Nov. 27, 2007

Historians Team Up to Back Obama

In the weeks approaching the 2004 and 1992 elections, among others, groups of educators issued formal statements of support for the Democratic nominees for president, taking public stands as members of their profession. In recent elections, groups of scientists have also weighed in — after the party nominations were settled.

Looking for a job?

See all new postings

Browse all job listings:

Faculty: 3,481
Administrative: 1,574
Executive: 156
FEATURED EMPLOYERS

But in a move that is unusually early and specific, a group of prominent historians on Monday issued a joint endorsement of Barack Obama’s bid for the presidency. The endorsement, released through the History News Network, was organized by Michael Kazin, a professor of history at Georgetown University, and Ralph E. Luker, a historian who is one of the leaders of the popular history blog Cliopatria. The scholars who signed included two past presidents of the American Historical Association — Joyce Appleby of the University of California at Los Angeles and James McPherson of Princeton University — and many other A-list scholars in the field.

Officials of the AHA (which was not a party to the endorsement) and several other long-time observers of the discipline said that they could not think of a comparable example of historians collectively taking a stand in a political race in this way. Historians, either through formal and informal groups, have spoken out about many issues, but they tend to be more closely tied to their field, such as appeals on behalf of historians abroad in countries where their rights are threatened, demands for easing visa rules so scholars can enter the United States, and so forth. A list of such actions by historians is on the History News Network site.

Officials with the John Edwards campaign said that they knew of individual historians backing their candidate, but did not have a formal group. The Clinton campaign did not respond to an inquiry. The Republican campaigns have not been active in seeking academic support, although they too have individual backers and in at least one case a semi-formal group of backers. The Fred Thompson campaign has a Lawyers for Thompson group that includes a Legal Professors Committee, several of whose members are prominent bloggers in the law professor world.

The Obama campaign’s support from historians follows numerous reports about the Illinois senator’s popularity not only with students, but faculty members. He has raised far more money from academics than have other candidates and he has plenty of academic connections himself — he taught at the University of Chicago law school and his wife, Michelle, held a series of positions at the University of Chicago Hospitals, rising to the position of vice president for community and external affairs.

In the historians’ endorsement, the scholars quote William James and reference the presidencies of Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and John F. Kennedy, but the history noted (the Emancipation Proclamation, the creation of Social Security) doesn’t require graduate-level knowledge. Georgetown’s Kazin, one of the organizers, said that while he and other scholars felt an obligation as “scholar/citizens” to speak out, they did not want to imply that historians are uniquely qualified to pick a president.

In fact, one of the parts of the endorsement in which the historians cite their knowledge of the field is where they note the limits of what presidents can accomplish. “As historians, we understand that no single individual, even a president, leads alone or outside a thick web of context. As Abraham Lincoln wrote to a friend during the Civil War, ‘I claim not to have controlled events, but confess plainly that events have controlled me.’ “

The general theme of the endorsement is that the country is in particularly bad shape, and that Obama has unique abilities to bring about change. Of the difficulties, the historians write: “Our country is in serious trouble. The gap between the wealthy elite and the working majority grows ever larger, tens of millions of Americans lack health insurance and others risk bankruptcy when they get seriously ill, and many public schools do a poor job of educating the next generation. Due to the arrogant, inept foreign policy of the current administration, more people abroad mistrust and fear the United States than at any time since the height of the Vietnam War. Meanwhile, global warming speeds toward an unprecedented catastrophe. Many Republicans and overwhelming numbers of Independents and Democrats believe that, under George W. Bush, the nation has badly lost its way. The 2008 election thus comes at a critical time in the history of the United States and the world.”

Of Obama, the statement says that “it is his qualities of mind and temperament that really separate Obama from the rest of the pack. He is a gifted writer and orator who speaks forcefully but without animus. Not since John F. Kennedy has a Democrat candidate for president showed the same combination of charisma and thoughtfulness — or provided Americans with a symbolic opportunity to break with a tradition of bigotry older than the nation itself. Like Kennedy, he also inspires young people who see him as a great exception in a political world that seems mired in cynicism and corruption.”

