History is written by the victors

>history is written by the victors

Is there any other phrase that makes it more obvious you are dealing with a historically illiterate retard?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei
fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simples_médecines
twitter.com/AnonBabble

((()))

that's a tl;dr of any recent wars thread, yes

A better version would be
>the popular understanding of history is generally structured by whoever happens to be in charge

Historians job is to see beyond this amd try to construct an idea of what actually happened as well as some idea of why it happened

any sort of "hey, Im just asking questions!" comment

Then how come there's shitload of Wehraboos and Hitlerboos who spout insane bullshit?
And I don't just mean Veeky Forums, people in general have an incredibly positive view of ''non-Nazi'' Germans and German performance in WW2.

the Germans did well in WWII you dolt

Sure:
-The Civil War was about states’ rights
-The Russians won WW2 by sending human wave after human wave against the Nazis
-WW1 was all Germany’s fault
-the allies were just as bad as the Nazis because muh Dresden
-hurr durr teh Joos got kicked out of every country on earth
-Communism killed 400 Septibillion people (or whatever absurdly inflated number ANCAPs are fond of using these days, the highest unironic claim I’ve seen is 190 million people, and to do it I’m pretty sure they just included literally everyone who died in the USSR while Stalin was in charge)
-muh Christian Dark Ages
There are many more of these.

Here are a few I've encountered:
>Alexander wasn't a good general
>Hannibal could have won the second Punic war
>Christianity caused Rome to fall
>Christianity set back scientific progress
>WW1 and WW2 were both not caused by Germany
>Human Rights exist

THE IF WE DON'T LEARN FROM HISTORY WE'RE DOOMED TO REPEAT IT MUMBO JUMBO...THEY JUST DID IT WRONG!

This is what I'm talking about. How the fuck did they "do well"?
First, their "economic miracle" was unsustainable bullshit.
Second, their "technological superiority" literally didn't exist, they only had an advantage in rocketry and perhaps submarine design, both a product of their specific circumstances (forced to invest in those fields).
Third, their "success" was literally taking weak opponents in turn, while everyone tried to evade conflict. Sure, France was a somewhat impressive success, but everything else was a joke. Then they invaded USSR, and broke their teeth. They practically lost a chance for victory in front of Moscow, and their defeat became probable after Stalingrad.
Kursk and Allied landing in Italy broke them, Bagration and Normandy were just finishing the job.
So, they lasted like 4 years after facing a serious opponent, and even then that's only because Hitler and his crew were fanatics who refused to accept defeat, like Germans in WW1 did.
So Nazis took power in 1933, and they were destroyed in 1945, destroying their own country and most of the continent in the process.
So how the fuck did they "do well"?
I could write a longer post, but fuck it, you're wrong, you historically illiterate pleb. Try discussing history when your knowledge doesn't come from HC and video games.

lay off the allied propaganda, you're straight up saying the Germans didn't do good at all during the war. just stop trying

>christianity didn't set back scientific progress

>muh allied propaganda

>History is written by the losers

good post

If anything, "Allied propaganda" helped this myth, you illiterate nigger.

>Christianity set back scientific progress
This one is true.

You guys are actually retarded if you REALLY believe WW1 was Germany's fault.
Ok fine WW2 whatever but the political climate in the early 1900s can't all be at the fault of Germany you utter retards.

>History is written by whom I disagree with
This is true enlightenment

>>Christianity caused Rome to fall
>>Christianity set back scientific progress
>implying these are wrong
what's up christian historical revisionist

Versailles was literally the worst thing ever.
1 Versailles= 20 Holocausts

>>history is written by the victors
It's not a bad phrase. You autists are just interpreting "victor" far too narrowly.

Me: It would be stupid to say WW1 was all Germany’s fault
(You): You guys are actually retarded if you REALLY believe WW1 was Germany's fault.
Ok fine WW2 whatever but the political climate in the early 1900s can't all be at the fault of Germany you utter retards.

The better phrase is
>all history is local
What you hear in Russia about WW2 is different from Germany is different from Japan is different from China is different from Taiwan and so on. Every society desires to beat narrative elements into their past and historians largely exist to counter that. I'd go so far as to say that the difference between pop and "real" historians is that pop history is for glorifying the local narrative for whatever and history history is for trying to understand what the fuck happened. As an aside, the masters of massaging history are the Serbs. Fucking lunatics.

That's true though. The only problem is complete morons who think it means literally everything the victors say is a lie.

>declare war on a country
>they fight back
>there were many factors leading to the conflict, don't be so narrow minded

>various countries ally with one another in increasingly complex defensive alliances
>tiny shitstain nationalist group kills leader of your closest ally
>country is understandably upset, wants to go impress upon shitstain nationalist group and their country that this is unacceptable behavior
>unfortunately, said country is protected by a huge empire, which immediately mobilized its troops along your border because their retarded generals think if they only mobilize the troops in the area they want to fight in it will cause mass confusion
>you mobilize in return, because how can you not when they have this enormous army on your border ready to invade
>they refuse to demobilize
>you believe the only reason they would refuse is if they plan to attack you, so you attack them first
>totally 100% your fault, they’re blameless
Yeah no sweetie, try again.

Wasn't the phrase "history is written by the victors" true because it was the official narrative of the ruling power?

That is no longer the case but it is certainly in places where propaganda is required, like China or NK. Spaniards also did it with their conquests in the new world but that also was due to them needing their stories to be more impressive so they could.get.more.funding from the crown.

>Marie Antoinette bankrupted France
>Marie Antoinette hated poor people
>Marie Antoinette was a slut

or any statements that make it clear they get their history from a Sofia Coppola film

>but what about that time she partied and fucked the guy from 50 Shades of Grey

Germany's biggest mistake was siding with the Austrian austists. Should've just annexed the germanic part of Austria and let the Slavs sort out their shit.

>Christianity caused Rome to fall
No, barbarians did
>Christianity set back scientific progress
How could they do so when there were no proper science back then. The scientific method wasn't developed until the XVI century. The maths of the time consisted in Geometry and simple Aritmetics, so the level of abstraction people could handle was very limited. In the fields of engineering and architechture Rome had been stagnated for centuries, and we have to wait until the middle ages to find some innovations, like cross-ribs and gothic arcs. Agricultural technology during the middle ages advanced to the point the efficiency of the land duplicated and triplicated in some places. People tend to think progress stopped because people didn't build huge public infrestructures after Roman collapse, but that's what happens when you don't have the resources of a continental empire to build things

>barbarians
ah, barbara, my favorite book in holy bible. chapter 3 verse 12 "man, fuck rome, like seriously."

Because during the cold war the west perpetuated the belief in the "clean wehrmacht"

Yeah, Austria sucked, but there were justified in this particular case.

it basically is tho.
>implying anything even happened before your birth

not only that, but losers often write their own narratives or in some cases take over the narrative, like confederate generals wrote a huge mountain of literature after the ACW to justify and airbrush the cause they were fighting for, creating the "lost cause" myth that not just Southerners but Northerners embraced

>He's so violently butthurt that the Wehrmacht tore the entirety of Europe a new asshole that he completely shifts the historical paradigm and distorts it to accommodate his butthurt

I'm not even a Wehrnigger and I'm still laughing at you for being a contratian faggot

>tfw there is no carthaginian account of the punic wars
>tfw no persian account of the grecopersian wars
>tfw all historians are anticommunist because the west won the cold war

>we would all be living in star trek tier society if it werent for xtians!

>Im an absolute monarchist

>[insert random third rate shitty third world dicitator] was actually a hero!

>judeo-bolshevism

>the gulag archipelago is fiction

>Im not a holocaust denier, I just dont accept that 6 bajillion jews were gassed

>how could they even gas 6 million jews in that time? the math just doesnt add up!

