Showing posts with label scholaship. Show all posts
Showing posts with label scholaship. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 10, 2019

Zarnow, "Battling Bella: The Protest Politics of Bella Abzug"

New from Harvard University Press: Battling Bella: The Protest Politics of Bella Abzug, by Leandra Ruth Zarnow (University of Houston). A description from the Press:
Bella Abzug’s promotion of women’s and gay rights, universal childcare, green energy, and more provoked not only fierce opposition from Republicans but a split within her own party. The story of this notorious, galvanizing force in the Democrats’ “New Politics” insurgency is a biography for our times.

Before Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Elizabeth Warren, or Hillary Clinton, there was New York’s Bella Abzug. With a fiery rhetorical style forged in the 1960s antiwar movement, Abzug vigorously promoted gender parity, economic justice, and the need to “bring Congress back to the people.”

The 1970 congressional election season saw Abzug, in her trademark broad-brimmed hats, campaigning on the slogan “This Woman’s Place Is in the House—the House of Representatives.” Having won her seat, she advanced the feminist agenda in ways big and small, from gaining full access for congresswomen to the House swimming pool to cofounding the National Women’s Political Caucus to putting the title “Ms.” into the political lexicon. Beyond women’s rights, “Sister Bella” promoted gay rights, privacy rights, and human rights, and pushed legislation relating to urban, environmental, and foreign affairs.

Her stint in Congress lasted just six years—it ended when she decided to seek the Democrats’ 1976 New York senate nomination, a race she lost to Daniel Patrick Moynihan by less than 1 percent. Their primary contest, while gendered, was also an ideological struggle for the heart of the Democratic Party. Abzug’s protest politics had helped for a time to shift the center of politics to the left, but her progressive positions also fueled a backlash from conservatives who thought change was going too far.

This deeply researched political biography highlights how, as 1960s radicalism moved protest into electoral politics, Abzug drew fire from establishment politicians across the political spectrum—but also inspired a generation of women.
Advance praise:
“This riveting biography could not be more timely. Bella Abzug’s career provides a crucial link in the histories of radicalism, feminism, and electoral politics from the 1930s to the 1990s. Through deep research, thorough historical grounding, and a lively writing style, Zarnow has produced a compelling account of a powerful female politician who fought for peace, racial justice, and gender equality.”—Estelle B. Freedman
“Bella Abzug speaks to our times from this well-wrought biography by historian Leandra Zarnow. Abzug knew progressive change is a not a sprint but a lifetime struggle in which racial and gender equity, economic justice, and peace belong together. From the hard times of the red scare to the glory days of left liberalism in the 1960s and ’70s and right through the reaction that followed, she marshaled grassroots energy to embolden her liberal colleagues with her signature flair, modeling the kind of courage we so need now.”—Nancy MacLean
More information is available here.

-- Karen Tan

Friday, January 15, 2016

Barzun on Causation, Legal History and Legal Doctrine

Charles L. Barzun, University of Virginia School of Law, has posted Causation, Legal History, and Legal Doctrine, which is to appear in the Buffalo Law Review 64 (2016):
This short essay is my contribution to a conference on “opportunities for law’s intellectual history,” which took place at SUNY Buffalo Law School in the fall of 2014. The essay offers a friendly criticism of what I perceive to be a trend in legal history. In particular, it criticizes legal historians’ seemingly increasing reluctance to offer causal explanations of past events or current practices. While recognizing the empirical and conceptual difficulties that beset any effort to identify “causes” of historical events, I argue that legal history cannot effectively serve the critical function many historians hope for it without making controversial judgments about historical causation in particular cases. The bulk of the essay is devoted to identifying and analyzing four potentially critical types of history: Impeaching Accounts, Genealogies, Stories, and Restorative Projects. My aim in discussing each type is to show that critical histories that purport to remain agnostic as to the driving causal factors at work in the historical phenomena under examination are either insufficiently critical, insufficiently historical, or both.

Thursday, July 16, 2015

Legal History Review 83:1-2

The latest issues of the Legal History Review, also known as the Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis and the Revue d'Histoire du Droit and not to be confused with the Law and History Review, are available online here.

Update: Link fixed. H/t: Jonathan Rose