You put a lot of effort into this. Thank you. I think it's a great slam: it's got the right tone, covers things in a fairly linear format, leads to a nice concl

You put a lot of effort into this. Thank you. I think it's a great slam: it's got the right tone, covers things in a fairly linear format, leads to a nice conclusion. As you can imagine, I think it's totally whack, but you tried. And it holds together. I'm not going to defend a ten-year-old essay here. I love the way it holds up and I'm happy with my editorial choices. If you'd like to talk over email, if this subject truly bothers you this much, hit me up. I like seeing this much passion in a rebuttal. Any other readers interested in talking about whether this piece is well-grounded in history or not, please give me a chance to provide sources. A comment thread on your own article is just much-too-confrontational of a place to get into that, as it would confuse the historical part of the essay with its thesis and conclusion. It's quite possible to agree with the historical stuff and disagree with the thesis -- and vice-versa. Thanks for taking the time. (Pearl-clutching, eh? Nicely done!)