And, it's well-known reviewers, too.
In his review of a book about Nixon and Kissinger essentially supporting genocide in East Pakistan during the 1971 civil war that led to the independence of Bangladesh, Dexter Filkins claimed the British forced the Muslim-Hindu partition of the Indian Raj.
Wrong. It was Muhammad Ali Jinnah. Wow, what a basic error. I mean, that's just basic.
In his review of a book about the year 1945 and the end of World War II, Adam Hochschild implicitly repeats the old canard of the "punitive" Treaty of Versailles that ended World War I, namely its indemnity on Germany.
Allowing for differences in population and 50 years of inflation, Prussia actually imposed a harsher financial indemnity on France in 1871 at the end of the Franco-Prussian War than the Allies did on Germany in 1919. And France paid it off in advance.
Another basic error. This one made by many a historian in previous generations, though the truth is getting written more and more often recently.
Sigh.
A skeptical leftist's, or post-capitalist's, or eco-socialist's blog, including skepticism about leftism (and related things under other labels), but even more about other issues of politics. Free of duopoly and minor party ties. Also, a skeptical look at Gnu Atheism, religion, social sciences, more.
Note: Labels can help describe people but should never be used to pin them to an anthill.
As seen at Washington Babylon and other fine establishments
October 06, 2013
New York Times book reviewers mangle history
Labels:
books,
world history
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment