I am fed up of the right wing bias in history. Even left wing historians accept it times. Another example of bias by the right is this, they talk of bad left wing stuff but not right wing. For instance there are holiday programmes, and people go to Russia, and they go on about Communism, and it's baddness. But when they visit Spain they do not mention Franco's evils, when he was more oppressive. Or they do not mention bad stuff about Dubai when they go there, like it's dictatorial anti free speech ways, or in Morocco. Where there regime STILL kills loads. Or Japan, they do not talk about British people dying in POW camps.
For instance there is a general view that all left wing revolutions are bad, if just one bad thing happens, but all right wing takeovers, and counter revolutions even if there were constant terrifying massacres. And if the evidence in undoubtable, as of mass left wing campaigns, like on the Spanish Civil war or Highland Clearances, the right launch mass "its a over simplification" campaigns, saying we should take a bizarre moral relativist position, that they never would take on any other situation.
So here is my big long list of that stuff. Big complaints include how British history does this. It talks of the British events right upto 2006. And in it, the only things abroad it talks of are the French Revolution. It does not mention the Holocaust that much. This is crazy, that they mention the Reign of Terror, When they do not mention much else abouit F rabnce. It is puelry to attack the left, They do not mention far worse massacres, like the Republican Party massacres in Central America in the 1980s, or the Saudi massacres in the 1930s of their people. Or the French Royal massacres of the 1570s of Protestants, or the Russian royal massacres of Poland, in 1792, of 10s of thousands. Or the French royal massacres of La Rochelle, or the 13th C, Or the good of the French revolution, OR the British royal massacres of Berwick of 15/20,000 people,
Or what about when Cromwell is talked about, The history books rarely mention the bad dpome by Charles or his sucessors, or his fellow royalists like massacres of Aberdeen, too South West England and Bolton. And never about the corruption and torture by the royal regime,
A really annoying thing about Rightists is to claim all left wing views are simplistic. I.e of the Highland Clearances, genuine historians talk about the bad things that happened. And then the right wing come along and claim that is all "simplistic". The most insane thing I read was the claim, most of the landowners were "kind" to those they evicted. This is deranged. I am not one of those people, who go on about Mugabe, and think he is the worst thing ever, but just imagine some lunatic said, Mugabe was generally kind to those he evicted. The idea woukld be rightly called laughable, But these right wingers pose as the sensible moderate middle ground, that those were evcited were being evicted kindly. If you are evicted you are not being treated kindly, especvially at a time, when you have to trek for miles, often at quick eviction. It was NEVER KIND. Even if some right wingers claim that the chiefs were evicting just to help the people they evicted. They have to realise, that the people evicted often suffered immense pain, during the evictions. But the dukes, and chiefs carried on evicting the populace,
Many annoying right wingers start talking to people who are giving facts as if they are a sexist old man explaining to a young lady why sexism is right. They really are scum. And thye do this to Men .
Or Cromwell's bad is talked of, like in Britain, of his massacres. But there is no mention in history books, of the Massacres of Bolton, Aberdeen, Leicster, and other places in the civil war,
Despite Royalism, beinh an inherintly evil ideal, in favour of satanic formws of government of dictatorship, they ignore bad stuff they did,
Very annoyingly
A classic example is this Joseph II, in 1765, as emperor attempts to revitalise Austria, And began plans unifying Hapsburg lands, Ending laws that divide it, And trying to accept enlightenment principles, of freedom,
He ups freedom, & officially abolishes serfdom in Austria & Bohemia in 1781, This is presented in most histories as a ending of serfdom from above, But the Bohemians had revolted against it in 1775, Seeing 40000 soldiers, needed to stifle the revolt,
Where it was never properly reimposed, So really it had come from the bottom up, & the myths of this being an enlightenment are exaggerated, Some claim this was enlightened but it was not, Bohemia, & German lands had revolted against it,
There were a number of other revolts, Never usually mentioned in right wing fairy story versions, of history, Such as in Eisenburg in Hungary in 1762, & 1765, When locals refused to do serfdom,
Austrian Silesia, in 1766, Transylvania in 1751, & 1759, Slavonia, in 1766, S-Hungary in 1753, Bohemia in 1680, & neighbouring Prussia, in 1719, The Bohemian revolt of 1680, limited serfdom a bit, But saw lords & troops suppress, & execute some, With orphans still sold to textiles mills, by the state, The major pusher to reform,
Was the fact there were so many revolts, & that now the leaders feared them, And that the leaders saw that peasants who own their own land, work harder, than serfs, And can make more profit, I would guess in these revolts many died,
Some then claim, ignoring all the revolts this shows the aristos are great, But infact they were just doing what they had been forced to do, And some claim that what happened next showed even equal reform from above, Results in chaos, So slave orders, & inequality should stay, Normally the people saying this are high up people, happy with their oppression of slaves, But some like gimps are able to be persuaded to agree,
As they say, this means all revolutions fail, & we must keep evil forever, Just like all revolutions, But as I say later, the monarchs made the reforms, fail, As they then tried to impose what was essentially err serfdom, In 1780s Austria & Bohemia, And some other fairly bigoted things, Which saw revolt, Most histories, claim this shows that if you try to reform, chaos will occur, Forgetting to mention the reimposing of serfdom bit,
Infact it shows revolt was needed to end evil, Reform would never be that much from above, in any long term form, And any reform would just be eaten away long term, probably for all, Unless power passed to all, And also that it is needed, And it is not that revolution & progress will always result in chaos,
Their other crazy view is that right wing reform, is always wonderful & good, Even through massive numbers of deaths, Actually it is that progress is essential, And probably long & short term chaos will come from not having progress,
But the people here had actually accepted this reform, which was good for the future, And made the area far more loyal to government, & order, than other areas, But also was an inspiration to others aswell, Which was very good for the future,
It ruins anti-Jewish/Protestants laws, letting them be a bit freer, As successful Prussia stopped persecuting religious minorities, beforehand, Reform, that'd make Austria wealthier ultimately, Although of course there were some restrictions staying there & in Prussia, And ghettoes, banning Jews from leaving their quarters,
With gates locked up at night, & taxes on them, but not on others, Forcing them to wear certain clothes, Or obey certain customs, As second class citizens, in here, Italy, & such,
But laws restricting them from certain important institutions & such were depleted, But Hebrew was now restricted, so to Germanify them, And synagogues were still banned, Jews were still into the 19thC to be banned from many provinces,
They were to pay a toleration tax, they were also still banned from being master craftsmen, & citizens, But Jews were now allowed in theatres, not to have beards, to commerce, & a whole range of things, In the earlier few decades Jews, had been expelled in 1000s from towns, In Hungary by the monarchy,
The land now acquires weak Poland's Galicia, And war gains Turks' land, 1 idea offending aristos, Was that they had to work as Vienna street cleaners, if they hit, or mock staff,
It was briefly Europe's best, & most enlightened city, As many or 2s walk along the clean road of the capital, And it's high buildings a few storeys & windows, That shock in splendor rural visitors, from rural peasant villages, Of dainty big wide street buildings, And poorer courtyard sections, & huts & hovel areas, of rubble, & a oven,
Alas, bad elements, didn't listen to the people enough, As there were no bodies to, German centric unity made his fall, They tried Germanify Hungary, & others like gypsies, by language law,
The Gypsies, were to be allowed, in Guilds, a great enlightenment act, But they were banned from wearing certain clothes, & forced by law to settle, This did have an effect, so it did have good & bad effects, Some call them enlightenment kings, But this brutal element shows that the enlightenment kings were not that enlightened, Surely this forcing of Gypsies to settle, must have had bad affects on some, Even if most people would claim that living in a village is more healthy than in a caravan,
I know generations of Gypsies, preferred to stay among their own families, Than stressfully settle down, by leaving their pals, But most Gypsies who become rich, in the old days, do settle in villages, Then again that is as that is the only place to be rich,
So then again, you may say, that if they had not been forcibly settled, They would have carried on being nomads, Which would have caused friction in some villages, & so towards Gypsies, But Britain never really had forcible settling,
