Charles-Good question. By and large, the articles from the 50's were critical of the French, but there was wide disagreement about how to best remedy the situation. Solutions offered included a huge role for NATO and the U.N. after the partition, as well as "convincing" France to get rid of Bao Dai and to institute a democratic structure. Obviously, the French went with the former with horrid results. With greater U.S. involvement, the articles once again, focus more on strategies and solutions, as opposed to debating about whether or not we should have been involved in the first place. It appears that to them, being there was an item of necessity. In that sense, yes, it is political. Presidents do not fare well in most of their articles, so they do take a rather skeptical approach to politics. The populist and labor movements do not get a free pass, and business owners take their lumps as well in articles about the minimum wage, safety regulations, and shootings at mining camps.
There is also some real good "social" items that aren't political in nature. I read a ton of articles about John Dewey's pragmatism and he authored a few articles as well on education and society. Right now, they have a great
write up on Louis Brandeis. If you don't like
The Nation,
The American Spectator, or
Mother Jones, this would be a good publication for you.
Oh, do check out their books section. They have some good reviews and general book interest articles as well.
http://www.tnr.com/articles/books-and-arts