>America deserved 9/11

>Pinochet was a hero!

>The US started the cold war

>The US won the Vietnam war

>Stalin was about to invade Europe, Hitler just beat him to the punch

>The USSR single handedly won WW2 and are morally superior to the US

>The US civil war wasnt about slavery

>The level of abstraction people were operating on wasn't near us

Opinion discarded.

Also
>The scientific method wasn't invented until
Good to know that the Egyptians werent doing science with their accurate measuring of the fucking planet and their pyramids, cuz some pedantic autist said that science didn't exist until the 18th century.

Posting frogs.

>send outrageously unacceptable demands with an ultimatum to another nation due to what some of their citizens did
>they agree to all of them except for one, which they request to be discussed in the international forum
>declare war anyway
They weren't justified, m8.

>Implying any of these theories are mainstream(excepts Pinochet was a hero) compared to the pro-western narrative

>science is just maths
Medicine, astronomy, chemistry... Almost everything was banned by that religion because knowledge was meant to belong to clergy exclusively. The literacy rate collapsed with the rise of christianity and stayed dramatically low for centuries thanks to them.

Those measures were done by Erathostenes (a greek) one of the best mathematicians of his era. Trigonometry, what earnt him his fame and the pinacle of "science" at the time, is taught in schools today, and the same measures can be done easily by anyone with basic math instruction. That's because until the late middle ages, all people had to do complex calculations with was Geometry.
Let's do a little experiment. Try to figure out how to do the square root of two with a ruler and a compass. Or with Roman numbers. You'll find that that simple operation requires a lot of time and effort, while simply conzeptualizing √2 comes almost as something obvious. That's what i'm talkking about when I'm saying people couldn't reach the level of abstraction we can work with. Not because they were stupid, but because they were limited by their language (geometry), just as we are limited by our language (arabic numbers), which is more flexible.

Prehistory : history isn't written at all
Antiquity : history is written by the group of people possessing writting skills
Middle-Ages to now : history is narated by the victorious but give it enough time and events that seem so one sided at first will finally reach an objective consensus

>The Waffen-SS were the elite of the Germany army

Fucking gets me every single time, stick a few lightning bolts on your collar and you become elite

When was this thread confined to only dealing with mainstream phrases or beliefs?

Nothing of that was banned by Catholicism; astronomy followed classical models, which were perfected over time; Medicine was also based on greek and roman knowledge, since the Church didn't allow authopsies (which, at the time, it was a very reasonable prohibition). Chemistry didn't exist as a science during the classical era nor the Middle ages, so I don't know what point did you tried to make on that one. It's true that literacy dropped after the fall of Rome, but not as much as you would think(education was private, and the lower classes were mostly illiterate; Tha's why the use of vulgar latin was so extended), and it definitely wasn't because some crazy conspiration of the church. Europe was very fragmented at that time, so people had better things to do than learning to read and write, like swordsmanship, craftmanship or working the land. In the middle ages education wasn't mandatory and free like now, because there wasn't a public authority to develop an educational program. However, anyone who wanted could become priest and learn to read and write (a lot of younger sons would follow this path in places were the inheritance were to the primogenit), the church wasn't hiding anything. That picture of the middle ages is part of the Enlightement anticlerical propaganda.

>astronomy followed classical models, which were perfected over time
Yeah, quietly... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei

>Medicine was also based on greek and roman knowledge, since the Church didn't allow authopsies
That's exactly why no progress was made (and no one denies that) and why surgery was left to fucking blacksmiths.

>Chemistry didn't exist
Herbalists were labeled witches and chemists were labeled alchemist... BURN! They buried thousands of years of knowledge, clap clap clap.

It's sort of like Alexander the Great. Sure he could take land but what does that matter if you lose it in five years? That's a failure in my books. All you've done it kill a lot of people without forming any nationhood.

