Jump to content

Thomas DiLorenzo: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
ce, remove undue detail
(6 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 26: Line 26:
DiLorenzo despised the social programs of the Great Society, which he thought were responsible for "human degradation by destroying the work ethic and breaking up families." The police's failure to arrest a man who allegedly mugged his older brother, on the basis of not wanting to "create racial tension" in the community, also helped foster DiLorenzo's "hatred" of government.<ref name=evil/>
DiLorenzo despised the social programs of the Great Society, which he thought were responsible for "human degradation by destroying the work ethic and breaking up families." The police's failure to arrest a man who allegedly mugged his older brother, on the basis of not wanting to "create racial tension" in the community, also helped foster DiLorenzo's "hatred" of government.<ref name=evil/>


DiLorenzo's libertarian path continued in his college years, in which he read the works of [[Milton Friedman]] and [[Ludwig von Mises]]. While completing his doctorate at [[Virginia Tech]], he studied under [[Gordon Tullock]], who introduced him to a number of Austrian School texts. Eventually, he met [[Murray Rothbard]], whose political and economic theories heavily influenced DiLorenzo's later thought.<ref name=evil/>
DiLorenzo's libertarian path continued in his college years, when he read the works of [[Milton Friedman]] and [[Ludwig von Mises]]. While completing his doctorate at [[Virginia Tech]], he studied under [[Gordon Tullock]], who introduced him to a number of Austrian School texts. Eventually, he met [[Murray Rothbard]], whose political and economic theories heavily influenced DiLorenzo's later thought.<ref name=evil/>


==Social and political views==
==Social and political views==
Line 35: Line 35:
==Books==
==Books==


In 2002 [[Random House]] published DiLorenzo's book ''[[The Real Lincoln|The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War]]'', a critical biography of [[Abraham Lincoln]]. The foreword was written by [[George Mason University]] professor [[Walter Williams]].<ref>Thomas DiLorenzo, ''The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War'', Random House LLC, 2009, ISBN 0307559386, 9780307559388.</ref> In a review published by the Ludwig von Mises Institute, [[David Gordon (philosopher)|David Gordon]] described DiLorenzo's thesis that Lincoln was not as interested in abolishing slavery as he was in putting in place a strong central government to create economic development through internal improvements, high tariffs and a nationalized banking system. He writes that the south was hurt by these policies and its right to secede was the majority opinion of the day. Gordon quotes DiLorenzo as writing that slavery "was already in sharp decline in the border states and the upper South generally, mostly for economic reasons".<ref>[[David Gordon (philosopher)|David Gordon]] review of Thomas J. DiLorenzo, [http://mises.org/misesreview_detail.aspx?control=207 "The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War"], ''The Mises Review'', Vol 8, No 2, February 2002.</ref>
DiLorenzo's book, ''[[The Real Lincoln|The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War]]'' is a critical biography published in 2002.<ref>Thomas DiLorenzo, ''The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War'', Random House LLC, 2009, ISBN 0307559386, 9780307559388.</ref> In a review published by the Ludwig von Mises Institute, [[David Gordon (philosopher)|David Gordon]] described DiLorenzo's thesis: Lincoln was a "white supremacist" with no principled interest in abolishing slavery, and believed in a strong central government that imposed high tariffs and a nationalized banking system. He attributes the South's secession to Lincoln's economic policies rather than a desire to preserve slavery. Gordon quotes DiLorenzo: "slavery was already in sharp decline in the border states and the upper South generally, mostly for economic reasons".<ref>[[David Gordon (philosopher)|David Gordon]] review of Thomas J. DiLorenzo, [http://mises.org/misesreview_detail.aspx?control=207 "The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War"], ''The Mises Review'', Vol 8, No 2, February 2002.</ref>


