Jump to content

Richard Hofstadter: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
rm
→Early life and education: keep cite used by Eric Foner
Line 21: Line 21:
His most important works are ''[[Social Darwinism]] in American Thought, 1860–1915'' (1944); ''[[The American Political Tradition]]'' (1948); ''[[The Age of Reform]]'' (1955); ''[[Anti-intellectualism in American Life]]'' (1963), and the essays collected in ''[[The Paranoid Style in American Politics]]'' (1964). He was twice awarded the [[Pulitzer Prize]]: in 1956 for ''The Age of Reform'', an unsentimental analysis of the [[Populist Party (United States)|populism movement in the 1890s]] and the [[Progressive Era|progressive movement of the early 20th century]]; and in 1964 for the cultural history ''Anti-intellectualism in American Life''.<ref>''Benét’s Reader’s Encyclopedia'', Fourth Edition (1996), p. 478</ref>
His most important works are ''[[Social Darwinism]] in American Thought, 1860–1915'' (1944); ''[[The American Political Tradition]]'' (1948); ''[[The Age of Reform]]'' (1955); ''[[Anti-intellectualism in American Life]]'' (1963), and the essays collected in ''[[The Paranoid Style in American Politics]]'' (1964). He was twice awarded the [[Pulitzer Prize]]: in 1956 for ''The Age of Reform'', an unsentimental analysis of the [[Populist Party (United States)|populism movement in the 1890s]] and the [[Progressive Era|progressive movement of the early 20th century]]; and in 1964 for the cultural history ''Anti-intellectualism in American Life''.<ref>''Benét’s Reader’s Encyclopedia'', Fourth Edition (1996), p. 478</ref>


==Radical roots==
==Early life and education==
Richard Hofstadter was born in [[Buffalo, New York]], in 1916 to a [[German Americans|German American]] [[Lutherans|Lutheran]] mother and a [[Jewish]] father, who died when Richard was ten. He attended the [[Fosdick-Masten Park High School]] in Buffalo. Hofstadter then studied philosophy and history at the [[University at Buffalo]], from 1933, under the [[Political history|diplomatic historian]] [[Julius Pratt]]. Despite opposition from both families, he married Felice Swados in 1936; they had one child.<ref>Brown (2006), pp. 18-19</ref> He was raised as an Episcopalian but later identified more with his Jewish roots. Antisemitism may have cost him fellowships at Columbia and attractive professorships.<ref>Brown (2006), pp. 12, 21, 38, 53</ref>
Richard Hofstadter was born in [[Buffalo, New York]], in 1916 to a [[German Americans|German American]] [[Lutherans|Lutheran]] mother and a [[Jewish]] father, who died when Richard was ten. He attended the [[Fosdick-Masten Park High School]] in Buffalo. Hofstadter then studied philosophy and history at the [[University at Buffalo]], from 1933, under the [[Political history|diplomatic historian]] [[Julius Pratt]]. Despite opposition from both families, he married Felice Swados in 1936; they had one child.<ref>Brown (2006), pp. 18-19</ref> He was raised as an Episcopalian but later identified more with his Jewish roots. Antisemitism may have cost him fellowships at Columbia and attractive professorships.<ref>Brown (2006), pp. 12, 21, 38, 53</ref>


In 1936, he entered the doctoral program in history at [[Columbia University]], where [[Merle Curti]] was demonstrating how to synthesize intellectual, social, and political history based upon secondary sources rather than primary-source archival research.<ref>Brown (2006), pp. 22, 29</ref> Hofstadter, influenced by his wife, was a member of the [[Young Communist League]] at university, and in 1938 he joined the [[Communist Party USA|Communist Party of the USA]]. In late 1939, he ended the Communist stage of his life, because of the [[Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact]] between the Soviet Union and Germany.
In 1936, he entered the doctoral program in history at [[Columbia University]], where [[Merle Curti]] was demonstrating how to synthesize intellectual, social, and political history based upon secondary sources rather than primary-source archival research.<ref>Brown (2006), pp. 22, 29</ref> Hofstadter, influenced by his wife, was a member of the [[Young Communist League]] at university, and in 1938 he joined the [[Communist Party USA|Communist Party of the USA]]. In late 1939, he ended the Communist stage of his life, because of the [[Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact]] between the Soviet Union and Germany. He remained anti-capitalist, writing, "I hate capitalism and everything that goes with it".<ref> Quoted in {{cite book|author=Eric Foner|title=Who Owns History?: Rethinking the Past in a Changing World|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=H3I-Z8KW5REC&pg=PT38|year=2003|publisher=Macmillan|page=38}}</ref><ref>Geary (2007) p 429</ref>