And actually has less tension than those lands do between Gypsies & the settled, And also if it was so good to be settled, They would maybe have settled anyway, if given equality, & encouragement, Like in 1950s Hungary, by benefits & jobs,
So the enlightened dictatorial, way, Unlike the Hungary 1950s settler way for Gypsies, probably caused stress & deaths, And many Gypsies were just conscripted into the army, a tough job in those days, With children taken away from parents, So on reflection although not as brutal as many genocides, It was not like a welfare state policy, it was more a brutal attempt,
In the same era the Russian empress, opted to make Gypsies slaves, But this seems to have had little effect, The fact is also that many Gypsy kids ran away from peasants paid to re-educate them, And then they & the Gypsies, escaped to live in remotes,
Also 1000s of Gypsies were still slaves & serfs into 1848 in Transylvania, With the Romani tongue barred, from 1783, And at times Gypsies banned from marrying, other Gypsies, other, Moldova's leaders banned Gypsies from marrying others, All these Austria-Hungary revolts & massacres from 1750-1795, Must have caused many 1000s of deaths, If you include the Szeklers, & Banat famines, Then the total must have been in the 10s of 1000s, And that does not include wars, & serfdom,
Even though it did not have colonies, Antwerp, had dealings with the slave trade, In the 1670s 100s of Protestants fled the Empire, & some died under torture, So in the 18thC they saw millions of deaths, especially when including their wars, Added to this 7000 Protestants after 1734, Were made to move to Transylvania, by discrimination, Also the Gypsies saw themselves barred from some of their traditional jobs, And allowed to be in the army & jobs they were barred from,
Just like in Spain at times, with their definition of who they were changed, And attempts to end their culture, In a time of huge racism, against them, With more evictions in the 1740s, & France in 1720s
I will now give a small amount about Gypsies, Of what happened to them upto the late 18thC, In the 18thC Spain, & France, still saw police style forces chase & catch Gypsies, With in it & France, centralised rule able unlike in the 16thC,
Able to arrest & whip, & punish, With in Germany mass punishments & in the Netherlands, restricting Gypsies, With posters on walls, Showing torture in German & Dutch late 17thC & early 18thC towns, flaying them,
With them seeing in Spain, them lashed, Every so often & encouragement's of them to become sedentary or leave, In the 18thC Spain succeeded in some sedentary ways, But it's flamenco dancing Gypsies remained dancing to some extent, In 1749 they rounded up 10,000 & sent them too build things, & forts, & slave centres, Sending more kids to other places, Of these many died, But some survived long enough to be released in the 1760s, But then receive massive restrictions,
Galleys had operated in Europe since the Medieval era, With many Huguenots, & Gypsies serving on them, For instance France had 10,000 serving them until 1748, But both it & Spain, the main users ended them as for new technology that year, So had to start sending them to other places, Galley slaves included murderers, too Gypsies, & thieves,
And it was a wish of monarchy to make courts send to there, or colonising, With in France, them forced to sleep in their own shit, & be branded, Both France & Spain, were chasing after Gypsies & jailing them to now, They had each sent them to galleys for over a C, With the Roman church saying they can not be priests in the 16thC,
Restrictions on Jews, upped a bit again in the 1790s, with restrictions in the capital, Making Gypsies go to church, banning freemasons, in 1740s by force, And Protestant churches were still banned from looking like churches, And still banned in many ways, Not to the 1860s were they properly free & equal citizens, Although they could enter public life, And not to the 1960s too, with Jesuits abolished in all Europe, by French actions, in 1773,
The finale, what about how, nominally centrist historians talk of Hungary before 1940, as if it was ok, but Hungary after 1946, just as bad. Surely that before 1940, was also a dictatorship. Which was very poor, Infact Hungary before 1940, was among the poorest lands in Europe, in the 1920s, loads of leftists were killed, the regime persecuted minorities, and made Hungary poor. But they do not talk of that bad, bnut see the report on post 1950s Hungary as just a hatchest job, and pre 1940,. as no hatchest job, despite poverty which saw Hungary very poor. and very oppressed, still with virtual sharecroppers, and feudal ways. This ignoring of this is a disaster. So we need a more reasnoble look at history. Not a right wing hatchest job, listening to right wing 19thC books, that were by elites who opposed the people, like they did foreigners, but a true pro decency attitude.