The statement added that “Barack Obama would only begin the process of healing what ails our society and ensuring that the U.S. plays a beneficial role in the world. But we believe he is that rare politician who can stretch the meaning of democracy, who can help revive what William James called ‘the civic genius of the people.’ “

Kazin said that about half of those he and others approached agreed to sign the statement. Of those who declined, some haven’t decided whom to support, others were unsure about making such a statement jointly, and some were backing other candidates. Kazin said several historians were backing the Edwards campaign and one the Clinton campaign.

One professor who was approached and who did not sign on is Maurice Isserman of Hamilton College. He shared his e-mail about why he declined. “Edwards is the most appealing candidate at the moment,” Isserman wrote. “It’s not just the vacuous ‘new generation’ rhetoric emanating from the Obama camp that disturbs me — worse is his flirtation with the notion of a ‘Social Security crisis.’ Let’s leave the Republican talking points to the Republicans for a change. Of course, I’d take him in a heartbeat over Hillary, just as (I suspect) I will be taking Hillary The Inevitable in a nano-second over whichever scary guy the Republicans finally go with.”

Another historian who passed, Casey N. Blake of Columbia University, said via e-mail: “While I am likely to vote for Obama in the New York primary, I am reluctant to endorse any candidate in my professional capacity as a historian.”

— Scott Jaschik

Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.

Comments

Go, Go, Mr. O!!

...and please visit Manassas, VA. We need you!

kgotthardt, at 6:40 am EST on November 27, 2007

This is an incredibly bad idea. First, from the interest of the history profession, it is self-destructive to created the misimpression that we collectively favor one party over another. Imagine the funding cuts we will suffer when the Republicans control the purse strings. Second, for heaven’s sakes, if you are a liberal, why not endorse Edwards, who has some solid ideas on how to help the poor and disadvantaged? If Obama gets elected, the best he will do would be to wrest the crown of “the best Republican president” from Bill Clinton. (Remember, “the best Republican president” is Alan Greenspan’s compliment for President Clinton.)

Voice of Cynicism, at 6:45 am EST on November 27, 2007

The past, the present and the future.

Historians attempt to understand the past, observe the present, and know nothing about the future. Political endorsements from historians about candidates are about as important as political endorsements from my plumber.

Armitage, Untenured Professor at Midwestern State U., at 6:45 am EST on November 27, 2007

We Need More Politics, Not Less

One of the initial goals of the AAUP at its founding was to influence public opinion by encouraging professors to speak out on issues of the day. Selecting a president is one of the most important issues we face today, and it’s great to see academics taking an interest in the people who make history before it becomes history. While it’s true that I wrote a new book embracing Obama’s campaign for the presidency (obamapolitics.com), I would support the idea of academics endorsing candidates no matter who was chosen by these professors. I wish there was more discussion and debate of politics on campus (in particular, I wish somebody would invite me to speak about my book on campus), but this is a good start to raise these issues.

John K. Wilson, obamapolitics.com, at 7:20 am EST on November 27, 2007

Obama and the historians

As an historian, I note that Obama is the LEAST qualified of ALL candidates to be president. He will be worse than George W. Bush. I will not vote this year.

Dr Arthur Ide, at 7:25 am EST on November 27, 2007

Cynicism’s Fears

It’s too bad that Voice of Cynicism is governed by her or his self-preoccupied fears in this critical moment of the country’s history. The historians who have endorsed Senator Obama have not endorsed a political party, and make no claim either to speak through our professional organizations or to speak on behalf of all historians. Armitage’s plumbers are entitled as citizens to take a position in contemporary affairs, so we historians, as citizens, are entitled to take a position. It would be helpful if critics would read our statement before condemning our civic responsibility.

