This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Why Niall Ferguson Sucks

Scroll to see replies

Yes, yes, yes they could. And an accountancy degree is not a mark of excellence (I never mentioned it), but it is a degree with an end in sight - the public utility of a ticket to be an accountant.

At McDonalds, yes. Or as a civil servant, or teacher, because no one in the private sector find them much chop.

Well, that solidly motivated person with a big passion for learning can learn anything: history, physics, engineering (theoretical basis. For practice, of course, you would need necessary facilities), law and anything that requires extensive knowledge. Universities just reinforce your passion if you have such.

Reply 41

TheArsenal

Original post by Ory

But a law student could out trump a history professor. Different caliber of intellect. Science, engineering, law, medicine - most of these students could do history equally well in their spare time.

But it's down to choice? If Stephen Hawking had chosen a history degree would he be any less intelligent aged 18 as he was choosing whichever degree he did? no.

Reply 42

Ory

No?

So then... Niall Ferguson doesn't suck?

Reply 43

Clumsy_Chemist

Original post by ajp100688

No, no they couldn't. You're speaking out of your ass and showing the ignorance of people who think that because they do something like accountancy they'll end up in a good job.

I agree

Original post by Ory

But a law student could out trump a history professor. Different caliber of intellect. Science, engineering, law, medicine - most of these students could do history equally well in their spare time.

What a load of BS. They only person who I might listen to when lecturing about a strict hierarchy of which areas of academia make the best people, it would be a polymath who actually has experience. Have you studied history, maths, law, economics, languages, engineering, philosphy and medicine? Thought not.

Original post by Ory

Yes, yes, yes they could. And an accountancy degree is not a mark of excellence (I never mentioned it), but it is a degree with an end in sight - the public utility of a ticket to be an accountant.

Accountants are multiple times more useful than "economists", which is a pseudo science at best.

Not all jobs have a degree which fits them perfectly. General skills do exist. How can you write off economics as an entire field of study??

Reply 44

Samd603

Because he's right wing I would imagine.... A lot of Labourites get jealous when right wingers become popular.

Reply 45

deFossard

Firstly, what's wrong with bias? Every historian has their own bias, his just happens to be (shock horror) a right wing bias. Unfortunately, British academia is pretty left wing, so he's rather despised, even more so because of his success.

He doesn't suck. He has a brilliant style of writing, makes sharp and succinct arguments, and puts them across with a lot of energy and flair. He admires Western Civilisation, he's a capitalist, and oh my God he even sees good in the British Empire. So what? Doesn't stop him from being a good historian.

I broadly agree with him anyway. Shame he's gone to America.

Reply 46

Ardilla

He's biased and so what? anyone in here isn't?

I really like his work- his books are much better than his TV shows though. I find it important that we finally have an historian who actually deals with history from a Historical Correct perception and not a Political Correct perception. Because the norm today is imperialism is bad, does not mean it brought something good with it. It is a political view of things- fact is that imperialism is the base core of how the world look today- good and bad. It lay the foundations for development not only in Europe, but in fact the whole world. And somehow, it is common to believe that all Europeans before our parents were some nazi- like imperialists, racist bastards wanting to exploit everything and everyone... come the **** on...

History has ever since Edward Said's Orientalism, been biased towards a romantic view of the non- european civilizations. I find it ironic that when looking at a map of say the mongolian empire people think "woooow that impressive", then looking at a map of the british empire and feel guilt... because we all know the mongolians were peaceful and sang "kumbaya" (!)

Reply 47

Locke54

Original post by deFossard

He's associated with the New College of the Humanities so he may be doing some vague kind of lecturing in the UK in the coming years but only for rich rahs who can't get into Oxbridge.

Reply 48

Ory

He lost me when he made reference to Zakaria.

Also, he seems to believe that the USA is in decline. Tell that to the 1,000,000,000 China-men who would move there in a flash - if they could.

He is the Ronald McDonald of Historians. Discuss.

Reply 49

Clumsy_Chemist

Original post by Ory

Also, he seems to believe that the USA is in decline. Tell that to the 1,000,000,000 China-men who would move there in a flash - if they could.

Yes, the USA has a higher standard of living than China so of course the Chinese would like to move there, but it is declining. America's share of the global economy is going down, China's is going up. The word "decline" is about the change, not the current position of things.