More for instance in late 2006, include the David Starky programme, that ignored the Bloody Assizes, that massacred 100s, when talking about the regime of the era, even when mentioning the revolt, by loads of people against the despotic regime, as of this being something that shows royalism to be bad, the worst human hand to human massacre in England in the last 100s of years, History progs always ignore the Culldoen massacres when roylaists massacred 1000s after that, the worst so and so massacre in Britain the last few centuries, and the royalists massacres in the English Civil war. Or like how royalists endlessly talk about the reign of terror but not the many more royalist massacres in the era, by Britain in the Indian Mutiny killing 30,000 by Chinese emperor of 100s of thousands, in Taipeng Revolt, or the 40,000 or so killed in the massacres of Naples, and Warsaw by royalists in the 1790-1800s, Or that way Burke, a pro slavery scumbag, is seen as a hero by loads of rightists when he opposed equality, and freedom, and was a evil oppressors, like the aliens in battle star galactica, Burke essentially did not oppiose most people being feudal slaves, this scumbag is no more a hero than Hitler, or Satan.
One of the most annoying right wing rubbishies is to claim everuything bad is as of the French Revolution, one person claimed as the French Revolution had conscription it was responsible for WW1, this is nonsense, the Kaiser caused WW1, and he was absolutely against the French Revolution, either you blame the Kaiser, tsar or Emperor of Austria, if you have any realisation of morality, And anyhow only a few decades earlier before the French Revolution Prussia had in the Seven years war such massive conscription, that the population was falling through this, so the idea the French Revolution started conscription is just a mad right wing lie, when the right undoubtabldy caused World War One, and caused it, the worst thing is when rightists say loony stuff like that they never say this is a opinion, but if you say no that is crazy, how can you say that, they belive that is a opinion, showing terribl;e levels of psycoptahic arrogant bias, on the behalf of the evil right, we need real history that looks at what happened to people, not royalist propaganda that pretends Burke or Carslile, rightists who opposed the rights of man, and scoffed at the idea of democracy, and freedom, and scoffed hugely at any equality, and wanted massive wars against any state that supported this, who were terrified about the idea of equality, and democarcy, and freedom, but did not care about real bad stuff being bad, are anything other than 18thC nazis, who saw themselves as a master race, who should ban the masses or people the vast majority from any power or rule, like The Nazis wanted to do in Russia. These scum should be seen as what they were, terrifying people who were just views of the past, not correct great minds. they were terrifying horrific enemies of the people, who did not care that there were people in famines, Highland Clearances unbelievable poverty, terrifying racist oppression as in Ireland, and the colonies, that made medieval villages look like mansions, and whole evil ideals, corruption and disgrace, Burke had views that are terrifying against the lower classes, and read like Hitler's views of races that he felt were inferior, it is humiliating to everybody to listen to people like that, as if they are anything other than terrifying, scary horrible bullies, oppressing the people, and opposing them, they have nothing but disdain to the people, and wish for us to be their lowers, that is unfair, and they deserve infamy, for that, we need a positive happy society, which helps all, not a oppression of the people, There is loads of anti leftist pro rightist bias. like how rightuist laud the horrific invasion of Scortland by the marquis Royal ally, which killed loads of people, and massacres loads, but the books, claimed the leader felt guilty about these massacres, thenthey massacresd more again, he did not mind marching with thne, and some histories then act like killing these massacring murderers was abiogger fact than anything else. also starky said the French Revolution was a thing of modernity versus traditon, and that the French Revolutionm was a bad revolution modernity thing, actually it was a fight of people versus fedual oppression, and that is that, and good on the side of the people, versus evil on the side of the self proclaimed master race, i,.e the nazi vermin, who opposed the french revolution, after it claimed that Jews were responsible, for the Revoltuon, that showed the royalists were the side of evil, as they were blam,ing a weaker group and all monarchs were anti semitic for ages, or most, like the tsars, then now Jews are not such a weak minority, and are equal with the rest of societym the Monarchs do not go on about jews, they were the side of evil, were the royalists, If we do not agree the French revolution was good, we get silly views like right wingers claiming it was responsible for WW1, and WW2, even though the Kaiser, Tsar, Hitler, and Emperor of Austria who caused those wars all oposed the French Revolution and 3 were directly lines of people who attacked it as much as they could, and 1 was on a line of the anti french revolution group linked to Prussian rightists Hitler who liked the Prussian royals so much in history he thought for Germany in ww1, despite being austrian born,
