Friday, October 9, 2009

historical revisionism ...

My latest post at UT is as follows:

historical revisionism ...

To get back to the topic of the post and off Glenn's side issue that was discussed, let us look at the way history is recorded.

To most people the phrase historical revisionism conjures up lying skinheads who spin crazy stories and call it history. However, history undergoes continual revision and this is proper. For example, once upon a time the history texts of America made a hero out of Christopher Columbus and never mentioned his murdering ways. The information was there for all to see in his own diaries, but the nation wanted a great man to be part of the founding myth of the white man in the Americas. Now, he is not presented in such a heroic light. This is history revised to more properly reflect what really happened.

History always starts with the news accounts of the day; just like the invasion of Iraq can be read about in old newspapers in America. But as our host has pointed out day after day after day to the point of obsession, the newspaper people are often engaged in propaganda rather than truth. Hence, the record will be revised on many occasions over the years to get closer to the truth until an enduring myth gains widespread acceptance. We hope this myth is close to the truth.

However, complete truth in a history book is a very rare animal. You will find more hen's teeth.

No comments: