Daffy Duck.

I suspect this will not draw you into a debate, but I find your theories on all things, as you present them on this page, a bit bizarre.

I think you need to come out on this one, and declare your hand.

Do you believe history to be written as a form of propaganda? It seems obvious to me, an historical event must be flavoured by the side writing the account. Why is that wrong?

If you wish to enlarge your thinking on historical events, why wouldn't you simply read more varying accounts of a particular event from different sides.
That surly is the advantage of a literate society, it allows for open mindedness as a premium.

Don't smoke, don't drink, don't gamble, & didn't even mix with bad women all that much. What a goody goody two shoes I am.

I have had a few vices though. The fool tax payer paid & lot to teach me to fly, & let me go rushing all over the sky in a rather obsolete jet, but otherwise my vices have been rather expensive.

There were my Formula 2 Lotus & Brabham racing cars, one hell of an expensive hobby.

Then the yacht. I had to sell the Brabham & the business to pay for that, it's conversion from racer to cruiser & other such.

Then the horses. Show jumpers & eventers, none of this pretty stuff getting judged for me.

And now the old sports cars, not all that bad, if you can fix most of the oily bits yourself.

The point is I could never have afforded any of these, if I had been paying the huge tax burden imposed on those who's vices involve the common ones. I had to do things one at a time even then to afford them. I have tried to explain to my son, who would like to do the things I have, that he could if he just gave up all those things he enjoys so much.

As this old body gets more broken down each year, I know my vices have taken their toll. I can't help wondering if the wine women & song vices would have taken any greater toll, or been any more fun/satisfying. I will never know now, & really don't care too much. I have nothing to complain about.

However if smoking or grog gives anywhere as much pleasure as flying, racing, sailing or the like, my advice is do it. I'd hate to die rich, having led a safe & boring life. As a smoking mate says, "If smoking doesn't kill me, I'll live till I die.

Dear Dan,

I agree with Duffy:

«Do you believe history to be written as a form of propaganda?»

Yes. Most often to glorify the people, leaders and ideas mentioned, but here and then, to criticise them.

«It seems obvious to me, an historical event must be flavoured by the side writing the account. Why is that wrong?»

Our life is not without limit, so why waste it on studying someone else's prejudices?

The author also has his prejudice: he does not glorify leaders and wars, yet he glorifies science and cooperation.

Towards the end, the author declares:
"It would make no sense to proceed in this way if knowledge were not permanent, and if it were not shared by the entire world."

However, knowledge is not permanent. Not only were ancient technologies lost and the memories of the vast majority of ancestors too, but mankind itself, even the universe itself, are not permanent.

The author is deluded: the entire world will never know it all, nor does it need to.

The most common reason we become old and die, is that we carry that much rubbish in our minds, especially gossip. Ancient people used to live several 100's of years because they cleaned their mind regularly and discarded irrelevant nonsense, just like we now regularly brush our teeth. The information about the longevity of those people has now been consigned to mythology rather than history because historians hate the notion of forgetting useless details.

John Avery states
<Humans often exhibit kindness to those who are closest to themselves, to their families and friends, to their own social group or nation. By contrast, the terrible aggression seen in wars and genocides is directed towards outsiders. Human nature seems to exhibit what might be called ``tribalism": altruism towards one's own group; aggression towards outsiders. Humans often exhibit kindness to those who are closest to themselves, to their families and friends, to their own social group or nation. By contrast, the terrible aggression seen in wars and genocides is directed towards outsiders. Human nature seems to exhibit what might be called ``tribalism": altruism towards one's own group; aggression towards outsiders.>

And here’s why. What needs to be taught and comprehensively understood about
tribal, (ethnic,racial) war and agression in history in the history classes.

In the same article he says teach, biology
Well, you can't teach biology, without pointing out, that mankind like every species on
the planet is biologically driven to protect his closest biological, genetic offspring, from all comers, if needs be. To a human their closest biological bloodline, is their CHILDREN, parents, brothers sisters,Aunties,Uncles,cousins, and by generational tribal intermarriage, the tribe around them
They have no biological imperative, to expend time and energy, trying to protect people who aren't biologically, and genetically closest. (not close kin)
In fact they and their bloodlines are in direct competition for the territory and survival
resources needed for our children, to survive and prosper, through the generations.
We need to understand this reason for constant ethnic warfare and ethnic cleansing not gloss over it, because “if you do not learn that mankind is hardwired to be territorial, at the biological level( as in:- programmed by nature), you will indeed be doomed to repeat it. Failure to learn from history, that to have big, non-assimilating tribes, on the one territory, is a recipe for civil war, over territorial control.

What was the IRA’s purpose for waging, terrorist warfare. They wanted control of Ireland and they were handed 6 seats in the Irish parliament, in a peace deal.

what this article is saying is we should gloss over and leave out all the wars in history,
to reprogramme the people, let people believe lies by omission.

The left wing academics in unis have done that for the last 30years. Going on and on about the Nazis and the British Empire whilst barely mentioning, the millions killed by Japan when they invaded China in the late 1930s, The over 7million killed by the Ottomon Empire, The ethnic cleansing of other black African tribes by the Zulu, whose black descendant now claim the land belongs to them, Well the white farmers were there before the Zulus came and ethnically cleansed thousands of black people to grab the land.
Why havent these historical facts been talked about and focused on ad nauseum like the sins of the British and white people.
It is these failures to emphasise and teach these genocides, that have led to the inability in European countries of people to think for themselves and protect their cultures,
Because they are not taught a balanced few of the war like natures and atrocities committed by other cultures who they unsuspectingly have allowed to immigrate into their countries.
All because what this author espouses, as a great new idea, has already been happening in our unis and has led to the disastrous situations, we have in Western nations today.