(06-30-2010, 07:01 PM)Gasbag Wrote: (06-22-2010, 02:44 PM)Dog Soldier Wrote: (06-21-2010, 07:10 AM)Herr Straßen Läufer Wrote: Altering history is making truth a lie.
HSL
Ever try to read Soviet era history? Hard to tell which self serving memoir has a grain of truth in it.
Glad there are professional historians trying to sort it out.
Dog Soldier
I could say much the same thing about some post war German sources. For example Hubert Meyer's 12th SS divisional history has no mention at all of the murder of Canadian POWs during the Normandy campaign. The original hardcover version of Michael Wittmann...of the Leibstandarte by Patrick Agte read like an SS propaganda leaflet. I don't know if the Stackpole version was cleaned up (better edited) but the original was almost nauseating in it's worship of Wittmann & company.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/8762969.stm
An interesting discussion, or rather, an interesting conclusion regarding history.
How should history be written? Should we record the evil men do in order not to repeat it? Or should we emphasise the bravery the people have shown in battles, protecting their values? Or both?
What should we include? What should we leave out? What should we not only leave out, but ban alltogether? (I am referring to initiatives in EU to ban both Nazi and Communist/Bolshevik symbols).
Little by little, the future generations will loose a grip of what really happened :-/
Archived Forums
Help
Calendar
Member List
Search
){kind=link}