Some claim historians should have no views then splurt out views endlessly saying things like this revolution was bad, and terrible, and some spurious conclusion of anti left wing pro royalist trash on some events or ignoring things whioch harm their views' ideals,
Without history having morals it ios worthless
You may say this does not matter, but uit is like this we canm surely say Hitler was worse than Stalin indeed that is what I would sday, I would like to think the rerason why Iraq has gone bad is as of a non realisation of this by some. The case is, that in the Iraq war, some people wanmted to say Hitler and Stalin are both as bad as eachother just to have no thourogh look, and to just make the massive anti nazi feelings in the west be as anti communist too. The fact was that Hitler's ideals were more evil, So the moral of that view that all dictators are extactly the same, especially if they are murderers. I think murderous dictators are scum of course, but not the same, so the Bathist Party a party that belived in basicaly normal stuff like Arab nationalism, and equality was seen to have to be treated the same way anazis were affter ww2, i.e chuck out a whole load from office, acvtually not enouggh nazis were punished but thats naotgher point, the British US people then fired the whole Iraqi government which weas mad, as there was nothing inanetly evil about bathism, other than nationalism, which all nations have, and iraq was supposed to have it after and beforeth war while nazis were inherently evil, for bullying and evil, the reason why people decided to fire thenm all, was as they wanted to prtend all republic's dictators are as bad eachother, when actually they were not, all that needed to happen was the baddies of the Iraqi reguime be punished and people lower down i.e higgh up this or that be punished if need be, but not if they were innocent. The fact is some were they were just normal people in society not believing in eviol not doing anything evil, certainly not any more than many in western lands, or any other lands inmcolved far more in wars or democides , or corruption, so in a sense firing people on mass, was like discrimination, it wouyld have been ok to fire them all if they geninuly felt they were a master race or had geninly evil beliefs but the bathist party was not that, the reason was people wanted to say left and right wing dictators are as bad as eachother, and it is funny even though monarchy killed more than communism, inthe 20th Century demonisation of royals never occurs as of the rightist bias, from Hitohito to the Kaiser, thats easy to see blah blah .Some right wingers claim they are just truying to be balanced but endlessly their "balanced" is to claim the right must be seen as superior master race guys who must rule, or have some form of higher power, over us, like they just attack the French Revolution, like that old chessnut of going on about how there were only 7 people in the Bastille, when it was stormed, this is to claim the French Revolution peasants did no goodm, and did not know what they were doing, actually the only reason it was raided was to get weapons, to stop right wingers, attacking the famine situation, condition of the peasants, there isd so much oa right wing bias in history, Its true ebven the kleft are affected by it, like Left wingers who see 1930s Hungary as great, but not 1950s, surely people werre being oppressed in 1930s Hungary, there was still poverty and badness,. and oppression, and it was only a decade since large massacres of left wingers, surely left wingers need to say the 1930s and 1920s had bad srtuff, too, not to go on about how great life was for rich people, then, but there was good andf bad then, just as they do for the 1950s, surely history is political and to not say there was badin the 1930s makes it seem a golden age, when it was era of recession evenm for Hungary and Eastern Europe, so not great, it was better than the 1940s or 1910s,, but it was a dictatoral era, and surely leftists should attack all non leftist dictatoprs, as they oppose their intrests and to not do so, should mean you just support right wing dictators who want to kill you, but nmo we shoudl oppose them blah blagh its al;l blah, right winmgers never giveup their we are always right ideas, what cha bce do the left have of winning if they do not practice was they preach which is to say leftist society and fredom is good, we need open mindedness, to right wing ideas, and the idea lidfer was not all terribl;e under the right, but also truth, and there is not enough of that, at the moment, we need more, and I have listed the bad in history and why we need the truth Here are some more sites, there are books and articles on the subjects in many internet places, or internet book shops, bookstores, at the bottom, are lists of which were the worst regimes of the past few centuries.