==1940s==


In 1942, he earned his doctorate in history and in 1944 published his dissertation ''Social Darwinism in American Thought, 1860–1915'', a pithy and commercially successful (200,000 copies) critique of late nineteenth-century American capitalism and those who espoused its ruthless "dog-eat-dog" economic competition and justified themselves by invoking the doctrine of [[Social Darwinism]], as identified by [[William Graham Sumner]]. Conservative critics, such as Irwin G. Wylie and Robert C. Bannister, disagree with his interpretation.<ref>Brown (2006), pp. 30–37; Irwin G. Wylie, "Social Darwinism and the Businessmen" in ''Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society'' 103 (1959), pp. 629–35, shows few businessmen believed in Social Darwinism. Robert C. Bannister, ''Social Darwinism: Science and Myth in Anglo–American Social Thought'' (1989). By the 1880s, Sumner had progressed beyond Social Darwinism, which Hofstadter de-emphasized by citing posthumous editions of Sumner’s essays.</ref>
In 1942, he earned his doctorate in history and in 1944 published his dissertation ''Social Darwinism in American Thought, 1860–1915'', a pithy and commercially successful (200,000 copies) critique of late nineteenth-century American capitalism and those who espoused its ruthless "dog-eat-dog" economic competition and justified themselves by invoking the doctrine of [[Social Darwinism]], as identified by [[William Graham Sumner]]. Conservative critics, such as Irwin G. Wylie and Robert C. Bannister, disagree with his interpretation.<ref>Brown (2006), pp. 30–37; Irwin G. Wylie, "Social Darwinism and the Businessmen" in ''Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society'' 103 (1959), pp. 629–35, shows few businessmen believed in Social Darwinism. Robert C. Bannister, ''Social Darwinism: Science and Myth in Anglo–American Social Thought'' (1989). By the 1880s, Sumner had progressed beyond Social Darwinism, which Hofstadter de-emphasized by citing posthumous editions of Sumner’s essays.</ref>

Revision as of 11:09, 30 May 2012

Richard Hofstadter
Hofstadter circa 1970
Hofstadter circa 1970
Born(1916-08-06)August 6, 1916
Buffalo, New York, United States
DiedOctober 24, 1970 (aged 54)
New York, NY,
United States
OccupationAuthor
Historian
Public intellectual
NationalityAmerican
SubjectAmerican History, Politics, Anti-intellectualism, Progressivism in the United States, Intellectual History
SpouseFelice Swados (died 1945)
Beatrice Kevitt (widowed in 1970)
ChildrenDaniel and Sarah

Richard Hofstadter (6 August 1916 – 24 October 1970) was an American public intellectual of the 1950s, a historian and DeWitt Clinton Professor of American History at Columbia University. In the course of his career, Hofstadter became the "iconic historian of postwar liberal consensus" thanks especially to his emphasis on ideas and political culture rather than the day-to-day doings of politicians. Geary says he is still admired for the grace of his writing, and the depth of his insight.[1]

His most important works are Social Darwinism in American Thought, 1860–1915 (1944); The American Political Tradition (1948); The Age of Reform (1955); Anti-intellectualism in American Life (1963), and the essays collected in The Paranoid Style in American Politics (1964). He was twice awarded the Pulitzer Prize: in 1956 for The Age of Reform, an unsentimental analysis of the populism movement in the 1890s and the progressive movement of the early 20th century; and in 1964 for the cultural history Anti-intellectualism in American Life.[2]

Radical roots

Richard Hofstadter was born in Buffalo, New York, in 1916 to a German American Lutheran mother and a Jewish father, who died when Richard was ten. He attended the Fosdick-Masten Park High School in Buffalo. Hofstadter then studied philosophy and history at the University at Buffalo, from 1933, under the diplomatic historian Julius Pratt. Despite opposition from both families, he married Felice Swados in 1936; they had one child.[3] He was raised as an Episcopalian but later identified more with his Jewish roots. Antisemitism may have cost him fellowships at Columbia and attractive professorships.[4]

