Because the book wasn't mentioned in the Times article, and because of my own addled brain, I didn't make the connection between Loewen and the Reader. In some of my angst over the "liberal sociologist" ID, I may have communicated some sort of disrespect for Loewen. I want to correct that by making two quick points: 1.) I don't believe you need a PhD in history to intelligently contribute to this discussion. 2.) I think Loewen and Sebesta are waging this campaign against the Lost Cause precisely as it needs to be--with the Confederacy's own documents, as opposed to with sweeping rhetoric, and broad interpretation.
Apologies for communicating anything else.
This article available online at: