text:
\section{Introduction}
Particle physicists worldwide are working on the design of a high
energy collider of electrons and positrons (the International Linear
Collider or ILC) which could be operational sometime around 2019. Any
experiment exploiting the ILC will require a high performance vertex
detector to detect and measure short-lived particles, yet be
tolerant to radiation damage for its anticipated lifetime. One candidate
is a set of concentric cylinders of
Charge-Coupled Devices (CCDs), read out at a frequency of around 50\,MHz.

It is known that CCDs suffer from both surface and bulk radiation damage. However,
when considering charge transfer losses in buried channel devices
only bulk traps are important. These defects create energy levels (traps)
between the conduction and valence band, and electrons are
captured by them. These electrons are also emitted back
to the conduction band after a certain time.

It is usual to define the Charge Transfer Inefficiency
(CTI) as the fractional loss of charge after transfer across one pixel.
An initial charge $Q_0$ after being transported across
$m$ pixels is reduced to
$Q_m=Q_0(1-{\rm CTI})^m$.
For CCD devices containing many pixels, CTI values around 10$^{-5}$ are important.
Previous results for a CCD with sequential readout have recently been reported~\cite{ieee}.
The expected background rate at the future ILC near the interaction point leads to
radiation damage in the CCD detector.
We simulated the charge transfer in a CPCCD (Column-Parallel CCD) using the trap
concentrations listed in Fig.~\ref{fig:trap}.
They correspond to about 3 years of operation for the 0.17 eV traps and
several more years for the 0.44 eV traps.

\begin{figure}[htp]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{plots/potential.ps}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c | c| c}
$E (eV)$
 & $C$ (\cm{-3}) &$\sigma_{\rm n}$ (\cm{2})\\ \hline
0.17 & \ntp{1}{12} & \ntp{1}{-14}\\
0.44 & \ntp{1}{12} & \ntp{1}{-15}
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{fig:trap}
Upper: detector structure and potential at gates (nodes) after initialization.
The pixel is located around between 20 and 40 $\rm \mu m$ length.
Lower: energy levels $E$, trap concentrations $C$, and electron-capture cross-section $\sigma_{\rm n}$
used in simulation. }
\end{figure}

\section{Simulations}

The UK Linear Collider Flavour Identification (LCFI)
collaboration~\cite{LCFI} has been studying a CCD with high-speed (50 MHz)
column-parallel readout produced by e2V Technologies.
It is a two-phase buried-channel CCD with 20\,$\mu$m square pixels.

Simulations of a simplified model of this device have been performed with
the ISE-TCAD package (version 7.5), particularly the DESSIS program
(Device Simulation for Smart Integrated Systems).
The simulation is essentially two dimensional and assumes a 1\,$\mu$m
device thickness (width) for calculating densities.
The overall length and depth are 55\,$\mu$m and 20\,$\mu$m respectively
(Fig.~\ref{fig:trap}).

Parameters of interest are the readout frequency, up to 50\,MHz, and
the operating temperature between 130\,K and 300\,K although
simulations have been performed up to 440\,K. The charge in transfer and
the trapped charge are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:transport}.

\begin{figure}[htp]
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,clip]{plots/signal.ps}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,clip]{plots/trapped.ps}
\caption{\label{fig:transport}
Upper: signal charge density.
Lower: trapped charge density.
}
\end{figure}

Charge Transfer Inefficiency is a measure of the fractional loss of
charge from a signal packet as it is transferred over a pixel, or
two gates. After DESSIS has simulated the transfer process, a 2D
integration of the trapped charge density distribution is performed
independently to give the total charge under each gate.

This CTI study, at nominal clock voltage, focuses only on
the bulk traps with energies 0.17\,eV and 0.44\,eV below the bottom
of the conduction band. These will be referred to simply as the
0.17\,eV and 0.44\,eV traps.
The 0.17~eV trap is an oxygen-vacancy defect,
referred to as an A-centre defect. The 0.44~eV trap is a phosphorus-vacancy
defect, an E-centre defect, as a result of the silicon being
doped with phosphorus and a vacancy manifesting from the displacement of a
silicon atom bonded with a phosphorus atom~\cite{Stefanov}.

\section{Simulation Results}

The CTI dependence on temperature and readout frequency was explored and
Figure~\ref{fig:allfreq_0_17eV} shows the CTI for simulations with
partially filled 0.17\,eV and 0.44\,eV traps at different frequencies for
temperatures between 130\,K and 440\,K, with a nominal clock voltage
of 3\,V. The CTI value depends linearly on the trap concentration for
a large concentration variation as also shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:allfreq_0_17eV}.

\begin{figure}[hbp]
\vspace*{5mm}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,clip]{plots/CTITemperature.ps}

\vspace*{10mm}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth,clip]{plots/Concentration.ps}
\caption{\label{fig:allfreq_0_17eV}
Upper: CTI values for 0.17 and 0.44~eV traps at clocking frequencies 10, 25 and 50~MHz.
Lower: CTI values for a large range of trap concentrations.
}
\end{figure}

The CTI values for a variation of the 0.17~eV trap level by 0.005~eV and
for 0.1\% and 1\% hit (pixel) occupancy are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:energy}.
Figure~\ref{fig:ISE_v_IM} shows the results of a study of a clock
voltage induced CTI in order to find the optimum clock voltage
with a low power consumption and keeping the CTI at an acceptable level.

\begin{figure}[htp]
\includegraphics[height=6cm,width=\columnwidth,clip]{plots/Energy.ps}

\vspace*{1mm}
\includegraphics[height=6cm,width=\columnwidth,clip]{plots/Occupancy.ps}

\vspace*{-2mm}
\caption{\label{fig:energy}
Upper: CTI values for 0.165, 0.170 and 0.175~eV traps.
Lower: CTI values for 0.1\% and 1\% hit (pixel) occupancy.
}
\vspace*{-1.5mm}
\end{figure}

\section{Comparisons with an Analytic Model}
The motivation for introducing an analytic model is to understand the underlying
physics through making comparisons with the TCAD simulations. This might then allow
predictions of CTI for other CCD geometries without requiring a full simulation.
A simple analytic model~\cite{ieee} has been adapted to the CPCCD characteristics.
The analytic model gives very similar results as shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:allfreq_0_17eV}
and~\ref{fig:energy}.
Figure~\ref{fig:ISE_v_IM_comp} compares the full TCAD simulation for 0.17\,eV traps and
clocking frequency of 50\,MHz to the analytic model. It emphasises the good agreement
between the model and full simulations\footnote{For temperatures below 140K the full simulation does not converge.}.
The variation of hit occupancy is studied and as expected at lower temperatures larger hit occupancy leads to
lower CTI values as traps are filled to a higher level.

\begin{figure}[htp]
\includegraphics[height=4.5cm,width=\columnwidth,clip]{plots/cti_voltage2new.eps}

\vspace*{-2mm}
\caption{\label{fig:ISE_v_IM}
Clock voltage induced CTI.}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}[htp]
\includegraphics[height=5cm,width=\columnwidth,clip]{plots/analytic_new.ps}

\vspace*{-2mm}
\caption{\label{fig:ISE_v_IM_comp}
CTI values for 0.17~eV traps at clocking frequency 50\,MHz.
Comparison of the analytic model with the full TCAD simulation
for two hit (pixel) occupancies of 0.1\% and 1\%.}
\end{figure}

However, there are limitations with the analytic model.
They could relate to a breakdown of the assumptions at high temperatures,
to ignoring the precise form of the clock voltage waveform, or to
ignoring the pixel edge effects.

\vspace*{-2mm}
\section{Conclusions and Outlook}

The Charge Transfer Inefficiency (CTI) of a CCD with high-speed column parallel readout
has been studied with a full simulation (ISE-TCAD DESSIS) and compared with an analytic model.
The 0.17\,eV and 0.44\,eV trap levels have been implemented in the full simulation and variations
of the CTI with respect to temperature and frequency have been analysed.
At low temperatures ($<230$\,K) the 0.17\,eV traps
dominate the CTI, whereas the 0.44\,eV traps dominate at higher temperatures.
Good agreement between simulations and an analytic model adapted to the CPCCD has been found.
The optimum operating temperature for the CPCCD prototype in a high radiation
environment is found to be about 230\,K for clock frequencies in the range 10 to 50\,MHz.
Our prototype CPCCD has recently operated at 45\,MHz and a test-stand for CTI measurements is
in preparation. The development of a high-speed CCD vertex detector is on track as a vital part
of a future ILC detector.

\vspace*{-1mm}
\section*{Acknowledgments}
\vspace*{-1mm}
This work is supported by the Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC)
and Lancaster University. The Lancaster authors wish to thank Alex Chilingarov,
for helpful discussions, and the particle physics group at Liverpool University, for the
use of its computers.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaArXiv


text:
Q: How to solve this adb grant permission error I want to grant android.permission.CHANGE_CONFIGURATION to my apk file.
adb command i used:

adb shell pm grant myPackageName
  android.permission.CHANGE_CONFIGURATION

but there is always the same error again and again:

Operation not allowed: java.lang.SecurityException: myPackageName has
  not requested permission android.permission.CHANGE_CONFIGURATION

Manifest.xml
<uses-sdk
    android:minSdkVersion="14"
    android:targetSdkVersion="22"/>
<uses-permission android:name="android.permission.WRITE_SETTINGS"/>
<uses-permission android:name="android.permission.CHANGE_CONFIGURATION" />

Permissions are already granted:
grantedPermissions:
  android.permission.READ_EXTERNAL_STORAGE
  android.permission.GET_TASKS
  android.permission.WRITE_EXTERNAL_STORAGE
  android.permission.ACCESS_WIFI_STATE
  android.permission.RECEIVE_SMS
  android.permission.READ_CONTACTS
  android.permission.GET_ACCOUNTS
  android.permission.CALL_PHONE
  android.permission.WRITE_CONTACTS
  android.permission.AUTHENTICATE_ACCOUNTS
  android.permission.READ_PHONE_STATE
  android.permission.READ_SMS
  android.permission.RECEIVE_BOOT_COMPLETED
  android.permission.CAMERA
  android.permission.ACCESS_FINE_LOCATION
  android.permission.MANAGE_ACCOUNTS
  android.permission.BROADCAST_STICKY
  android.permission.RECORD_AUDIO
  android.permission.WAKE_LOCK
  android.permission.ACCESS_NETWORK_STATE
  android.permission.USE_CREDENTIALS
  com.skype.android.app.permission.C2D_MESSAGE
  com.google.android.c2dm.permission.RECEIVE
  android.permission.MODIFY_AUDIO_SETTINGS
  android.permission.READ_SYNC_STATS
  android.permission.READ_PROFILE
  android.permission.DISABLE_KEYGUARD
  android.permission.WRITE_SYNC_SETTINGS
  android.permission.SYSTEM_ALERT_WINDOW
  android.permission.WRITE_SETTINGS
  android.permission.BLUETOOTH
  android.permission.INTERNET
  android.permission.CHANGE_WIFI_STATE
  com.skype.permission.ACCOUNT
  android.permission.READ_SYNC_SETTINGS
  android.permission.VIBRATE
  com.skype.android.app.permission.RECEIVE_ADM_MESSAGE

What is the solution for this? Posts on google does not help me.
Thanks in advance.

A: My phone is running android pie and it isn't rooted. An app that i installed required me to grant it permissions using adb. Initially I got the error

java.lang.SecurityException: grantRuntimePermission: Neither user 2000 nor current process has android.permission.GRANT_RUNTIME_PERMISSIONS.

After searching my developer options, one seemed interesting - Disable permission monitoring. It wasn't enabled. After enabling, ran the command
adb -d shell pm grant packageName android.permission.DUMP

It worked!

A: i don't have "Disable permission monitoring" in my developers options
i have pixel 4a android 12

A: if you need grant in android 10+ ,plase try on usb debugging(safe mode) or usb install ,because my device is android 11 on Redmi 11
---- on off use grant ------
Exception occurred while executing 'grant':
java.lang.SecurityException: grantRuntimePermission: Neither user 2000 nor current process has android.permission.GRANT_RUNTIME_PERMISSIONS.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


1.1.4 Who can apply to World Youth Forum 2018?
1.1.5 What do I need to apply to WYF Egypt?
1.1.6 What is the selection criteria as a participant?
1.1.7 Will WYF cover my flight?
1.1.10 What are the registration steps?
Applications are open again for the� world Youth forum fully funded conference which is going to be held in Sharm El Sheikh Egypt . World Youth Forum is a platform built by promising youth� inviting 5000 participants from all over the world.
Round Airfare Tickets from your nearest hub to Egypt, including the domestic as well as international flights within Egypt.� Accommodation during WYF will be provided to participants by WYF.
It sends a message of peace, prosperity, harmony, and progress to the entire world. It engages youth from around the globe in an enriching set-up, allowing them to exchange views and recommend initiatives to decision-makers and influential figures.
The forum is a chance for you to engage with top policymakers, network with promising youth from the region and the world that are determined to make our world a better place for everyone.
Below You can see my 2016 Trip to Egypt. The program was sponsored by AIESEC. A really Beautiful Country to visit once in a life.
Last year, we had around 3200 participants, this year we are aiming to host around� 5000� participants.
The World Youth Forum will run from November 3 to November 6, 2018. participants will arrive on 1st November and will depart on 8th November. So, the total No of Days is 8.
WYF Egypt 2018 will take place November 2-6, 2018 in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt.
Who can apply to World Youth Forum 2018?
It is open to all youth of all nations between the ages of 18-40 years old.
Youth that are influential in their communities and areas of studies are also encouraged to apply.
You can attend WYF as An Attendee a normal participant as a youth, A Speaker, A Model participant, A Workshop participant Or World Youth Theater participant.
What do I need to apply to WYF Egypt?
What is the selection criteria as a participant?
Personal, Professional and Educational experience related to the forum discussed topics.
Will WYF cover my flight?
The Round Ticket to & from Egypt, are FULLY FUNDED by WYF, including the domestic flights within Egypt.
You will have to submit your suitable dates of arrival and departure. World Youth Forum will run from November 3 to November 6, 2018. participants will arrive on 1st November and will depart on 8th November.
Wait for the confirmed date of your flight.
An SMS will be sent to your registered mobile number to notify you, in addition to an email.
Yes, Accommodation during WYF (1st – 8th November) is FULLY FUNDED by WYF.
Once your participation is confirmed, you will receive an accommodation reference number, along with your hotel details.
Yes, hotel transportation is provided from and to the airport.
WYF will do its best to facilitate your visa procedures and requirements through Egyptian Embassies and consulates all over the world; however, obtaining the visa is your responsibility.
The registration will close on� 15th Oct. The screening process takes from 2-4 weeks after submitting your application successfully. You will be notified via email.


Greek shipping company Metrostar Management Corporation has ordered two more Aframaxes from South Korea's Daehan Shipbuilding, VesselsValue data shows.
Under the agreement signed on June 15, the shipbuilder is scheduled to deliver the two 114,000 dwt vessels to Metrostar Management in 2019.
Athough the financial terms of the agreement were not disclosed, VesselsValue informed that the ships have a market value of USD 41.4 million a piece.
The order comes only a month after the Greek owner sealed a deal with Daehan for its first 114,000 dwt Aframax tanker duo.
Metrostar Management, which is paying USD 86 million for the two tankers, expects to take delivery of the vessels in 2018.
Posted on June 16, 2017 with tags Daehan Shipbuilding, Metrostar Management.


Tired of being cooped up all winter? Want a tune-up before the June 2nd Mammoth Fun Run/Walk?
Or maybe you just want an excuse to get ice cream at the ferry landing?
Mark your calendar for our ninth annual saunter starting at Devil's Lake State Park and ending at Gibraltar Rock, a distance of about 11 miles, through some of the most beautiful and unique terrain in southern Wisconsin.
An added treat this year will be the art installations that are part of Art on the Trail we will be able to admire as we stroll by.
We will start at the Devils Lake State Park Roznos Meadow parking lot on Hwy 113 at 9:00 am on Saturday, May 19. A bus will be waiting at Gibraltar Rock to shuttle hikers back to Roznos Meadow.
Please dress appropriately for hiking and the weather. bring lots of water and a snack/lunch.


text:
Thousands without power, planes delayed as storm Bella lashes France
27 December 2020 | 5:40 pm
Thousands were left without electricity and planes were delayed or forced to re-route Sunday as storm Bella caused torrential rain and heavy winds in much of northern France.
Some 12,000 households suffered power cuts in Brittany and Normandy in northern France and up to 6,000 around the Calais region.
Over a third of flights from France's main airport of Charles de Gaulle in northern Paris suffered delays of an average of 50 minutes due to the storm, the airport operator said.
Three flights heading to the airport were re-routed to Paris Orly airport in the south of Paris while an Aeroflot flight landed in Amsterdam and a plane heading from Luxemburg turned back.
A top flight rugby clash between Pau and Stade Francais scheduled for the afternoon was delayed by three hours after the storm prevented the Paris-based team from taking off.
The winds and rains were due to abate in some areas by the late afternoon but heavy show was forecast on higher ground in the south of the country heading into Monday.
Similar troubles were seen in the south of England where winds reaching 170 kilometres (105 miles) an hour were recorded on the Isle of Wight overnight Saturday to Sunday.
Meanwhile some 20,000 households in Wales had their electricity cut while delays were also seen on railways due to trees falling on the line.
Storm BellaVictor Oluwasina Oladokun

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Neanderthin: Eat Like a Caveman to Achieve a Lean, Strong, Healthy Body is a book written by Ray Audette . The author suffered from diabetes (at age 33), and had endured a battle with rheumatoid arthritis for 12 years. His research led him to Paleolithic nutrition – natural diet based on what Stone Age people ate prior to the development of agrarian societies.
The simple explanation of the diet, is that only food which is edible in its raw state AND which was available in the Paleolithic age should be eaten. There is no need to refrain from cooking or other forms of food-preparation when following the Neanderthin Plan.
Neanderthin has been called a low-carb diet by some. Grains (oats, barley, wheat, rye, etc) are completely out – as are all refined carbohydrates and sugars. This is a big list of 'forbidden' food and includes breads, pasta, rice, and even beans. Dairy is also not allowed (obviously a product of agricultural society). Fruit and vegetables are allowed, along with honey (in small amounts).
It is essentially a similar diet to what the hunter-gatherer would eat. Nuts, eggs, fish, and seafood, along with a high amount of meat. Obviously the meat must be cooked for health purposes.
There is no calorie counting or portion control here – you eat until satiation.
Look for some tasty high protein recipes here.
There has been considerable amount of research and study into eating habits in relation to disease. History shows an interesting record of this, and many conclusions have been drawn. The success of the Neanderthin diet, and other Paleo-diets may have more to do with removing refined foods from the diet – rather than a premise of "eating what the caveman ate".
There are a number of idiosyncrasies in Neanderthin – such as forbidding peanuts – which completely qualify as a raw food.
The sad thing is, is that in modern society healthy (fruits and vegetables) are so expensive compared to their processed counterparts. Nutritionally-challenged breads are so cheap to buy that it's no surprise that it is a staple of our modern diet.
PaleoFood – Extensive collection of recipes.
www.neanderthin.com – Official site of the Neanderthin diet.
Since quitting smoking 6 months ago i have steadily gained 7 kilos and have been banging my head against the wall trying to lose this weight Despite a seemingly healthy balanced diet and regular exercise nothing was working! Thanks to my chiropractor who introduced me to this way of eating the weight is coming off effortlessly and i cant remember feeling better! my skin looks amazing and my energy levels are soaring.
Do you guys do organ meats?? Do you bother with the pemican?? Can this be made safely/easily??
I've never felt better than when I'm on the Neanderthin diet. I have more energy, my skin and teeth are better, and I just plain feel healthy. It's also the only diet that makes sense to me. No processed foods, no manufactured "foods." I highly recommend reading the book!
I regards to why we can't eat beans, it is because in their raw state, they are toxic and will cause a number gastro-intestinal illnesses when eaten raw.
Though cooking removes most of these, a small amount remains and is considered best to avoid them.
Neanderthin is working for me. In a month I've lost 15 lbs. Considering that prior to starting Neanderthin, I was running 15-20 miles a week and eating low calorie and not losing, this is a huge success.
I won't ever do any other diet again and since reading the book, I've done a lot of research on Paleo-type lifestyles and it makes a lot of sense.
Regarding Sebastian's comment about it being more balanced, I totally agree. I have tried Atkins several times over the past few years and I could never stick to it for longer than a few days, so even though there are some similarities, this is different.
I agree with Julia's comment about Canola oil. I only do lard and sometimes butter. I don't do any oils at all. Regarding the raw meat, I would have to disagree.. our modern factory farms don't make for the healthiest animals. We really need to cook them to make them safer. Ideally, we would only do grass fed animals.. but they are so expensive.
A great plan apart from the author recommending that we avoid saturated animal fats and eat Canola. Hardly a caveman dietary item. And why cook the meat, raw meat is easily digested and if handled properly perfectly safe.
The paleolithic diet seems like a more balanced version of a low carb diet which is the only diet that works for me. I might have to give it a try.


We have booked the holiday through Iglu Ski - got a £90 pp discount so that was a bonus. We can get half price ski hire if we add it through that package, my only concern is where the ski hire shop is in Sauze that Inghams use. Does anyone know? Ski hire with ski set is about 73 euro, so half price could be very good! Any idea?
They will have it on their website, but you need to ask if IGLU are using the Ingham's choice.
Whenever we have been looking at ski hire the "best" option has been SkiSet with a discount voucher (-40% or -50% vouchers seem to turn up regularly later in the year).
We have asked about group discounts from specific shops, looked at "discounts" with TO's and other outlets from Intersport, Sport2000 and others.
The 50% "discount" has always been from full list price with TO's (Crystal, Inghams, Neilson).
If pre-booking you will presumably be paying in sterling and this has to be factored in too. So - is the actual price being offered by Inghams/Iglu competitive? For example; a couple of years ago in Austria early pre-booking looked good but at the time of the holiday the hotel price/offer was slightly cheaper.
I tend to go for a convenient shop that has the kit I want on offer rather than worry about saving a fiver.
4. I like to be self sufficient.
Ps - we will be booking separate. Remembered from last time that inghams gear was poop!
We always get our skis from Paolo Chalp at the bottom of the Clotes lift as you can store them there so you don't have to trudge them up and down the hill. I am pretty sure the TO's don't use him though but the majority of the ski hire shops are family run and are pretty good in Sauze.
I always get skis from Edyllin Sport. If you book them on line you get a discount and also free ski storage. They are at the bottom of the clotes slope near Hotel Stella alpina. Nice walk in the morning to get our skis and not far to the Ghost bar at the end of the day.
Significant Fresh Snow is forecast for Macugnaga.
At least 29 Ski Areas in Italy are reported to be open.
Sauze D'Oulx for Beginners ?


text:
Bring out your dead! Reporting Scotland's plague on journalism
March 20, 2019 johnrobertson834
'Infection control measures here in Scotland are among the best in Europe but it's impossible to completely guarantee that hospitals are safe.'
That is of course, the headline we should be hearing and it's a truth closer to the shared experience and information needs of most viewers but by that time, the damage had been done with:
'Around 10% of health care infections detected over the past three years are likely to be linked to NHS buildings.'
How informed do we feel after hearing that? Is 10% a lot? Is it lower than elsewhere? Is it falling over time? How likely is likely?
'A flagship hospital with some serious health problems.'
Are they serious – 3 deaths where a hospital-acquired infection may have been a contributory factor (only)? Not one person died because of a health problem posed by the building. Not one. Tabloid journalism.
'48 incidents may have originated in NHS buildings.'
Once more, without context, we have no idea what to make of that figure. Tabloid journalism.
There is no real health care crisis here. A politically motivated media feeding frenzy initiated by the courtiers at the state broadcaster has constructed a classic moral panic out of unremarkable, statistically insignificant events and, with the help of dodgy opposition politicians, forced the Scottish Government to act as if they were significant or face accusations of complacency.
I'm reminded of Ian Stronach's line:
'Shouting 'Theatre!' in a crowded fire'
Previous Article Unemployment in Tory UK is 15% higher than in Scotland
Next Article Trafficking of children more than 50 times higher in England than in Scotland
3 thoughts on "Bring out your dead! Reporting Scotland's plague on journalism"
Pingback: Bring out your dead! Reporting Scotland's plague on journalism | speymouth
gavin March 20, 2019 / 11:44 am
I noticed that on the Holyrood Committee hearing, BBC Where U Ur (usually "Scotland" is in London these days) showed a Tory, Lib Dumb and Labour politician.
I think its called "product placement".
Alasdair Macdonald March 20, 2019 / 10:45 pm
Including Mr Lewis Macdonald of the Labour Party looking gravely serious.


Want to learn more about moving in a rental truck? Check out this comprehensive resource on moving trucks for tips and information.
Dents, dings and damage. Note any existing damage in your inspection contract so you aren't held responsible for issues that were already there.
Tires. Make sure there is plenty of tread on the tires and that they appear to be in good condition.
Brakes. Test the brakes to see if they're in working order.
Lights. Have a friend stand outside to confirm the headlights, brake lights and turn signals (both front and back) work properly.
Air conditioning/heat. Does the air temperature change correctly? Depending on the time of year, these functions can be really important during a long drive.
Radio/sound system. This one isn't necessary for safety, but a drive across the country can get boring without music or other audio entertainment.
Keep a safe distance. Trucks require more room and time to stop than cars, so keep several car lengths between you and any vehicles in front of you.
Turn wide. Moving trucks are longer than typical personal vehicles, so they have a wider turning radius. Turn wide to avoid curbs and other objects.
Change lanes and pass with caution. Don't pass on hills or curves because they can slow the vehicle down and require more time to pass safely. Keep in mind that the truck is bigger than most vehicles, so you'll need more room to switch lanes.
Stay off your phone. While it's wise to keep your phone charged in case of emergencies, avoid using it while driving. This can cause distractions and many states have laws preventing it.
Choose parking spots wisely. Look for spaces where you can pull through instead of spots where you'll have to back out. Set the parking brake before getting out.
Keep the truck secure. Park in well-lit areas, if possible. Make sure to lock the passenger and cargo areas.
Use help when backing up. Rental trucks have more blind spots because there's no rearview mirror — only side mirrors — so it's helpful to have help when backing up. But even with assistance, check multiple times for people or objects in your path and keep your windows down so you can hear outside noise.
If you're uneasy about driving a moving truck, there's another option. You can move without having to drive — often for a price comparable to truck rental! U-Pack is a "you pack, we drive" company, so your belongings get delivered door to door and you don't have to worry about driving the equipment.
Compare rates with a free moving quote or call a helpful moving consultant at 800-413-4799. If you have any questions about driving a moving truck or moving with U-Pack, leave us a comment. We're here to help!


Lemon sweets are the divas of desserts. Assertive and bold, lemons can be flamboyant, tart, and tangy as in the Lemon Granita or sweet, mellow, and velvety like the creamy Lemon Panna Cotta. Over 70 recipes—from the classics to lip-smacking new favorites—are all enticingly presented in Luscious Lemon Desserts. These recipes vary from the simple to the sublime, from the quick and easy to the most elaborate showstoppers. Author Lori Longbotham provides great tips on buying, storing, and using this most popular fruit. Whether it's a fast and fabulous lemon pudding or a Mile-High Lemon Angel Food Cake, the name says it all: Luscious Lemon Desserts. Yum!
Move over smores - Woof'ems are here and we're taking campfire cooking to a new level. Wrap store bought biscuit dough around the 'cup' of your Woof'em Sticks and toast over a campfire, barbecue pit, outdoor fire pit or a propane stove. Fill with pulled pork, topped with cheddar cheese and sour cream. How about your favorite white chicken chili recipe or do breakfast over the campfire and fill with scrambled eggs, cheese and bacon. Then serve quick and easy desserts everyone will have fun toasting and filling with all their favorites. Lemon, cherry and blueberry pie filling, vanilla, chocolate & butterscotch puddings, fresh fruit, even a quick scoop of ice cream. Always be sure to top with a huge dollop of whipped cream. Let us know if you were able to "Woof" just one. The most adventurous usually have at least three.
All the decadent flavor of a velvety lemon loaf (with plenty of icing) comes to life in this anytime herbal tea. Our irresistible recipe offers notes of refreshing citrus and creamy, buttery vanilla—without any guilt.
Looking for more Desserts Lemon similar ideas? Try to explore these searches: Three Small Links, Terra Cotta Sun Plaque, and c750 Black Toner.