Reply 50

Ory

The standard of living in Somalia is also going up. It doesn't change the fact that 99% of its people would move to the USA if they could. The living standards in England have also gone up in the last 70 years - even though on Ferguson's theory it has declined and been near bankrupt for most of this time and continues down that path.

Ferguson fails to see the reality between "decline of empire" and living standards. The standards of living in Japan are high - would you move to Tokyo now considering what happened in March? The US is not in decline in reality even if the PRC grows at the same recent rate for the next 100 years, any normal individuals' standard of living may never reach the standard of the US, simply based on environment, resources such as water, geography, culture, social structures, soft power, and and historical fortune (such as existed with US, Aus, Can after WWII, their soil being relatively untouched by conflict and still very abundant in space and resources). If you think otherwise, tell us why and why Ferguson's famous speeches about this are somehow right.

The fact that he relies on or refers to Fareed makes him look like Ronald McDonald.

Discuss and try not to use that PR slogan-like analysis like that you just attempted to use.

Reply 51

Ory

Original post by Clumsy_Chemist

How can you write off economics as an entire field of study??

Because in its present form it's largely pseudo-science.

Reply 52

Luccy.

Really I don't think you can get where he is "sucking" he has to have some quality and coherence in his work to get it accredited like it is. I have only done some work on his work in regards to the Treaty of Versailles and it's effects such as self-determination. Although I didn't agree with everything said he makes valid points in an accessible way. By all means not my favorite historian but he isn't my least.

Reply 53

Clumsy_Chemist

Original post by Ory

Perhaps the UK and USA are declining in other ways, despite being awesome at living standards? Maybe military power, maybe diplomatic influence, maybe some other economics indicators, maybe social breakdown. You can't just say "the USA has very high living standards, therefore it can't possibly be declining in any way".

Reply 54

fuzzybear

Original post by Ory

Because in its present form it's largely pseudo-science.

not trying to be controversial are you? :wink:

Reply 55

Ory

Original post by Clumsy_Chemist

You can't just say "the USA has very high living standards, therefore it can't possibly be declining in any way".

I didn't say that at all - but perhaps now you will realize that making such generalizations that Country X is Declining is a bit like saying that Country A B C are improving - whether A B C etc are Somalia, India or another country doesn't matter, the statement that Country X is in decline as a relative standard is largely irrelevant when people still find it 100x or 1,000,000x better to live - irrelevant except for people with no better social utility than to speak the obvious and then attempt to make money from it. At the end of the day - it is not reality - but rather generalization of opinion of the most unhelpful kind. Simply put - these large scale "trends" mean nothing at al - local, mirco trends ie actual events in individuals lives mean everything.

What does this mean? That Niall Ferguson is like the Ronald McDonald of pseudo science of economics - history - think of it as a hardcore Herman Wouk novel for those who dont like fiction. It has about as much impact, unless you want to admit he is a mouthpiece - I rather think he is more just harmless - except to his students who presumably pay tens of thousands of dollars for something they could read on wikipedia, the archives and public libraries - and then deduce equally correct or incorrect but obvious "conclusions"for themselves.

But you probably think Fareed and Niall are Ye Sagacious Truth Tellers of The Modern Era.

Reply 56

Ory

Original post by fuzzybear

not trying to be controversial are you? :wink:

Some would say it's a scam of the likes of astrology - certainly they would say that institutions taking money from students to "teach"it may be - but I would rather say that it appears to be a pseudo-science.

Reply 57

Rainy

An arrogant Tory neo-imperialist showman, whose involvement in the National Curriculum review reflects all that's wrong with the incumbent Government. I don't agree with him on a personal nor academic level.

Also, "bias" is little but an empty (and hypocritical) term of abuse in our discipline.

Reply 58

Chillaxer

I don't like his obsession with how protestantism made us great and religion is inextricably linked to our greatness, but this is a farily predictable view from a Scotsman, in their eyes no-one compares to their way of doing things. I agree with the above poster also, I hate pro-establishment/rightist historians for some reason.

(edited 12 years ago)

Reply 59

Chillaxer

Original post by Clumsy_Chemist

Yes, but he's sensible to emphasise quality of life and domestic affairs. That is the greatness of a country, we 'fight' for things abroad, stupidly at the moment in my view, but our country and way of doig things domestically, our example, is of primary importance, and if you don't think this, think we need constant wars to validate our existence, then you are approaching total nihlism. This insecure obsession with global importance is rather deluded and possibly incompatible with how things will be in the modern world.