Message from @ELIS314
Discord ID: 794979046596411403
But if you want a contextual understand of a period and people definitely look at the art and culture of the time
History should be presented objectively and from the context of that era, not ideologically.
Agreed. And if it has to be with an ideological bent, that bent should be explained
There is no such thing as objective history
Like, it was written by this dude, who won
So take it with a grain of salt
Well, history is written by winners, so yeah.
I’d argue that the belief in objective history is worse than not having history at all
It devalues the other side and forgets that what you’re being told may not be true
Yeah, I think that history should have some little bias, but not too much. And both sides should be shown.
The most important thing i was taught was to try to view history through the lense of society at the time
Many if the account of german tanks during ww2 were writen by nazis, the german tanks like panzer tend to do worse that T 34 , the germans won ironically because of their bigger number of tanks, this is an example were the losing side did write it but the point about taking history with a grain of salt remains
Yeah, we can't judge history by our modern standards. This is what liberals do wrong.
Like taking into consideration who writen it and such
They judge history by our modern day, and try to silence it, instead of judging it by that society's values and morals.
I just realized my writing is really a weird amalgamation of British English rules and American English rules
And I should work on that
Both sides contribute to the historical record, the winners don’t make it all on their own, but the side that won ultimately decides who will be portrayed as in the right
Like we view vlad the imapler as a national hero and he was a preaty good leader , and this comes from someone that would have been impaled by him for being gay , like I do get the context but I will not apologise for the wrongs he done
You’re Romanian?
Here in the USA Vlad the impaler is considered more of a historical villain
In fact he was the inspiration for Dracula
Yeah , but he is a national hero who fought against the turks
And fight against the Otoman empire is a big thing around here
I never thought of vlad as a villain. He just seemed desperate to protect his people
In a really weird way
And this is an example of different historical beliefs brought around from different perspectives
There are so many stories though, that the historical record has made a mess of.
Well his grandfather and gradgrandfather lose in directly fighting the otomans so he needed guerilla and intimidation tactics
Like the countess of bathory
Like, she may have killed a few people, maybe a few hundred, maybe she was a political assassination?
We dont know. There's no actual evidence at this point.
By political assassination, I mean that she was destroyed, rather than killed
She held lands the crown wanted
And now.. she is listed as one of the most prolific female serial killers 😂
Like natinalists and facist people keep telling that "if only vlad was alive today" and I disagree,even though he was a good leader at the time context and times have changed and his way of ruling doesn't work in the modern age
<@&757102104182784051> rule 11 , Lord Dummy thicc GOAT username
.......
Wtf is wrong with you?
No, vlads tactics were great for 1450. Not so great for 2020