Your Mather home is like a book — it gets judged by its cover.
Our network of lawn care companies in Mather, PA will give you a lush green lawn and can improve the overall look of your home, improving curb appeal and even increasing your property value.
In Mather, PA Trugreen is our featured partner. Mather homeowners can depend on TruGreen for year-round care that is specifically meant for lawns in the city of Mather. Trugreen consists of lawn care experts who are highly qualified to provide the best recommendations for you and your lawn, no matter where you live in Mather. A TruGreen specialist can take a look at your lawns grass type and soil condition and come up with the best lawn care service for your home.
Mather homeowners can depend on Lawncare.net for year-round care that is specifically meant for lawns in the city of Mather.
Lawncare.net is a team of lawn care experts who are highly qualified to provide the best recommendations for you and your lawn, no matter which part of Mather you live in.


text:
historians and the public
Tips for Public Writing
January 15, 2020 January 14, 2020 / johnfea
Are you an academic who wants to write for the public? If so, check out Katie Rose Guest Pryal's helpful Chronicle of Higher Education piece "You Want to Write for the Public, but About What?" It includes wisdom from historians Kelly Baker, Kevin Kruse, and Sarah Bond.
Here is a taste:
Kelly J. Baker, a former faculty member in religious studies and now editor of the newsletter Women in Higher Education, fields a lot of unsuccessful pitches from academics new to public writing. One of the most common mistakes they make, she said, is a failure to move beyond their scholarship: "Their pitch is too specific to their discipline. They rely on too much jargon or write a pitch that would be a better fit for an academic journal rather than a magazine." (Baker offers further advice on this in her blog post on writing for nonacademic readers.)
To succeed in public writing, then, you have to take that brave first step beyond the small but safe territory of your scholarly expertise. Use your academic training as a foundation and then do the additional research and reporting necessary to write a journalistic piece. I used current events as the driving force of my freelance writing, and my expertise followed.
Read the entire piece here.
I recently wrote about my own experience with public writing.
The List of Historians Endorsing Impeachment Reaches 2000+
On December 16, 2019 there were just over 750 historians calling for impeachment. By December 17, 2019, the number rose to over 1500.
Yesterday the number of historians endorsing impeachment reached 2000.
Writing for the Public in "Perilous Times"
December 18, 2019 / johnfea
Recently the editors of The Panorama, an online magazine published by the Society for Historians of the Early American Republic and the Journal of the Early Republic, asked me to compose a short piece on public writing. The piece was published today under the title "Sometimes Writing History for the Public Means Forgetting Everything You Learned About Writing in Graduate School."
Public writing is not for the faint of heart. The comments sections of online platforms are some of the darkest places on the internet. The discourse occurring every day on Twitter may be one of the strongest arguments for the Christian doctrine of original sin. But if we are serious about challenging citizens to think more deeply about the links between past and present, it is a cross that we must bear with courage.
Number of Historians Endorsing a Statement Calling for the Impeachment of Donald Trump Reaches 1500+
Last night we reported that 750 American historians signed the statement. That number has more than doubled in less than 24 hours.
Some new names that caught my attention include:
Gretchen Adams, Dee Andrews, Brian Balogh, Ed Baptists, Amy Bass, J.L. Bell, Carol Berkin, George Boudreau, Anne Boylan, Francis Bremer, W. Fitzhugh Brundage, Anthea Butler, Una Cadegan, William Chafe, Mark Cheathem, Rachel Hope Cleaves, Jelani Cobb, Frank Cogliano, Nancy Cott, Ruth Schwartz Cowan, John Faragher, Elizabeth Fenn, Linford Fisher, Eric Foner, Kevin Gannon, Carl Guaneri, Philip Gura, Steven Hahn, John Craig Hammon, Luke Harlow, Graham Hodges, Fred Jordan, Catherine Kelley, Peter Kolchin, Alan Kulikoff, Naomi Lamoreaux, David Levering Lewis, Mark Lilla, Kenneth Lockridge, James Loewen, Daniel Mandell, Matthew Mason, Donald Mathews, Kevin Mattson, Sheila McIntyre, Keri Leigh Merritt, Gary Nash, Johann Neem, Sarah Pearsall, John Ragosta, Jack Rakove, Joshua Rothman, Vicki Ruiz, Mary Ryan, Stacy Schiff, Randolph Scully, Robert Shaffer, Kathryn Sklar, Richard Norton Smith, Randy Sparks, Thomas Sugrue, Bill Svelmoe, Alan Taylor, Jemar Tisby, Jose Torre, Richard Sutton, Elizabeth Varon, and Ronald White.
I also noticed a few American historians from Christian colleges with evangelical or CCCU identities:
Brad McKinnon: Heritage Christian University
Mark Edwards: Spring Arbor University
Paul Otto: George Fox University
David Diephouse: Calvin University
Arlene Sanchez-Walsh: Azusa Pacific University
Paul Yandle: North Greenville University
Daniel Miller: Calvin University
Over 750 American Historians Call for Impeachment of Donald Trump
The list of historians who signed the statement include:
Tyler Anbinder, Fred Anderson, Debby Applegate, David Armitage, Eric Armstrong Dunbar, Rick Atkinson, James Banner, Thomas Bender, Keisha Blain, Casey Blake, David Blight, Sidney Blumenthal, John Boles, Patricia Bonomi, Eileen Boris, T.H. Breen, Douglas Brinkley, Jon Brooke, Kathleen Brown, Richard Brown, Mari Jo Buhle, Ken Burns, Jon Butler, Colin Calloway, Margot Canaday, Robert Caro, Ben Carp, Kate Carte, Mary Cayton, Joyce Chaplin, Ron Chernow, Lizabeth Cohen, Juan Cole, Seth Cotlar, Robert Dallek, Philip Deloria, John Demos, Gregory Downs, Ellen Dubois, Kathleen DuVal, Carolyn Eastman, Douglas Egerton, David Hacket Fischer, Richard Fox, Sylvia Frey, Gary Gerstle, Glenda Gilmore, Todd Gitlin, Adam Goodheart, David Greenberg, Amy Greenberg, Robert Gross, Jacquelyn Hall, David Hall, Leslie Harris, Christine Heyrman, Joan Hoff, David Hollinger, Michael Holt, Harold Holzer, Daniel Walker Howe, Tera Hunter, Matthew Jacobson, Karl Jacoby, Maya Jasanoff, Joseph Peniel, Michael Kazin, Robin D.C. Kelley, Ari Kelman, Ibram Kendi, Linda Kerber, Alice Kessler-Harris, James Kloppenberg, Cynthia Kierner, Sarah Knott, Gary Kornblith, Alan Kraut, Kevin Kruse, Jon Kukla, Wayne Lee, Walter Licht, Nancy MacLean, Peter Mancall, Kate Masur, Elaine Tyler May, Stephanie McCurry, Lisa McGirr, Jon Meacham, Joanne Meyerowitz, Randall Miller, Philip Morgan, David Nasaw, Mae Ngai, Walter Nugent, Peter Onuf, Robert Orsi, Nell Painter, James Patterson, Rick Perlstein, Matthew Pinsker, Daniel Richter, Seth Rockman, Dorothy Ross, Joan Rubin, Martha Sandweiss, Claudio Saunt, Robert Self, Christopher Sellers, Andrew Shankman, Rick Shenkman, Russell Shorto, Irene Silverblatt, Manisha Sinha, Christine Stansell, John Stauffer, Jeremi Suri, Heather Thompson, Nancy Tomes, Camilla Townsend, Daniel Usner, Robert Utley, Barbara Weinstein, Bernard Weisberger, Stephen Whitfield, Sean Wilentz, Garry Wills, Brenda Wineapple, Peter Wood, Serena Zabin, Rosemarie Zagarri, and Michael Zuckerman.
Here is the statement:
President Trump's numerous and flagrant abuses of power are precisely what the Framers had in mind as grounds for impeaching and removing a president. Among those most hurtful to the Constitution have been his attempts to coerce the country of Ukraine, under attack from Russia, an adversary power to the United States, by withholding essential military assistance in exchange for the fabrication and legitimization of false information in order to advance his own re-election.
President Trump's lawless obstruction of the House of Representatives, which is rightly seeking documents and witness testimony in pursuit of its constitutionally-mandated oversight role, has demonstrated brazen contempt for representative government. So have his attempts to justify that obstruction on the grounds that the executive enjoys absolute immunity, a fictitious doctrine that, if tolerated, would turn the president into an elected monarch above the law.
As Alexander Hamilton wrote in The Federalist, impeachment was designed to deal with "the misconduct of public men" which involves "the abuse or violation of some public trust." Collectively, the President's offenses, including his dereliction in protecting the integrity of the 2020 election from Russian disinformation and renewed interference, arouse once again the Framers' most profound fears that powerful members of government would become, in Hamilton's words, "the mercenary instruments of foreign corruption."
It is our considered judgment that if President Trump's misconduct does not rise to the level of impeachment, then virtually nothing does.
Hamilton understood, as he wrote in 1792, that the republic remained vulnerable to the rise of an unscrupulous demagogue, "unprincipled in private life, desperate in his fortune, bold in his temper, possessed of considerable talents…despotic in his ordinary demeanour." That demagogue, Hamilton said, could easily enough manage "to mount the hobby horse of popularity — to join in the cry of danger to liberty — to take every opportunity of embarrassing the General Government & bringing it under suspicion — to flatter and fall in with all the non sense of the zealots of the day." Such a figure, Hamilton wrote, would "throw things into confusion that he may 'ride the storm and direct the whirlwind.'"
President Trump's actions committed both before and during the House investigations fit Hamilton's description and manifest utter and deliberate scorn for the rule of law and "repeated injuries" to constitutional democracy. That disregard continues and it constitutes a clear and present danger to the Constitution. We therefore strongly urge the House of Representatives to impeach the President.
Yes, I signed it.
Read all the names of the signers, their affiliations, and their scholarship here.
The New York Times coverage of the statement is here.
The Washington Post coverage of the statement is here.
Do You Want to Write for the Public?
December 5, 2019 December 4, 2019 / johnfea
Are you an academic who wants to write for the public? If so, you should take a look at Katie Rose Guest Pryal's Chronicle of Higher Education piece "10 Questions Every Academic Should Ask Before Writing for the Public." Here is a taste:
Here are 10 questions that every academic should ask before writing for the public.
No. 1: Who is my public? Chances are, you already write for "a public." If you are a faculty member, you might write articles for journals or give talks at conferences. If you are an administrator, you might write reports for various stakeholders, including the general public. If you are a graduate student, you might already be presenting at conferences or publishing in journals.
But here we'll talk about expanding your definition of "public," understanding who that audience might be, and then making sure you know how to best write for your new readers.
For now, consider "the public" to mean this: educated people who read popular magazines and websites that you also like to read. What venues do you turn to for your daily commentary on world events, large and small? The readers of those venues compose your public audience. For now.
No. 2: Why do I want to do this? Some people start writing for popular publications because they think they'll earn money. Some do it because their institution encourages public engagement. Others do it because they want to make sure their research is accessible to as many readers as possible. Whatever your motivations, you need to have a clear idea of what they are before you get started. Your reasons might change as you go along, and that's fine.
Carlo Ginzburg on the Study of History and the Boundaries of His Commitments
October 28, 2019 / johnfea
Historians know Ginzburg as the founder of the "microhistory" and the author of The Cheese and the Worms. In a recent interview at Verso Books with Claire Zalc he talks about his career and the current state of the historical profession. Here is a taste:
How do you define the boundaries of your commitments?
I must say that I don't like sermons. If there is anything I can do, as a historian, from an analytical point of view, it is very good. It's part of my job. But the situation is evolving in a way that I may have to get a little more involved. Yesterday, I was asked to comment on the screening of a film on immigration and I accepted. Would I have said yes five or ten years ago? The context is changing… Even if the idea of the committed intellectual is not something I particularly like.
