This technique is used by bad historians to assert facts and
opinions that have been disproved or off-the-wall. Primary and reliable secondary sources, (even
when listed in the bibliography) are ignored. Instead a fact/assertion is based
on an unreliable or obscure secondary source.
Example:
Thomas Ricks “The
Generals” states “MacArthur tried to keep Marshall down in the 1930s”. What is Thomas Ricks’ source? An interview
with Omar Bradley in the late 1950s! Why
would Omar Bradley know anything about it? Well…Meanwhile his Bibliography
lists Clayton James’ definitive ‘MacArthur’ biography, Pogue’s George Marshall
interview transcripts, and his definitive George Marshall Biography. All these sources (based on interviews and
source documents) state that MacArthur did NOT try to “keep Marshall down. Both books point out:
·
MacArthur was not vindictive and didn’t try to
keep anyone “down” while Chief-of-Staff or as SWPA Theater Commander
·
MacArthur and Marshall were not ‘rivals’ before
1930 – they barely knew each other
·
MacArthur didn’t help Marshall “jump the line” –
but then he didn’t help anyone “jump the line”
·
The Seniority System was based on Congressional
and Presidential action – MacArthur disliked it and presented a new promotion
system to Congress in December 1934
·
FDR and the Secretary of War were the key
players in deciding who to promote to General in the 1930s
·
MacArthur stated in writing that “Marshall was
the best of the Infantry Colonels”
·
In 1935, MacArthur recommended Marshall be
promoted to General.
·
MacArthur wanted to promote Marshall to “Chief
of Infantry” a two-star general position.
·
Marshall’s transfer to Chicago in 1933 was not a
“career killer” but an important and sensitive post. Marshall didn’t want to go
because he hated living in big cities and liked the South.
Yet Ricks ignores this and uses an unreliable secondary
source to bash MacArthur. It’s the secondary
source two-step.
No comments:
Post a Comment