Ralph Luker, at 7:25 am EST on November 27, 2007

Man The Pumps Boys! Its Getting Too Thin to Shovel!

Armitage, you obviously hate history and know nothing about the discipline. I can understand that when one looks back of the history of the past six years of the Cheney Administration and your continue blind support of its misguided ideological nonsense. I’d hate history too. But for the record, my plumber also supports Barak as well. If you want, I can provide his contact information for you so he can explain why. If you can’t understand someone who has made a life’s profession of studying diplomatic, political, and military history, you perhaps can understand the truth from someone who’s had to deal with shit all his career and know how to recognize it! Always willing to help the predictable dull posters from Young America and College Republicans. Say hi to Mr Horowitz for me!

Diogenes, at 7:45 am EST on November 27, 2007

The kind of elite thinking about “Plumbers” being less than intelligent is why we are in the condition we are in today. You won’t think that when you your toilet breaks.

AP, at 7:55 am EST on November 27, 2007

Endorsing as a Group is Misplaced

I am not surprised to see Michael Kazin’s name associated with this effort. He has always been an “agitator” in the quest for “change.” While one of his graduate students, I recall hearing stories of his efforts during the Vietnam War, and of his support for Jesse Jackson’s quests for the presidency during the 1980s.

However, I must agree with “Armitage” in this matter. It is NOT the role of historians to endorse as a group—they have no more collective wisdom than any other to predict who will or will not do a “good job” as President. Their role is to analyze and then synthesize what happened and why and how. To suggest that Obama will be a good President is mere speculation based on what is really a faulty and premature prediction of his true abilities when confronted with hard choices. Quite simply, Obama does not yet have enough experience in the political realm to make such an assumption.

It doesn’t matter how well spoken and written Obama is. I do recall how excited everyone in academia and the media were because Bill Clinton could speak in complete paragraphs.

This action just contributes to the “pampered elite” moniker that is foisted on academics—we with our life-long job security and many with guaranteed pensions—that “average Americans” do not have, along with the assumptive accusation that we are all Liberals or Socialists.

Dr. Kazin, you are still one of my top 3 best professors of all time, but I think you are wrong here.

Cheryl Zaleski, Valley Forge Military College, retired, at 9:00 am EST on November 27, 2007

For historians, plumbers and entertainers to endorse a candidate is a noble American pursuit. Now, if a group of evangelical theologians were to toss an endorsement into the ring, that would be crossing the line.

Denise Carroll, capitalist, at 9:00 am EST on November 27, 2007

Denise LOL

They do all the time Denise Capitalist (and some how....capitalism is a theological issue? Didn’t the British assume that when they colonized Africa?). That’s why we’re in the mess we’re in.

Diogenes, at 9:15 am EST on November 27, 2007

No historian should ever declare “I will not vote this year.” Lordy, how does that sound to students of history who respect our efforts to have them understand the dynamics behind of particular style of representative government? Shame.

I like Obama, but had him as my choice in 2012 or 2016; my first choice is BILL RICHARDSON, concensus builder, internationally recognized mediator, etc. He has the personality, the experience, and the breadth of national and international knowledge (and network) needed to untangle the mess the current administration has created. A Richardson/Obama ticket would please me.

I do believe historians should take positions, but those reading about the stands, should take them only as beacons lighting the way for further personal inquiry into the pros and cons of each candidate.

Let me end where I began. Everyone should vote, period. As an historian, I see leadership as part of my job description, a requirement that cannot be abrogated because of personal pique.

Prof P, at 9:30 am EST on November 27, 2007

Historians are not uniquely qualified, so listen to us

According to the report, Kazin says he didn’t mean to imply that historians are uniquely qualified to choose a president. But, according to the endorsement, Kazin and his historian colleagues invite other historians to add their names to the endorsement of Barack Obama.