>the civil war wasnt fought over slavery
Zombie tier retardation

Excepting that Germany invaded neutral Belgium, dragging the UK into it after many years of splendid isolation. Neutrality is Neutrality and needs to be honored if you don't want the international system to turn into chaos.

>fucked up meth cooks are scientists

Of you are alive long enough to write what happened

You truly lost

What?

>It's the American Revolution, NOT the American war of Independence

>The "Galileo dindu nuffin" meme
>The "church burned pharmacists" meme
>Implying that alchemy is Chemistry or a science whatsoever
>The church was the only institution that didn't allow authopsies
>The "da evil church was hiding the precious pagan knowledge" meme
>Wikipedia
Jesus Christ, I don't even know where to start with you. Do you learn history through documentaries or something?

All of your statements are laughable though.

>shitload of Wehraboos and Hitlerboos
Really now

What about this?

“History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon.” Napoléon Bonaparte

>the Black Death was ‘bad’

You are looking History through modern times lenses and falling for enlightened propaganda. First of all, i assume you didn't read the article you quoted me (I'm gonna pass the fact you quoted Wikipedia) becaused It explains why Galileo got condemned. It may not seem fair through modern day lenses, but at that time, with northern Europe turned against itself in the bloody wars of religion, It's understandable that Urban VIII wouldn't want a single trace of heresy in his sphere of influence. But, until the publication of the Dialogues, he was a friend and admirer of Galileo.

It's true that the prohibition of authopsy had stagnated medical progress, but you have to consider that letting people desecrate tombs and open corpses was a delicate question and generated a lot of reject (even today). However, the church eventually did allow the study of corpses.
When people couldn't afford a physician, they would call a blacksmith (I think they usually called a barber or a butcher) to perform minor operations, like amputations or bloodlettings.

Do you have some sources on the herbalist thing? Because I think the catholic church had banned the persecution of witches as soon as the phenomenon started. But the use of herbs as medicine is not as the movies portray, and can't substitute real medicine. I can totally see some peasant giving poison by accident and killing his neighbor's son.

Chemistry as a science didn't exist, as it didn't involve serious study of mattery, but something closer to craftmanship which involved a lot of trial and error. I think alchemy was in fact a correct label.

>they buried thousands of years of knowledge

Given that you agreed with me that medieval "science" followed what Rome left, I don't think that's true.

No no no, you tell me catholic authorities had reasons to take down scientist researches, that's not how it works obviously. They did it, and the reasons don't matter.
>Do you have some sources on the herbalist thing?
Unfortunately no, but this is common knowledge. In my countryside the "rebouteux" still exist and are still ostracised, they're the remant of ancient simple knowledge. fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simples_médecines yay a wiki link, and in French at that, I'm lazy.
The clergy DID collect a huge amount of knowledge, but they condemned it and never ever shared it.

It's completely true.

It's why Hitler is considered worse than satan whereas Churchill and Stalin are lionised by their people.

It's why Wehrmacht are considered bad for every military action they undertook in the east whereas the soviets are considered "liberators" and the US is considered justified in nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

It's why Churchill isn't considered a genocidal maniac for killing 11 million Bengalis but hitler is for some reason. It's why Germany has more monuments to holocaust dead than German victims of the war.

>the US is considered justified in nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
They also razed allied cities by the dozens.
>no casualties mate, just a prank

I mean that would depend on what you consider “elite”

The SS-Divisions recieved the same training as the Heer, with more political shit thrown in, but they generally received better the equipment faster. Most of the actual SS Divisions, like the Liebstandarte, Das Reich, Wiking, etc should definitely be considered elite. The Divisions of the SS on the other hand are a different story

It’s true though. The way national socialism and antisemitism are portrayed in history are propagandistic charicatures.

would you say it's anti antisemitism?

this also irks but i always feel like an asshole if i try to bring it up

“history claims to narrate the past but, in practice, what it does is conceal our collective shame”
-Gilad Atzmon summarising Lyotard

It’s pro-Anglo. They get to be absolved of all crimes because they “saved the Jews”. This is only impressive if the attack on the Jews was an act of inexplicable barbarity.
Meanwhile Britain and America’s long histories of genocide, racial oppression, concentration camps for national/ethnic groups, aggressive war, imperialism and attacks on civilians get ignored.

