Over at the History News Network, a few serious historians and a few pretend ones launched a bizarre and at times delusionally paranoid attack on my book — two years after it came out (Thanks to Michael Ledeen for being a voice of sanity, by the way). I’m not surprised by the absurdities and insults from someone like David Neiwert, but I was really shocked at how completely unhinged Roger Griffin is. He’s a serious scholar of fascism. His essay reads like a long, fevered, Democratic Undergound post. Personally, I found some of it hilarious. I would like it if in the future all of you could call me “Journalist Goldberg.”
Robert Paxton, an even more eminent scholar, has a rambling blunderbus of an attack on my book in which the noted scholar gets a lot of facts just plain wrong.
Of course I’m biased, but I think the wild, nasty overreactions — I’m like Holocaust–denier David Irving and LF is like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion — says a lot more about my attackers than it does about me or my book. I also think that I have the better argument in rebuttal. But again, I’m biased. Judge for yourself. My response is here and you can find the links to everyone else there as well. My apologies for making it so long. But as long as it is, I had to let all sorts of nonsense go unrebutted just to keep it readable.
Update: Oh, as several readers have informed me, for some reason the piece is posted twice making it appear twice as long as it actually is. I’ve notified HNN, so hopefully it will be fixed soon.