Do you think that doing history helps us understand our present? I have in mind the frequent analogy made between the current situation and the 1930s.
I had never used the word 'fascist' outside its historical context. Then I watched Trump's election campaign on TV. I was in Chicago, and I thought, 'This guy's a fascist.' Then I thought about a conversation I had with Italo Calvino, around 1968. He knew Argentina well, and said to me: 'You see, in the light of the Perón experience, the definition of fascism has to change.' This struck me. Certainly, there is historical fascism, but can we broaden this definition? Racism or anti-Semitism are not, in my opinion, necessary elements. But we should think about this.
Why do history today? Do you think it still makes sense?
Yes, completely. But we must avoid confusion or identification between history and memory. Even if history is nourished by memory, and memory is also nourished by history, it is necessary to keep this distinction: Maurice Halbwachs demonstrated this very well. It reminds me of the Internet. There are, with the Internet, gains and losses. We gain a potential for opening up, for 'de-provincialization', which is magnificent. But there is also a risk of losing the slowness of reading, the slowness of reflection. You have to play between the two, speed and slowness, to regain the thickness of the present.
Read the entire interview and Zalc's introduction here.
I was struck by Ginzburg's reflections on the historian's engagement with contemporary events. I think his answer to this question best captures how I have approached the Trump administration and my book Believe Me. "The situation is evolving in a way that I may have to get a little more involved."
Should Junior Scholars Write for the Public?
October 19, 2019 October 17, 2019 / johnfea
Sarah Bond of the University of Iowa History Department and Kevin Gannon (aka "The Tattooed Prof") of the Grandview University History Department help junior faculty decide if they should write for public audiences. I am glad to see the reference here to former Messiah College student Ernie Boyer. Here is a taste:
A recent advice column in The Chronicle — "Which Publications Matter at Which Stages of Your Career?" — argued that junior colleagues are devoting too much time to op-eds, blog posts, and other types of "less than impressive" public writing not published in top-tier academic journals or written in service to monographs or grant proposals. Instead, it said, they should "be calculating" about which publications will actually lead to tenure, and which won't, and focus more on the former.
That advice certainly applies to faculty at major research universities or elite liberal-arts colleges (like the one where its author teaches). Trouble is: Most faculty positions aren't within that small (and getting smaller) slice of academe. Compared with those lavishly resourced institutions, the rest of higher education evaluates faculty publications through a fundamentally different set of lenses.
Lower-tier liberal-arts colleges, teaching-oriented universities, and community colleges — where the vast majority of academic jobs are found — have long championed the need for their faculty to pursue public outreach together with effective teaching. So telling graduate students to eschew public-facing writing and outreach in favor of "impressive" or "legitimate" publications is the wrong advice for the many job candidates who will end up employed outside of the select circle of wealthy institutions.
In fact, even some departments at R1 universities are starting to use public writing and outreach in tenure cases, as an indicator of a scholar's impact. We believe that the very survival of academe is, in part, predicated on encouraging both graduate students and junior scholars to engage in activities that speak to and for the public.
The Boyer model. Many liberal-arts colleges use the Boyer model of scholarship, or something very close to it, as the evaluative criteria for faculty publishing. The Boyer model — in its framing of four types of scholarly domains such as the "scholarship of teaching and learning" and the "scholarship of application" — speaks most directly to the missions and interests of these types of institutions. They emphasize engagement and service, and their faculty are expected to perform — and are rewarded for — scholarly work that fits within that mission. Some departments at these colleges might remain exclusively wedded to the traditional "scholarship of discovery" (Boyer's term), above all else, but they are outliers swimming against a more powerful institutional tide.
Read the entire piece here. I find myself solidly in the Bond-Gannon camp here. And as long as we are writing about Kevin Gannon, check out our conversation on teaching history on Episode 26 of The Way of Improvement Leads Home Podcast.
Historian Thomas Sugrue on Public Thinking
April 4, 2019 April 3, 2019 / johnfea
Over at Public Books, University of Chicago historian Destin Jenkins interviews New York University historian Thomas Sugrue about his work as a public scholar. Here is a taste the interview:
DJ: We could talk shop all day. How and why did you decide to communicate this history with the public?
TJS: Throughout my career, I have chosen topics that have contemporary relevance. I don't see a bright line between past and present. When I was in graduate school, one of the harshest criticisms you could level against a historian was that he or she was a presentist. Somehow our historical scholarship would be compromised by our engagement with the world that we live in now. I've never found this argument to be persuasive. It's a fallacy to see the present as somehow uprooted from history. The opportunities and constraints that we experience in the here and now are the result of historical processes.
I also don't draw a bright line between scholarly work and public advocacy. I think those of us who have the skills to write clearly should exercise those skills. We should try to reach beyond a couple hundred specialists in our scholarly subfields.
DJ: You said there's no bright line between scholarly work and public advocacy, but is the process different? Is the process of writing an article or book chapter different from writing op-eds? Walk us through the mechanics.
TJS: When you write an op-ed for the New York Times or the Washington Post, you might have 750 or 800 words. You have to take a lot of complex material and boil it down to its essence. That requires making really hard choices about what's in and what's out. We historians love detail. We love the specifics, but when you're writing short, popular pieces, you've got to let a lot of that detail fall by the wayside.
Some would say that it's dangerous to simplify complex arguments, but I think it can be done well. The key is to be faithful to the substance of your argument even if you're leaving a lot of the evidence out. Readers who want to know more can find my articles online or go to their local library or bookstore and pick up a copy of one of my books.
DJ: What have been some of the other ways you've shown up as a public thinker?
TJS: I have been asked to be an expert witness in a number of civil rights cases. That requires another type of writing. I'm an archive hound. I'm really rigorous. I try to leave no statement that I make in a book or a scholarly article unsupported. I try to turn over every last stone. The burden of proof, already high, is even greater when you are engaged in research for a legal case, because your work is going to be used in an adversarial process. I go through every word, every footnote, and make sure everything is absolutely precise. I know my work is going to be subjected to close scrutiny by lawyers who want to demolish my credibility.
Another way in which I engage different audiences is through public speaking. I've given hundreds of talks and workshops and lectures, not only at colleges and universities, but also to community organizations, museums, religious congregations, and foundations. I once even gave a keynote at a chamber of commerce event, because that audience needed to be exposed, more than most, to scholarship on race and inequality. I speak to people who agree with me, but also to people who don't.
Read the entire interview here.
Back in 2014, I offered my two cents on public scholarship in a 9-part video series published on YouTube as part of the old Virtual Office Hours. Here is episode 1:
AHA Executive Director Jim Grossman Invited Max Boot to the Annual Meeting
March 8, 2019 March 7, 2019 / johnfea
Some of you have been following Max Boot's recent comments about historians and the public. You can get up to speed here and here.
Over at the blog of the American Historical Association, Jim Grossman, the Executive Director of the AHA (and our first guest on The Way of Improvement Leads Home Podcast!), has invited Boot to come to the next annual meeting to see what historians are up to these days. Here is a taste of this piece:
Boot's praise of the "prominent exceptions" and public historians who "do a wonderful job" leaves aside the hundreds of historians working in the academy who have been publishing in local venues and in blogs about all sorts of important contemporary topics, such as a scholar of early modern Europe who helped readers of a Cleveland newspaper place a papal election in context. Had Boot consulted the AHA, as many reporters do on a regular basis, including his colleagues at the Washington Post, we could have delivered numerous such sources, including a substantial bibliography of AHA members' commentaries relating to Confederate monuments: work written by historians coming from specializations in politics, gender, race, regional culture, and all sorts of other angles.
Boot is not wrong about the lack of incentive for academic historians to reach wider publics, an issue frequently discussed in this magazine. Had Boot read even a few of these pieces, however, he would know that this is related less to what historians study than to traditional definitions of scholarship itself. Our discipline does have to rethink its definition of scholarship to consider whether and how to include scholarly interventions in public culture.
Talk to historians, Max. I asked you to do that on Twitter, and I'll ask you again. I'm happy to organize a session at our next annual meeting where you can discuss these issues with the people whom you admire and the people you dismiss.
Max Boot Responds to Historian Critics
February 26, 2019 / johnfea	/ 1 Comment
Get some context here.
Here is a taste of Boot's recent piece at The Washington Post:
I seem to have struck a nerve among historians with my Feb. 20 column on the waning popularity of history as a major among college students. You would think that most historians would approve of an article calling on students to study their subject. But 90 percent of the reaction focused on 10 percent of the article — namely, my contention that historians "bear some blame for the increasing irrelevance of their discipline," because many "have retreated from public debate into their own esoteric pursuits," neglecting the study of political, diplomatic and military history.
The History News Network website devoted a whole article to the brouhaha. A few of the more polite tweets: "Omg. Get out from under your rock! Meet some of the many historians doing exactly that. Quit trading in outdated assumptions about what we do or don't do. It's tiresome." "I love that today is the day we watched a Dutch historian shred Tucker Carlson into tiny little tantrum pieces and it's also the day Max Boot told us historians hiding in broom cupboards are to blame for everything in the world." "Max, I don't think this is accurate. There has been amazing work in all of these subfields, indeed as good as the 'classics.' Yes, political/diplomatic/military history have been reimagined, but the publications and classes are as good as ever."
A number of historians pointed to their own work as relevant to the public debate. They're right! I never suggested that all historians engage exclusively in esoteric pursuits. I'm delighted to note that there are prominent exceptions, such as Harvard's Jill Lepore, who is a writer for the New Yorker, and Princeton's Kevin Kruse, who regularly skewers Dinesh D'Souza on Twitter. The Post's own Made by History column brings historical research to bear on current events. "Public" historians working at museums, archives, foundations and historical sites do a wonderful job. But the historians who are on Twitter are, by definition, more likely to engage in public debate. They are not necessarily a cross-section of the profession.
