Historians and Rhetoric
Deliotb at AOL.COM
Mon Jan 22 12:18:07 PST 2001
(1) George Mason, for the record, does not insist that everyone accept law
and economics, nor is it a gospel. Our faculty has philosophers, politicals
scientists, and others who aren't law and econ people (think Peter Berkowitz,
formerly of the Harvard Gov't dept), though we are definitely biased in favor
of law and econ.
(2) I would be very pleased if historians were as conversant in mainstream
economic thought as they are in Marx and such.
In a message dated 1/22/01 11:56:52 AM Eastern Standard Time,
paul-finkelman at UTULSA.EDU writes:
<< It is hard to comprehend what history departments Prof. Zywicki is
to; there are almost no "Marxist" historians around; a few famous ones here
and there; no departments are "marxist." There is nothing, as far as I know,
in the world of history departments to compare, say, to George Mason Univ.
Law School's insistence that aparently _everyone_ accept the gospel of Law
and Economics. Do historians read Marx? Sure. Does he provide a framework
for some social analysis? Sure. Does that make everyone who reads or even
sometimes uses Marx a Marxist? Hardly. >>
More information about the Conlawprof