Heather, this is a brilliant overview of world events. Thank you! And I do so appreciate you ending with Lula’s words:
“(Lula) called for protecting the natural world to combat climate change, and creating a world governance to enable us to work together against existential threats.
‘This is not a government program,’ Lula said. ‘This is a faith commitment of someone that believes in humanism, someone that believes in solidarity. I don’t want to live in a world where humans become algorithms. I want to live in a world where human beings are human beings. And for that, we have to take care very carefully what God gave us: that is the Planet Earth.’”
I'd sure like to see this letter and so many others of yours, Heather, front and center on all major media outlets. The mainstream news is a joke to me anymore.
In addition to Dr. Richardson's letter I read the NY Times and the Wall Street Journal every day. I certainly do think Dr. Richardson's writing is unique.
I don't, necessarily, think the above noted two news sources are jokes. However, those information sources are not able to maintain a constant theme like Dr. Richardson nor are they able to provide the deep historical background she provides. Even today, as Dr. Richardson reports on the poor response in Turkey, she maintains her steady theme of democracy vs autocracy or dictatorship (why, when, where and how).
However, those newspapers do provide in depth reporting on many aspects outside of Dr. Richardson's fairly focused purview. The NY Times recently had a visual investigation that provided an in depth look at how poorly and openly classified documents, hundreds of them, were stored at Mara Lago.
Also, the detailed reporting of the emergency response in Turkey is well done in NY Times.
Also, Jamelle Bouie's editorials in NY Times are pretty darn good honestly. His chapter in The 1619 Book Project is even better.
So, I would say that the NY Times and certainly the Wall Street Journal offer a different look at the world every day than Dr. Richardson.
All three of them taken together (NY Times, Wall Street Journal and HCR) can provide a daily dose of information that, if not mitigated with some good outdoor time, leave you wondering about "our country" for sure.
agreed -- but in place of the WSJ, I read the Washington Post. They have reporters and investigators right there in the thick of things. (And I lived in Maryland for 18 years.) Isn't the WSJ owned by Murdoch? I don't trust myself to be able to sift out the rightwing bias. If you can, more power to you.
This is also what I read. At the end of the day we get an email from The Atlantic which I also read. Sometimes the NYT and the WaPo irritate me, but they have lots of interest. Locally, our paper is owned by Gannett who have also destroyed the Register Guard in Eugene, so I usually read the Oregonian for news. All of this online. We do get the NYT in the print edition every day but Saturday because the local rag no longer prints a Saturday edition. Since we live in Salem, the state capital, there are a couple online alternatives that we see.
For me it's WaPo and the Guardian (both US and UK editions). I dropped the NYT after suffering through their abysmal coverage of the 2016 presidential election campaign. The NYT does have some good columnists, like Jamelle Bouie, but so does WaPO (Jennifer Rubin has really come into her own, and Eugene Robinson is also especially good). The best commentary I see, though, is in Slate, and Substacks like this one, and even the various MSNBC blogs (I'm in awe of Steve Benen of the Maddow Blog).
I think writing at the Times would open up a can of worms for HCR. I am just guessing, but I think she may like her life just as it is. A great teaching job with time to write brilliant books. And this gig which makes her a small fortune. All of that balanced out with a life in what I think is the most beautiful part of the country.
I think she could blow the doors off at the Times. But maybe she doesn't want the distraction from a well designed life with her new husband. Again, I am just guessing.
Bill, I think you are right, much as I long to see HCR's Letters more widely read. Also, Heather is a (brilliant) historian, not a journalist and I believe that journalists probably want to protect "their turf". Nevertheless, I wish more people could take advantage of the honesty and clarity of her work.
However, the other day I was listening to something, I forget what but it may have been CNN, and I heard the words "as Heather Cox Richardson said..." !
More people need to benefit from her writing. She doesn't need to be a journalist. This piece deserves to be widely circulated. "Turf" doesn't matter. The truth will serve us all.
