Friday, February 15, 2008

Revisionist "Historians"

I really hate revisionist history.  I recently read a book entitled  “Lies My Teacher Told Me:  Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong,”  by James L. Loewen,  which purports to show that we were never taught the truth in American History.  Talk about revisionist PC!  The author is a far-left liberal who is bent on finding fault on virtually everything European...by opinion rather than facts.  As an example,  he consistently uses adverbs such as  ‘probably;’  throughout the text in a lame attempt to prove his point.   In other words,  offering his opinion as fact.  And many folks are buying into this crap.  Don’t believe me?  Check out the reviews on Amazon
www.amazon.com/review/product/0743296281/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt/002-4049274-7729626?%5Fencoding=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

There are thousands of books about every aspect of American History;  from the earliest colonists through 9-11,  any subject about our great nation is easily accessible at nearly any bookstore or library. Most of these books use numerous original primary sources:  letters,  journals,  diaries,  newspaper accounts.  Then you get one or two so-called  'historians'  who will release a history book that goes against the more popular grain  (Howard Zinn is the other horrendous pseudo-historian that comes to mind),  stating pretty much that all we have learned about history in school was untrue.  Of course,  the idea behind such books are very intriguing,  but, upon reading the text one will begin to notice that these so-called academic history books are based more on,  as stated,  agenda-filled opinion and political correctness rather than hard facts.  The authors will get their information from what they believe to be true without further deeper research.
No thank you – I will read the history books available that cite their primary sources plain and simple rather from a college professor  (which is the biggest red flag alert!).

What is it about these so-called  "historians"  (and their followers)  in this day and age that are bent on changing our history?  Yes,  I will agree that much has been left out of past textbook,  such as the plight of the Indians.  But,  instead of writing an antithesis,  why can’t we gather all of the FACTUAL information  (without tossing in an opinion),  and add it to the books instead of writing a scathing, dare I say, anti-European-American piece of POS propaganda?  Of course,  that will not happen – not as long as this garbage is eaten up by these horrible extremist college professors and those who worship them.
Yeah...you know who you are.
The following is just one teeny example of the B.S.  perpetrated by these extremists:
"The Europeans were able to conquer America not because of their military genius, or their religious motivation, or their ambition, or their greed. They conquered it by waging unpremeditated biological warfare."
Nice research,  idiot.
How about re-writing this to state something along the lines of : Unbeknownst to the European colonists who settled on the American soil, they brought with them diseases that the natural anti-bodies of the Indians could not fight off.  It was unfortunate that millions of the native peoples died because of this.
Naw...that's too nice,  right?
Here's another extremely biased accusation from the same page:
The scarcity of disease in the Americas was also partly attributable to the basic hygiene practiced by the region's inhabitants. Residents of northern Europe and England rarely bathed, believing it unhealthy, and rarely removed all of their clothing at one time, believing it immodest. The Pilgrims smelled bad to the Indians. Squanto "tried, without success, to teach them to bathe," according to Feenie Ziner, his biographer.
And where did biographer Feenie Ziner receive this information from? 
And Loewen call this "Biological” warfare? Because the Indians supposedly bathed more than the Europeans?
Now,  in looking at this with a bit more reason  (if it is true at all),  in my opinion - at least I admit it - it could be that because the Indians did not wear much clothing and the Europeans did,  of course the smell might be a bit stronger.  Also,  I am sure the European's odor was different than the Indians,  hence the idea that they smelled bad.  This is common sense, folks!
Or how about maybe we should just add the cannibalism tradition of a few tribes,  maybe for fun,  right?  For it is known that war prisoners were ruthlessly tortured and...eaten;  in the Algonquin tongue the word Mohawk actually means  "flesh-eater."  There is even a story that the Indians in neighboring Iroquois territory would flee their homes upon sight of just a small band of Mohawks.
But let's not talk about that---we'd rather speak on how bad Europeans smelled.
Again...idiots.
(To read more about Native American tribal tortures,  click HERE)

Another very easy target author Howard Zinn jumps on is the whole Columbus issue.  Instead of admiring the greatness it took to navigate across the Atlantic Ocean in the 15th century - and instead of understanding life in the 15th century - Zinn chose to concentrate on condemning Columbus as if he should have known better.  Columbus should have thought the way we do today!  Hey---a little secret:  he didn't cross the ocean until 1492.  It was a different world then with a different thought process.  And he did nothing that was illegal. We know now that was what accepted then is certainly not welcome or accepted today,  thank God,  but in his era, one was either a slave,  a slave owner,  or one of the very few in between.  He was a man of his time,  like you are today.   Whites,  Blacks,  Asians,  Indians…all were slaves or kept slaves at one time or another.  Accept it.  Get over it.  
You want the truth?  Then print the whole truth.
But that means you have to do research rather than print your feel-good opinions.

So,  the question is,  why would anyone want to spew crap like these authors do?  
To push an agenda?  
I don't know...maybe in some people's minds two wrongs do  make a right,  I’m sure.  
Me? 
I’d rather get the truth – as close to the whole truth as possible.  PC filled agenda'd books like this from idiots like Loewen and Zinn are,  in my opinion,  anti-American drivel,  which fits in perfectly with the mindset of the  "woke"  far left extremists;  it’s  “in”  to knock everything American and anyone who disagrees with them,  everything patriotic,  and everything traditional.
Now,  instead of fixating on changing our history books to make you feel good,  why not,  for example,  go after the modern slave trade that still persists today.
It's happening in some form are every continent.

You know,  I am a proud American.  Do I like and agree with all that is going on in this country today?  Of course not.  But,  I also look at the positive and good.  Yes,  contrary to what you may hear,  there is a lot of good going on in our society today.  Of course,  just stating that I am a proud American will give many the jitters.  They will automatically pigeon-hole me with George Bush and the like.  They will also think that,  duh…I’m not the smartest because,  duh,  I am patriotic. 
Believe what you want – you’re going to anyhow.
And if you do,  you are the idiot.

















.

1 comment:

  1. Ken, as you know, my family came to America in 1630 and happened to do so from Europe. England, specifically. White Anglo-Saxon, blah blah blah. I am pretty sure they weren't evil and had a complicated plan to take over the world. That is for James Bond villains.

    Just a bunch of people trying to make a go of it in a harsh world.

    When folks elsewhere complain about America, I cannot help but think of how everybody wants to come here.

    Don't get me started on the French... "Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys". They seemed to love us in World War I and World War II fine.

    And everybody loves America when they want something or need help.

    ReplyDelete