The Accuracy Of History.

I’m becoming increasingly worried about the accuracy of “History” when following the news cycle and witnessing how stories are pinned and framed. To say that I find this worrying would be a major understatement.

Certain events are re-furnished, re-packaged and visibly falsified, yet if you repeat something long enough, it sadly seems to stick, eventually reaching the status of “truth”.

I’m living in the hope that historians see beyond whatever popular chanting that is the norm in their time, and that we are actually looking at genuine truths when looking at the past. I’m starting to have my doubts if the behaviour we witness today is testimony Β to what people have been up to before… Β Hopefully there will be a small grain of truth left regarding how our present will be re-told to future generations….

American conservative politicians have already been physically attacked due to their political opinions. Violently attacked. I didn’t feature those news stories on here, but I followed them with great horror and worry.

Now there is a new cycle of street-level political-terror, but no one really seems to be putting this into the correct context, completely omitting that street-level political violence have been filmed and broadcasted from across the pond for a while actually, depicting people being physically attacked for wearing a MAGA hat, for example.

There’s been instances of anti-austerity protests in Europe that have gotten quite violent, with one of the strangest locations targeted for vandalism being the “Cereal Killer” “coffee shop” in London. Why such a place would attract such behaviour can only be explained in what they unknowingly or unwillingly represent: gentrification. Which simply means that safety is an illusion. You never know, and that’s all you’ll ever know.

There were scary riots in Croydon, there is a state of chaos in various French and Swedish territories due to cultural enrichment, but to claim that these hostilities and clashes are only race and/or ethnicity based is false. There is a political element that divides people who look just the same, whether you are looking at foreigners who bring their tribal feuds with them into Europe, various European tribes openly arguing about how to handle the invasion/migration crisis, and outrageously angry inter-group arguments due to profound ideological division. I therefore fail to see why there are some who seem so very keen on further destabilisation. In short: it already looks like a f*@% mess.

In fact, when looking at some of the material that is out there regarding inter-European arguing we can very well be approaching a specific point that triggers a whole domino effect of state initiated political-violence. In fact it is remarkable that it hasn’t happened already, all things considered. You can sense a certain dread, a disrespect, an annoyance, a contempt, between European decision makers when observing footage of them interacting, or reading about their whereabouts. The most troubling signs of a continent in total decay are actually the small things, because these bear witness of turbulent situations that are not under control but that are rather bubbling up to the surface, all of a sudden becoming visible in the mainstream. It’s all in the small side-comments, the sarcasm, the ridicule, accusations of mental disorders, threats of imprisonment, the hold back of money if people don’t take in more migrants, etc; It all looks like a landscape where everything will of a sudden be thrown into absolute turmoil, because it already is … under the surface.

It is vital to understand these situations. It is vital to look at the provocateurs, what causes the reaction, the poking, what stirs people. Yet we are apparently not supposed to do this, and this, ironically enough comes from those who would chant “Never Again” and that history has to be studied so that crimes against humanity are not repeated….

How can you expect history to stand still if you refuse to look at things critically and in-depth?

Why did Charlottesville happen? Why were there people there in the first place? Was it because there was a movement to remove a statue due to it being deemed politically incorrect? Isn’t it so that there are individuals over here who also want to remove culturally/historically offensive statues? Isn’t it so that there is a movement to de-whitefy our culture in a territory that isn’t even African or Arab? We are after all talking about European Nations. Our territories, population groups and cultures are old. Very old.

Why did people vote from President Donald J.Trump? What is it really like to live in the U.S.A.? What is it like to live in Urban-America? Did America look like a country that was doing well for itself, financially, culturally, before Trump? Or did it seem like a country on its deathbed?

How is it like to live in the territory commonly referred to as Europe? Why are people angry? Are they angry perhaps since they are being forced to share living space with imported people who don’t come from Eastern Europe or other parts of the continent, but people who come from Africa and the Middle East? Are people upset perhaps because they are losing their Nations and their cultures? Are people maybe upset because they end up being the targets of violence? Because they feel wronged, forgotten?Or are people upset because they sense that their safety is rocked due to what they see and/or hear about from other territories and then align this with their own situation?

It is rather difficult to not get upset if several parts of your continent is being recklessly compromised. It is unrealistic to expect complacency. What is also dangerous are those who in a state of panic start suggesting all sorts of petitions that are worded clumsily, because they don’t dare to call a spade a spade, potentially throwing a great deal of people under the bus, by formulating suggestions for legislation that would incriminate pretty much everyone. The pitfalls are endless, innumerable.

Yet if you understand President Donald J.Trump’s popularity or you support him you are allegedly an enemy of the people….

No.

You are not, but I think that there is one enemy who’ll always be loathed more than any other, and it is that brother or sister of yours who tells you the truth or God forbid: that you are wrong.

In practise that individual isn’t really you’re enemy, but you’ll perceive it as such when you feel slighted, and it is precisely in a moment like that, when “the slighted” might feel like striking back; and it is in the response to a reaction such as that, that it is determined whether you are going to war or not.

Preferably not.

Yet with humans being so profoundly irrational, then what can ever be expected?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s