I know that Heather is read by a wide range of journalists (and many politicians), though maybe not the extreme right wing. Not unexpected, so nothing to waste time moaning about. That she and other historians are now routinely being included in the analysis of current affairs is a welcome change, one that benefits our understanding all around. Hooray for historians, and for journalists whose grasp of the back story improves their coverage.
I sometimes catch Brian Tyler Cohn on YouTube and he recently quoted her. I find his takes, besides that of Beau of the Fifth Column" to be worth hunting down.
Bill, I would not suggest that she "change her life" and work for the Times. I do believe this article should be a widely distributed OP ED. Coastal Maine is wonderful. We were there in the fall.
If it were her desire to be more widely read, I think she would be a national force for understanding. Nobody can pull the news together with historical perspective the way Heather can. Plus lately, she has found a talent for terrific ironies and a "concluding comment" that is wicked powerful.
Wouldn't it be epic if she wanted to "teach" on a grander scale?
I just don't know if she would want the attention and the pressure of such a large platform. Whatever works best for her life. Guess I feel protective :)
My introduction to HRC came some years ago with a historical opinion piece on the Bloomberg site. My awareness of this blog was made possible by a HRC opinion piece in the Guardian, so there is that. I don't know how she does it all anyway, but I would like to see some of the historical (well past and contemporary) vignettes reprinted more widely.
At least in one sense history=learning=history. Not always social/political history, as even the ability to read is the culmination of retaining a great many successive lessons (I can still remember "Spot can run. Run, Spot run." or something very similar). Human history is sometimes described as a spiral rather than a cycle (here is a particularly meaningful spiral illustration visualized as "3-D" (a cycle + time) https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/300/video-climate-spiral/
Navigating reality relying on misinformation can be roughly like flying a plane though a fog, depending upon significantly inaccurate navigational aids. Lacking reasonably accurate foresight, realities, like a mountainside, could suddenly smack you in the face.
Two (Opps, three) things will always stick in my brain, somewhat akin to your Spot analogy. In the Democracy vs. Republic schtick, “…a Labrador is still a dog…”. In the understanding of the Reagan years, via Little House on the Prairie and the Phylis Schlaflys of the day, puffy dresses, “… Pa was an idiot who always had to be rescued by the women…”, and “Infrastructure, a social basic safety net, regulation of business.” I discovered HCR’s podcasts at the beginning of Covid. I was there every Tuesday and Thursday, plus the Letters. Kept me sane, to say nothing about what connection to community, in the midst of isolation, accomplished.
I don’t think Prof. Richardson should or would want that type of exposure. She is a well-respected author. Teaching American history is her passion. We follow her writings and learn so much. We have the ability to pass along to others what she so capably, thoughtfully, straight-forward and factually
I don’t think Prof. Richardson should or would want that type of exposure. She is a well-respected author. Teaching American history is her passion. We follow her writings and learn so much. We have the ability to pass along to others what she so capably, thoughtfully, straight-forward and factually
HCR posts her letters daily on Facebook—ostensibly the social media platform with the highest visibility. Some of her FB letters get up to 50k likes and thousands of comments, and are shared numerous times. Unfortunately, I believe most of the people this information should reach will not take the time to read a letter; they’re better predisposed to take in short visual news segments or memes.
From another Georgia girl, I believe Dr. Richardson’s ability to make her own points and draw her own conclusions is on a far stronger footing here than at a major daily with an editorial board, especially one with a brand to protect.
I do frequently post her letter on my own FB page, to the appreciation of 4 or 5 of my friends. Some of my friends have subscribed to LFAA. And now and then I forward mine to a couple of "die-hard" MSM friends, choosing carefully which letters I forward.