The Norman Davies book a History of Europe, is very good, and informative, but I wish to make a few condemnations of it. I found Norman Davies's book to right wing. It goes on and on about Stalin's killings demonising him,. But ignores Hitler's in many ways. And when Hitler's are mentioned like the Nuremberg trials, at the end of it he goes on about katyn which was earlier. And says nothing of Franco's mass executions. He also lists waffen ss divisions,. If that, why not list the red army divisions, he does it to pretend the waffen ss were more popular than the international brigade which fought in Spain for the republic, The international brigade was composed of 40,000 volunteers from neutral states, states that opposed them going, while waffen ss was made up entirely of people from puppet states, and had less recruits than the Indian army had from Britain, the waffen ss had less than 100 members recruited from lands not under nazi rule, the IB had over 40,000 from lands that did not really want them to go there. So the IB was far more popular. Also there is a bit where he seems to claim that Stalin was planning a attack on Hitler for which if you look at Soviet records there was no such plan. This is almost conspiracy theory history by him. Another thing showing his right wing bias is a statement which talks of Italy and it's post war era. It calls the left wing red Brigade, "terrorists", and the Bologna bombing by right wingers as "counter terrorism" surely the British security forces killing a member of the IRA in Gibralter could be called Counter Terrorism, or other right wing crushings of some group which can be labelled terrorist rightly or wrongly. But to call a Secret Far right group, killing a larger amount of people, than the Red Brigade ever killed, purely to encourage terrorism, and fear, and to help their allies and own selves into power, in dictatorial ways, was not counter terrorism, but was terrorism. Infact the words terror define that absolutely. And there is a whole load of stuff of this sort of right wing bent.
Bias does exist in history books, long back I read a major 1930s History book and it went on about how it thought Scottish independance after 1400s was just bad for Scotland, as it was written by an Englishman, this was just felt rto be undeniably correct by English writers, also all books have bias, What about how the right always try to claim when they are losing the debate that the lwewft are closing down the debate, when actually all that has happened is the debate has been won and we do not feel like hearing their pathetic ignorant sdame old lies propaganda, then you say your view and they never want to listenm what about how when nazi war criminals were being traxced in the 1990s some so called mainstream rightuists and whole right wing newspapers said they should not be traced, while they said Communist spies who comitted far less bad stuff should be jailed for crimes of the same period when they were just as olf, or about when the left ban holocaust denial the media go on and on about it saying should be accepted, but when the right in the Baltics ban Comie crimes denial, none of these4 rightuists shout free speech they just agree that you should not be allowed to commen the people who saved Europe from nazi-ism, or when bravedheart was being filmed loadfs of nazis said it is wrong purely as they did not like how Scotland was being celebnrated not the big powerful country , and they did not condemn their own land having its history falsely taught just to benefit itself, and often right wing not real left wing ideas, iot is right wing to be very unfair
Also what about how when their are allegations of crimes by establishments forces the media alsways suck up to them, and say oh but all people are like that and oh but look at the situation, when we know from the 20th century that criminals should be ehled responsible for their crimes whether they are in the police army monarchy or anything else, and not excused, and not seen as great when everybody else is not trusted as it can only lead to a more brutal and worse society so we just need good left wing nice y nicey realisations that right wing ideaologty ios satanic eveil and worshipping the stronmg and the servants of the strong and ruins all happily even themselves at tinmes, but it is ebvil distrustful and scary just like all right wingersd, anti democracy antio the republic anti thye socialism ways people we will never give in to these scary loonies the crazy fools will lose we will win hoorahhh
I also find those right wing anthropoligists annoying who claim animals are like this, or that when they are being like what they are , uncaring and that is unfair, what about those animals, which care, for others, there are loads, the more sucesful usually more so,
Armies often bring some bad, as they are strong, armies of all lands, anmd strengh is often used to just bully the weaker, or less powerful ebven when the weaker are better
I also think it is silly when rich people make some tribes make old Indian land ways privatised, as surely they will sell it to richer people, like how gambling alsways sees rich powerful bookie win in end just liek capitalism, or in times when soldiers recieved land in many eras and sold it to rich, so indians in south america maybe should keep it , or maybe they ir s a new left wing capitalist way
Finally, that saying with rights come respsonsibilites, I disagree, some right are inalienable, we do not need resposnsibilities, to be protected against murder, what about babies, they have no responsibilities, but have rights, and animals, too, also some responsibilities do not see a requirements for rights, i.e climbing a cliff, you may succeed, and then be sad to see a even higher cliff, my point therem, is very hard top understand, I am speaking in a hard to understand way but am right, we all deserve rights, unless we earnm the right to not have them, by some sort of badness, and even then hmmm ?