Reviewing for ''[[The Independent Institute|The Independent Review]]'', Professor Richard M. Gamble noted that DiLorenzo’s book "manages to raise fresh and morally probing questions" but said the book "is seriously compromised by careless errors of fact, misuse of sources, and faulty documentation".<ref>Gamble, Richard M. "The Real Lincoln: Book review" ''The Independent Review'' [http://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?a=79].</ref> In his review for the [[Claremont Institute]] Ken Masugi writes that "DiLorenzo adopts as his own the fundamental mistake of leftist multiculturalist historians: confusing the issue of race with the much more fundamental one, which was slavery." He noted that in Illinois "the anti-slavery forces actually joined with racists to keep their state free of slavery, and also free of blacks."<ref name="Unreal Lincoln">{{cite web|last=Masugi|first=Ken|title=The Unreal Lincoln|url=http://www.claremont.org/publications/pubid.226/pub_detail.asp|publisher=Claremont Institute|accessdate=26 November 2013}}</ref> In 2002, DiLorenzo debated Claremont Institute fellow professor [[Harry V. Jaffa#Debate with Thomas DiLorenzo|Harry V. Jaffa]] on the merits of [[Abraham Lincoln]]'s statesmanship before and during the Civil War.<ref>{{cite web|title=The Real Abraham Lincoln: A Debate|url=http://www.independent.org/events/transcript.asp?eventID=9|work=Events|publisher=The [[Independent Institute]]|author=[[Harry V. Jaffa]]|coauthors=Thomas J. DiLorenzo|date=May 7, 2002}}</ref>
Reviewing for ''[[The Independent Institute|The Independent Review]]'', a think tank associated with DiLorenzo, Professor Richard M. Gamble called the book "travesty of historical method and documentation".<ref>Gamble, Richard M. "The Real Lincoln: Book review" ''The Independent Review'' [http://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?a=79].</ref> He said the book was plagued by a "labyrinth of [historical and grammatical] errors", and concluded that DiLorenzo has "earned the ... ridicule of his critics." In his review for the [[Claremont Institute]] Ken Masugi writes that "DiLorenzo adopts as his own the fundamental mistake of leftist multiculturalist historians: confusing the issue of race with the much more fundamental one, which was slavery." He noted that in Illinois "the anti-slavery forces actually joined with racists to keep their state free of slavery, and also free of blacks."<ref name="Unreal Lincoln">{{cite web|last=Masugi|first=Ken|title=The Unreal Lincoln|url=http://www.claremont.org/publications/pubid.226/pub_detail.asp|publisher=Claremont Institute|accessdate=26 November 2013}}</ref> Masugi called DiLorenzo's work "shabby" and stated that DiLorenzo's treatment of Lincoln was "feckless" and that the book is "truly awful".<ref name="Unreal Lincoln">{{cite web|last=Masugi|first=Ken|title=The Unreal Lincoln|url=http://www.claremont.org/publications/pubid.226/pub_detail.asp|publisher=Claremont Institute|accessdate=26 November 2013}}</ref><ref>Masugi is an academic in the fields of American history and multiculturalism at Johns Hopkins University and the Claremont Institute. See: {{cite web|title=Ken Masugi Faculty bio|url=http://advanced.jhu.edu/about-us/faculty/ken-masugi-phd/|publisher=Johns Hopkins University|accessdate=26 November 2013}}</ref> In 2002, DiLorenzo debated Claremont Institute fellow professor [[Harry V. Jaffa#Debate with Thomas DiLorenzo|Harry V. Jaffa]] on the merits of [[Abraham Lincoln]]'s statesmanship before and during the Civil War.<ref>{{cite web|title=The Real Abraham Lincoln: A Debate|url=http://www.independent.org/events/transcript.asp?eventID=9|work=Events|publisher=The [[Independent Institute]]|author=[[Harry V. Jaffa]]|coauthors=Thomas J. DiLorenzo|date=May 7, 2002}}</ref>


