Today a new series has begun on these pages which critically explores the evidence for doubting the 'received wisdom' about the history of the world during the 20th century. The point of this blog is to explore the ideological bias in official histories which we contend here are not to be trusted. The corporate media is the conduit for the official account of history. Its propaganda tentacles extend across popular culture and works to create a wide ranging myth that has been reinforced in cinemas, schools and the print media for the best part of the last century.
The persuasiveness of this manufactured history in the 21st century has been compromised by a number of factors, including the spread of information technologies and a generally better informed and more sceptical public, but the single event that has damaged official credibility most of all has been the 9/11 'attacks' and the implausibility of the official account of what is said to have happened on that day.
The persuasiveness of this manufactured history in the 21st century has been compromised by a number of factors, including the spread of information technologies and a generally better informed and more sceptical public, but the single event that has damaged official credibility most of all has been the 9/11 'attacks' and the implausibility of the official account of what is said to have happened on that day.
I don't think it an exageration to say that anybody who has studied in any detail the events that took place on 11 September 2001 in the United States, could not possibly believe the stories the governments and media have circulated about it.
The BBC for example simply will never recover from reporting the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 more than 20 minutes before it actually collapsed, by all appearances demolished by controlled explosions.
The BBC will never be able to regain the credibility it once enjoyed now that it has been caught lying to us on behalf of the secret service agencies that contol it's news output.
If the BBC can be shown to be crudely propagandist with regard to its reports of false flag attacks of 9/11, how can we ever believe it again on any issue of historical significance whatsover.....the answer in the absence of an admission of guilt and an apology to licence fee payers and the world is never.
The BBC for example simply will never recover from reporting the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 more than 20 minutes before it actually collapsed, by all appearances demolished by controlled explosions.
The BBC will never be able to regain the credibility it once enjoyed now that it has been caught lying to us on behalf of the secret service agencies that contol it's news output.
If the BBC can be shown to be crudely propagandist with regard to its reports of false flag attacks of 9/11, how can we ever believe it again on any issue of historical significance whatsover.....the answer in the absence of an admission of guilt and an apology to licence fee payers and the world is never.
From this position of radical doubt has evolved a whole new revised history of the 20th century, of the meanings of the First World War, the Great Depression, the rise of fascism, eugenics, the Holocaust, the cause and sponsorship of the Second World War, the relationship between capitalism and state socialism in Soviet Russia, the Cold War, the establishment of Israel and the role of Zionism, the attack on state welfare and civil liberties, the rise of NATO, the so-called 'Green Revolution', globalisation, the use of food as a weapon and the new world order.
It is the contention of this blog that the official English language (Anglosphere) history of these world-changing events are wrapped in a complex tissue of lies, distortions, disinformation and pure fantasies which we will be exploring here in more detail.
The latest received wisdom propagated via a compliant corporate media and infotainment industries is that a group of fanatical, evil and very possibly insane conspiracy theorists are spreading lies and insane fantasies about history and how it really happened.
These Conspiracy Theorists have been demonised in the popular media and turned into another threat to our way of life - alongside Muslims, Communists and Anarchists....meanwhile other conspiracy theories have also been leaked by the official historymakers because according to the official view of things, conspiracy theories are now a part of history itself.... just like Roundheads or Minutemen are.
These Conspiracy Theorists have been demonised in the popular media and turned into another threat to our way of life - alongside Muslims, Communists and Anarchists....meanwhile other conspiracy theories have also been leaked by the official historymakers because according to the official view of things, conspiracy theories are now a part of history itself.... just like Roundheads or Minutemen are.
This device to consign all critical and forensic historiography and/or investigative journalism to the catch-all term for the mad, bad or critical as subversive conspiracy theory has worn very thin as the evidence accumulates for some very big cover-ups indeed. This process begun by heretic historians like Antony Sutton (of whom we'll hear more later) and which exponentially exploded after the 9/11 events is now unstoppable, the Genie created by Hollywood and the likes of Time Warner, News International and the BBC can never be put back into the bottle.