Also I read one of those right wing typical statements, that claim May Day was first done by the Nazis, a typical right wing thing of just sayiong thuings to upset left wingers, in real history bvooks, not to make a better society, or say teh treuth, but just make leftists be embaredds, but it is untrue the USSR celevrated May Day from 1917, and socialists celebrated it before the Nazis, and the Nazis just had a celebration later, and not of workers, but of their nazi ideals, also much right wing history is just a attempt to gaul the left by mirepresentation of facts, ignorning loads, and loads and loads of absolute lies, we need truthful left wing history, not silly rightist lies, and opinions, like that the empire was great when these people know nothing of it's bad, and excuse all the bad, as they do not love good enough, so they dserve to be told they are wrong,. and realise it,
Lasly the right wing are often saying we should not say how Clivwe of India, and co caused milliosn of deaths, asit harms the patriotism of the land, of who is aying, it,. but look they dod not mind condemning more left wing symbols, like Lloyd George, and Attlee, or todays lefties, so they say well done mass murderers, we should never make our nation look bad, by saying bad people were bad in teh past, but they do not mind condemning good people, as i say in my page Patriotism.
We really should condemn teh evil leaders of the past whatever nationmality they are, look at Germany Germans cheer their land when it wins the world cup, as do Russians when they win sports, even though both nations have a massive proprtion of each land, ashamed of many of their nations leaders, Britain also has seen it's people ashamed of many bad leaders but still allot of pride, for wins, same to for the US, yes some are not, but normally for good reasons, A good nation has pride and shame in it's past leaders, just like a good person is not always happy at what every person does, or unhappy.
Also rightists have a chip on their shoulder, like when they claim the word comrade is ok, but raising your fist in a swatika is not, or they complain there are programmes about the Nqazais but not so much Communist oppression, which is insane the word comrade was used before Communism saw it's regimes start in 1917, and was used by many groups for many years, and right wing things are used allot, like Royal stuff, of evil dictators, like Hnery VII, and also some things from rightist eras are kept on, like Volkswagons, and stuff, like that, and loads of rightist stuff is celebrated far more than leftist stuff, histiory shoudl celebrate leftist stuff, as even rightists now accept they are wrong on most stuff, so we should have histiory which says lets see leftist history is right, Volkswagons though are now a lthing left wing society has absorbed as a car can not in total be racist, or nazis, well it cam be, but enough water is under the nridge to have a bit denazified it etc etc, maybe, but rigjhtists moan about wevery left wing thinmg unbeliabl;ey and then cl;aim they accept our views, and accept murder is bad,
People who support Clive of India, and such just as he was British are like people who in tegh future will supports Saddam or Mussolini just as he was of thei9r nation, and surely if history is just supposed to be a nation myth, then it will be that all the most evil of todfay will be seen as good and most good as evil, and our future will just see evil for our future as people will think the right way to be brought up is to be brought up to be evil as they will belicve that will result in good as the liar right wing history will teach people so, we should teach a pro left wing truth as that is the truth and leads to good, we all know nice ness is what is good, and needed, for ourselves with some hard descions, so we need the true history the left wing one, not a right wing one, which picks and chooses truths for it's own sake, but a true left wing one, otherwise we would see Gandhi demonised, and Nazis glorified which is wrong, we need good to be seen as good, and teh evil as evil, the truth that is all we need for histiory and fun intrests at times, tharts not tall but its a thing we need.
It can not be stressed how crazy it is that people say britain has got better if we say the queen has led since 1950 but say it has got worse iof we say socialist have as history is from a right wing bent forgetting to say well done the left. Or how when right wingers feel like, all in the same year, they claim everything in teh country is terrible, like if they are making excuses for proposing a big change, while if leftists do, the same rightists claim everything in the country if perfect and for the life of them they honestly can not see why change is needed. Left wing changes are good, that is a usual lesson from history, not always but usually. right wing bad.
