View the H-Diplo Discussion Logs by month
View the Prior Message in H-Diplo's June 2010 logs by: [date] [author] [thread] View the Next Message in H-Diplo's June 2010 logs by: [date] [author] [thread] Visit the H-Diplo home page.
Jeffrey Kimball <jpkimball@muohio.edu> Mon, June 21, 2010 4:53 pm From where I sit at this moment, it seems to me that Ed Moise, Ken Hughes, and Jeff Kimball are more in agreement than disagreement. E.g., on the issues of the Nixon administration's decent-interval policy and Nixon-Kissinger's contribution to prolonging the war, we appear to agree. We even agree with the empirically-based theory that, of the three main species of crows in North America, all but a few exceptional white crows are black. Perhaps some details remain to be discussed and clarified, but for me the lesson is that when there is reasonably abundant evidence historians and political scientists and all others who talk and write about history can find agreement on facts, explanatory theses, and even grand theories -- especially when they have an opportunity to discuss their apparent differences, explain their methodology, and clarify what they mean by their statements. If we link this discussion of the "politics of U.S. troop withdrawal" in Vietnam with the concurrent discussion of "politics and scholarship," we can say that as long as we understand the historical questions at issue, and as long as we have evidence bearing on the matter, then historians can indeed find agreement -- despite whatever political or ideological differences exist, if they are willing to listen and explain their methodology and arguments. Jeff Kimball
|