In 2007 Random House published DiLorenzo's ''[[Lincoln Unmasked|Lincoln Unmasked: What You're Not Supposed to Know About Dishonest Abe]]'', a follow-up to ''The Real Lincoln.''<ref>Thomas DiLorenzo, ''Lincoln Unmasked: What You're Not Supposed to Know About Dishonest Abe'', Random House LLC, 2007, ISBN 030749652X</ref> David Gordon again reviewed the book, writing that DiLorenzo's thesis was that Lincoln opposed slavery's extension to new states because black labor would compete with white labor; he hoped that eventually all blacks would be sent back to Africa so that white laborers would have more work. DiLorenzo holds Lincoln only supported emancipation of slaves as a war measure to defeat the south.<ref>David Gordon review of ''Lincoln Unmasked: What You're Not Supposed to Know About Dishonest Abe'', Mises Review, Volume 13, Number 2, February 2007.</ref> Reviews in ''[[The Washington Post]]'' and ''[[Publishers Weekly]]'' both posited that the book seemed to be aimed at unnamed Lincoln scholars in American universities.<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/12/AR2007011200119_2.html</ref><ref>http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6359374.html?q=Lincoln+Unmasked</ref>
DiLorenzo's book, ''[[Lincoln Unmasked|Lincoln Unmasked: What You're Not Supposed to Know About Dishonest Abe]]''(2007), continues his explorations begun in ''The Real Lincoln.''<ref>Thomas DiLorenzo, ''Lincoln Unmasked: What You're Not Supposed to Know About Dishonest Abe'', Random House LLC, 2007, ISBN 030749652X</ref> In a review, David Gordon stated that DiLorenzo's thesis in the 2007 volume was that Lincoln opposed the extension of slavery to new states because black labor would compete with white labor; that Lincoln hoped that all blacks would eventually be deported to Africa in order that white laborers could have more work. According to Gordon, DiLorenzo states that Lincoln only supported emancipation of slaves as a wartime expedient to help defeat the south.<ref>David Gordon review of ''Lincoln Unmasked: What You're Not Supposed to Know About Dishonest Abe'', Mises Review, Volume 13, Number 2, February 2007.</ref> Reviews in ''[[The Washington Post]]'' and ''[[Publishers Weekly]]'' both stated that the book seemed to be aimed at unnamed Lincoln scholars in American universities.<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/12/AR2007011200119_2.html</ref><ref>http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6359374.html?q=Lincoln+Unmasked</ref>


==Controversy over League of the South involvement==
==Controversy over League of the South involvement==

Revision as of 15:29, 27 November 2013

Thomas DiLorenzo
Thomas DiLorenzo at CPAC in February 2010.
Born (1954-08-08) August 8, 1954 (age 70)
NationalityUnited States
Academic career
FieldEconomic history, American history, Abraham Lincoln
School or
tradition		Austrian School
InfluencesHenry Hazlitt, John T. Flynn[1]

Thomas James DiLorenzo (born August 8, 1954) is an American economics professor at Loyola University Maryland Sellinger School of Business.[3] He identifies himself as an adherent of the Austrian School of economics.[4] He is a research fellow at The Independent Institute,[5] a senior fellow of the Ludwig von Mises Institute,[6] and an associate of the Abbeville Institute.[7] He holds a Ph.D. in Economics from Virginia Tech.[3]

Biography

In his autobiographical essay "The Evil of Politics", DiLorenzo examines the formation of his social and political views. He attributes his early commitment to individualism to "playing competitive sports." DiLorenzo also resented the government's treatment of a friend who "had the same kind of athletic ability as Joe Namath, Joe Montana, Tony Dorsett, and Dan Marino", but whose National Football League prospects were cut short by his having to move to Canada to avoid conscription.[8]

DiLorenzo despised the social programs of the Great Society, which he thought were responsible for "human degradation by destroying the work ethic and breaking up families." The police's failure to arrest a man who allegedly mugged his older brother, on the basis of not wanting to "create racial tension" in the community, also helped foster DiLorenzo's "hatred" of government.[8]

DiLorenzo's libertarian path continued in his college years, when he read the works of Milton Friedman and Ludwig von Mises. While completing his doctorate at Virginia Tech, he studied under Gordon Tullock, who introduced him to a number of Austrian School texts. Eventually, he met Murray Rothbard, whose political and economic theories heavily influenced DiLorenzo's later thought.[8]

Social and political views

DiLorenzo writes about what he calls "the myth of Lincoln" in American history and politics. He has said, "[President] Lincoln is on record time after time rejecting the idea of racial equality. But whenever anyone brings this up, the Lincoln partisans go to the extreme to smear the bearer of bad news."[9] DiLorenzo has also spoken out in favor of the secession of the Confederate States of America, defending the right of these states to secede.[10]

DiLorenzo is a frequent speaker at von Mises Institute events, and offers several online courses on political subjects on the Mises Academy platform.[6] He also writes for LewRockwell.com.[11]