Mike, it’s not the in depth reporting that makes The NY Times so often complicit in the corruption of our democracy. It’s the failure to report facts of the Biden administration’s extraordinary achievements since he won the election. It’s publishing articles (with sensationalistic headlines) on crime statistics using only sources from the police, and burying the actual statistics deep into the story. I could go on (there are hundreds of instances) but you get the point.
I don't disagree that many written and televised news sources are excellent. They're a wealth of factual information for those who pursue them. My comments are focused on getting the larger mass of American voters--who may not read extensively or watch the best tv sources--better informed so they can vote for their own best interests. My concern is that a large part of the voting population only watches a mainstream 6:00 news program for the entirety of their consumed information, and that we end up with uninformed voters going to the polls. I see those sources doing the country a huge disservice by basically lying by omission, and keeping their focus more on people-pleasing stories. My question is how many voters really understand that this is a hair-on-fire moment.
Of course HCR would do a great job as a journalist, but she might consider aiming higher. In 2024, Maine Senator King's term will be over and he will be 80, with reelection to another six year term likely, if he chooses to run. But if he does not ....
We need articulate, charismatic politicians who champion "Liberty and Justice for All" (for real and really for all) but also journalists, academicians, poets, artists, song writers even comedians, of which there are a few who are currently well known. History lessons can be as dry as dust, but HRC draws out the threads of historical relevance to present circumstance, which is under-represented outside of some classrooms (in my experience, inside too).
It matters what the Boston Tea Party was really protesting. It matters whether the 2nd Amendment was specific to the needs of a state-controlled militia, or whether, as maintained by the learned-sounding audio lecture sent by a former school-mate of my wife, it was intended to arm the entire public in order that they may overthrow the government should it become too liberal. It matters whether 40 years of Reaganomic policy has noticeable improved "Main Street" prosperity and social justice or has it diminished it.
This requires following a chain of events, along with their ambient context, which seems in short supply in popular media and culture, yet is essential to forming, choosing and recognizing wise choices, which based on available evidence, are most likely to result in beneficial outcomes; and we need more readily accessible demonstrations of this particular science and art. It seems to me that this is the only way a wise and just democracy is likely to be secured.
Timing of the professor's comments couldn't be better. Trump has awakened our dark side. Regardless of his re-elected, his legacy will be a possible determinate of our future. I remain stunned at it's power over our country like we have forgotten our better angels and prefer corruption over democracy. There may be a few encouraging signs , but the battle is a long way from over.
John, even if there is no further damage to our democracy than has already been done, it will take generations to restore it.
If we have that long.
The first and primary task is to restore our education system. Equip all students with critical thinking, national pride, truthful history, and civic, social, and government studies. And continuing studies of the Constiution and other vital national documents, coupled with a national 'can do' optimism resulting from all of the above.
In order for this to happen, it will take all of us--starting now--to limit further damage and lay the groundwork by inspiring our educators, supporting them with adequate compensation, and running point to provide them with the means to design and accomplish what we are asking of them.
We still have our voices, our votes, and our volition to do this! People like our dear professor Heather Cox Richardson don't fall out of the sky, they are educated. With all my heart soul and mind I believe education is the way to long term stability of the precious ideas that form our national identity and strength.
Fabulous how you illuminate so much we don’t see in the news and bring all the current situations together as the challenges to democracy Thanks
Agreed, Susan!
Heather, this is a brilliant overview of world events. Thank you! And I do so appreciate you ending with Lula’s words:
“(Lula) called for protecting the natural world to combat climate change, and creating a world governance to enable us to work together against existential threats.
‘This is not a government program,’ Lula said. ‘This is a faith commitment of someone that believes in humanism, someone that believes in solidarity. I don’t want to live in a world where humans become algorithms. I want to live in a world where human beings are human beings. And for that, we have to take care very carefully what God gave us: that is the Planet Earth.’”
I love this quote especially as I don't want to be an algorithm. And I nod to doing something about climate change.
Did you go to college in Vermont?
Yes.
I also went to college at Trinity. Thank you for your support on the Trinity thread.
