Enrichment – historians and the Brexit debate

150302-Impact-Brexit-BarometerIf you click here you will get to Gideon Rachman’s article in the Financial Times discussing the differing views of historians to the Brexit debate. It is an excellent read, and there is a certain  schadenfreude in watching them fall out with each other. It is however worth making the point there is nothing new about historians getting sucked into political controversies…

” In Germany in the 1960s, an academic argument about whether the country had been responsible for the first world war provoked a ferocious public debate — because of its implication that Nazism was not a solitary aberration in German history. The bicentenary of the French Revolution in 1989 provoked a sharp division between French historians about the true meaning of the events of 1789 — with the left celebrating the revolution as a triumph of liberty and the right emphasising the way in which it had descended into terror and despotism”.

Mr Kydd.

This entry was posted in Enrichment, history in the news, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Enrichment – historians and the Brexit debate

  1. Joe Razavet says:

    I think auschwitz should kept open, they should keep spending more money on refurbishing the ruins of auschwitz. I think they should do this because it will be evidence of the holacoust even happening. If auschwitz wasn’t refurbished in the future there would be no evidence of the holacoust happening, so people might not believe that it happend. It would be awful if the holacoust was forgotten about therefore they should keep aschwitz open.

Comments are closed.