Read the rest here.
Max Boot's Screed Against Historians
February 20, 2019 February 20, 2019 / johnfea	/ 2 Comments
Max Boot is the Jeanne Kirkpatrick senior fellow for national security at the Council on Foreign Relations and a global affairs analyst for CNN. He is probably best known these days as an anti-Trump crusader.
Boot is also the latest public intellectual to chide academic historians for failing to speak to public audiences. Here is a taste of his recent piece at The Washington Post:
A survey by the American Council of Trustees and Alumni found that "more Americans could identify Michael Jackson as the composer of 'Beat It' and 'Billie Jean' than could identify the Bill of Rights as a body of amendments to the U.S. Constitution," "more than a third did not know the century in which the American Revolution took place," and "half of the respondents believed the Civil War, the Emancipation Proclamation or the War of 1812 were before the American Revolution." Oh, and "more than 50 percent of respondents attributed the quote, 'From each according to his ability to each according to his needs' to either Thomas Paine, George Washington or Barack Obama." It used to go without saying that this was one of Bernie Sanders's most famous lines. (Wait. I may be confused.)
Boot defines the value of history education in America by how much kids know about the past. He is completely unaware of the fact that Americans have been failing these tests since the early 20th century. Sam Wineburg starts his seminal book Historical Thinking and Other Unnatural Acts with a reference to a 1917 exam in which Texas students answered 33 of 100 questions about "the most obvious facts of American history." The educators who conducted the test concluded that such a score "is not a record in which any high school can take pride." In other words, there is nothing knew here. Boot's understanding of history education seems to be little more than test-taking and memorization. It has nothing to do with educating students to think historically. I wrote about all this in the context of my home state of Pennsylvania. Click here.
Boot continues:
You simply can't understand the present if you don't understand the past. There is no more alarming case study of the consequences of historical ignorance than President Trump. He has adopted a foreign policy mantra of "America First" seemingly without realizing (or so I hope!) that the original America First Committee of 1940-1941 was sympathetic to the Nazis. And he has embraced tariffs seemingly without being aware of the disastrous consequences of the 1930 Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act.
More broadly, his appeals are steeped in misbegotten nostalgia. His slogan "Make America Great Again" implies that we must recover some lost golden age, a conceit that has been a constant of Western history since ancient Athens. Asked when America was great, Trump pointed to the early years of the 20th century and the 1940s-1950s. One wonders if he has heard of the Triangle Shirtwaist factory fire? Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle"? The Balangiga Massacre? Lynchings? The Palmer Raids? McCarthyism? Task Force Smith? Orval Faubus? Of course, the United States did a lot of extraordinary things in the first half of the 20th century — but it was far from the paradise that Trump evokes. If Trump did understand that era, he wouldn't be trying to undo its proudest achievements — from the Progressives' regulation of business and protection of the environment to the Greatest Generation's embrace of NATO and free trade.
Boot is right here. It is not a new argument. I have been deconstructing "Make America Great Again" since 2015 and I have written about it extensively in Believe Me: The Evangelical Road to Donald Trump. Others have done the same. And many are doing it before public audiences. In the last two weeks I lectured on this very topic to audiences at the University of Colorado-Colorado Springs, the University of Southern California, and a group of Christian college provosts at a conference in St. Petersburg, Florida.
Boot then goes after social history:
As historians Hal Brands and Francis Gavin argue in War on the Rocks, since the 1960s, history professors have retreated from public debate into their own esoteric pursuits. The push to emphasize "cultural, social and gender history," and to pay "greater attention to the experiences of underrepresented and oppressed groups," they write, has been a welcome corrective to an older historiography that focused almost entirely on powerful white men. But like many revolutions, this one has gone too far, leading to the neglect of political, diplomatic and military history — subjects that students need to study and, as enrollment figures indicate, students want to study but that universities perversely neglect. Historian Jill Lepore notes that we have ditched an outdated national narrative without creating a new one to take its place, leaving a vacuum to be filled by tribalists.
Political, military, and diplomatic history is important, especially as we try to make sense of the Trump administration. But the study of oppressed groups are more important than ever in the age of Trump. How can we understand what Trump said about Charlottesville or what he is trying to do on the Mexican border without an understanding of social and cultural history? How do we deal with the racial tensions in our country or the #MeToo movement without a grasp of this history? I should also add that political, diplomatic and military history has not disappeared. It has just become integrated with the new social history in a way that seems to make Boot uncomfortable. For example, historians are now thinking about the politics of race, the imperialism embedded in the history of U.S. diplomacy, and the role of women in the military.
And then Boot brings it home:
Historians need to speak to a larger public that will never pick up their academic journals — and students need to grasp the importance of studying history, not only for their own future but for the country's, too. Don't worry, it's not a bad investment: History majors' median earnings are higher than other college graduates'.
This reminds me of Thomas Sugrue's recent critique of Jill Lepore. Historians are getting much better at engaging the public, but the university system does not often reward them for doing this kind of work. So I have mixed feelings about this whole debate. In other words, I do not think Boot is entirely wrong about this. I wrote about it here in the context of the Sugrue-Lepore dust-up.
Boot has responded to critiques of his piece:
While historians respond furiously on Twitter by claiming they are doing a fabulous job, I am hearing privately from historians who are in agreement with me but are afraid to say so on Twitter for fear of being pilloried by their doctrinaire colleagues. https://t.co/Uq5fyl1RcV
— Max Boot (@MaxBoot) February 20, 2019
January 19, 2019 / johnfea
Hi I'm a historian. You may know me from my greatest hits including. 'No, I haven't seen that on The History Channel', 'Im not sure who the 23rd president was off the top of my head and 'I don't really know that much about the Panzer tank to be honest' https://t.co/ubcB0SFJGU
— Doug Priest, PhD (@10MinuteHistory) January 19, 2019
Introducing *Contingent Magazine*
January 8, 2019 / johnfea	/ 1 Comment
If you care about history and want to hear from historians working outside of the academic tenure-track, then you should be aware of Contingent Magazine, a new startup from historians Erin Bartram, Bill Black, Emily Esten, and Marc Reyes.
Here is the mission:
Contingent is our idea for a nonprofit online magazine driven by people's desire to understand the past and, inevitably, themselves. We have a threefold mission which can be broken down into the magazine's creators, content, and audience:
Our creators will largely be historians working outside the tenure-track professoriate—those hired on a course-by-course or year-to-year basis, working in public history, or not working in a history-related field at all
Our content will be ethically produced, rigorous, and accessible to the public
Our audience will be those who have a deep love for and interest in the past but are often not catered to
We hope to challenge people's assumptions about what historians, historical writing, and lovers of history look like. We'll do this through a variety of genres, from features to book reviews to photo essays to comics.
The magazine will tap into a pool of severely underused talent: the thousands of historians who have been left adrift by the collapse of the academic job market.
American Historical Association chart illustrating the decade-long downturn in full-time work for history PhDs (source: American Historical Association)
These historians have lots of stories that they want to share with the public. But the outlets that will usually publish them (paywalled academic journals) aren't accessible to the public, while the outlets that are accessible to the public often won't publish them. Frequently in the latter case, and nearly always in the former, the historian isn't paid. Contingent will be somewhere they can tell these stories, and will pay all its writers and contributors.
We believe there is a hunger among the larger public for well-done, accessible history beyond the Trumpocentric hot take. Unfortunately, history-related stories from mainstream journalism outlets are sometimes poorly sourced and argued (or just lift a professional historian's work wholesale), while good work done by professional historians is often inaccessible to the public thanks to the dysfunction and paywalls of academia. We hope to help bridge this gap between historians and the public, and provide something of real value which neither the 24-hour news cycle nor traditional academia have the structural incentive to provide.
Why Contingent?
Our name refers in part to the historical concept of contingency—the idea that any single historical event is dependent on a multitude of causes. In other words, there is no single thing that can explain a historical event, and therefore no way for historians to ask every possible question about the past. There is always more digging to do.
The name is also an allusion to the growing percentage of professional historians who are contingent workers as opposed to full-time, long-term employees. Over the past few decades, and especially since the 2008 recession, colleges and universities have increasingly adjunctified their faculty, since it is cheaper to pay two part-time people to teach two classes each than to pay one full-time person to teach four classes.
Chart showing how, of the 8,523 people who received a history PhD in the United States between 2004 and 2013, fewer than half are now tenure-track professors, and one-third don't teach at a college or university at all (source: American Historical Association)
Non-tenure-track faculty, including adjunct faculty as well as "visiting" professors who are usually contracted to teach for one year, provide a disproportionate share of the teaching in US colleges, upward of 70%. In short, even while there is increasing demand for the work historians do, their work is being increasingly devalued. We want to show what is possible when their work is properly valued.
Help them get started with a donation. Click here to donate.
I am really excited to see this project develop. I know that a lot of it stems from Erin Bartram's experience in the academy, as told in Episode 37 of The Way of Improvement Leads Home Podcast. Here is my daughter, an undergraduate history and psychology major, listening to that episode:
Thank You Rick Shenkman!
January 3, 2019 January 5, 2019 / johnfea
Rick Shenkman, the founder, publisher, and editor of History New Network (HNN), has retired. In a farewell interview with M. Andrew Holowchak, Shenkman tells us why he founded HNN:
HNN began with a grievance. During the impeachment of Bill Clinton, you may recall, there were cries that Congress censor him rather than impeach him. In their reporting the media kept citing the censorship of Andrew Jackson and sometimes John Tyler. I was doing research at the time for my book, Presidential Ambition, and knew that James Buchanan had been censured too. I tried to contact various media outlets like ABC News and the New York Times to let them know about this forgotten moment in our history but got nowhere. I fumed about this. It seemed crazy that journalists would ignore a historian who had valuable information to add to an important debate. (Here is the article I wound up writing about censure.)
