Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Robert Owen Paxton (born June 15, 1932) is an American political scientist and historian specializing in Vichy France, fascism, and Europe during the World War II era. He is Mellon Professor Emeritus of Social Science in the Department of History at Columbia University .
The Anatomy of Fascism is a 2004 book by Robert O. Paxton, published by Alfred A. Knopf.. Paxton sought to establish a more concise definition of fascism in an era where people used the term loosely. [1]
American historian Robert O. Paxton argues that with the absence of a mass revolutionary party and a rupture from the incumbent regime, Imperial Japan was merely "an expansionist military dictatorship with a high degree of state-sponsored mobilization [rather] than as a fascist regime"; [11] British historian Roger Griffin, called Putin's ...
That argument has been rejected by several historians who specialised in the subject, such as the widely recognised American historian Robert Paxton and the historian of the French police Maurice Rajsfus. Both were called on as experts during the Papon trial in the 1990s. Paxton declared before the court on 31 October 1997, "Vichy took ...
Ragnhild Hatton (1913–1995) – historian of 17th- and 18th-century international relations; Klaus Hildebrand (born 1941) Andreas Hillgruber (1925–1989) Paul Kennedy (born 1945) – British historian, author of influential The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers; William L. Langer (1896–1977) Arno J. Mayer (1926–2023) Lewis Bernstein ...
Paxton, who has vowed to investigate "every credible report we receive" pertaining to criminal activity tied to elections, argued that citizens have the ability to register to vote when renewing ...
Bill Paxton's son James Paxton talks about his cameo in "Twisters," which is the sequel to "Twister," the 1996 film starring his dad.
In January 2010, the History News Network published essays by David Neiwert, Robert Paxton, Roger Griffin, Matthew Feldman, Chip Berlet and Michael Ledeen criticizing Liberal Fascism. These reviews denounced the book as being "poor scholarship", [6] "propaganda", [7] and not scholarly. [8]