Conservatives also Attack Neo-Confederate, Revisionist History

February 17, 2005

Eric Muller, a University of North Carolina Law Professor, recently contributed a guest piece about Thomas E. Woods' new "historical" work, put out by right-wing publisher Regnery, entitled "A Politically Incorrect Guide to American History."
In case you've never heard of Thomas Woods, he is apparently a founding member of the League of the South, a neo-secessionist group that advocates the flying of the Confederate flag at every opportunity, as well as devotion to the South's Christian and Anglo-Saxon character.
And in case you haven't had a chance to read Woods' new American classic, Muller described its thesis simply as "everything [you] know about all of American history is leftist garbage." Muller also pointed us to a fawning "review" of Woods' book praising the authors ability to explain to the reader:

[T]hat the Constitution was never understood to be a permanent union, that big government caused the North-South conflict, that Alexander Hamilton's friends were racketeers, that the US didn't have to enter WW I, that Hoover was a big government conservative, that FDR made the Depression worse, that there really were Communists in government, that FDR made WW II inevitable, that the Marshall Plan was a flop, that the Civil Rights movement increased social conflict and made everyone worse off, that unions made workers poorer, that the 80s weren't really the decade of greed, that Clinton's wars were aggressive and avoidable, and that his personal issues were a major distraction from the real problems of the 1990s.

Now apparently some on the right have taken their own look at Woods' "scholarship" and are aiming daggers his way. Prof. Volokh recently referenced a not-so-glowing summation of Woods' work by neocon writer Max Boot:

Max Boot (not a particularly politically correct fellow himself, writing in the not very politically correct Weekly Standard) criticizes [Woods] forcefully and in detail.
Boot points out the error in the New York Times Book Review's characterization of the book as a "neocon retelling of this nation's back story," faults Regnery, Woods' publisher, and warns conservative consumers: "Conservatives looking to inoculate themselves or their children from liberal indoctrination would be well advised to steer clear of Woods's corrosive cornucopia of canards."