My pleasure. I love supporting Trinity!
I'd sure like to see this letter and so many others of yours, Heather, front and center on all major media outlets. The mainstream news is a joke to me anymore.
Cindy,
In addition to Dr. Richardson's letter I read the NY Times and the Wall Street Journal every day. I certainly do think Dr. Richardson's writing is unique.
I don't, necessarily, think the above noted two news sources are jokes. However, those information sources are not able to maintain a constant theme like Dr. Richardson nor are they able to provide the deep historical background she provides. Even today, as Dr. Richardson reports on the poor response in Turkey, she maintains her steady theme of democracy vs autocracy or dictatorship (why, when, where and how).
However, those newspapers do provide in depth reporting on many aspects outside of Dr. Richardson's fairly focused purview. The NY Times recently had a visual investigation that provided an in depth look at how poorly and openly classified documents, hundreds of them, were stored at Mara Lago.
Also, the detailed reporting of the emergency response in Turkey is well done in NY Times.
Also, Jamelle Bouie's editorials in NY Times are pretty darn good honestly. His chapter in The 1619 Book Project is even better.
So, I would say that the NY Times and certainly the Wall Street Journal offer a different look at the world every day than Dr. Richardson.
All three of them taken together (NY Times, Wall Street Journal and HCR) can provide a daily dose of information that, if not mitigated with some good outdoor time, leave you wondering about "our country" for sure.
agreed -- but in place of the WSJ, I read the Washington Post. They have reporters and investigators right there in the thick of things. (And I lived in Maryland for 18 years.) Isn't the WSJ owned by Murdoch? I don't trust myself to be able to sift out the rightwing bias. If you can, more power to you.
This is also what I read. At the end of the day we get an email from The Atlantic which I also read. Sometimes the NYT and the WaPo irritate me, but they have lots of interest. Locally, our paper is owned by Gannett who have also destroyed the Register Guard in Eugene, so I usually read the Oregonian for news. All of this online. We do get the NYT in the print edition every day but Saturday because the local rag no longer prints a Saturday edition. Since we live in Salem, the state capital, there are a couple online alternatives that we see.
For me it's WaPo and the Guardian (both US and UK editions). I dropped the NYT after suffering through their abysmal coverage of the 2016 presidential election campaign. The NYT does have some good columnists, like Jamelle Bouie, but so does WaPO (Jennifer Rubin has really come into her own, and Eugene Robinson is also especially good). The best commentary I see, though, is in Slate, and Substacks like this one, and even the various MSNBC blogs (I'm in awe of Steve Benen of the Maddow Blog).
I also read Benen and love him. And Eugene Robinson.
Me too.😊
WSJ is owned by Murdoch. Their editorial page is very righ-biased, however the news itself is pretty straight.
Why doesn’t HCR post in the Times? The more that read her the Better.
I think writing at the Times would open up a can of worms for HCR. I am just guessing, but I think she may like her life just as it is. A great teaching job with time to write brilliant books. And this gig which makes her a small fortune. All of that balanced out with a life in what I think is the most beautiful part of the country.
I think she could blow the doors off at the Times. But maybe she doesn't want the distraction from a well designed life with her new husband. Again, I am just guessing.
Bill, I think you are right, much as I long to see HCR's Letters more widely read. Also, Heather is a (brilliant) historian, not a journalist and I believe that journalists probably want to protect "their turf". Nevertheless, I wish more people could take advantage of the honesty and clarity of her work.
However, the other day I was listening to something, I forget what but it may have been CNN, and I heard the words "as Heather Cox Richardson said..." !
More people need to benefit from her writing. She doesn't need to be a journalist. This piece deserves to be widely circulated. "Turf" doesn't matter. The truth will serve us all.
I know that Heather is read by a wide range of journalists (and many politicians), though maybe not the extreme right wing. Not unexpected, so nothing to waste time moaning about. That she and other historians are now routinely being included in the analysis of current affairs is a welcome change, one that benefits our understanding all around. Hooray for historians, and for journalists whose grasp of the back story improves their coverage.