This was the genesis of HNN. It seemed obvious to me that historians should have a national platform to help journalists and the public make sense of the news. I set out to create one in 2000. (We went online in 2001.)
Today, of course, it is not uncommon for journalists to seek the expertise of historians. Rick had something to do with that.
I check HNN every day. It has become an invaluable resource. As a blogger who tries to keep my site fresh, I usually gravitate towards HNN's "Breaking News" and "Historians" tabs in the top right corner of the website. There have been many weekends when I need a few additional entries for my Sunday Night Odds and Ends feature and I always find something of note at HNN.
Rick has also made HNN a place to go for news, videos, and interviews from the American Historical Association and other conferences. In fact, I first met Rick when he was covering an AHA meeting. He was the guy running around the lobby conducting video interviews with historians who had just presented papers or talks. In the process, he has done a wonderful service for the historical profession and the general public at large.
An accomplished historian in his own right, Rick has long served as a model for how to bring good history to public audiences. His work at HNN has inspired my own work in this area and has certainly influenced what I do at this blog.
I came to HNN through the late Ralph Luker's blog Cliopatria. Luker was one of the first historians to see the potential of blogging. A check of his daily link roundup became a daily ritual for me. I remember hoping that one day I might receive a "Cliopatria Award" for history blogging, but it never happened. 😦
In November, Rick e-mailed to tell me that he was retiring and wanted to run one more of my pieces. I pitched a piece based on my book Believe Me: The Evangelical Road to Donald Trump and Rick published it on December 30, 2018, his last issue. Just recently he wrote to inform me that a piece I had published earlier in the year was one of the most read posts of 2018.
Rick has been publishing my stuff for nearly fifteen years. Some of my pieces have been original to HNN and others have been reposts from other sites, including The Way of Improvement Leads Home. I will always appreciate his willingness to bring my writing to a larger audience. Thanks, Rick! Enjoy your retirement! I am sure that HNN is in good hands at George Washington University under the leadership of Kyla Sommers.
Here are most of the pieces I have published over the years at History News Network:
Trump's White Evangelicals are Nostalgic for an American Past that Never Existed for Blacks and Others (13-30-18)
Why is Christian America supporting Donald Trump (6-29-18)
John Fea's new book sets out to explain why 81% of white American evangelicals voted for Donald Trump in 2016 (6-19-18)
You Are Never Going to Believe Which Verse Was Most Quoted in American Newspapers Between 1840 and 1920 (6-15-18)
The Discipline of the History Professor in the Age of Trump (9-13-17)
What the Trump Presidency Reveals About American Christianity and Evangelicalism: An Interview with John Fea (7-30-17)
Trump threatens to change the course of American Christianity (7-17-17)
Historian John Fea's twitterstorm in defense of the NEH (3-16-17)
John Fea warns evangelicals to be wary of David Barton (2-2-17)
What Was Missing from Trump's Inaugural Address? (1-25-17)
Another Kind of Identity Politics (12-10-16)
Still Misleading America About Thomas Jefferson (2-7-16)
Has the Sesquicentennial of the U.S. Civil War Been a Failure? (4-29-14)
Why K-12 Teachers Should Attend the American Historical Association's Annual Meeting (12-12-13)
William Pencak, R.I.P. (12-9-13)
Why Didn't Obama Say "Under God" in His Recitation of the Gettysburg Address? (11-20-13)
Is a Historian Worth $1.6 Million? (11-23-11)
Interviewing at the AHA (12-30-09)
The Limits of Cosmopolitanism in Early America (5-25-08)
Are Christian Conservatives "Christian" or "Conservative" (11-30-07)
Is America a Christian Nation? What Both Left and Right Get Wrong (9-30-07)
Protestant America's Selective Embrace of the Pope's Teachings (4-17-05)
The Messages You May Have Missed Reading Dr. Seuss (3-8-04)
Who is Kevin Kruse?
He is the Princeton University historian with 221,000 Twitter followers. You can hear him talk about his Twitter fame on Episode 34 of The Way of Improvement Leads Home Podcast. But did you know that he was hired at Princeton at the age of 27 and received tenure at age 33? Did you know that his family sometimes tells him to put the phone down? Did you know he once wrote a newspaper column titled "Kevin Kruse: Public Embarrassment?"
Kruse is the subject of Emma Pettit's piece at The Chronicle of Higher Education. Here is a taste:
It's weird because Kruse thinks of himself as an introvert who doesn't seek out confrontation, which is the opposite of who he is to his fans on Twitter. In one-on-one conversations, "I invariably find myself backing away," he says, even when the conversation is pleasant. (He used to tell people he was a math teacher to avoid talking about history at parties.) The closest Kruse has gotten to being in a fight was when a kid sucker-punched him in middle school. He worked as a bouncer in college and had to bust up a few drunken brawls, but mostly he sat on a stool, smoking Camels, paging through a biography of Harry S. Truman.
Kevin Kruse on How to Challenge the Bad History Emanating From the Right
November 30, 2018 November 29, 2018 / johnfea	/ 7 Comments
In Episode 34 of The Way of Improvement Leads Home Podcast we interviewed Princeton University historian Kevin Kruse about his work on Twitter. It remains one of our most popular episodes of the podcast. I encourage you to listen to it when you get the chance.
Over at the Pacific Standard, David Perry interviews Kruse about how he uses his Twitter feed to challenge right wing pseudo-historians like Dinesh D'Souza. Here is a taste:
Let's jump forward to your ongoing debates with Dinesh D'Souza, which seems to have vaulted your visibility to new heights. How did that get started
There was one right before the Fourth of July [this year]. I remember being at the beach, picking up my phone and saying, "Oh God that's not good." It really blew up and we had a series of back-and-forths where he would make claims, I would fact-check, and then he'd move the goal posts.
People really didn't like what he was doing and people liked someone with some knowledge pushing back on it. [It turns out that] dunking on D'Souza is a great way to build a following.
D'Souza clearly isn't interested in facts, so what kind of effect do you think you can have?
I'm under no illusion that I'm going to get him off Twitter. He's got a very profitable con—I assume it's a con. I do it for people on the sidelines, [for] people who aren't already his fans but are confronted with people pushing his work directly or his arguments indirectly. It's a way to serve as counterbalance.
Are you worried that you're just giving him more oxygen?
Both D'Souza and Trump have a much bigger audience than I have. The millions of people who follow them are already going to see [their tweets]. It's important to not just let them go unchallenged. D'Souza's schtick was to say that no historians ever objected to what [he says]. So our lack of fact-checking was taken as at least our tacit approval. If we don't speak up and challenge these untruths, then they have the floor.
Historians have the same kind of duty that scientists have to climate change deniers, that doctors have to anti-vaccine folks. It's not fun. It's not good for me to do this stuff. It's not the best use of my time. I don't get paid for it. I get flooded with hate mail and angry replies, but somebody's gotta do it.
By the nature of who I am and where I am—I'm a white straight man, a full professor at an Ivy League university—I catch 1 percent of the crap that is thrown at other scholars out there. I have the security to do this. I have no excuse not to do this, other than that I don't want hate mail or it's a drag on my time. Those are not good excuses, as far as I'm concerned.
I believe that we, as scholars, have a duty to engage with the public. As much time and energy as I put in my scholarly books and articles and teaching, we have a duty to these larger audiences that will never read one of my books. They don't have [my books] on my desk, but they're going to see one of these Twitter threads. And that's good.
On Historians, Public Debate, and Journalists
November 21, 2018 November 21, 2018 / johnfea	/ 1 Comment
The days of Richard Hofstadter are over
Last week The Chronicle of Higher Education published an interview with Harvard University historian Jill Lepore. We posted about it here. During the course of the interview, Lepore said:
The academy is largely itself responsible for its own peril. The retreat of humanists from public life has had enormous consequences for the prestige of humanistic ways of knowing and understanding the world.
Universities have also been complicit in letting sources of federal government funding set the intellectual agenda. The size and growth of majors follows the size of budgets, and unsurprisingly so. After World War II, the demands of the national security state greatly influenced the exciting fields of study. Federal-government funding is still crucial, but now there's a lot of corporate money. Whole realms of knowing are being brought to the university through commerce.
I don't expect the university to be a pure place, but there are questions that need to be asked. If we have a public culture that suffers for lack of ability to comprehend other human beings, we shouldn't be surprised. The resources of institutions of higher learning have gone to teaching students how to engineer problems rather than speak to people.
When Lepore laments the lack of public engagement among historians, I imagine that she wants historians to write for popular publications such as The New Yorker, The Atlantic, or The New York Review of Books Or perhaps she means writing books with trade presses.
Thomas Sugrue, a Professor of History and the Director of the New York University Collaborative on Global Urbanism, whipped-off a series of tweets in response to Lepore's article. I have included these tweets below. Since I have mixed feelings about these tweets, I have decided to comment on some of them.
1/Thought-provoking interview with Jill Lepore in the @chronicle, but I just can't buy her argument that we historians have left public engagement to the journalists and the non-academic presidential historians. https://t.co/IxLjb4xS5r
— Tom Sugrue (@TomSugrue) November 14, 2018
I don't hold an academic appointment that most in the academy would consider prestigious, so I am not sure how many folks listen to me or take me seriously, but I have been preaching about the need for historians to engage the public for more than a decade.
2/ I've made this argument before, and I will again: if you look at the pages of our major newspapers, including @nytimes and @washingtonpost, it's a veritable golden age for historians engaging the wide public.
I think Sugrue is correct. Lepore's criticism of historians staying in the ivory tower and not writing for the public is not as strong as it was a decade ago. But what counts as public engagement? It seems that Lepore and Sugrue are in general agreement that public engagement is primarily about writing in magazines that have very little readership beyond a well-educated, urban class that either live in blue states or aspire to live in blue states.
Moreover, those who publish pieces in The Washington Post and New York Times usually write for online audiences. Most Americans do not search for these kinds of pieces in the online versions of national newspapers. The thinking classes usually learn about these pieces through social media–usually Facebook and Twitter. As a result, pieces in the Post or the Times circulate among the proverbial choir. Is this really shaping public debate?
3) The notable change from the days when Hofstadter and his ilk roamed the earth is that there are far more historians who enter the public fray today. The range of voices is greater than it was in the past, reflecting changes–to the better–in our profession.
I agree. The Internet has enabled this.
4) Political historians are strong voices in the popular media–and most of them haven't as Sean Wilentz suggests in his opening quote–lost their academic credibility for their public writing. Consider, Wilentz himself, or @julianzelizer or @PastPunditry, or Eric Foner.
