You gave me a link, to a site with more links, etc.  My admittedly cursory 
review reveals that the major complaint was that Conquest was too reliant on 
the testimony of emigres, who were impliedly anti-Stalinist.  By itself, that 
is a not very compelling criticism.  All I ask is for you to state in your own 
words a single fact alleged by Conquest where you believe the competing 
evidence is more compelling and shows Conquest was wrong.

David Shemano

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Charlie
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 8:33 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Robert Conquest

David S. wrote: "The mainstream, the conventional wisdom, etc., treat Conquest 
as authoritative.  He wrote on the subject for 50 years with his reputation 
intact at his death..."

Mainstream professional historians have rejected conclusions by Conquest as 
well as his method. They have avoided putting his professional reputation on 
the line because of his dominance of the field, which is entangled with the 
pressure on academics to keep anti-Soviet, anti-Stalin propaganda alive. But we 
go in circles; you were given citations and references at a link I already 
posted:
http://www.stalinsociety.org/2015/08/05/grover-furr-on-robert-conquest/

_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
____________________________________________________
 
Information contained in this e-mail transmission may be privileged, 
confidential and covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 
U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521.

If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, distribute, or reproduce 
this transmission.

If you have received this e-mail transmission in error, please notify us 
immediately of the error by return email and please delete the message from 
your system.

Pursuant to requirements related to practice before the U. S. Internal Revenue 
Service, any tax advice contained in this communication (including any 
attachments) is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for purposes of 
(i) avoiding penalties imposed under the U. S. Internal Revenue Code or (ii) 
promoting, marketing or recommending to another person any tax-related matter.

Thank you in advance for your cooperation.

Robins Kaplan LLP
http://www.robinskaplan.com 
____________________________________________________
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to