Is revisionist history the ultimate deception?
As with most things, there’s potitives and negatives. There’s nothing wrong with historical revisionism which attempts to look at past events in a different light, to add new information or to challenge the reasons for events and their outcomes. There’s even a place for revisionism which challenges accepted norms – for example Japanese schools are still avoiding teaching their children about the Manchurian Campaign, and are very light on factual information about WW2 and Japanese military actions within it generally. This form of teaching could do with a big kick from a size 12 revisionist boot. However, to completely deny events to suit one’s own reading of history is I think verging on the criminal. Question them – yes, to perhaps obtain more accurate information or widen the scope of the original subject, but to deny an event took place in an attempt to re-write the past to suit oneself smacks of childishness and an unformed mind. ‘The Ultimate Deception’ however, is a bit strong. M