In 1936, he entered the doctoral program in history at Columbia University, where Merle Curti was demonstrating how to synthesize intellectual, social, and political history based upon secondary sources rather than primary-source archival research.[5] Hofstadter, influenced by his wife, was a member of the Young Communist League at university, and in 1938 he joined the Communist Party of the USA. In late 1939, he ended the Communist stage of his life, because of the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact between the Soviet Union and Germany. He remained anti-capitalist, writing, "I hate capitalism and everything that goes with it".[6][7]

1940s

In 1942, he earned his doctorate in history and in 1944 published his dissertation Social Darwinism in American Thought, 1860–1915, a pithy and commercially successful (200,000 copies) critique of late nineteenth-century American capitalism and those who espoused its ruthless "dog-eat-dog" economic competition and justified themselves by invoking the doctrine of Social Darwinism, as identified by William Graham Sumner. Conservative critics, such as Irwin G. Wylie and Robert C. Bannister, disagree with his interpretation.[8]

Geary (2007) concludes that, "To Hofstadter, radicalism always offered more of a critical intellectual stance than a commitment to political activism. Although Hofstadter quickly became disillusioned with the Communist Party, he retained an independent left-wing standpoint well into the 1940s. Both his first book, Social Darwinism in American Thought (1944), and The American Political Tradition (1948) were written from a radical point of view."[9]

Charles Beard’s influence

In the 1940s, as a historian, Richard Hofstadter acknowledged that: "Beard was really the exciting influence on me",[10] specifically the social-conflict model of U.S. history that emphasized the struggle among competing economic groups (primarily farmers, Southern slavers, Northern industrialists, and the workers) and discounted abstract political rhetoric that was rarely translated into action. Historians following that model must search for the hidden self-interest and financial goals of the economic belligerents. As such, Charles Beard perceived the American Civil War (1861–65) as a South-to-North transference of political power, progressing from slavery to industrial capitalism, because neither the Union nor the Confederacy was truly interested in resolving the cultural and constitutional contradictions of American slavery.

Consensus historian

In 1946, he joined the Columbia University faculty; in 1959, he became the DeWitt Clinton Professor of American History and played a major role in directing PhD dissertations in American history.

After 1945, Hofstadter philosophically broke with Charles A. Beard and moved to the right in his leadership of the "consensus historians". Hofstadter disliked the term, but it was widely applied and refers to his rejection of the Beardian idea that there was a fundamental conflict running throughout American history that pitted economic classes against each other.[11]

As a consensus historian, Hofstadter rejected Beard's interpretation of history as a succession of socio-economic group conflicts. He thought that all historical periods could be understood as an implicit consensus, shared by antagonists, explaining that the generation of Beard and Vernon Louis Parrington had:

...put such an excessive emphasis on conflict, that an antidote was needed.... It seems to me to be clear that a political society cannot hang together, at all, unless there is some kind of consensus running through it, and yet that no society has such a total consensus as to be devoid of significant conflict. It is all a matter of proportion and emphasis, which is terribly important in history. Of course, obviously, we have had one total failure of consensus, which led to the Civil War. One could use that as the extreme case in which consensus breaks down.[12]

In 1948, he published The American Political Tradition and the Men Who Made It, incisive interpretive studies of twelve major American political leaders from the eighteenth, nineteenth, and twentieth centuries. Besides critical success, the book sold nearly a million copies at university campuses, where it was used as a history textbook; critics found it "skeptical, fresh, revisionary, occasionally ironical, without being harsh or merely destructive".[13] Although, as Bruce Kuklik notes, it still "owed much to Hofstadter's leftist background", it was ironic and paradoxical in dealing with political leaders from the Revolution to the present. Each chapter title illustrated a paradox: Thomas Jefferson is "The Aristocrat as Democrat"; John C. Calhoun is the "Marx of the Master Class"; and Franklin Roosevelt is "The Patrician as Opportunist".[14]

Later works

As an historian, Hofstadter’s ground-breaking work came in using social psychology concepts to explain political history.[15] He explored subconscious motives such as social status anxiety, anti-intellectualism, irrational fear, and paranoia—as they propel political discourse and action in politics.