I sometimes catch Brian Tyler Cohn on YouTube and he recently quoted her. I find his takes, besides that of Beau of the Fifth Column" to be worth hunting down.
Bill, I would not suggest that she "change her life" and work for the Times. I do believe this article should be a widely distributed OP ED. Coastal Maine is wonderful. We were there in the fall.
So true. As to Maine I would like to be one of the fortunate who can summer in Maine and winter in the low country or Florida.
Got it :)
Not knowing the newspaper business as more than a consumer I wonder if she couldn’t be syndicated.
If it were her desire to be more widely read, I think she would be a national force for understanding. Nobody can pull the news together with historical perspective the way Heather can. Plus lately, she has found a talent for terrific ironies and a "concluding comment" that is wicked powerful.
Wouldn't it be epic if she wanted to "teach" on a grander scale?
I just don't know if she would want the attention and the pressure of such a large platform. Whatever works best for her life. Guess I feel protective :)
Agree, but wouldn't it be nice to see her as a guest on MSNBC? I often see Joanne Freeman there.....Heather would be a nice addition too.
Monthly Fireside Chats with Biden would be fantastic for the country.
My introduction to HRC came some years ago with a historical opinion piece on the Bloomberg site. My awareness of this blog was made possible by a HRC opinion piece in the Guardian, so there is that. I don't know how she does it all anyway, but I would like to see some of the historical (well past and contemporary) vignettes reprinted more widely.
At least in one sense history=learning=history. Not always social/political history, as even the ability to read is the culmination of retaining a great many successive lessons (I can still remember "Spot can run. Run, Spot run." or something very similar). Human history is sometimes described as a spiral rather than a cycle (here is a particularly meaningful spiral illustration visualized as "3-D" (a cycle + time) https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/300/video-climate-spiral/
Navigating reality relying on misinformation can be roughly like flying a plane though a fog, depending upon significantly inaccurate navigational aids. Lacking reasonably accurate foresight, realities, like a mountainside, could suddenly smack you in the face.
Two (Opps, three) things will always stick in my brain, somewhat akin to your Spot analogy. In the Democracy vs. Republic schtick, “…a Labrador is still a dog…”. In the understanding of the Reagan years, via Little House on the Prairie and the Phylis Schlaflys of the day, puffy dresses, “… Pa was an idiot who always had to be rescued by the women…”, and “Infrastructure, a social basic safety net, regulation of business.” I discovered HCR’s podcasts at the beginning of Covid. I was there every Tuesday and Thursday, plus the Letters. Kept me sane, to say nothing about what connection to community, in the midst of isolation, accomplished.
I don’t think Prof. Richardson should or would want that type of exposure. She is a well-respected author. Teaching American history is her passion. We follow her writings and learn so much. We have the ability to pass along to others what she so capably, thoughtfully, straight-forward and factually
presents.
I don’t think Prof. Richardson should or would want that type of exposure. She is a well-respected author. Teaching American history is her passion. We follow her writings and learn so much. We have the ability to pass along to others what she so capably, thoughtfully, straight-forward and factually
presents.
HCR posts her letters daily on Facebook—ostensibly the social media platform with the highest visibility. Some of her FB letters get up to 50k likes and thousands of comments, and are shared numerous times. Unfortunately, I believe most of the people this information should reach will not take the time to read a letter; they’re better predisposed to take in short visual news segments or memes.
https://www.facebook.com/heathercoxrichardson?mibextid=LQQJ4d
Yes, my elderly father can watch Fox for hours, but her newsletter was "too long".
Agree. This should be an Op Ed printed and distributed widely.
From another Georgia girl, I believe Dr. Richardson’s ability to make her own points and draw her own conclusions is on a far stronger footing here than at a major daily with an editorial board, especially one with a brand to protect.
