Left Wing Historical Revisionism

Patchman123 · 02-01-12, 08:25 PM

Anyone on this forum here notice about left-wing revisionism in history dealing with the Pacific War revising it to make America the bad guy and the aggressor and racist against the Japanese and the Japanese as innocent victims and minimizing Japanese atrocities and their racist attitudes towards Chinese, Filipinos, and whites?

I've read somewhere that the left-wing historians in America, California I believe, present the ACCEPTED view of history of the Pacific War where Japan is the aggressor, as racist conservative history and that it is preventing them from writing their blatant garbage about America that they write, from being written, by a history tainted by nationalist conservatives that are reactionary and don't know nationalism from patriotism. Their view of history that holds on to the ACCEPTED view, will be labeled pseudohistory by Wikipedia and labeling the conservative view as wrong, even though the World War II Japanese were a brutal bunch of people, no one's gonna dispute that, right?

The far-left sickens me to death! Is there anybody who shares my opinion about this outrage?

It isn't pseudohistory when they do it, because they write and interpret the history. I regrard the aformentioned article on Wikipedia as a joke because Wikipedia is a revisionist encyclopedia, not peer-reviewed by historans and their presenting of anyone who doesn't do that as pseudohistory not accepted by "academics" (Wikipedia is NOT accepted by academics) as a complete joke. It's a total joke that highlights the tea kettle being called black, that highlights how Wikipedia's pseudohistory article is a joke because Wikipedia does not use historiographic methods, it is not accepted by academia and their history articles are regarded as fake history by professional histories because they aren't well-written or properly cited. That's why the pseudo stuff on their article is a total joke, but someone has to push their stupid agenda through. Nationalist history is now pseudo-history, Really? The history of victorious nationalists that wrote histories of entire nations and helped shape their consciousness and histories is pseudo-history? What a joke!

I love the military historians better than the civilian ones because the military historians are often more objective in their presentations and interpretations that these militant liberal civilian historians. The military historians better review the evidence. If only Samuel Eliot Morrison were alive today, he'd flail these people alive and expose them as the frauds they are .

Wikipedia is a revisionist's dream because it can be edited with all kinds of sensational claims, despite the article never properly defining "sensational claims" and all that and to me it silences the writing of history, where historians make sensational claims aming fellow historians to properly discuss the evidence and write the history, and labeling claims as pseudo-history to be silences the writing of history, and think it disgusts me.

02-01-12, 08:25 PM	#1
Patchman123 Electrician's Mate Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Cochranton, Pennsylvania Posts: 139 Downloads: 226 Uploads: 2	Left Wing Historical Revisionism Anyone on this forum here notice about left-wing revisionism in history dealing with the Pacific War revising it to make America the bad guy and the aggressor and racist against the Japanese and the Japanese as innocent victims and minimizing Japanese atrocities and their racist attitudes towards Chinese, Filipinos, and whites? I've read somewhere that the left-wing historians in America, California I believe, present the ACCEPTED view of history of the Pacific War where Japan is the aggressor, as racist conservative history and that it is preventing them from writing their blatant garbage about America that they write, from being written, by a history tainted by nationalist conservatives that are reactionary and don't know nationalism from patriotism. Their view of history that holds on to the ACCEPTED view, will be labeled pseudohistory by Wikipedia and labeling the conservative view as wrong, even though the World War II Japanese were a brutal bunch of people, no one's gonna dispute that, right? The far-left sickens me to death! Is there anybody who shares my opinion about this outrage? It isn't pseudohistory when they do it, because they write and interpret the history. I regrard the aformentioned article on Wikipedia as a joke because Wikipedia is a revisionist encyclopedia, not peer-reviewed by historans and their presenting of anyone who doesn't do that as pseudohistory not accepted by "academics" (Wikipedia is NOT accepted by academics) as a complete joke. It's a total joke that highlights the tea kettle being called black, that highlights how Wikipedia's pseudohistory article is a joke because Wikipedia does not use historiographic methods, it is not accepted by academia and their history articles are regarded as fake history by professional histories because they aren't well-written or properly cited. That's why the pseudo stuff on their article is a total joke, but someone has to push their stupid agenda through. Nationalist history is now pseudo-history, Really? The history of victorious nationalists that wrote histories of entire nations and helped shape their consciousness and histories is pseudo-history? What a joke! I love the military historians better than the civilian ones because the military historians are often more objective in their presentations and interpretations that these militant liberal civilian historians. The military historians better review the evidence. If only Samuel Eliot Morrison were alive today, he'd flail these people alive and expose them as the frauds they are . Wikipedia is a revisionist's dream because it can be edited with all kinds of sensational claims, despite the article never properly defining "sensational claims" and all that and to me it silences the writing of history, where historians make sensational claims aming fellow historians to properly discuss the evidence and write the history, and labeling claims as pseudo-history to be silences the writing of history, and think it disgusts me.