The rural ethos

The Age of Reform (1955) analyzes the yeoman ideal in America’s sentimental attachment to agrarianism and the moral superiority of the farm over the city. Hofstadter—himself very much a big-city person—noted the agrarian ethos was "a kind of homage that Americans have paid to the fancied innocence of their origins, however, to call it a myth does not imply falsity, because it effectively embodies the rural values of the American people, profoundly influencing their perception of the correct values, hence their political behavior." In this matter, the stress is upon the importance of Jefferson's writings, and of his followers, in the development of agrarianism in the US, as establishing the agrarian myth, and its importance, in American life and politics—despite the rural and urban industrialization that rendered the myth moot.[16]

Anti-intellectualism in American Life (1963) and The Paranoid Style in American Politics (1965) describe the provincialism in American society, warning it contains much anti-intellectual fear of the cosmopolitan city, presented as wicked by the xenophobic and anti-Semitic Populists of the 1890s. They trace the direct political and ideological lineage between the Populists and anti-communist Senator Joseph McCarthy and McCarthyism, the political paranoia manifest in his contemporary time. His dissertation director Merle Curti noted about Hofstadter that: "His position is as biased, by his urban background . . . as the work of older historians was biased by their rural background and traditional agrarian sympathies".[17]

Irrational fear

The Idea of a Party System (1969) describes the origins of the First Party System as reflecting fears that the [other] political party threatened to destroy the republic. The Progressive Historians: Turner, Beard, Parrington (1968) systematically analyzes and criticizes the intellectual foundations and historical validity of Charles Beard's historiography; the book "signalled a growing support for neoconservatism" by Hofstadter. While not publishing his harshest thoughts, Hofstadter said privately that Turner no longer was a useful guide to history, because he was too obsessed with the frontier and his ideas too often had "a pound of false-hood for every few ounces of truth".[18]

Howe and Finn argue that rhetorically, Hofstadter's cultural interpretation drew upon concepts drawn from literary criticism, anthropology, and social psychology. He used them over and over: First: "irony," "paradox," "anomaly," "curiously". Second: "myth," "tradition," "legend," "folklore". Third: "projection," "unconsciously," "identity," "anxiety," and "paranoid." He artfully employed their explicit scholarly meanings and their informal prejudicial connotations. His goal, they argue, was "destroying certain cherished American traditions and myths derived from his conviction that they provided no trustworthy guide for action in the present."[19] Thus Hofstadter argued, "The application of depth psychology to politics, chancy though it is, has at least made us acutely aware that politics can be a projective arena for feelings and impulses that are only marginally related to the manifest issues."[20]

Attacks student radicalism

Angered by the radical politics of the 1960s, and especially the student occupation and temporary closing of Columbia University in 1968, Hofstadter began to criticize student activist methods. His friend David Herbert Donald said: "He was appalled by the growing radical, even revolutionary, sentiment that he sensed among his colleagues and his students. He could never share their simplistic, moralistic approach."[21] Moreover, he was "extremely critical of student tactics, believing that they were based on irrational romantic ideas, rather than sensible plans for achievable change, that they undermined the unique status of the university, as an institutional bastion of free thought, and that they were bound to provoke a political reaction from the right".[22] Despite strongly disagreeing with their political methods, he invited his radical students to discuss goals and strategies with him. He even employed one, Mike Wallace, to collaborate with him on American Violence: A Documentary History (1970); about the book, Hofstadter student Eric Foner said that it "utterly contradicted the consensus vision of a nation placidly evolving without serious disagreements".[23]

Death

Richard Hofstadter planned to write a three-volume history of American society, but at his death from leukemia in 1970, he had only completed the first volume, America at 1750: A Social Portrait (1971).

Criticism

The sharpest criticism of Social Darwinism in American Thought, 1860–1915 focused on Hofstadter's weakness as a research scholar: he did little or no research into manuscripts, newspapers, archival, or unpublished sources. Instead, he primarily relied upon secondary sources augmented by his lively style and wide-ranging interdisciplinary readings, this producing very well-written arguments based upon scattered evidence he found by reading other historians.[24]

Hofstadter showed scant interest in his students. In undergraduate classes, he read aloud every day the draft of his next book.[25] As a senior professor at a leading graduate university, Hofstadter directed more than one hundred finished doctoral dissertations but gave his graduate students only cursory attention; that academic latitude enabled them to find their own models of history. Some adopted New Left perspectives that he rejected, among them were Herbert Gutman, Eric Foner, Lawrence W. Levine, Linda Kerber, and Paula Fass, while others, such as Eric McKitrick and Stanley Elkins, were more conservative than he; hence, Hofstadter had few disciples and founded no school of history writing.[26]

Conservative commentator George Will called Richard Hofstadter "the iconic public intellectual of liberal condescension", who "dismissed conservatives as victims of character flaws and psychological disorders — a 'paranoid style' of politics rooted in 'status anxiety', etc. Conservatism rose on a tide of votes cast by people irritated by the liberalism of condescension."[27]

Published works

  • "The Tariff Issue on the Eve of the Civil War," The American Historical Review Vol. 44, No. 1 (Oct., 1938), pp. 50–55 full text in JSTOR
  • "William Graham Sumner, Social Darwinist," The New England Quarterly Vol. 14, No. 3 (Sep., 1941), pp. 457–477 online at JSTOR
  • "Parrington and the Jeffersonian Tradition," Journal of the History of Ideas Vol. 2, No. 4 (Oct., 1941), pp. 391–400 JSTOR
  • "William Leggett, Spokesman of Jacksonian Democracy," Political Science Quarterly Vol. 58, No. 4 (Dec., 1943), pp. 581–594 JSTOR
  • "U. B. Phillips and The Plantation Legend," The Journal of Negro History Vol. 29, No. 2 (Apr., 1944), pp. 109–124 JSTOR
  • Social Darwinism in American Thought, 1860-1915 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1944); 1992 edition with preface by Eric Foner. ISBN 978-0-8070-5503-8
  • The American Political Tradition and the Men Who Made It (New York: A. A. Knopf, 1948). online edition
  • "Beard and the Constitution: The History of an Idea," American Quarterly Vol. 2, No. 3 (Autumn, 1950), pp. 195–213 JSTOR
  • The Age of Reform: from Bryan to F.D.R (New York: Knopf, 1955). online edition
  • The Development of Academic Freedom in the United States (New York: Columbia University Press, 1955). (with Walter P. Metzger) OCLC 175391
  • The United States: the History of a Republic (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.,: Prentice-Hall, 1957), college textbook; several editions; coauthored with Daniel Aaron and William Miller
  • Anti-intellectualism in American Life (New York: Knopf, 1963).
  • The Progressive Movement, 1900-1915 (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1963). edited excerpts. OCLC 265628
  • The Paranoid Style in American Politics, and Other Essays (New York: Knopf, 1965). ISBN 978-0-226-34817-9
  • The Progressive Historians: Turner, Beard, Parrington (New York: Knopf, 1968).
  • The Idea of a Party System: The Rise of Legitimate Opposition in the United States, 1780-1840 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969).
  • American Violence: A Documentary History. co-edited with Mike Wallace (1970) ISBN 978-0-394-41486-7
  • America at 1750: A Social Portrait (1971)