Yes. I appreciate Zelizer on this front. He is engaging a much wider audience every Saturday on CNN.
5) So many cutting edge historians weighing in on major issues of the day: @marthasjones_ on birthright citizenship: https://t.co/0Qm5Qw9kGz
6) Or @kathleen_belew on white power https://t.co/9MeO4EWSyA
7) I mean I could go on nearly forever, just based on my last few months reading major periodicals and newspapers: @HC_Richardson on the GOP, Matt Lassiter and Lily Geismer in the NYT on suburban politics, @hthompsn nearly everywhere on mass incarceration, just to name three.
8) Can any intelligent reader talk about human rights without engaging @samuelmoyn's essays? About authoritarianism without @TimothyDSnyder or @ruthbenghiat?
9) One of the most exciting outlets for historians–from giants like Dan Rodgers to beginning scholars like @pedrorgld who are on their way to becoming public intellectuals–is the Made By History series in the Washington Post. Read it early and often. https://t.co/kEqmsFzhnj
10) The @NewYorker, perhaps because of Lepore's influence, has been giving voice to historians, most notably her brilliant colleague @jelani9. Hell, even I have penned a few pieces for them online.
11) I haven't even gotten to social media, especially the wild and wonderful world of #Twitterstorians, where @KevinMKruse has more followers than most celebrities. BTW, Kevin's list of historians whom he follows include a lot of people whom you should follow.
12) Lepore writes about the real challenges of women historians gaining recognition for their authority #womenalsoknowhistory. Fortunately, there are some powerful women tweeting the past. Get to know @ProfCAnderson, @SassyProf, and @nataliapetrzela, @GilmoreGlenda, and more.
13) The historian as public intellectual isn't dead. But we are swimming against strong tides. Lepore blames humanists for their own failures. She's right that many scholars lose readers with unnecessary jargon. Too many authors bury their important arguments in turgid prose.
14) Overall, though, we face far bigger hurdles than murky prose. The corporatization of universities stifles humanistic and social scientific research. Insecure academic employment silences many voices. Public history venues are wobbling because of years of austerity.
15) My comments, so far, mostly focus on historians writing in the media or online. To be fair, Lepore talks mostly about book writing. Here too, historians face obstacles. most not of their making. Some are internal: namely universities' narrow criteria for tenure.
16) The publishing market matters even more. Biographies of presidents and prominent people sell. But with all due respect to some of my favorite authors, do we really need the 21,462nd Lincoln biography or yet another tome, however crisp and jaunty, on the Founding Fathers?
17) Another big obstacle: the decline of serious book reviewing. Yes, @nybooks and @nytimesbooks are alive and well, as are feisty upstarts like @BostonReview, the wonderful @PublicBooks, and @LAReviewofBooks. But it's harder for smart, serious authors to get public attention.
18) Still, I'm heartened historians are still reshaping public debate. We are more diverse in our topics and voices than ever before. But we have to spend less time longing for the days of Hofstadter and instead amplify the voices of our own Mary Ritter Beards & W.E.B. DuBoises.
19) Keep working fellow public historians and #Twitterstorians. Listen harder journalists and editors. Celebrate our gains. Work harder to lift the obstacles that are still in our way. Promote each others' work. Fin.
This is all well and good, but all of Sugrue's examples here are historians shaping public debate by, for the most part, preaching to the choir. I don't want to be unfair to Sugrue because I largely agree with him on most of these tweets, but some of us do not live in a world where a well-targeted op-ed or a review in the LA Review of Books is going to be read. The people I encounter every day in American evangelicalism or in south-central Pennsylvania do not usually read The Atlantic or The New Yorker. They don't see these magazines shaping public debate in their neighborhoods and towns.
I live in a world where we need to defend the very idea that historians have something to offer public life. The people I know need to be convinced that history is important. They do not breathe the rarefied intellectual air that Sugrue and Lepore breathe.
While I have published pieces in The Atlantic, The Washington Post, and other places that Sugrue or Lepore might deem worthy of a historian-public intellectual, I am convinced that we need more than this. I want to push for a deeper, even more engaged, public witness. We need public historians laboring tirelessly to present the past to visitors in small museums. We need historians making cases, in their own backyards, for why these small museums need funding. We need historians to earn trust among audiences through public lectures (reading papers in public venues are not public lectures) and face-to-face conversations about their books. We need historians willing to educate college presidents and boards on the importance of the humanities. We need historians to build communities through blogs and social media. (Kevin Kruse is a great example here, but most of his audience represent one political/ideological perspective). We need to work with teachers and make connections with local school districts. We need historians teaching Sunday School. We need to embrace the opportunity to teach large survey classes that put us in front of young men and women who need to see the importance of the past for their work in the worlds of business, engineering, and health care. We need to stop thinking about our own ambitions and start using our skills to serve the common good in the places where we live and work. The age of the superstar historian who speaks to mass culture is over. Mass culture no longer exists. We now live in what Daniel Rodgers has called "the age of fracture."
Finally, we need to abandon the term "public intellectual." The only people who care about this moniker are other "public intellectuals" or scholars who aspire to a life as a "public intellectual." The phrase invokes a bunch of elite white men sitting around in Greenwich Village writing pieces that the overwhelming majority of Americans do not read.
Instead, perhaps we need to reclaim the public dimension of the term "historian."
I don't think Sugrue would disagree with any of this, but if we really want to reach as many people as possible in the age of Trump, we need to have a much more expansive view of public culture.
Alexander Hamilton Biographer Ron Chernow Will Speak at White House Correspondents Dinner
November 19, 2018 / johnfea	/ 2 Comments
No comedian this year. Here is the Daily Beast:
The White House press corps announced Monday that it will ditch comedians altogether for next year's White House Correspondents Dinner. Pulitzer-winning presidential biographer Ron Chernow will be the featured speaker at the April 27, 2019 gala—marking the first time in recent history that the position has not been filled by a comedian.
"As we celebrate the importance of a free and independent news media to the health of the republic, I look forward to hearing Ron place this unusual moment in the context of American history," wrote Olivier Knox, president of the White House Correspondents' Association. Chernow is famed for his biographies of Alexander Hamilton (which served as source material for the blockbuster Broadway show), George Washington, and John D. Rockefeller.
Read the rest here. It is not clear as to whether Chernow will be telling any jokes.
Some Thoughts on the Audience of *Believe Me: The Evangelical Road to Donald Trump*
July 20, 2018 July 20, 2018 / johnfea	/ 5 Comments
Who is the audience for Believe Me: The Evangelical Road to Donald Trump? There are three audiences. Here they are, in no particular order:
The 81% of white American evangelicals who voted for Donald Trump.
The 19% of white American evangelicals (and non-white evangelicals) who did not vote for Donald Trump
Anyone who wants to understand why 81% of American evangelicals voted for Donald Trump.
I realize that many of those in the 81% will want nothing to do with this book. But I hope some will read it. I hope the book can serve as a way of encouraging dialogue in churches and other places where evangelicals gather together in communities of Christian fellowship that transcend politics. (I am assuming, of course, that some of these places still exist. I think they do).
I also realize that those who study evangelicals at the highest level–many of them former evangelicals or disgruntled evangelicals–want to take evangelicalism to the woodshed for its many sins. Their scholarship is good and needed, but I part ways with many of them when it comes to reaching the church. As a Christian, I am a member of the body of Christ–the Church. That is where I must find my primary identity.
Of course I still have a responsibility to live out my vocation in the academy, the classroom, and as a professor at a Christian college. If you are a regular reader of this blog, you know that some posts are written with my church community in mind. Others are written for American historians or members of the academic community. Still others are for the general public. These groups often overlap. I have written books for my students, my academic discipline, the general public, and the church.
As a Christian, I have chosen to worship among American evangelicals. In 2016, a large number of my tribe voted for Donald Trump. I don't think that was a good idea. I have even written a book to tell my tribe that I do not think it was a good idea. But in the end, I must live with the people in my tribe and try my best to fulfill my vocation as a historian and educator in their midst. Some will say I go too far in the criticism of my people. I know this from the letters, e-mails, and phone messages I receive–some of them pretty nasty. Others will say I don't go far enough in criticizing my people. I know this from the reviews of the book.
The trashing of evangelicalism is popular these days and you can get pretty far and become pretty successful in academic/scholarly circles–especially in the fields of history and religious studies–by doing this. I am sympathetic to scholars who call evangelicals to task for their sins. As I am learning on the Believe Me book tour, many people had (or are having) very, very bad experiences in evangelicalism. They are hurting. They are angry. I am listening to their stories.
But in the end, I will continue to defend the term "evangelical" because it still means "good news." For me, this "good news" is the ultimate source of hope for those who are hurting. I am still willing to fight for the "good news" of the Gospel because this message changed the trajectory of my life and the life of my family and extended family in positive ways. And I have seen hundreds of other lives changed by this message—men, women, people of color, poor people, rich people, gay and straight people.
In the end, I want to use my vocation as a historian to be a more direct part of the solution in the evangelical church rather than someone who merely diagnoses the problem or calls-out evangelicals for their many sins. I am not sure I can do this as an academic, but I am willing to try. Perhaps other Christian and evangelical scholars are called to something different. But if they are called to something different, they will need to convince me how they will use their gifts and knowledge to serve the body of Christ. This point relates not only to the content of their work, but also to its style and means of dissemination.
If we pursue this path within evangelicalism today, it will mean that we must serve those with whom we disagree on a whole host of political and cultural issues. It will also require us to work hard at uncovering the common spiritual and theological ground that draws us together every Sunday morning despite our differences. I am convinced that this kind of engagement deepens our faith, helps us to see the flaws in our precious arguments, makes us better listeners and communicators, and teaches us to love. It may also mean, in some cases (but certainly not all cases), staying in a particular religious tradition rather than leaving for a more a comfortable place of worship and fellowship where people think more like us.
I am sure that for some of my readers, this post just made me a subject of analysis, rather than a detached scholar. Of course such analysis goes both ways. I have seen many of my fellow academics as subjects of analysis for a long time! 🙂