The TRUTH About Historical Revisionism, Once and For All

and this video is brought to you by blinkist a verified or indisputable fact proposition principle truth is the property of being in a court with fact of reality as one of the fundamental core principles of everything I stand for and everything I fight for on this platform it being mostly a channel for historical divulgation the truth namely in this case historical truth has been a constant Chief element of my research the main quest in my life has been to discover the truth and my personal feelings about what I find are absolutely relevant that's because not only it's fascinating as is but historical truths help us understand what has happened in the past and how these occurrences have shaped the world we live in we search evidence-based data and feelings don't change it real genuine knowledge of the past can illuminate deepen and enrich the present historical truth is the building block of a future successful Society this is why today I decided to challenge publicly the very idea of the erasing of the past historical negationism or denialism of facts and ideology which I would now Define endemic you see an argument is deductively valid when the truth of the premises guarantees the truth to the results if any given individual is offended by a historical event and decides to modify it effectively introducing feelings into the equation then the premises begin to give no rational grounds for accepting the conclusions that's what is called a fallacy a politically correct past is a fallacy an idea germinated in our current social cultural space which I often refer to as the agenda on my videos but the practice of removing or altering the past according to one's desire whether it be at the behest of a ruling Elite a regime or a loud minority isn't a new phenomenon historically speaking in this video we'll see how real historical facts have been changed doctored banned or altered in the past whether it be the exaggerated numbers of battle reports for patriotic and propaganda reasons done by several medieval rulers the complete destruction of anything that goes against that carefully fabricated lies such as the Aztec's complete rewriting of their own history or impede of Japan trying to hide Unit 731 all the way to the dumnatio Memoria used by Roman authorities if you change the past you control the present we'll also see how real historical facts are being changed in the present how historical truth is under a systematic extensive attack fueled by corporate money which is permeating both the educational and edutainment infrastructure particularly in Western Society within the anglosphere it's an attack to a collective memory we'll talk about how power has been given to those who have demonstrate an incompetence in handling even the most basic facts and have zero interest in applying any sort of guard against selective bias how there is no my truth or her truth but only one absolute truth and I say this in a sense of evidence-based and reliably sourced factual reality [Music] history is not politically correct in its very nature and it doesn't care if it offends the archives that enshrines the Deeds of billions upon billions of members of our species cannot it should not be modified according to what may be acceptable by modern sensitivities because our present will become someone else's past and will be remembered for how we treated it the removal of historical truth by replacing it with a doctored inoffensive shapeless approximation of an ethnically fluid amalgamation of occult nothing deprives the people of the very enrichment of shared factual knowledge it infringes on the very rights of all human beings that live ever lived and will ever live it leads to social moral and societal Decay it's damaging to you and to your children no matter what side of the political Spectrum you choose to be moreover who has the moral authority to alter anything based on personal feelings and political bias alone anyways a scholar an erudite wooden have that moral justification let alone A diversity consultant Jada Pinkett Smith making a historical documentary is the equivalent of the Milkman performing life-saving heart surgery on you if you love historical accuracy even if we may disagree on some level you and I are on the same side I know exactly how you feel whenever you see a historical character being either Ray swapped or a historical event being completely misrepresented you complain they call you racist and then you type this number one this is a word of intellect and it requires accurate speech otherwise even though you are correct your arguments will be easy to counter what we fight for requires Precision so let's look at a common counter argument that is usually represented whenever we complain about the rewriting of History you will be met with this ah but historical revisionism is part of the very method by which historians work as I will demonstrate on this video this argument is not only mute but completely inappropriate since what we are complaining about is the woke revision of History which is completely different thing apples and oranges but to be fair whenever people say that they hate historical revisionism they usually mean they hate historical denialism to be precise up to a certain extent as long as it's done in a factually based way motivated by nothing but the Searcher for historical truth historical revisionism is a tool used by all historians established accepted and traditional views about historical Persona historical events phenomena can and should be challenged upon the introduction of new contrary evidence the presence of new technology or even the application of newly available methods to the long-existing material modern politically motivated historical revisionism however which is the only form of historical revisionism we are complaining about is a completely different beast and it has nothing whatsoever to do with a methodology used in professional and academic discourse but does the end justify the means inclusivity representation second wife of Henry VIII of England really the end does not justify the means this is not true representation because it's based on a lie you want to see real representation watch this video of mine minute 1008 then call me a racist but now I'd like to take a moment of your time to mention the kind sponsor that made this video possible blinkist blinkist is this really cool app that allows you to understand the most important things from either non-fiction books or podcasts you're interested in in the very space of just 15 minutes on blinkis you'll find a variety of content over 5500 titles within 27 different categories now what's really cool is that it's bite-sized content so if you're a busy professional you're a student you just don't