References

  • Susan Stout Baker. Radical Beginnings: Richard Hofstadter and the 1930s (1985)
  • Alan Brinkley, "Richard Hofstadter's the Age of Reform: A Reconsideration," Reviews in American History Vol. 13, No. 3 (Sept., 1985), pp. 462–480 JSTOR
  • David S. Brown, "Richard Hofstadter: An Intellectual Biography" (U. of Chicago Press, 2006) full-scale biography; seen as "readable, informative, engaging, and provocative"[28]
  • David S. Brown, "Redefining American History: Ethnicity, Progressive Historiography and the Making of Richard Hofstadter," The History Teacher, Vol. 36, No. 4 (Aug., 2003), pp. 527–548 in JSTOR
  • Dane S. Claussen, Anti-Intellectualism in American Media, New York: Peter Lang Publishing (2004).
  • Robert M. Collins, "The Originality Trap: Richard Hofstadter on Populism," Journal of American History 76 (June 1989): 150-67 in JSTOR
  • Stanley Elkins and Eric McKitrick, "Richard Hofstadter: A Progress," in their The Hofstadter Aegis (Knopf, 1974), pp 300–367.
  • Eric Foner, "The Education of Richard Hofstadter." The Nation . Volume: 254. Issue: 17. May 4, 1992. pp 597+.
  • Daniel Geary, "Richard Hofstadter Reconsidered," Reviews in American History, Volume 35, Number 3, September 2007, pp. 425–431 in Project Muse
  • David Greenberg, "Richard Hofstadter Reconsidered," Raritan Review Vol. 27, No. 2 (Fall 2007), pp. 144–167.
  • Allen C. Guelzo. "History with a Smirk: Richard Hofstadter and scholarly fashion," Books and Culture (Jan-Feb. 2007) online
  • Daniel Walker Howe and Peter Elliott Finn, "Richard Hofstadter: The Ironies of an American Historian," Pacific Historical Review 43 (February 1974): 1-18 in JSTOR
  • Michael Kazin, "Hofstadter Lives: Political Culture and Temperament in the Work of an American Historian,? Reviews in American History 27.2 (1999) 334-348 online in Project Muse
  • Jack Pole, "Richard Hofstadter," in Robert Allen Rutland, ed. "Clio's Favorites: Leading Historians of the United States, 1945-2000" U of Missouri Press. (2000) pp 68–83
  • Harry N. Scheiber, "Review: A Keen Sense of History and the Need to Act: Reflections on Richard Hofstadter and the American Political Tradition' Reviews in American History Vol. 2, No. 3 (Sep., 1974), pp. 445-452 JSTOR
  • Schlesinger, Arthur M., Jr. "Richard Hofstadter" in Marcus Cunliffe and Robin Winks, eds. Pastmasters: Some Essays on American Historians (1969) pp 278–315.
  • Daniel J. Singal, "Beyond Consensus: Richard Hofstadter and American Historiography," American Historical Review 89 (October 1984): 976-1004. in JSTOR
  • Jon Wiener, "America, Through A Glass Darkly." The Nation, October 5, 2006.

Notes

  1. ^ Geary (2007), pp. 430, 425
  2. ^ Benét’s Reader’s Encyclopedia, Fourth Edition (1996), p. 478
  3. ^ Brown (2006), pp. 18-19
  4. ^ Brown (2006), pp. 12, 21, 38, 53
  5. ^ Brown (2006), pp. 22, 29
  6. ^ Quoted in Eric Foner (2003). Who Owns History?: Rethinking the Past in a Changing World. Macmillan. p. 38.
  7. ^ Geary (2007) p 429
  8. ^ Brown (2006), pp. 30–37; Irwin G. Wylie, "Social Darwinism and the Businessmen" in Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 103 (1959), pp. 629–35, shows few businessmen believed in Social Darwinism. Robert C. Bannister, Social Darwinism: Science and Myth in Anglo–American Social Thought (1989). By the 1880s, Sumner had progressed beyond Social Darwinism, which Hofstadter de-emphasized by citing posthumous editions of Sumner’s essays.
  9. ^ Geary (2007) p 418
  10. ^ Foner, 1992
  11. ^ Brown (2006), p. 75
  12. ^ Quoted in Pole (2000), pp. 73–74
  13. ^ Pole (2000), p. 71
  14. ^ Bruce Kuklick in Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society v.42 #4 (2006), pp. 574-577
  15. ^ He was influenced by his friend sociologist C. Wright Mills; Brown (2006), p. 93
  16. ^ Richard Hofstadter, The Age of Reform (1955), p. ?
  17. ^ Quoted in Brown (2006), p. 112
  18. ^ Quoted in Brown (2003), p. 531; the private letter was written to Merle Curti, probably in 1948.
  19. ^ Howe and Finn, "Richard Hofstadter: The Ironies of an American Historian," pp 3-5, 6
  20. ^ Richard Hofstadter; Sean Wilentz (2008). The Paranoid Style in American Politics. Random House Digital, Inc. p. xxxiii.
  21. ^ quoted in Brown (2006), p. 180
  22. ^ Geary (2007), p. 430
  23. ^ Richard Hofstadter; Eric Foner (1992). Social Darwinism in American Thought. Beacon Press. pp. xxv in Foner's "Introduction".
  24. ^ Brown (2006), pp. 38, 113
  25. ^ Brown (2006), p. 66
  26. ^ Brown (2006), pp. 66-71; Kazin (1999), p. 343
  27. ^ Candidate on a High Horse, George Will, The Washington Post, April 15, 2008
  28. ^ Geary (2007) p. 425
Wikiquote has quotations related to Richard Hofstadter.

Template:Persondata

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Richard_Hofstadter&oldid=495111434"