Books

DiLorenzo's book, The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War is a critical biography published in 2002.[12] In a review published by the Ludwig von Mises Institute, David Gordon described DiLorenzo's thesis: Lincoln was a "white supremacist" with no principled interest in abolishing slavery, and believed in a strong central government that imposed high tariffs and a nationalized banking system. He attributes the South's secession to Lincoln's economic policies rather than a desire to preserve slavery. Gordon quotes DiLorenzo: "slavery was already in sharp decline in the border states and the upper South generally, mostly for economic reasons".[13]

Reviewing for The Independent Review, a think tank associated with DiLorenzo, Professor Richard M. Gamble called the book "travesty of historical method and documentation".[14] He said the book was plagued by a "labyrinth of [historical and grammatical] errors", and concluded that DiLorenzo has "earned the ... ridicule of his critics." In his review for the Claremont Institute Ken Masugi writes that "DiLorenzo adopts as his own the fundamental mistake of leftist multiculturalist historians: confusing the issue of race with the much more fundamental one, which was slavery." He noted that in Illinois "the anti-slavery forces actually joined with racists to keep their state free of slavery, and also free of blacks."[15] Masugi called DiLorenzo's work "shabby" and stated that DiLorenzo's treatment of Lincoln was "feckless" and that the book is "truly awful".[15][16] In 2002, DiLorenzo debated Claremont Institute fellow professor Harry V. Jaffa on the merits of Abraham Lincoln's statesmanship before and during the Civil War.[17]

DiLorenzo's book, Lincoln Unmasked: What You're Not Supposed to Know About Dishonest Abe(2007), continues his explorations begun in The Real Lincoln.[18] In a review, David Gordon stated that DiLorenzo's thesis in the 2007 volume was that Lincoln opposed the extension of slavery to new states because black labor would compete with white labor; that Lincoln hoped that all blacks would eventually be deported to Africa in order that white laborers could have more work. According to Gordon, DiLorenzo states that Lincoln only supported emancipation of slaves as a wartime expedient to help defeat the south.[19] Reviews in The Washington Post and Publishers Weekly both stated that the book seemed to be aimed at unnamed Lincoln scholars in American universities.[20][21]

Controversy over League of the South involvement

Controversy arose in 2011 when DiLorenzo testified before the House Financial Services Committee at the request of former U.S. Congressman Ron Paul. During the hearing, Congressman Lacy Clay criticized DiLorenzo for his associations with the League of the South, which Clay described as a "neo-Confederate group".[22] In Reuters and Baltimore Sun articles about the hearing, a Southern Poverty Law Center story about DiLorenzo's connection with the League was mentioned.[23][24] Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank wrote about Clay's remarks and he said the League of the South was listing DiLorenzo on its Web site as an 'affiliated scholar' as recently as 2008.[25][26]

DiLorenzo denied any affiliation with the group, telling a Baltimore Sun reporter that "I don't endorse what they say and do any more than I endorse what Congress says and does because I spoke at a hearing on Wednesday."[27] In a LewRockwell.com column, he described his association with the League as limited to "a few lectures on the economics of the Civil War" he gave to The League of the South Institute about thirteen years ago.[28]

Publications

DiLorenzo has authored several books, including:[29]

  • Organized Crime: The Unvarnished Truth About Government (2012). Ludwig von Mises Institute, ISBN 9781610162562. OCLC 815625479
  • Hamilton's Curse: How Jefferson's Arch Enemy Betrayed the American Revolution – and What It Means for Americans Today (2009). Random House LLC, ISBN 9780307382856. OCLC 593712801
  • Lincoln Unmasked: What You're Not Supposed To Know about Dishonest Abe (2006). Random House Inc, ISBN 9780307338419. OCLC 67727894
  • How Capitalism Saved America: The Untold History of Our Country, From the Pilgrims to the Present (2004). Random House LLC, ISBN 9780761525264. OCLC 834478638, 56895316
  • The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War (2003). Random House LLC, ISBN 9780761536413. OCLC 716369332
  • From Pathology to Politics: Public Health in America, with Thomas T. Bennett, (2000). Transaction Publishers, ISBN 0765800233. OCLC 43978653
  • The Food and Drink Police: America's Nannies, Busybodies, and Petty Tyrants with James T. Bennett, (1998). Transaction Publishers, ISBN 9781560003854. OCLC 60213705
  • CancerScam: The Diversion of Federal Cancer Funds for Politics, with James T. Bennett, (1997). Transaction Publishers, ISBN 9781560003342. OCLC 59624748
  • Underground government: the off-budget public sector, with James T. Bennett, (1983), Cato Institute, ISBN 9780932790378. OCLC 9281695