have a lot of time blinkist is going to be perfect for you because you can connect it to your everyday activities say that you are cleaning your room maintaining your highly accurate medieval replica jogging exercising you can give more value to your routine tasks because you can listen to the audio files as you are doing these things I've been using the app there are a few books that I would suggest and particularly one let me show you so as you go into my library section you'll see that there is this book called 10 kaisas by Barry straws it's a book that tells you about the most Salient and important aspects of the first four Emperors so I decided hey why not looking for books within the app that can give me more information and perhaps inspire me for making more videos about this topic I highly recommended go check it out also blinkist has a new feature called spaces this feature allows you to create a space for your friends or family or both and in this space you can recommend books recommend titles share titles but what's really cool is that your friends and family that you share this with or they don't need to have a premium account to access the books you share tap on the spaces icon at the bottom right corner of the screen tap on create space type in the name for your space you can then tap on share and create space to immediately send an invite to whomever you like or just tap on CreateSpace only and send an invite later you can now tap on invite to invite more people and start sharing title recommendations with them if all of this sounds awesome then check this out get 25 of your blinkist annual premium start your 7 day free trial by clicking the link in the description box so make sure to check the link in the description below and big thanks to blinkist for sponsoring my video unfortunately this whole idea that many truths exist and should all be respected it's starting to take foot even within Academia and talking about Academia today I ran into this article on National Endowment for the Humanities written by an American historian by the name of James moral Banner Jr all history is a revisionist history now I suspect that this is the article that everyone who says aha but all histories revisionist history so you shouldn't complain is using as a basis because they're literally repeating the words written on this article ad verbatim not to be transparent I don't know anything about the author of this article I don't know anything about his political position his allegiances and maybe it's better that way because what we're going to do now we're going to read a few passages from this article and since I don't know anything I can't have any preconceived idea or bias I'm just gonna judge this article on the basis of what's written on it and believe me I already found quite a few massive red flags but I am giving the professor the benefit of the doubt maybe he's not using this to defend vocal revisionism about perhaps all the rest of his Publications are Masterworks I don't know I'm just ruining this one article let's go the professor says mere facts don't have meaning they must be given that meaning by human beings and those human beings very well may disagree among themselves about their meaning he then proceeds to present his eloquent and well articulated defense of historical revisionism and then we reach a paradox at the end of the article after having presented his positions he says we should celebrate as well as accept that fact you said the mere facts have no meanings unless we humans give a meaning to them and that human beings may very well disagree so according to what she said at the beginning of the article why should I accept and celebrate the facts you presented that does not give me space to disagree accordingly it's a contradiction but if no subject is immune from reconsideration what about the widespread conviction that history can and should be objective in the sense of being an accurate and full account of what actually occurred it's likely to surprise most people that today's historians believe that it can't be on what grounds that they believed that the first reason both existential and epistemological grows from the impossibility of knowing all that has happened in the past personally this feels like an elaborate weak defense for historical revisionism I agree with the fundamental idea that yes we can't know everything and therefore we need to constantly reshape and remodel the things we know more progress into the field more research into the field will develop new ideas and theories but that does not mean that history and historical research cannot try to be objective or as objective as possible in fact we should strive to be as objective and unbiased as possible so the simple fact that you can't know everything doesn't mean that you shouldn't try to know as much as possible whenever you're trying to delineate historical events then the professor goes on to talking about the storming of the Bastille in Paris July 14 1789 yes we have some witness accounts but we can't know for sure if what they're remembering is right because there is some bias in selective memory you might have the perspective of someone from outside the Bastille someone inside the Bastille people belonging to different political parties and of course all of this is bias and at the end of this he says the result is that what historians know of anything in the past is only a part of what occurred was witnessed and was reported this is really strange because it makes it sound like all historians do is review verbal reports or written records but that's not how you do history you need to overlap these reports with archeology the reviewing of the material Goods literary evidence cultural evidence what the surrounding cultures and civilizations say about that event statutory iconography steli that's how you pinpoint three-dimensionally any event in the past if the historical record says that in a specific date there was a battle in a specific location and then we excavate and find remainings of helmets and swords we date them and then the dating perfectly overlaps with the written accounts we now have a much stronger case and then if you find that iconographic representation of the battle and it looks like the same that looks like the same Hill it looks like they're wearing the same types of armor you now have a much clearer picture and a much Stone case and depending on what historical events we're talking about this can extend into many other fields mathematics astronomy professor says we should keep in mind too that there is nothing novel in the interpretative variety of historical knowledge I absolutely agree in fact the interpretive variety of historical knowledge started with freaking Herodotus the father of History if you really want