Cold War Revisionism: A Practitioner's Perspective

Abstract

“Excuse me, sir,” an aide interrupts the president. “History is here to see you.” George W. Bush perks up. “History?” The assistant explains: “He seems ready to render a judgment.” Taken aback, the chief executive asks: “What about my papers? I don't want him snooping around my papers!” No problem. “Already locked up forever, sir. As per your orders.”1 This cartoon dialogue hints at what we have been doing since SHAFR's founding, although we would substitute “historian” for “history,”“interpretation” for “judgment,” and “keep classified” for “locked up,” and we would remove the gender bias. Despite official “orders” to deny scholars access to the public record, historians have been writing imaginative and controversial works, revisiting the past with new approaches and research discoveries, reading familiar documents afresh, and mining more deeply U.S. and foreign archives. Permit me a personal pathway here to focus on just one of the significant changes in the field that has influenced and continues to influence many of us: Cold War revisionism.2