Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Editor’s Note: Ruth Ben-Ghiat is a professor of history at New York University.She is author of the book “Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present,” and she publishes Lucid, a Substack newsletter ...
Editor’s Note: Ruth Ben-Ghiat is a professor of history at New York University.She is the author of the book “Strongmen: Mussolini to the Present,” and she publishes Lucid, a Substack ...
— Ruth Ben-Ghiat (@ruthbenghiat) October 23, 2024 There is nothing embarrassing in saying "this new information changes my opinion." Nothing shameful in saying "I was wrong, but I've learned more."
Ben-Ghiat further stated that she "started writing about Trump in 2015 because everything about him seemed familiar to me as someone who had studied fascism for decades: the rallies, the attacks on the press, the lying, the loyalty oaths, the declarations of violent intent, the need to dominate and humiliate". [169]
Ruth Ben-Ghiat (born April 17, 1960) is an American historian. She is a scholar on fascism and authoritarian leaders. [ 1 ] Ben-Ghiat is professor of history and Italian studies at New York University .
Jurek v. Texas, 428 U.S. 262 (1976) Texas's new death penalty statute is constitutional because it uses a three-part test to determine if a death sentence should be imposed. Woodson v. North Carolina, 428 U.S. 280 (1976) North Carolina's new death penalty statute is unconstitutional because it calls for a mandatory death sentence to be imposed ...
Ruth Ben-Ghiat explained how authoritarian takeovers usually go down. Skip to main content. Sign in. Mail. 24/7 Help. For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us ...
Justice John Paul Stevens concurred in the opinion of the Court, writing separately to explain his concerns with the death penalty in general. [6] [7] He wrote that the case questioned the "justification for the death penalty itself". He characterized the motivation behind the death penalty as an antithesis to modern values: