I realize that this relates more to academic history than public history necessarily, but I found this to be a rather interesting read about how a fair amount of academic research into history (which then filters through public history) has shifted towards studying capitalism since the recession began in 2008.
From the New York Times about a month ago:
After decades of “history from below,” focusing on women, minorities and other marginalized people seizing their destiny, a new generation of scholars is increasingly turning to what, strangely, risked becoming the most marginalized group of all: the bosses, bankers and brokers who run the economy.
Even before the financial crisis, courses in “the history of capitalism” — as the new discipline bills itself — began proliferating on campuses, along with dissertations on once deeply unsexy topics like insurance, banking and regulation. The events of 2008 and their long aftermath have given urgency to the scholarly realization that it really is the economy, stupid.
I’m curious as to hear your reactions to this burgeoning attention towards capitalist history. Do you see it as a more timely, relevant area of history? Are you concerned that this gives too much credence to capitalists and not enough attention to potential flaws of capitalism?
The full article can be found here.
findinghistory 