to pinpoint it and possibly even earlier than that but whoever uses these words to justify what modern revisionism does is the king of apples and oranges you should go open a Street Market where enforced Orthodoxy exists their lies totalitarianism I would agree with that but I would also add the same applies to cancer culture and removal of freedom of speech same totalitarianism and here is the part I take most issue with a democratic culture in which different views and different truths are allowed to coexist and share billing in the public forum of thought ought also to be seen as a glorious Storehouse of ideas Professor since you say that the debate is by about the nature of historical discussion then I'm sure you won't mind me debating this Noble ones mark my words whether it be a democracy a republic a monarchy there is absolutely nothing glorious about supporting and pushing many different truths and personally I also think that even the author of this article doesn't believe what he's saying since he literally put the word truths in Brackets fundamental truth is not dialectical where by dialectical we mean a synthesis or integration of opposites the sun is either 92 hydrogen or is not you're either here or you are not the ancient Romans existed or they didn't both contrasting statements cannot be true at the same time because they are mutually exclusive either I'm right and the ancient Roman Empire existed or she's right in the ancient Roman Empire didn't exist it's not a matter of well the Roman Empire exists in is my truth and the Roman Empire not exists in her truth there is only one truth and I think the major problem with this whole idea of my true the Autos was their truth is of a linguistic in nature they use the word truth to mean belief and opinion that's a misnomer no matter how many brackets you put into it truth isn't an opinion I might think that what I have is the truth and perhaps I'm wrong that doesn't change fundamental truth it only changes my perspective of it in fact even when we don't have historical documented data the truth is still there we're just not aware of it and before people mention quantum mechanics I'm talking about historical truth I'm not talking about quantum physics the concept of multiple truths interferes with the truth they can't coexist just like light and darkness cannot coexist in any given physical space that's because Darkness isn't a thing of its own it's an illusion darkness by definition is the lack of light likewise a lie isn't its own truth a lie is the lack of Truth and this doesn't only apply with the realm of historical accuracy let's have a look at mathematics if your truth is two plus two equals four and another person truth is two plus two equals five he can incorrectly call it truth as much as he wants it doesn't change the fact that you are right and they are wrong and on the same note if I believe something that I think is the truth but then I'm proven Wrong by actual documented evidence then I'll be more than happy to say you were right I was wrong this is the real truth rather than building up this defensive facade and saying no that's your truth and this is my truth and you need to respect it in fact if you keep talking your racist homophobic blah blah blah I will cancel you that totalitarianism professor I would like to now introduce briefly the concept of damnatio Memoria which is a modern term in Latin to describe something that the ancient Romans absolutely did particularly during the Imperial period this is a very striking type of past Erasure whereby portrait inscriptions and material Legacy of all condemned individuals would be destroyed we have a very plated example of this practice when it comes to actual Emperors and their predecessors and we can see a very basic pattern vilify the individual you wish to replace then replace it with yourself represented in a positive light this created an immediate form of contrast which ingrained more efficiently than newly doctored negative identity into the minds of the people at the same time benefiting the recipient of the replacement identity it was a form of social control which worded on that removal of physical evidence connected to condemned individuals you see societal memory differently from Individual experiential memory is communicative in nature because it transcends the life of single individuals therefore the best weapon to attack the site on memory is to remove freedom of speech if you can't say it you can't share it if you can't pass it on it will be forgotten to give you an example Sula destroyed all the commemorative monuments of the victories of Marius and then replace them with his own but what they did was establish a negative narrative remove every possible evidence to contrast what you are establishing and then replace it with your own narrative even though the natio Memoria was a rather flamboyant and physical way of altering or doctoring memories in a way I believe it was less dangerous than what's happening today when a book is doctored people don't even know that there was a change in the first place and when they read they don't know that the words they're reading don't actually belong to the original author you cannot fight an enemy you can't see also when it comes to mass psychology the key to establish a false memory is its significance to the group hence Cleopatra was the right pick not the kandake in my opinion if we allow the values of the present to manipulate the past we risk to enter a circle of Doom projected to our immediate future as each successive present will then reshape the past according to their values which make no mistake will change if the foundation of a civilization is solid truth then future Generations will be able to build upon it if instead the primary constituent of the foundation of a civilization is subjective ever-changing personal truth that very foundation will be shaken every single time a new truth replaces the preceding one that foundation will inevitably crumble that is why I say when it comes to the defense of historical objective truths no matter the consequences Hold the Line [Music] [Music] how do you know [Music] everything changes [Music] Begins for me [Music]

Channel: Metatron

Views: 346,564

Keywords: history, historical, metatron, anne boleyn, king henry the viii, netflix, blackwashing, whitewashing, queen charlotte, agenda, political, historian, erasing the past, historically accurate, king, queen, danger, dangerous, myth busting, debunking, debunk, professor, teaching, teach, documenatry, cleopatra, scandal, the, my, my truth, their truth, politically correct, pc, archive, history teacher, conservative, liberal, discuss, talk, freedom of speech, debate, cancel culture

Id: v-fK55zA4iY

Length: 19min 57sec (1197 seconds)

Published: Thu Jun 01 2023