Along with, I should mention, their continued imperialism and their support for ethnic cleansing and imperialism by Jews in Israel/Palestine.

tfw you realize a lot of the people there think they deserve to be

Deserve to be what?

in camps

Saving the Jews has not in anyone's mind "absolved" the UK or any other country of those crimes. It's practically used as a justification for the influx of migrants to the UK and the UK is top 2 or 3 globally in terms of money spent on foreign aid (and still pretty far up as a % of gni).

>tells AH they should invade Serbia
>declare war first on everyone
>invade Belgium
>unrestricted submarine warfare
I agree that war would have been inevitable and maybe in an alternate universe it was France or Russia that was the primary aggressor. However, in this universe Germany was the one that pushed the hardest for war and began most of the conflict. I agree that it can't be all put on Germany, but its certain that they were the biggest problem

Meant to be for

in this era it gets written by disgusting rejects of society who wouldn't know an education if it ate the chip off their shoulder

>Alexander wasn't a good general

Depends on what you define as general. He was undeniably however spiritually an arrogant 13 year old kid up until his death

Stop samefagging you spastic

t. academic babby

is that an answer to op's question? or a comment on the phrase they used as an example?

a reflection on the later

phew. i as gonna say i'd never heard that one before

*was not as,

> The Civil War was about slavery

Well, why else was there a point of contention? One can bandy on about your philosophy on the distribution of powers to state assembly, but what was the root of the near sundering of our nation? What popular phenomenon broke the back under this mounting weight of dissension?

((((you))))

>Herbalists were labeled witches and chemists were labeled alchemist... BURN! They buried thousands of years of knowledge, clap clap clap.

Being this retarded should be illegal.

>history is unbiased

Ah yes, of course, it's not like we every now and then find out that something we took as being right was actually a lie made up regime that was in charge back then.

>fascism is far right ideology

Oh man this. Or republicans etc not understanding their ideology is left just not as left as cancer

They were no research on the part of Galileo in the matter of heliocentrism. Even cardinal Bellarmine showed more scientific spirit when he claimed that unless he could prove without doubt that the Earth moved, the church would treat the theory as a violation of the council of Trent Galileo failed to do so (not his fault, the technology did't allow to measure a stellar parallaz until the XIX century) and even worse, insulted the pope in his dialogues. However, they left his works on pendulum and motion untouched, as they were actually proven right.

I don't understand why you're convinced the church is some kind of fascist regime obsessed with hiding information. I'm gonna assume a "reboteux" is some kind of herbalist, and that "ancient simple knowledge" is pharmacy. Until the XIV century, the church punished severely witch trials, and even then it was rare to see a witch execution, since the Inquisition tended to disbelieve most of the charges. Still, I can see how a peasant whose child had been given a wrong herb by accident accusing the "reboteux" of witchcraft, blinded by the grieve. And I think that was pretty common at the time.

Militarily, considering their circumstances the Germans did do pretty well.
This has literally nothing to do with their economic policies or the outcome of WW2. It's like saying Alexander, or Timur didn't "do well" because their empires collapsed shorty after their deaths.

Spotted the jew

There's plenty of real world examples where history was indeed written by the victors. Most of the wars involving ancient Egypt for example, or Austria-Hungary and the fact local monarchists and their demands got effectively erased from history.

what an argument

You forgot the part where they supported the ridiculous demands of their ally and encouraged them to go throught with it and demanded france to hand over all defensive positions else they'll declare war.
So sure, it's also because of Austria.