Is historical revisionism ok if it serves a worthy political/ activist purpose?

Is historical revisionism ok if it serves a worthy political/ activist purpose?

On the contrary. It's ok if it serves to further our understanding of the truth.

FPBP

It's okay if it lets me get in them guts.

New world scum stealing others heritage

I just tell people that Egypt's population was mixed race (kinda true, or close to it), with people of lighter skin and darker skin, and had white people and black people. I then mention notable black civilizations such as Ethiopia and Nubia. The effect is to make people try to claim Egypt less, and to inform people that Egypt wasn't the only 'african' civilization that was great.

That said, nothing wrong with taking aspects of a culture and trying to better oneself with it. Might as well be Egypt. But knowing more about African history would likely lead to less 'my people!' and hopefully more 'a people (that I like)'.

This is the thinking man's post.

This is a good approach, I do this too. When it works, people actually take an interest in learning more, regardless of politics.

no

"I happen to share a phenotype with a group of people who accomplished something of note. Yay me"

There is nothing wrong with "historical revisionism" at all so long as you have actual arguments and reasons behind your claims.

This meme of "revisionism" in itself being a problem on Veeky Forums is primarily because Holocaust Deniers with their batshit crazy conspiracy theories falsely claiming the title of "revisionist".

"I have no pride in my people and will not defend them from outsiders because I was indoctrinated to believe that taking pride in ones own people is silly, yay me"

Why should you defend anything from outsiders if you are of zero importance for so-called your people? If anything, you should help the invaders.

Only if it's my political/activist purpose.

This is your brain on leftism.

"my people, my bruddas, i am robert mugabe of zimbabwe and we are the proud zimbabwean people. You should be proud of being a zimbabwean because we are special and superior to all others, if you question this our entire corrupt fucking system will fall apart"

"my people, my serfs, i am otto von bismark, be proud of being german so you can fight my wars for me"

"my people, my cheese-eating surrender monkies, be proud of being part of the 'revolution' and go fight my wars for me"

no you should help which ever side benefits you you fucking faggot

This is your brain on autism

>I am totally unable to respond

you tell me

Damn, people are really this cucked. Hopefully their genes get extinguished within the next century.

you tell me

you tell me

It's self-refuting nonsense.
Why would out group entities value you when even the in group entities which are predisposed to value you, don't?

Disloyalty is dysgenic.
Individuals who consistently betray those they interact with inevitably find themselves alienated with no one willing to interact with them.

>historical revisionism
Stop using words when you don't know what they mean.

you tell me

>Individuals who consistently betray those they interact with inevitably find themselves alienated with no one willing to interact with them.

I bet you know a lot about that user

This.

Fuck we wuz niggers. Their ideas are shit and they should be ashamed.

grug want politic party win
grug will pretend history different

...

wuz

>worthy
>political/activist purpose
pick one

Lies are never a service to anything worthwhile.

We must drive him from hence at once!

"Revisionism" is too often just "Hey, look at me, I'm going to claim everybody who has studied history for hundreds of years before me were wrong, pay attention to me! Also, look at my trendy, academically acceptable politics I slather all over it."

That brand of revisionism cannot be denigrated enough.

Much more rare is "Hey, I have new data, I have made some new connections between points in the old data, I have a new and better way of looking at something." That stuff is gold.

But so fucking rare...

You can do all you want after you go back to europe. America belongs to Amerindians.

>tfw dont know what revisionism means

I'd call this cultural appropiation rather than historical revisionism
revisionism is, basically, when you change things
in this case, historical revisionism would be like when the turkish government ( I think it was during Atatürk) ordered to teach in the schools and write in the books that the turkish people were in anatolia since thousand years ago, to boost nationalism.
Another case of historical revisionism could be the reinterpreation of a historical event or person.

What, like in textbooks and schools? Or in movies and fucking Halloween costumes?

People can believe whatever the hell they want, even if it isn't true, and they can tell anybody anything they want too. The burden is on the individual to learn the truth if they give a shit; and on the scholar, teacher, or writer who presents the truth. For everyone else, it's not a moral issue to be wrong about stuff that happened in the past, whatever the reasons they have for believing it.

>HHUUURRRRRR lemme ask a retarded question