So to begin to consider our own position on modern history (and therefore the here and now) I invite you to view this video below which expresses a different view of the meaning of various historical events including the annexation of Palestine for the establishment of Israel.
There is an official acount of those historical events and there are alternative accounts.... here is one of the latter.
I neither want to uncritically endorse nor condemn this perspective at this point. I just think that we cannot have a truly rounded view of our own histories unless we are aware of the way they have been contructed, by whom and for what reasons. But without such a rounded and better informed view it is I think difficult to make sense of the world today and where we as individuals, communities, and societies stand in relation to it.......History is created not given.
Thank you for the video! Once again you have presented us with very good information to consider Aaran. Keep up the writing. I'm your biggest fan! LOL, remember that line from the movie Misery? Don't worry, I'm no Kathy Bates. :-)
ReplyDeleteI'm relieved to hear that you don't intend to smash my ankles with a sledgehammer, not that sort of 'fan' lol....thanks for leaving your comments She :-)
DeleteVery provocative video and a interesting introduction to the history of the 20th Century, AA. I do agree with you that it is more reasonable to take points that are generally agreed upon first--objective facts like the creation of Israel, the controversial entry of the USA into the great war by President Wilson and Congress in the passage of the draconian Espionage Act in 1917--and how much certain major financial forces can take advantage of and be a smooth catalyst for complex world events that to my mind are often less manageable then parts of this video presents. But, as you say, there is a certain pre-determined view of these events from the media and who owns the means of dissemination that bears constant updating and questioning.
ReplyDeleteI cannot be wholly agree that history is partly a creation, sometimes written mostly by the victors but also the surviving "losers" as well.
Thanks for your comments Doug. I do think it is interesting that the defenders of the (capitalist) faith like their the Christian predecessors not only own the means of material production but also the means of ideological production.
DeleteThis used to be disseminated via the church of course which in the last century was supplanted by the corporation.
It used to be popes and monarchs that generated the propaganda empire to support their self-serving hegemony, now it is the media magnates of the military industrial complex. Digital scribes of late capitalist corporatocracy now write the official [eg.Time Warner] histories and collude to keep us in the dark as to what really did happen.
I think we have to suspend our disbelief if we intend to make that leap of faith that there is solid evidence to support us when we land in a place where even the BBC for example is highly suspect.... and nothing can be accepted uncritically nor taken on trust.
This evaporation of trust is of course the death knell for hegemony and a sign of the impending collapse of the existing staus quo.
Yes, AA, I think we have to weigh a lot of evidence into the balance, even the sources themselves. The old phrase from the Watergate Scandals of Richard Nixon's days were never more true than now: "follow the money."
DeleteGood point about Popes and monarchs. Many men and women with good intentions have had their ideas perverted into a power source for illegitimate "descendants" to keep people ignorant and scared. And yet people want the truth, and I'll bet even the hardened cynics of our time won't give up on getting it.
It's clear that the era of what Noam Chomsky calls "Manufactured Consent" has taken a blow with the advent of the Internet and especially sites like this.
The trick (and its not easy) is to get a proper picture of an event or a cause-and-effect. One thing I know for certain now is that it takes time and a lot of reportage from many sources to get a fix on what can be reasonable trusted--and then only until something new is dug up that passes a measure of credibility.
Looking forward to your next in this series along with Scott.
It is undoubtely true that 'manufactured consent' has indeed taken a blow from the Blogosphere I think Doug, but there is also the matter of 'manufactured dissent' out there. Mr Chomsky himself has been identified by some as very possibly part of the latter phenomenon... along with other mainstream radicals like Michael Moore for example.
DeleteAn excellent blog here AA. I have read 7 of Antony Sutton's books. I "totally" can't wait for part II :)
ReplyDeleteCheers Scott....Oh shit I'll have to totally get round to writing Part 2 then....thanks for visiting and leaving your comments. Antony Sutton is an interesting theorist whose perspective should be a well known counterbalance to the 'official' line. It isn't given that status for obvious reasons... so we have to help it along here a bit I think.
Delete