Written History.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-02-2013, 09:15 PM
RE: Written History.
(02-02-2013 09:13 PM)Hughsie Wrote:  It's illegal in some countries, not all. But I take your point on that, Germany outlawing the questioning of the holocaust did little to aid in impartial investigations. However, Germany is the country with nothing obvious to gain from faking it. For the allied forces it helped to legitimise their cause, they haven't banned the questioning of it though (at least as far as I know, the UK definitely hasn't). What would Germany gain by falsifying something that seriously discredited themselves (to put it mildly)?
Germany isn't discredited, the Nazi Party were the ones who became discredited and the 'bad guys' the Germany today is simply a government installed by the allies who won WWII.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2013, 09:17 PM
RE: Written History.
(02-02-2013 09:14 PM)Tartarus Sauce Wrote:  Too bad the actual calculated demographic AND population impact the Holocaust marked on Europe can't be explained with 100,000 missing persons.
You do realize that epidemics were not just localized to the Concentration Camps, and that a good deal has to be reconciled for civilian casualties on both sides who bombed cities.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-02-2013, 11:57 PM
RE: Written History.
I would say the Ukrainian Holodomor might be another example of what you speak of.

It was denied and covered up for decades and I believe it's still argued about to this day. The best sources of it are from first hand accounts of those who survived it. People just have to be willing to listen I suppose. I'd say the truth of written history is more reliable over time when things can be studied, compared and investigated by enough sources. If those things fail to happen, then it becomes folklore, myth or misconception. Or like Hughsie said- whatever you want it to be. It's not simply a statutory time frame equation.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2013, 01:16 AM
RE: Written History.
(02-02-2013 11:57 PM)Grassy Knoll Wrote:  I would say the Ukrainian Holodomor might be another example of what you speak of.

It was denied and covered up for decades and I believe it's still argued about to this day. The best sources of it are from first hand accounts of those who survived it. People just have to be willing to listen I suppose. I'd say the truth of written history is more reliable over time when things can be studied, compared and investigated by enough sources. If those things fail to happen, then it becomes folklore, myth or misconception. Or like Hughsie said- whatever you want it to be. It's not simply a statutory time frame equation.
How you quick you are to judge. I know not of this Holodomor as you describe it. I've heard of it yes, critically analyzed it I have NOT! I for one do think that the Soviet Union murder of 80 million people might be a little bit exaggerated, as I've said before I have not studied it and I can not say with reassurance that it has weight behind it.

The holodomor may well have been a propaganda bit by the anti-communism countries in the west. With my current views on the Holocaust, it's not that hard to think that other genocides may have been outright misinterpretations of the facts. Such as I do know that epidemics while rare in our first world countries we have today we exceedingly prevalent in wars and in centuries before vaccines could be made for them. Diseases like Tuberculosis, Dysentery, and little puny Typhus that hardly anyone has ever even heard of. Were common diseases during epidemics and could produce the skeleton men we see in the holocaust, and maybe even this Holodomor. I don't know... any genocide that has a name for it you might want to... question it.

I reserve my opinion on the Holodomor as open for inquiry, since I have not been able to critically analyze the situation I can not make a strong argument for it or against it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2013, 07:02 AM
AW: Written History.
Welcome back, TheArcticSage. Drinking Beverage

[Image: IcJnQOT.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Vosur's post
09-02-2013, 10:03 PM
RE: Written History.
When investigating claims regarding history you should always try to track it back to primary sources. It is all about evidence, just like science.

Do you have only one source of information (such as a Christian who uses only the Bible as their evidence for a historical Jesus), or do you have multiple sources to corroborate the story? Primary sources in writing is excellent, but also having evidence in the form of architecture, art, pottery, sculpture, etc. are also a good addition to finding out the clues to the truth.

Just as in science, it is a good idea to try to eliminate any bias you might have as much as possible, to try to find the truth in the evidence.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like PurpleChimp's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: