Jump to content



Photo

Revisionist History vs. Conspiracy History


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 stocks

stocks

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 3,928 posts

Posted 14 October 2017 - 01:57 PM

A revisionist historian reads at least a dozen books, or in the case of the Kennedy assassination, maybe a hundred books. He begins the study of the Kennedy assassination with a detailed investigation of the Warren Commission. He has to read everything connected with the Warren Commission and then begin his questioning in response to those documents. A conspiracy theorist has probably never read the Warren Commission report, let alone the support volumes.

 

When somebody questions almost every official account of everything, you know that he is not a revisionist historian. He is a conspiracy historian. It takes too much work to study any major event in which there may have been a cause that is completely different from the government's official version.

 

 

When it comes to explanations other than the official explanation, I prefer to wait for a heavily footnoted book written by somebody who has written a book on something else, and who has demonstrated in that book his ability to research evidence and draw plausible conclusions from the evidence. That is hard work. Somebody has to be dedicated to do this kind of work.

 

 

The crazies live in a world of self-induced fantasy. They do not accept the validity of historical cause and effect. They do not follow the money, or the confession, or the media back to a source. They are unwilling to make the commitment to any verifiable truth. They prefer to move on to a new conspiracy.  

 

The greatest revisionist historian was Murray Rothbard. He was an economist. He looked for economic motivation. He followed the money. He followed the publications. He followed the meetings. He named names. He did his homework. Then he provided plausible arguments for causation. He did not promote the idea of a single conspiracy. He showed how self-interested people used state power to feather their nests. He did not accept official explanations.

 

Rothbard understood a fundamental point: conspiracies gain their leverage through political power. 

 

 

 

https://www.garynort...ublic/17241.cfm

 

 

 


-- 

 “Men think in herds and go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, one by one.” 

― Charles MacKay


#2 stocks

stocks

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 3,928 posts

Posted 24 October 2017 - 06:41 AM

What is the "Alt-Right"? 

 

The Alt-Right: “Equality is BS. Hierarchy is essential. The races are different. The sexes are different. Morality matters and degeneracy is real. All cultures are not equal and we are not obligated to think they are. Man is a fallen creature and there is more to life than hollow materialism. Finally, the white race matters, and civilization is precious. This is the Alt-Right.” 

 

 

 https://www.lewrockw...ove-hans-hoppe/


-- 

 “Men think in herds and go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, one by one.” 

― Charles MacKay


#3 stocks

stocks

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 3,928 posts

Posted 04 November 2017 - 12:52 PM

The Progressive Era from the 1880s to the 1920s. 

 

The Madisonian model — the federal government may only lawfully do what the Constitution directly permits — prevailed in government from 1789 to the 1880s. After the Progressive Era, the Wilsonian model — the federal government may do whatever there is a political will to do except that which the Constitution expressly prohibits — continues to prevail up to the present day. 

 

The rapid upsurge of statism in this period was propelled by a coalition of two broad groups:

 

certain big business groups, anxious to replace a roughly laissez-faire economy by a new form of mercantilism, cartelized and controlled and subsidized by a strong government under their influence and control; and

 

newly burgeoning groups of intellectuals, technocrats, and professionals: economists, writers, engineers, planners, physicians, etc., anxious for power and lucrative employment at the hands of the State 

 

  

 https://www.lewrockw...-still-matters/

 


-- 

 “Men think in herds and go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, one by one.” 

― Charles MacKay


#4 stocks

stocks

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 3,928 posts

Posted 19 July 2018 - 07:09 AM

Desperate Deception: British Covert Operations in the United States, 1939-44 

 

Reveals the widespread use of front groups, agents, and collaborators-

 

Details how British agents manipulated polling data and influenced election campaigns.  It was a desperate time for the UK.

 

Faced with the growing prospect of war with Germany in 1939, the British government mounted a massive secret political campaign in the United States to weaken the isolationists, bring America into the war, and then influence U.S. war policy in England's favor 

 

If you thought that FDR did not try to get us into world war II read this book. It demonstrates quite clearly the he used every trick that he could to get us into the war. It also shows that the British had a major intelligence network in the United States from about early 1940. This worked in conjunction with the White House using high level government officials and the Rockefeller family.

 

There would have been no World War II for America if he had left things alone. The Germans would have gone East as they originally intended to 

 

 

 

https://www.amazon.c...?tag=unco037-20

 


-- 

 “Men think in herds and go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, one by one.” 

― Charles MacKay


#5 AChartist

AChartist

    Tim

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 5,242 posts

Posted 29 July 2018 - 05:03 PM

Moleneaux on slavery and the crusades

 

 


"marxism-lennonism-communism always fails and never worked, because I know

some of them, and they don't work"  M.Jordan


#6 stocks

stocks

    Member

  • Traders-Talk User
  • 3,928 posts

Posted 14 November 2018 - 07:31 AM

The Civil War was not a civil war. 

 

A civil war is when two sides fight for control of the government. The southern states had seceded and formed their own country. The Confederacy had no interest in controlling Washington.

 

The war happened because Lincoln invaded the Confederacy. The Confederacy fought because they were invaded. The North fought to maintain the Union, as Lincoln said repeatedly.  

 

The same Union army that fought to bring human rights to black slaves immediately on war’s end was sent under the same generals, Sherman and Sheridan, to slaughter the Plains Indians. Why did the Union army fight for human rights for blacks and against human rights for native American Indians?

 

 

Americans live in a matrix of misinformation in which facts, and history itself, are disappearing. Emotion, not reason, rules. We now have a mob, Antifa, that has introduced physical violence into politics. Those who control the explanations denounce Trump and Tucker Carlson, not Antifa’s violence.

 

 

 

https://www.lewrockw...h-over-history/


-- 

 “Men think in herds and go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, one by one.” 

― Charles MacKay