You know, this is a very irritating phenomena. The phrase that "history is written by the victors" is unfortunately true.
It's not so much that historical details are hidden, although the tyrants throughout the ages have sure tried to hide or destroy and unfavorable information. But they had survived, hidden away for centuries by historians. They had to hide from the church, the kings, the aristocracy, you name it. Everyone who didn't want that information to come out, and would kill any historian that would expose the "noble lie".
However even if the details were known, they've spend a lot of time and resources to try to spin it towards their needs and to make it look as if it were a necessary sacrifice at that time. There is nothing more Orwellian than to call every tyrannical act a "necessary sacrifice" for the "nation" or the "country". Hitler called the 1933 fire decree a "necessary sacrifice", that rounded up people and paved the way for Concentration Camps. And now we know the horrors of WW2, on both sides, but just think about it how many "necessary sacrifices" were there throughout history, that all ended up in genocide.
Julius Caesar
Julius Caesar the great hero and father of western civilization. The founder of the Roman Empire, which turned into the Holy Roman Empire, which turned into the German Empire, which turned into the Nazi Empire, which turned into the European Union.
This great leader that stood up against his enemies, and had to do what he did as a "necessary sacrifice" to save Rome. He has statues, monuments and huge buildings dedicated for him in every major or medium sized city in Europe. And is thaught in government schools, that he was indeed a brilliant person and had a great legacy for Europe.
Nope, he was a mass murdering power-hungry psychopath, that slaughtered at least 1,000,000 men, women, children, and elderly trying to pass through his territory while being governor of Gaul.
Nothing that he did made any sense, Rome was a pretty decent republic with limited human rights and low taxes and free markets, and the military was restrained to defensive doctrine. As soon as he got into power, he slaughtered all his enemies, turned Rome into a fascist empire, enslaving everyone, and unleashed endless conquest and slaughter to Europe. In fact he was the first one to create a permanent standing police force, turning Rome into a totalitarian police state. Yet somehow he is this great leader that we should admire. The tyrants sure love him, he was a great inspiration for tyranny.
Napoleon
For Napoleon it's the same thing. He just lived 200 years ago, that's not that much in historical terms, and we already had a printing press, so censoring truth was harder by this time. However he is also revered as this great leader that tried to unite Europe and bring peace. And everything he did was just a "necessary sacrifice".
But in reality he slaughtered half of Europe, was a vicious tyrant, burned down villages, destroying free sovereign countries, and permanently turning Europe into a tyranny machine, that goes on right to this day.
Yet Napoleon is still worshipped like a saint in France, and most of Europe has statues, buildings, monuments dedicated to him. And in schools, kids are taught that he was indeed a good person.
Hitler
We know now that Hitler was a horrible tyrant that exterminated 12 million people in Concentration Camps and more people otherwise. And if not for the great work and struggle of the European Jewish Congress, he would also be whitewashed by history as another of these "great leaders" that just had to do a "necessary sacrifice".
Utterly disgusting. And you already see people trying to deny the Holocaust, and try to spin the works of Hitler as just "necessary sacrifices" that had to be done due to the Treaty of Versailles, and painting Germans as these poor victims that had to endure hardships of the Treaty of Versailles.
Oh poor Germans.... Well look here dumbass, if the Germans were not been warmongers for 300 years, then they would have not had to endure the Treaty of Versailles, because there would have been no Franco-Prussian Wars and no World War 1.
So this is what is happening already, they are trying to paint Germans as victims (even though they were warmongers for 300 years before), and try to ignore or outright deny the suffering that happened to the Jews and other persecuted ethnicities.
Stalin
Stalin is not even criticized nowadays in Russia, even though Nikita Khrushchev had already exposed his as a monstruous tyrant. Currently in Russia Stalin is thaught as a strong leader that helped defeat the Nazis and industrialized the Soviet Union. While the Gulags, Holodomor, and other atrocities are hardly mentioned.
So just as Caesar and Napoleon were already whitewashed by history. I really wonder how will Hitler be portrayed in 1000 years from now.
If we let this happen, then Hitler might have his own statues throughout European cities in 1000 years from now, while the Holocaust will be totally erased from history.
The question is, will people let this happen, given that today we have the most advanced piece of mass communication technology, the Internet?
Sources:
https://pixabay.com
Bundesarchiv, Bild 183-H1216-0500-002 / CC-BY-SA CC BY-SA 3.0 de, via Wikimedia Commons
By Gautier Poupeau from Paris, France (César) CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons
I agree with you, history books are heavily politicised. It is shocking what our children are taught in school. History is never black and white, but multiple sources on every event should be studied carefully before coming to an opinion about a historical event. And even then opinions should be subject to change when new information surfaces. I majored in history at university and the my personal take away from the degree is knowledge of history is vital in preventing the holocausts of the future. History is not a dead subject, it is very much alive!!!
I agree, I have studied history a lot, it is one of my favorites. There is that saying that those who don't know the evils history are cursed to repeat it.
But my view is very simple. Just apply morals to it. For example if you have a "leader" that has slaughtered tens of thousands of people.
Well I don't care how you spin that, you can't make him to be a righteous man. There is just no justification for genocide, it's utterly evil. And anyone who tries to justify it, is an accomplice.
So how could those events been settled throughout history? I don't know, but there was always a solution that didn't involve murder. But they have always ignored that.
Just read Chomsky how he points out that in the Cold War the US ignored every single peace proposal from the Soviets and instead pushed further with war. Well that is that.
So there is always a peaceful decent solution, and we must always seek to choose this one instead of the evil one.
