The study of history

[MrFun]

Settled wilderness? bullocks

When English settlers first arrived in North America, they took over abandoned villages, not virgin wilderness.

Those abandoned villages resulted from the new diseases brought by previous contacts, with European traders and fishermen.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Lord Merciless


It still doesn't change the fact that Aztecs were a brutal civilization and Spaniards had more help from Natives than they needed.

Revisionist views that Native Americans were peaceful, nice, and primitive were completely bullsh!t. Unfortunately, that view is held true by too many.

Oh, the Aztecs and Cortes deserved each other, indeed.

But is there a view that the Aztecs were peaceful and nice? I've never heard anyone say this. It's pretty well-known what a bloody culture it was.

[Lord Merciless]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


Oh, the Aztecs and Cortes deserved each other, indeed.

But is there a view that the Aztecs were peaceful and nice? I've never heard anyone say this. It's pretty well-known what a bloody culture it was.

It was well known to educated people like you.

But what about all those non-history-buff people who are constantly subject to the false notions that Native Americans were in general a peaceful, nice, and primitive bunch?

I bet most people don't have any ideas about Aztecs.

[Az]

But is there a view that the Aztecs were peaceful and nice?

you've never played colonization, I presume.

My opinion. Europeans were brutal colonizers. If the native americans would come to europe, they would do just the same. So would the chinese, Indians, arabs, Africans, and whatnot. That was how "bussiness" was done then.

[RGBVideo]

they would do just the same

Revisionist views that Native Americans were peaceful, nice, and primitive were completely bullsh!t. Unfortunately, that view is held true by too many.

I've got the same impression. You, people from the USA, can congrulate yourselves
because of your wonderful education system.

[Chris 62]

Originally posted by MrFun
Settled wilderness? bullocks

When English settlers first arrived in North America, they took over abandoned villages, not virgin wilderness.

Those abandoned villages resulted from the new diseases brought by previous contacts, with European traders and fishermen.

See?

This is where problems start.

Did I say EVERY site?

I said MANY areas, I'm well aware that the Plymouth colony was founded on the location of a smallpox outbreak.

So, save your "Bullocks".

[Lord Merciless]

Originally posted by Tuomerehu
I've got the same impression. You, people from the USA, can congrulate yourselves
because of your wonderful education system.

The ultra-leftist, self-loathing intellectuals tore apart the US education systems between the late 60s and late 80s.

For example, a math problem in 1960 would be formed in this way in 1980:

1960: A forest worker sells the trees he fell for $100. His cost was 80% of his selling price. What is his profit?

1980: A forest worker sells the trees he fell for $100. His cost was $80, and his profit $20. Your job here is to UNDERLINE the number "20".

Now we got to fix all the mess left behind by those people.

[Az]

Tuomerehu: anything substancial to say?

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by MrFun
What has been revised, is doing away with the distorted history through the lenses of white supremacy and Western imperialism.

Did you know that on Earth, there are non-Western cultures and peoples? That there is more than one perspective in history, other than Western civilization?

You make it sound like all european history was originally written by white supremacists.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Originally posted by MrFun


Revisionist history -- before Anglophiles twisted it into a negative connotation -- simply means that all parts of world history has more than one perspective.

And revisionist history involves undoing myths, one of which you mentioned, Boris. So I don't see why Anglophiles continue to huff and puff about revisionist history until they get red in the face.

I am not a spokespman for "Anglophiles".

I personally "huff and puff" because I've had too many arguments with people who claim the holocaust never happened. Are they just expressing their different perspective?

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Re: The study of history

Originally posted by MrFun

Using the words "revisionist history" to knock serious scholarly work, is an insult to all respectable historians out there, who know that their field of study is not static.

It certainly is.

It's less of an insult when used against cranks and liars looking to prop up flimsy and revolting personal and political beliefs, however. In fact, it's rather polite.

[Ned]

Mr. Fun, I am all for writing history based on factual accounts and for debunking myths that tend to whitewash "difficult" facts.

But, even you must admit, that a lot of current revisionism is more that this. It is about rewriting history to remove "difficult" facts from the history of communism and to add "difficult" facts to the history of capitalism.

The revisionist also seem to be mindreaders. Their histories put a lot of motivation into the rendition of historical facts. For example, "the US fought WWII in order to expand its empire." I have seen this sentiment set forth here on this forum numerous times. Where did this editorial come from but from someone trying to undermine US history.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by MrFun
Settled wilderness? bullocks

When English settlers first arrived in North America, they took over abandoned villages, not virgin wilderness.

Those abandoned villages resulted from the new diseases brought by previous contacts, with European traders and fishermen.

MrFun: There are a lot of good academic papers written on this topic. By the early 17th century some where between 75%-90% of the pre-Columbian population of the Americas was dead. Nearly all of these people died without ever seeing or hearing about a whiteman. Most of them died of old world desiese which were spread by indian to indian contact well in advance of European exploration or settlement.

[MrFun]

Exactly my point, Oerdin -- reread my post.

And others in this thread are right -- people who view Amerindians as being ecologically utopian people are just as ignorant as people who deny that the United States has been, and continues to be, an imperialist nation.

People who deny the Holocaust happened are either Nazis who know nothing of history anyway, or are incredibly naive and who have no respect for scholarly history.

I support legitimate revised history -- not lunatic ideas created by ignorant people.

[Sarxis]

Originally posted by MrFun
What has been revised, is doing away with the distorted history through the lenses of white supremacy and Western imperialism.

Did you know that on Earth, there are non-Western cultures and peoples? That there is more than one perspective in history, other than Western civilization?

That's called the Tolkien's Middle Earth effect; where the Easterling and Southling cultures are grouped into the term Swarthy Men.