The Not So Solid South

[dvrmte]

Lacy K. Ford, University of SouthCA.

http://artsandsciences.sc.edu/hist/lacy-k-ford-jr

Selected works of Lacy K. Ford jr.

http://works.bepress.com/lacy_fordjr/

Unionblue

Ford's book uses Clyde Wilson as a source.

Remember this?

"The man espouses such clap trap as to come across as a real loon to me. I place him in almost the same league as the Kennedy Brothers and DiLorenzo, but I still would not use him for a source of any kind, not with his wild claims about the tariff and his absolute blindness when it comes to slavery.

Just saying, when I see him referenced, I shut off any seriousness on my part of learning anything new or important concerning Civil War history."

 

[unionblue]

Ford's book uses Clyde Wilson as a source.

Remember this?

"The man espouses such clap trap as to come across as a real loon to me. I place him in almost the same league as the Kennedy Brothers and DiLorenzo, but I still would not use him for a source of any kind, not with his wild claims about the tariff and his absolute blindness when it comes to slavery.

Just saying, when I see him referenced, I shut off any seriousness on my part of learning anything new or important concerning Civil War history."

dvrmte,

No, I do not. Doesn't look like one of my posts. Also, I would like to see how Clyde Wilson is used as a source by Ford.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

 

[DanF]

dvrmte,

No, I do not. Doesn't look like one of my posts. Also, I would like to see how Clyde Wilson is used as a source by Ford.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

Wilson is listed in the bibliography 4 times. 3 times as source for his editing of the papers of John C. Calhoun the other was in reference to a paper by him and another man on the history of South Carolina.

 

[unionblue]

Wilson is listed in the bibliography 4 times. 3 times as source for his editing of the papers of John C. Calhoun the other was in reference to a paper by him and another man on the history of South Carolina.

Danf,

Thank you for your above information.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

 

[dvrmte]

dvrmte,

No, I do not. Doesn't look like one of my posts. Also, I would like to see how Clyde Wilson is used as a source by Ford.

Sincerely,
Unionblue

I wouldn't just make something up.

http://civilwartalk.com/threads/the-right-to-secede.93463/page-9

In the book Deliver Us From Evil, Ford cites Wilson's editing of The Papers of John C. Calhoun, and Abundance of Negroes That Nation: The Significance of African Ethnicity in Colonial South Carolina.

I would almost bet that Dr. Ford was a student of Clyde Wilson.

From Wiki:
"Wilson became Assistant Professor of History at the University of South Carolina in 1971; Associate Professor, 1977; Professor, 1983. In 1977 he became editor of The Papers of John C. Calhoun, producing volumes 10 through the completion of the edition with volume 28 in 2003. Scholarly reviewers were unanimous in high praise for the Calhoun Papers for meticulous editorial work, insightful historical introductions, and steady progress. The term "exemplary" was often applied. Wilson's work on Calhoun drew comments like "shows high ability in the field of intellectual history" (Journal of American History), "plows new ground by the acre" (Virginia Magazine of History & Biography), and many others of similar import.

During 32 years at the University of South Carolina, Wilson taught a wide variety of courses and directed 16 doctoral dissertations, four of which quickly became books."

In one of Gustav's threads you called a quote of Dr. Ford's an "excuse", but now you seem to be pushing one of his books. What's come over you? Have you had an epiphany? Are you coming over from the dark side?

http://civilwartalk.com/threads/philosophy-of-northern-southern-conflict.95251/page-37

"The above can be distilled down to one word.

Excuse."

 

[unionblue]

I wouldn't just make something up.

http://civilwartalk.com/threads/the-right-to-secede.93463/page-9

In the book Deliver Us From Evil, Ford cites Wilson's editing of The Papers of John C. Calhoun, and Abundance of Negroes That Nation: The Significance of African Ethnicity in Colonial South Carolina.

I would almost bet that Dr. Ford was a student of Clyde Wilson.

From Wiki:
"Wilson became Assistant Professor of History at the University of South Carolina in 1971; Associate Professor, 1977; Professor, 1983. In 1977 he became editor of The Papers of John C. Calhoun, producing volumes 10 through the completion of the edition with volume 28 in 2003. Scholarly reviewers were unanimous in high praise for the Calhoun Papers for meticulous editorial work, insightful historical introductions, and steady progress. The term "exemplary" was often applied. Wilson's work on Calhoun drew comments like "shows high ability in the field of intellectual history" (Journal of American History), "plows new ground by the acre" (Virginia Magazine of History & Biography), and many others of similar import.

During 32 years at the University of South Carolina, Wilson taught a wide variety of courses and directed 16 doctoral dissertations, four of which quickly became books."

In one of Gustav's threads you called a quote of Dr. Ford's an "excuse", but now you seem to be pushing one of his books. What's come over you? Have you had an epiphany? Are you coming over from the dark side?

http://civilwartalk.com/threads/philosophy-of-northern-southern-conflict.95251/page-37

"The above can be distilled down to one word.

Excuse."

dvrmte,

Rest assured, I KNOW you would never make anything up in any of your posts. But after 18,398 posts and well over ten years of posting on this forum, I cannot recall every post I have made here.

Wow! I was a lot more eloquent on that one post you found than my more recednt, regular posts.

But, as long as Wilson keeps pushing nonsense about the tariff, he will remain in that dark place that DiLorenzo and others of his ilk hide out in.

As I have said many times before, I would prefer to read how Dr. Ford uses Wilson's references.

But be at ease, friend dvrmte, I have not crossed any line nor had anything "come over me." It's just that Dr. Ford's book interests me and I am willing to let him fall or stand according to my already well established standards.

Sincerely,
Unionble

 

[dvrmte]

dvrmte,

Rest assured, I KNOW you would never make anything up in any of your posts. But after 18,398 posts and well over ten years of posting on this forum, I cannot recall every post I have made here.

Wow! I was a lot more eloquent on that one post you found than my more recednt, regular posts.

But, as long as Wilson keeps pushing nonsense about the tariff, he will remain in that dark place that DiLorenzo and others of his ilk hide out in.

As I have said many times before, I would prefer to read how Dr. Ford uses Wilson's references.

But be at ease, friend dvrmte, I have not crossed any line nor had anything "come over me." It's just that Dr. Ford's book interests me and I am willing to let him fall or stand according to my already well established standards.

Sincerely,
Unionble

Clyde Wilson is considered a paleo-conservative or old school conservative and many people have reasons they might not like his politics, which he speaks and writes of prolifically. He is also a meticulous researcher. His introductions such as to Calhoun's papers, are very insightful and often quoted. Personally I usually can find fault with any historian as they are people and people are faulty. But over my life I've also learned that no matter how much I dislike or think someone is totally ignorant, etc., I can still learn something from them.

As far as Dr. Ford, he is an excellent historian but I think his fault is that he 'gives in' sometimes and creates 'acceptable' narratives in order to keep his job and make money. An example in Origins of Southern Radicalism where he seems compelled to add what seems an apology because he doesn't write about the slaves or their perspective. Now I knew when I read the title and reviews that the book wasn't from a slaves perspective but from the common whites' of South Carolina. I feel there was some kind of PC 'pressure' that he include that apology in a book about antebellum white people.

Have a nice day!

 

[unionblue]

Clyde Wilson is considered a paleo-conservative or old school conservative and many people have reasons they might not like his politics, which he speaks and writes of prolifically. He is also a meticulous researcher. His introductions such as to Calhoun's papers, are very insightful and often quoted. Personally I usually can find fault with any historian as they are people and people are faulty. But over my life I've also learned that no matter how much I dislike or think someone is totally ignorant, etc., I can still learn something from them.

As far as Dr. Ford, he is an excellent historian but I think his fault is that he 'gives in' sometimes and creates 'acceptable' narratives in order to keep his job and make money. An example in Roots of Southern Radicalism where he seems compelled to add what seems an apology because he doesn't write about the slaves or their perspective. Now I knew when I read the title and reviews that the book wasn't from a slaves perspective but from the common whites' of South Carolina. I feel there was some kind of PC 'pressure' that he include that apology in a book about antebellum white people.

Have a nice day![/QUOTEquite

dvrmte,

Your opinion is noted and read with some interest by myself, but not entirely accepted.

I am sure you are quite surprised by this.

But I enjoyed our discussion.

Sincerely,
Unionblue