References

  1. ^ Thomas DiLorenzo, The New Deal Debunked (again), Mises Daily, September 27, 2004.
  2. ^ http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/108102.html
  3. ^ a b Sellinger School of Business and Management, Loyola University Maryland Faculty Directory and Sellinger School of Business school staff profile of Thomas DiLorenzo, accessed November 22, 2013.
  4. ^ Interview with Thomas DiLorenzo at Ludwig von Mises Institute website, August 16, 2010.
  5. ^ Thomas DeLorenzo profile at The Independent Institute website, accessed November 22, 2013.
  6. ^ a b Thomas DiLorenzo profile, at the Ludwig von Mises Institute website, accessed November 22, 2013.
  7. ^ Abbeville Institute associates list, accessed November 22, 2013.
  8. ^ a b c DiLorenzo, Thomas (December 25, 2002). "The Evil of Politics." LewRockwell.com
  9. ^ "Confronting the Lincoln Cult," Mises Daily 3 June 2002
  10. ^ "An Abolitionist Defends the South," LewRockwell.com October 20, 2004]
  11. ^ Archive of DiLorenzo commentary for LewRockwell.com.
  12. ^ Thomas DiLorenzo, The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War, Random House LLC, 2009, ISBN 0307559386, 9780307559388.
  13. ^ David Gordon review of Thomas J. DiLorenzo, "The Real Lincoln: A New Look at Abraham Lincoln, His Agenda, and an Unnecessary War", The Mises Review, Vol 8, No 2, February 2002.
  14. ^ Gamble, Richard M. "The Real Lincoln: Book review" The Independent Review [1].
  15. ^ a b Masugi, Ken. "The Unreal Lincoln". Claremont Institute. Retrieved 26 November 2013.
  16. ^ Masugi is an academic in the fields of American history and multiculturalism at Johns Hopkins University and the Claremont Institute. See: "Ken Masugi Faculty bio". Johns Hopkins University. Retrieved 26 November 2013.
  17. ^ Harry V. Jaffa (May 7, 2002). "The Real Abraham Lincoln: A Debate". Events. The Independent Institute. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  18. ^ Thomas DiLorenzo, Lincoln Unmasked: What You're Not Supposed to Know About Dishonest Abe, Random House LLC, 2007, ISBN 030749652X
  19. ^ David Gordon review of Lincoln Unmasked: What You're Not Supposed to Know About Dishonest Abe, Mises Review, Volume 13, Number 2, February 2007.
  20. ^ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/12/AR2007011200119_2.html
  21. ^ http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6359374.html?q=Lincoln+Unmasked
  22. ^ Walker, Childs (February 11, 2011). "Loyola professor faces questions about ties to pro-secession group". The Baltimore Sun.
  23. ^ Sullivan, Andy (February 9, 2011). "Paul calls Fed's Bernanke "cocky" in House hearing." Reuters
  24. ^ Walker, Childs (February 11, 2011). "Loyola professor faces questions about ties to pro-secession group." The Baltimore Sun
  25. ^ Milbank, Dana (February 9, 2011). "Ron Paul's economic Rx: a Southern secessionist". The Washington Post. Retrieved 24 November 2013.
  26. ^ League of the South Institute for the Study of Southern History and Culture
  27. ^ Burris, Joe (February 14, 2011). "Loyola investigating whether professor has ties to hate group." The Baltimore Sun
  28. ^ "My Associations with Liars, Bigots, and Murderers", Lewrockwell.com, February 11, 2011
  29. ^ Loyola University Maryland, listing of representative publications for Dr. Thomas J. Di Lorenzo
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Thomas DiLorenzo.

Template:Persondata

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Thomas_DiLorenzo&oldid=583538779"