So, which is it? If he’s inviting other historians but not people in other occupations to join this endorsement, he inescapably implies that specializing in history gives one special insight in the election of a President. The weight of one’s authority is the whole purpose of a political endorsement by the editor of a newspaper, a labor union or a group of historians. He’s talking out of both sides of his mouth: Historians don’t have unique qualifications in choosing a President, but trust our endorsement because we’re historians.

Jack Olson, at 12:00 pm EST on November 27, 2007

A Certain Arrogance

I’m reminded of when the group Physicians for Social Responsibility came to the forefront some years ago. I thought then, as I think now, that it was odd for physicians to suppose that their rather narrow areas of expertise somehow gave them a privileged perch from which to declaim about large social issues. Physicians, qua physicians, are no more—and to be sure, no less—qualified to make policy recommendations than any other citizens. Same with historians. It’s just a strange stance to adopt.

Simplex Scholasticus, at 12:00 pm EST on November 27, 2007

“Perspective people”

Nicely said, Cheryl Zaleski! Historians are no better suited to gaze upon a crystal ball and see the future better than anyone else, including the plumber. Suggesting the intelligence of a plumber? It’s interesting to think… the plumber has a skill that probably nets him more yearly income than many of you. It’s also interesting to think that the same people who have spewed countless rhetoric over the plight of the working class, the poor, the downtrodden are by definition – the wealthy elite, including most of the candidates for the presidential race. Are they going to pay for all the free lunches? Historically speaking; not likely!

Historians’, see that you record the events of the day and keep the opinions where they belong… in the editorial page and out of the history books!As an American I will cast my ballot because it is my right, my duty, my obligation to my myself, my children and to you.

Bill, at 12:50 pm EST on November 27, 2007

Arrogance

“Jack Olson” and simple scholar would surely have the same objections to a Women for Giuliani or a Lawyers Committee for Fred Thompson. And — poor, overtaxed Bill would surely insist on his right to vote as he pleases, no matter what Women or Lawyers say. No one’s denying you the right to vote as you choose, Bill.

Ralph Luker, at 1:10 pm EST on November 27, 2007

Response to Ralph Luker

My comment is not a criticism of the right of citizens who are professional historians to offer their opinions as to who they believe should be the presidential candidate for a particular party. It is a criticism that this is even worthy of attention as “news” in higher education.

Armitage, Untenured Professor at Midwestern State U., at 1:45 pm EST on November 27, 2007

Historians for Obama

In response to my old student, Cheryl Zaleski, and others who think it’s “elitist” or somehow unprofessional (a contradiction, by the way) for historians to endorse a candidate: groups of citizens, self-defined by occupation or ideology or ethnic group or religion or gender, have been doing this since the late 19th century. That, I would think, is the beauty of a society in which voluntary associations thrive and take the obligations of citizenship seriously. And anyone who thinks that historians are merely objective chroniclers of the past or dispassionate commentators on it has not been reading much history since Von Ranke’s day.

Michael Kazin

Michael Kazin, at 1:45 pm EST on November 27, 2007

Its good to hear from the Historians!

Personally, I am very pleased to hear from the Historians. Their training and their reading bring a perspective that can only add to our understanding. In addition, I don’t think that this group of historians are speaking as experts, but merely saying “this is how it looks from where we stand". They are giving their opinion — to take or to leave. As one who doesn’t have much daily contact with historians, I welcome with curiosity and interest what they see, and what they can add to the discourse on the upcoming election.

V. Meeks, at 2:00 pm EST on November 27, 2007

Look,I realize a lot of people hate Bush and, for that matter, I realize he’s screwed up a lot and has done a lot of things to be a mediocre guy.

But, if you’re a competent historian, you can discuss these facts without acting like it’s 1932 and we’re about finished with the Hoover administration. I appreciate the historians’ enthusiasm discussed in the article, but when they talk about this country being in a critical moment, a key moment that makes it crucial for them to speak out, they ought to be able to discuss the election and modern politics without acting like we’re entering some post-apocalyptic scene out of Blade Runner.

