Friday, 25 December 2009 - 10:07 AM EST

Michael:

I think you and I live in his brain. He's obsessed. What's more ironic is that he seems to be basing his revelation on research that was done exclusively online, something which he often criticizes. It is so obvious to anyone that has read his blog over the last few years that he chose the topic and timing for strictly personal reasons involving you - his vendetta. How petty.

Of course, not all his readers agree with his "analysis" - Professor Noe in particular:

". . . the Schaffner and Wycoff posts dialectically have established to my satisfaction anyway that the core of the story probably is true. Somebody went over the wall once ["the Georgian"], it probably was indeed Kirkland. . ." ~ Ken Noe

Moreover, his misinformed, agenda-driven comments in a recent post about Jackson's Sunday school class just further illustrate what he's really all about. His comments and interpretation are, as always, extremely shallow. 

Wishing you the best success for the film . . . 

Richard Williams

Tuesday, 29 December 2009 - 11:06 AM EST

Levin appears to have a personal issue with you as his posts are too often reactionary to yours (such as the Mort K. posts following one of your pieces). At least you know he reads your stuff.

Tuesday, 29 December 2009 - 11:08 AM EST

The truth is that I used to care very much what he said, but one day I realized that he is simply a dissatisfied person who likes to project himself as someone of bigger influence. Outside of his classroom and blog, he has very little influence. Therefore, I don’t worry about him anymore. He’s harmless.

Thursday, 31 December 2009 - 8:04 PM EST

"Outside of his classroom and blog, he has very little influence."

Precisely Michael. Dana Shoaf of Civil War Times said in an interview a while back that, “The problem with academic historians is they are not reaching a wide popular audience.” I've personally noticed that academics, particularly those like Levin, talk mostly to themselves. Shoaf further noted, "people often are reluctant to read social history because they think it is boring." Levin is a "social historian" and a self-proclaimed "activist historian." That limits his influence and impact.

Moreover, Levin's (and many of his followers) constant impugning and mocking of Confederate heritage and history turns a lot of people in the "popular audience" category off, which even further narrows his influence.

Monday, 4 January 2010 - 10:28 PM EST

Well Richard it appears that our post has resulted in Kevin calling us out again. I cannot believe that he still thinks he is fooling people. Of course those posts were personally aimed at me. This happens time and time again and they are not coincidences (especially the Kunstler posts).

Thursday, 7 January 2010 - 9:14 PM EST

I told you, we live in his brain.

RGW