entirely detached from matters of class / socio-economic status.
This is well in line with the pervasive assumption of a white “normal” that still governs the American political and cultural discourse. Concepts like “working class,” or “parents,” or “Christians” often come with a silent “white.”
Read 6 tweets
Feb 3
I am teaching a graduate course on the “21st Century History Wars” this semester. If anybody is interested in following along here on Twitter, I’d be happy to keep a running diary of what we read and discuss. A few thoughts on the outline of the course and the idea behind it:
Not just in the United States, but on either side of the Atlantic, we are witnessing intense conflicts over questions of cultural hegemony and national identity that have catapulted debates over “history” to the top of the political agenda.
These are struggles over who gets to define the national story and what place the legacies of racism, slavery, colonialism, and imperialism should occupy in it – with serious implications for the political, social, and cultural order in the present.
Read 18 tweets
Feb 2
The alarmed reactions to Joe Biden’s pledge to nominate a Black woman to the Supreme Courts reveal a lot about the conservative psyche and the pervasive siege mentality on the Right: To a reactionary white patriarchal movement, a Black woman rising is a threat.

My new column:
Conservatives feel threatened by Biden’s announcement because they understand it symbolizes the recognition that having white men dominate the powerful institutions of American life is a problem that needs to be rectified.
Conservatives see Biden’s announcement as an indication of how powerful the forces of liberalism, “wokeism,” and multiculturalism – those radically “Un-American” ideas that are threatening “real” (read: white Christian patriarchal) America – have already become.
Read 9 tweets
Jan 31
It is worth diving into the conservative reactions to Biden’s pledge to nominate a Black woman to the Supreme Court. They reveal a lot about the conservative psyche – and why the announcement is important even though, as @ElieNYC notes, the Right will still control the Court: 1/
Conservative politicians, intellectuals, and activists certainly didn’t try to hide their disdain. Even though it’s unclear who the candidate will be, they already know they won’t support this “beneficiary of affirmative action” and fight against this “lesser Black woman.” 2/
If you bemoan “exclusionary criteria of race and sex” only if and when they result in the selection of someone who is *not* a white man, you’re telling on yourself. 115 people appointed to the Court in 232 years – 7 have not been white men. Seven. 3/
Read 29 tweets
Jan 29
As @marceelias notes, it also includes this absolute gem:

“Whether the federalization of election rules that Democrats were pushing in their voting bills would have made the system somewhat better or somewhat worse…”

What a bizarre piece of reactionary centrist propaganda.
I just wrote at length about why I find the “anti-alarmism” genre so unconvincing - but I was focusing on a liberal version that is based on a misunderstanding of the history of democracy in America. This is something else entirely: A reactionary anti-alarmist smoke grenade.
Yes, the author decries the “wounds inflicted on American democracy by Donald Trump and the Republican Party” - but that’s standard operating procedure for reactionary centrists and “moderate” conservatives alike: Declare Trumpism and multiracial democracy equally illegitimate.
Read 6 tweets
Jan 28
Matthew Yglesias learn the difference between a pandemic and an endemic situation challenge.

But hey, he’s “a little skeptical,” and whatever doesn’t immediately and intuitively make sense to the Arbiter of Reason, whatever makes him uncomfortable, must be derided as nonsense.
This type of pundit never starts from a position of trying to understand what strikes him (they’re almost always men, almost always white) as odd or surprising. He considers himself the arbiter of what is and what is not reasonable - often without much substantive knowledge.
This is indicative of a striking lack of humility and unwillingness to listen - which is par for the the course for a certain type of pundit. Yglesias, Silver, Mounk, Barro, many more like them: They don’t examine, they judge; they don’t reflect, they determine.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

:(