Military Review

Historical lie

“The more monstrous the lie, the faster the public believes in it,” said the propaganda minister of the Third Reich, Joseph Goebbels. Nazi Germany succeeded in rewriting storiesbut we remember well how it ended. Or is it not?

Currently, there is an unhealthy tendency to a radical review of past events, not only distant, but also practically recent, that took place in the twentieth century. It is no secret that history has been adjusted before, but so unceremoniously as it is now, it has not been dealt with. Newly appeared chroniclers literally misinterpret the facts, despite the fact that eyewitnesses are still alive. However, each individual person has his own truth and his own vision of the past days. Is it possible then to even talk about such a science as history?

"Who owns the information - he owns the world!" - According to legend, this now famous aphorism was first heard from the lips of Nathan Rothschild. He uttered these words after he and his brother Jacob swindled their stock market rivals and got rich on 40 million pounds sterling, the sum two centuries ago is incomparably more significant than today. They were assisted in this by ostensibly postal pigeons, from which the Rothschilds had learned before about the Napoleon fiasco at Waterloo. Using the information, they conducted a simple, but very profitable scam.

Like it or not, but in the phrase attributed to Rothschild (someone thinks that Churchill first expressed it, and someone Francis Bacon), there is undoubtedly a deep meaning. He who possesses objective information is capable of properly analyzing the present and creative future. That's just not always easy to figure out what is true and what is false. A huge stream of all sorts of information is able to knock down even those who, it would seem, have enough brains to navigate in it.

Unanswered Questions

What is the cause of falsification of history? Firstly, the change of power, secondly, the change of the socio-political system (here the story begins to be cut on a larger scale) and, thirdly, the occupation of the country by a foreign power (usually in these cases, the defeated are declared that they have always been part of the winning states, or have always dreamed of being such).

Sometimes textbooks on the history of the country are not rewritten for small internal needs, but simply do not tell them the whole truth. For example, in the Soviet Union for a long time the fact of mass repressions in Stalin's time was not publicized, although everyone knew about them. Obviously, the authorities believed that the communist regime was eternal, and that state crimes would eventually be forgotten.

So how to understand the history of his country, if each fragment is ambiguous and requires documentary evidence, and the archives are still securely hidden from prying eyes? What of the revised and proven in history will be accepted by modern society unconditionally? And is it possible that objective perception is real where the interests of entire nations that have fallen under the influence of political propaganda in their country intersect?

Some people think that we need to know the truth about this or that fact around which bastions of myths and legends have lined up over the decades. Their arguments are simple and clear: by understanding the past, we can avoid mistakes in the future. Others sound the alarm, as the unfavorable truth can sometimes deprive the people of its past. Debunking the established myths is the destruction of ideals, which means undermining the foundations of the state, and it is also difficult to disagree with this.

Is the renunciation of power by Emperor Nicholas II a voluntary act of the king or a mistake of his environment? How to determine what happened in October 1917 - the Great October Socialist Revolution or a coup d'état? What should Vladimir Ulyanov (Lenin) be considered as a humanist who wanted his own people freedom, equality and fraternity, or a criminal who organized a coup for Russia that was worn out by the war of Russia? What dictated the actions of the USSR when signing the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact? Nikita Khrushchev - the unmasker of the cult of personality or a tyrant who craves for power? How did the collapse of the Soviet Union begin - from the economic crisis or from moral degradation?

Today there are more questions than answers. After all, behind any knowledge of history is a person with his emotions, his worldview and his interests.

There are many questions, and everyone, answering them, will be right in his own way. But does the presentation of a particular person truth?

The brilliant Japanese writer Akutagawa Ryunosuke has the novels “B more often” and “Gates Rashomon”, based on which the film was shot by director Akira Kurosawa. Their characters are trying to figure out what turned out to be witnesses. However, they all describe what happened as if we are talking about completely different events.

Four characters - four different points of view. Both the writer and the director are confident that any life situation can be perceived and described in different ways. And it all depends on the person, from the witness. Any life circumstance, if you look at it from different angles, confirms the multiplicity of variants of objective reality, which in this case can hardly be considered objective.

Sworn ... brothers

Unfortunately, quite convincing evidence of a fact is often not enough, or they are hidden for some reason. This is fertile ground for speculation and the emergence of various "revelations." Often such messages come from the political leaders of the former fraternal republics of the USSR. And increasingly, it becomes a tool to justify their own mistakes, miscalculations and failures. After all, the easiest thing to write off all the evil uncle. So homegrown academics are creating new myths that will rebuild the course of our history. They need neither truth nor truth of fact.

It is clear that in the assessment of what is happening today and in the discussion of modern history, polar positions collide. Biased foreign politicians are trying to blame Russia in order to put it in a bad light on the international arena and push its own interests into reality. However, bias in the presentation of material is also peculiar to our historians.

Many historians today work in favor of political clans, some of them consciously, others with unshakable confidence that they actually work for the good of truth. After all, as modern psychology asserts, there is nothing that you cannot convince yourself of. And if a person is convinced of something, his next goal is to convince others. There are many ways of fraud and falsification of evidence.

This is a direct distortion of the facts, and falsification of documents, and the construction of a chain of arguments, in which individual links are deliberately missed. If we compare textbooks for higher and secondary schools in neighboring states, it may seem that they are talking about completely different events, the true meaning of which remains a secret sealed with seven seals. This also makes us doubtful about the events of the distant past - who knows how many times and under whose watchful eye they were deliberately distorted during their presentation?

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Escander
    Escander 7 May 2011 09: 46
    Here you need to learn from amers.
    They are sure that they were cowboys in jeans with two revolvers and smoked Marlborough. Well, in their free time they won all the World Wars.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  2. Pribalt
    Pribalt 7 May 2011 19: 25
    Where did you advise 30 years ago?
    -What about justis 1968 Czekoslovakia?
    -Lixujet people...
    1. Joker
      Joker 8 May 2011 15: 27
      -Wath about justis 1968 Czekoslovakia? - riot provoked by the CIA !!!
  3. Joker
    Joker 8 May 2011 15: 26
    For those interested in history, I recommend looking for the Fomenko chronology; he uses mathematical processing of chronicles.
    For the overall development is very, very interesting.
    APASUS 10 May 2011 18: 56
    Unfortunately, the modern government supported this tradition! True, no one needs it — this is the result of modern reality.
  5. Roman 75
    Roman 75 31 May 2011 12: 14
    For those interested in history, I recommend looking for the Fomenko chronology; he uses mathematical processing of chronicles.
    For the overall development is very, very interesting.

    Yeah, that's perhaps "for general development" ... And even better - like a cool humorous reading!
    And the attempts to apply Fomenko's "methods" to current events are just the finish ...