There is no way I could have said it better! :)
I'm going to be controversial...
"Hitler might have his own statues throughout European cities in 1000 years from now, while the Holocaust will be totally erased from history"
I hardly think that the Holocaust will be erased from history.
As to statues of Hitler a thousand years from now, why not (well, not everywhere, of course)? History is history - statues are not just for celebration. It is important to see these things in a historical light. In fact, in a thousand years time, people might look at a statue of Hitler and say, "Of course that happened, because......".
The world was a completely different place 75 years ago and we have different values now. In the past, even though people may pretend otherwise, human lives really did not matter.
In the past, Britain had an empire and people were brutally killed in wars and uprisings, etc. Does this mean that we should not have statues of past British Prime Ministers? My personal view is no. History is history and it makes us what we are today.
I don't agree.
I think until the issue is relevant, it should be presented in a way to highlight the immorality of it. So for instance Nazism is still relevant, you have Neo-Nazi marches in Greece and Latvia. You have neo-nazi websites and forums on the internet. And you have an increasing police state in the USA and the EU.
I think the issue of Nazism is still very relevant unfortunately. And until it's relevant, it should be fought.
After it doesn't become relevant, the worst thing you can do is to resurrect it. So you should not give Hitler the pleasure of having an infamy. He should not have any fame in 1000 years from now.
By then hopefully the society will be free and advanced, and there will be no chance of another Nazi resurrection. So there will be no point in obsessing with the Nazis afterwards.
But unfortunately Nazism is still relevant, after all these years, people have not learned from their mistakes. So the ghost of Hitler is still haunting us, via Godwin Law
And you think that's because of Hitler? In my view, it's more a sign of social injustice and inequality problems in society (No, I don't mean the social justice warrior type of stuff. I mean the basic fabric of society). Anyway, my point was talking about 1000 years from now. The point about the British (I am British) is that, as the writer of the post said, history is written by the victors. For me, the bombing of Iraq by the leaders of the world was also horrific, but I can guarantee that those leaders
No. Whether the injustice was there or not is irrelevant. Hitler was basically like your average conmen, trying to gain power by pandering to those emotions,nationalism,racism prevalent at that time.
He played the masses emotionally, but the system of control was already set up for him hundreds of years ago.
I mean the only thing he needed to do was to beat up a few journalists who criticized him, and win an election.
So how could have those atrocities happened? Well, blame the centralized political control. Germany had transitioned from a militaristic ultra-nationalist empire into an aristocratic democracy where you had basically military generals as president and MP's.
So it wasn't really that hard to do what he did, he already had the full power system at his knee.
The same thing goes on today. All these wars and tyranny. Nobody held a referendum to ask the population what they thought about it. They just went on and did it.
So it's the centralized forces that are feeding the tyranny. And every tyrant just used it to further his own will.
"And you think that's because of Hitler?"
I think you misread my reply. I was speaking in the present tense.
So are you referring to the Neo-Nazi marches? Well it had to do with Hitler.
Because if Hitler had not existed, then maybe people would actually found the solutions to those problems, instead of this rabid racial hate and eugenics mentality.
Most of these Neo-Nazi marches happen due to an anti-immigrant sentiment.
Ok so then end the welfare system. I can understand that people resent those that come and steal resources. But after it is ended, there will be no reason to be racist.
I mean an african doctor is just as good as a chinese doctor, if he is a good doctor.
But a chinese street rioter is just as bad as a muslim street rioter or an african one.
So I would just dismantle the welfare system, most of it.
And if they had any brains they would do this, instead of just hating everyone. It's ok to hate a thief, but just unconditional hate based on skin color or ethnicity is bad.
"Because if Hitler had not existed, then maybe people would actually found the solutions to those problems, instead of this rabid racial hate and eugenics mentality."
That's a very big "maybe". Many people would say that WW2 made the world see that such wars should never happen again and has actually united people.
"I mean an african doctor is just as good as a chinese doctor, if he is a good doctor."
No, no, no. Culture and upbringing is very important. As an example, the doctors in Slovakia are very well educated, but some of them are arrogant and downright abusive towards their patients (foreigners don't generally see this because doctors grovel to rich English speakers).
The welfare system? That is one of the things delaying my return to the UK. As an Expat, I will have no right to state resources, but will have to pay the higher prices generated by the welfare system - higher rents, council tax, etc.
Dismantle the welfare system? That's a big one!
Interesting thoughts. But IMO, nobody can rewrite history - in fact, it is ummutable as blockcahin and as blockchain it is open for every thinking person. Colors of emotions are gone with time. Persons you mentioned just demonstrated some milestones in the human history. Popular quote (by memory, may be not precise): "Stalin was an evil person, but it was not him, who wrote 20 million of false denunciations". And if you want to know who invented such horrible thing as concentration camps, just google "lord Kitchener concentration camp"
Now it is, but in the past it wasn't that transparent. You had a few books, that were printed in tightly controlled and regulated printing presses, that could easily lose their printing license or their lives if they put out something against the king.
Social control was extreme until the internet. Every printing press ,every radio, every TV station was controlled by the government.
This is how Hitler got into power, he threatened or bribed newspapers to write good things about him, and others who tried to speak up, had no platform to do so, under this heavily regulated system.
So a heavily regulated and centralized political system is the seed of destruction for itself. It always ends up in tyranny.
Notice the hidden hand on the Napoleon picture? You might wanna read this as it's an ancient problem:
https://steemit.com/illuminism/@soveranger/nuancing-the-freemasons