Many have mentioned that her readers should post her letter on their social media and to newspapers.
I do frequently post her letter on my own FB page, to the appreciation of 4 or 5 of my friends. Some of my friends have subscribed to LFAA. And now and then I forward mine to a couple of "die-hard" MSM friends, choosing carefully which letters I forward.
I would add the Washington Post. I subscribe to NYT, WaPo and HCR. And some others, notably Lucid by Ruth Ben-Ghiat.
Mike, it’s not the in depth reporting that makes The NY Times so often complicit in the corruption of our democracy. It’s the failure to report facts of the Biden administration’s extraordinary achievements since he won the election. It’s publishing articles (with sensationalistic headlines) on crime statistics using only sources from the police, and burying the actual statistics deep into the story. I could go on (there are hundreds of instances) but you get the point.
I would like to see HCR's blog printed in these newspapers.
I don't disagree that many written and televised news sources are excellent. They're a wealth of factual information for those who pursue them. My comments are focused on getting the larger mass of American voters--who may not read extensively or watch the best tv sources--better informed so they can vote for their own best interests. My concern is that a large part of the voting population only watches a mainstream 6:00 news program for the entirety of their consumed information, and that we end up with uninformed voters going to the polls. I see those sources doing the country a huge disservice by basically lying by omission, and keeping their focus more on people-pleasing stories. My question is how many voters really understand that this is a hair-on-fire moment.
Of course HCR would do a great job as a journalist, but she might consider aiming higher. In 2024, Maine Senator King's term will be over and he will be 80, with reelection to another six year term likely, if he chooses to run. But if he does not ....
We need articulate, charismatic politicians who champion "Liberty and Justice for All" (for real and really for all) but also journalists, academicians, poets, artists, song writers even comedians, of which there are a few who are currently well known. History lessons can be as dry as dust, but HRC draws out the threads of historical relevance to present circumstance, which is under-represented outside of some classrooms (in my experience, inside too).
It matters what the Boston Tea Party was really protesting. It matters whether the 2nd Amendment was specific to the needs of a state-controlled militia, or whether, as maintained by the learned-sounding audio lecture sent by a former school-mate of my wife, it was intended to arm the entire public in order that they may overthrow the government should it become too liberal. It matters whether 40 years of Reaganomic policy has noticeable improved "Main Street" prosperity and social justice or has it diminished it.
This requires following a chain of events, along with their ambient context, which seems in short supply in popular media and culture, yet is essential to forming, choosing and recognizing wise choices, which based on available evidence, are most likely to result in beneficial outcomes; and we need more readily accessible demonstrations of this particular science and art. It seems to me that this is the only way a wise and just democracy is likely to be secured.
Share daily to help spread the word!😊
Yes!!! Me too!!
Times 10!!!
Timing of the professor's comments couldn't be better. Trump has awakened our dark side. Regardless of his re-elected, his legacy will be a possible determinate of our future. I remain stunned at it's power over our country like we have forgotten our better angels and prefer corruption over democracy. There may be a few encouraging signs , but the battle is a long way from over.
John, even if there is no further damage to our democracy than has already been done, it will take generations to restore it.
If we have that long.
The first and primary task is to restore our education system. Equip all students with critical thinking, national pride, truthful history, and civic, social, and government studies. And continuing studies of the Constiution and other vital national documents, coupled with a national 'can do' optimism resulting from all of the above.
In order for this to happen, it will take all of us--starting now--to limit further damage and lay the groundwork by inspiring our educators, supporting them with adequate compensation, and running point to provide them with the means to design and accomplish what we are asking of them.
We still have our voices, our votes, and our volition to do this! People like our dear professor Heather Cox Richardson don't fall out of the sky, they are educated. With all my heart soul and mind I believe education is the way to long term stability of the precious ideas that form our national identity and strength.
Always my take, as well, Susan and Rowshan!