I also hate the way right wingers feel they can express any view in anything, but if you do they claim you are politicially motovated and should be ingored, as if they are not, Are views are motovated by the truth and theirps by dishonesty so we should be listened, to, and it is they who should be ignored. But if they ignore us, we will tell the world and just win the debate as we have the truth and they just have liess and we just have the truth,
It is also annoying how most history books feel a good intention left wing thing that causes deaths should be demonised but feel a good intention rightist things should always be just ignored as not their fault. I.e plague caused by left, the full est evil, one caused by right, not their fault.
I suppose we win if you read this site, tjhe left win, so much, we should say the crimes of the left aswell as right can be remembered, the left;'s atoned, teh right not, The cromes in the Ukranian famine, were like a left wing local government or national regime, failing you, it happens, and was bad, and needs looking at for why, its pretty easy to realise what went wrong, it was dictatorship and maybe more things, I always see the Cambodian Disaster as horrific, when I see it on TV, thats what makes the left best, and now we have won the debate of who was most evil, we can look at these, and not do the right wing thing of saying stop talking about it help help stop tal,king about this, your putting our countyry down, stop making us feel guilty thing, no we can talk about left and right wing crimes and alws remenber the right were worse, up with Ukraine, up with Congo etc etc,
Not that it would be right to blame yourself really, I have never felt guilty about many of these things, strangel;y at times I felt guilty about left wing criomes but nmot Brtitish, when many do vice versa. and there was no way they were my fault, but maybe that keeps you on path to right views or wrong I dont know, well we should suppiort the good people, and maybe look at the acts of bad people at times, but up with good people, should I feel guilty not really, but then again, maybe I should to try to be right but that can lead to very bad ideas, so lets not feekl guilty in a way and only oppose when people say was not bad hmm, maybe, but just say what was right etc etc its a long story
An Index with links to almost all our sites.
The Highland Clearances and it's full terribleness
A site on the Belgian Congo, and how the king of that land killed 10s of millions of Congolese
Why the French Revolution was good
A tiny paragraph on why it is right to remember history
The most evil regimes of the 19th Century
The Full Story of the Beja People, who it is felt inspired the Roman idea of the Blemmye people
What were the nicest regimes ever
The Best regimes ever in terms of achievers
A site saying how the Communists have moral authority over the right in Russia
A Biography of Vietnamese Communist, Ho Chi Minh
A site attacking how some Upper Class people are still attacking Lower Class people in 2006
Which regimes killed the most people in the 19th Century, find out here,
Worst 17th Century regimes ever
A site stating what have been the world's largest empires ever
What would happen in a war between these sides
What were the most evil regimes ever
A list stating what were the worst 1990s regimes
What were the worst 16th Century regimes ever
What were the worst 2000s regimes
A site stating the 10 largest majority English speaking lands, as their main tongue in the world
A site on space, and the records to do with this subject
A site on a time traveling revolutionary
The world's 10 most powerful countries in 2008
My Worst regimes of the 20th century essay
Villas Madeira - In Association plus a List nearer the bottom of the politics of winners of the Soccer World Cup and European Championships, I.e Uruguay in 1930 a Democratic, Left wing, Republic, plus a list of games I have played,.
Our History Lounge - Where you can peruse many fascinating historical articles.
Worst 70 regimes of the 20th Century
In conclusion I like to think the 1560s Scottish revolt helped bring in democracy and socialism, as it made the covenanters get in power, in Scotland they helped Cromwell to power in the 1640s, this opprtunity only arrived as of Ireland's revolt in the 1640s against imperial oppression and Cromwell was Welsh, and a more democratic Britain for the 18th Centiry than before was better than ebfore, and this inspired France's revolution and the US's and these helped 3rd world ones so the world is democratic and relativelpy prosperopus if the Covenanters had not used some socialist welfare statements in the 1560s they would never have got power, not that they were great to live under, but they were better than the royals in many ways, so if we did not have that we would probabaly still have famines in Europe, just like how Bruitain's working class were poor before democarcy in the 1840s depiste Britain being wealthy as to France in 1780, with LEs of 18 in some towns in Britain in the 1840s before democracy and for France in the 1780s, when it was wealthy in some ways with Hot air ballons invented, but when many people died of famine in huge numbers, and when the LE was dreadful, with some areas having people who felt a guy with a just a few klivestock was rich, living in huts, and with huge poverty, without these tools created by covenanters etc against aristo-royal dictats, we would have been in their control and democarcy would not have come, so thats what I feel