[WikiEN-l] Can we ban 172 now? And VV too! (in response to Fred Bauder)
steven l. rubenstein
rubenste at ohiou.edu
Wed Jun 2 20:13:00 UTC 2004
I am very sorry to hear that 172 is considering leaving the project. I am
also disturbed by the nature of this discussion.
To be clear, I myself have had frustrating, caustic, and even exasperating
arguments over edits with 172 myself. I do not always find his
presentation of self to be very congenial, although I am in no position to
throw stones. Nevertheless, I am convinced of the integrity of his
historical research, and his sincerity in applying the standards of sound
scholarship to Wikipedia. while we are not and ought not to be constrained
by the limits of conventional encyclopedias and scholarly research,
academic historians are people who dedicate the better part of their lives
to learning about and understanding events. In my experience they
generally hold themselves to high standards, and I think Wikipedia can
benefit from those standards and the work of such historians. In these
terms 172 has made many valuable contributions.
It disturbs me that some -- I think VV, Fred, Stan and perhaps others --
characterize this as a right/left argument. Even they understand that 172
himself sees it as a scholar/non-scholar argument. I have gone over the
articles in question and I think that this is indeed the root issue. Of
course, many people in the US (and perhaps other countries) sees the
difference between academia and non-academia in terms of politics (scholars
are liberal or Marxist), but I do not think this is constructive.
Every Soviet scholar understands that Stalin played a key role in many
awful things, involving millions of deaths. I don't think 172 has ever
denied this. I do, however, think that he has tried to establish a
framework for understanding Soviet history that is grounded in scholarly
research and not just Cold War rhetoric. My sense is that anyone who has
studied history at the graduate level (although I am sure this is true of
many non-scholars too!) has had to slog through now only huge amounts of
historical material, but some pretty complicated historical debates. Of
course in the process one learns just how bad things were in the Soviet
Union, especially during certain periods and for particular groups of
people. But academic historians have to go beyond just saying "SU = bad"
or "Stalin = bad" to say something more insightful about how and why
whatever happened happened. I think 172's contributions have been informed
by this concern, and I think some people here systematically misunderstand it.
Steve
Steven L. Rubenstein
Associate Professor
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
Bentley Annex
Ohio University
Athens, Ohio 45701
-------------- next part --------------
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.690 / Virus Database: 451 - Release Date: 5/22/2004
More information about the WikiEN-l
mailing list