History is fun. I’ve studied it all my life. But calm down a little.

AD, at 3:10 pm EST on November 27, 2007

Be real

It’s simple…everyone has the right to their opinions and to support any political agenda or candidate they so choose. Historians have this right as well as anyone. Representing yourselves as uniquely qualified to have the “right opinion” by virtue of profession??? If Obama is your choice, then so be it. By the way Ralph, my taxes aren’t overwhelming, and I hope they don’t get to that point.

Bill, at 3:45 pm EST on November 27, 2007

Histrionics for Obama?

“Meanwhile, global warming speeds toward an unprecedented catastrophe.”

Lions and tigers and bears, oh my!—deleted from an earlier draft—

Jefferson, at 4:15 pm EST on November 27, 2007

Even handedness?

I sit here with a wry smile...should or should not a professional group come out for a given candidate? Why the heck not? Yet, you academics twiddle and twaddle about not much in yabbering amongst yourselves about who is more Left than another — que droll!I also went down the comments waiting to see if there was talk by any conservative that would dare show his or her head above their foxhole in this place. Alas, none in sight. Trust me, outside the Ivory Tower, it is noticed how much to the Left academia has gone. Obama, Hillary, Richardson, Edwards....where’s the sign of a complete discussion from all sides of the issue (e.g., nothing on Rudy, McCain, Huck, or Fred)? I may only have an MS and be the low man on the totem poll at this site, but it is quite telling (and has provided fodder for me in the past) to see how “right-side-blinded” you folks in the academy have become. Are there no ideas or people on the Right that are worthy of more than the “scary guy the Republicans finally go with"?

Skip, Chief Techie, at 4:50 pm EST on November 27, 2007

Race matters

Summon up the courage, and answer honestly: is America ready to make history by selecting either, a black man, a woman, or mormon as president?

I want to think America can transcend these issues, but my instincts tell me otherwise.

Gilmore Harris, at 5:20 pm EST on November 27, 2007

If it’ll make Skip happier I volunteer to organize Professors for Giuliani. Should put him right over the top. Apparently thousands of Iowa caucus-goers are waiting to hear how academic opinion is trending, which must be why Mitt Romney keeps trying to phone me. In New Hampshire, folks with Ph.D.s can barely get out of the house without their neighbors badgering them for advice on how to vote.

c, at 5:50 pm EST on November 27, 2007

Get over yourselves

And this my friends is why I was warned about inherent biases in my history books. So much for being neutral observers.

John, Marquette University, at 7:15 pm EST on November 27, 2007

Ah, I have read the endorsement statement. I wish Obama were as worthy a candidate as the statement represents him to be. Then it would be actually worthwhile to take big risks for him. I would be willing to stick my neck out more if Jesse Jackson were running. But Obama seems more like a Republicrat than some would love to believe. Remember his statement on “high valued targets"?

Voice of Cynicism, at 5:15 am EST on November 28, 2007

I hereby announce Molecular Biologists for Obama! Feel free to join the team, regardless of discipline.

Do you wonder why the Ron Paul enthusiasts have not yet discovered this commentary? Or why the focus of triangulation has not yet cut through the obvious morass?

Fecalito, at 5:05 pm EST on November 28, 2007

Whom would the historians have voted for again?

Just wonder, if U.S. could go back somehow, whom the historians would have voted for again, from the last 3-4 presidents (I am not sure whether the attributes of President Washington would produce similar great results today) and for the well-beings of Average American? The expertise of the historians should be more than capable to do such a research. Then if we compare their findings with the attributes of the current presidential candidates, would that be a better approach than political zeal? I would really appreciate the historians if they then can tell us which candidate will be able to resume the greatness of America, that we haven’t seen much in the last eight years and as expressed in the comments and the paper? (FYI: I am independent of any political parties; I can’t and don’t vote; I am not historian and know “little” about history).

