BF2S Forums BF3s Book Club

The Living Dead is a 2020 horror novel authored by George A. Romero and Daniel Kraus. The book was unfinished upon Romero's death in 2017 and Kraus was hired to complete the novel using Romero's notes and incorporating an old short story by Romero. Wikipedia

A "full-dress history of the war by one of our most distinguished military writers" (NEW YORK TIMES), WORLD WAR I takes us from the first shots in Sarajevo to the signing of the peace treaty in Versailles and through every bunker, foxhole, and minefield in between. General S.L.A. Marshall drew on his unique firsthand experience as a soldier and a lifetime of military service to pen this forthright, forward-thinking history of what people once believed would be the last great war. Newly introduced by the Pulitzer Prize-winning historian, David M. Kennedy, WORLD WAR I is a classic example of unflinching military history that is certain to inform, enrich, and deepen our understanding of this great cataclysm.

uziq wrote:

read christopher clark. he is an astonishingly good historian on that period.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2021-12-29 16:18:31)

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Walking around the store with a bookish friend/girlfriend is fun. They even have a Starbucks to get a snack at and talk. I will give them credit for that. Fond memories.

The store being like half anything but books is probably how they keep the whole thing running. That and gift cards to nerdy relatives. The little cards telling you a bunch of the books on the shelf are signed was cool.

Funny things...Hitler had his own shelf in the World War 2 section. All of the presidents had to share a section meanwhile Hitler gets like 10 different books. Somebody also rearranged the history section to hide the 1619 book. I picked up a book titled "The Cause: The American Revolution and its Discontents, 1773-1783" and behind it somebody hid the 1619 book. Also behind "WASPS: The Splendors and Miseries of an American Aristocracy" was two 1619 books. Funny choices to hide those 1619 books. Why not just take them to the Manga section?

Weeks before, I had received an email from a New York Times research editor. Because I’m an historian of African American life and slavery, in New York, specifically, and the pre-Civil War era more generally, she wanted me to verify some statements for the project. At one point, she sent me this assertion: “One critical reason that the colonists declared their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery in the colonies, which had produced tremendous wealth. At the time there were growing calls to abolish slavery throughout the British Empire, which would have badly damaged the economies of colonies in both North and South.”

I vigorously disputed the claim. Although slavery was certainly an issue in the American Revolution, the protection of slavery was not one of the main reasons the 13 Colonies went to war.

I was concerned that critics would use the overstated claim to discredit the entire undertaking.

“Hannah-Jones, though, was livid, and let Kingsbury and Stephens know it in emails ahead of publication,” the Post reported. “One the day the NAS called for the revocation of her Pulitzer, she tweeted that efforts to discredit her work ‘put me in a long tradition of [Black women] who failed to know their places.’ She changed her Twitter bio to ‘slanderous and nasty-minded mulattress’ – a tribute to the trailblazing journalist Ida B. Wells, whom the Times slurred with those same words in 1894.”

The revisionist project, which has attracted sharp scrutiny since its publication last year, has since maintained full editorial support from the newspaper despite major corrections to its essays and leagues of historians debunking its primary claims.

After a group of leading historians objected to the Times’ project’s false information, the magazine’s Editor in Chief Jake Silverstein wrote back that “historical understanding is not fixed.” In other words, the Times doesn’t care what historians with decades of experience think if it counters the religious narrative that critical race theory demands.

I was concerned that critics would use the overstated claim to discredit the entire undertaking.

Last edited by uziq (2021-12-30 00:14:51)

Last edited by uziq (2022-01-10 23:39:08)

Last edited by uziq (2022-01-11 00:18:43)