Independent Observer, at 7:45 pm EST on November 30, 2007

The work of history? Promoting history or promoting politicians

As someone who can proudly say that while I have always voted I have yet to vote for a successful candidate for the office of President, I am confident that my “historical” endorsement would doom any candidate to failure. Rather than making myself and my candidate a source of derision and laughter, it is far better that I actually work for and support said candidate. Making public pronouncements as “historians” sitting in ivory towers either isolates you from the historical community or isolates the historical community from those with differing opinions. If you support Obama, or any other candidate, get out and work for him or, if you must, her, rather than making “historical” [hysterical?] pronouncements. My job as a historian is to promote history; a quite different work than my job as a citizen to promote my choice for president.

Prof B, at 10:55 am EST on December 3, 2007

Professional lemmings

As a non-professional, my comments amount to zilch...about as much as the comments made about Obama’s contribution for a better outcome from our schools. We already have evidence of this coming from his relationship with Ayers.

Obama was given leadership of the Annenberg Foundation grant to upgrade the city of Chacago’s schools. He directed the grant towards Ayers — $50,000,000 of seed money so to speak. Instaed of using the funding for outcomes like standards, tests, or teacher training in the core subjects, this money was directed towards student assessments and student attitudes. Needless to say the project failed.

What is interesting is that Obama sends his own children to private schools. Imagine what the outcome of using the $50,000,000 would have been had it been directed to school choice? Or is school choice only a privelege for the elite like Obama? McCain has said that he favors school choice — the cost of which is far less than what we have now. Why have the above academics not jumped on his bandwagon when this does give hope?

Perhaps because they teach in college where there IS school choice.

In a somewhat related manner I heard one of the above listed academics speak at Gettysburg in a commemoration of the battle and the Gettysburg Address. His topic was Civil Rights — a subject which was not even on the horizon at the time of the battle -perhaps emacipation, but Civil Rights no.This particular professor shamed the veterans for whom the battlefield was memorialized — they vowed to never mention poitics there, but rather to commemorate the heroism of the 3 days. this professor twisted the subject, much like the above mentioned do by Not looking at Obama’s real record of Educational accomplishment.

Or perhaps the real issue is that Obama has nothing relevant to add to the subject of Academics and is ul;timately the favorite of so many professors because he is but another liberal or progressive?

Erwin Rysz, at 9:25 am EDT on October 14, 2008

Jobs Related to Historians Team Up to Back Obama

or search for jobs directly.

Adjunct- History
Raritan Valley Community College

Raritan Valley Community College (RVCC), serving Somerset and Hunterdon County residents for forty years, offers over 90 ... see job

Adjunct Faculty, Dept. of History (Part-Time)
Bridgewater State College, MA

BSC is one of the largest and most exciting centers for higher education in the commonwealth. Here in our idyllic setting, ... see job

Asst. Prof.-Modern US History Since 1930
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

Modern US History since 1930. The History Department at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill invites applications ... see job

Assistant Professor or Instructor of Art History — Medieval Art
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job

British History
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

British History or British Imperial History since 1750. The history department at the University of North Carolina at Chapel ... see job

History — Ancient/Classical/Medieval, Assistant Professor
Florida Gulf Coast University

FGCU, a member of the State University System of Florida, is a comprehensive university created to address the educational ... see job

Assistant Professor — U.S. Environmental History
University of Denver

Job Summary: The History Department at the University of Denver invites applications for a ... see job

History ASSISTANT OR ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR (TENURE-TRACK)
American University

American University is an independent liberal-arts university located in Washington, DC with 12,000 students. The faculty are ... see job

Assistant/Associate Professor of Art + Architectural History, Renaissance/Baroque Specialty
Roger Williams University

Roger Williams University is one of the top ranked liberal arts universities in the Northeast and is an Equal Opportunity ... see job

Multiple Faculty Positions
DePaul University

DePaul University’s College of Liberal Arts and Sciences has a number of tenure track faculty positions at the assistant ... see job