3 ms·

> Someone on HN recommended Oliver Stone's Untold History of the Unites States. It's a really good look at the other end of this empire. It's obvious where his

> Someone on HN recommended Oliver Stone's Untold History of the Unites States. It's a really good look at the other end of this empire. It's obvious where his biases lie (check out his Putin interviews for some real ass kissing). Sometimes he says cringeworthy stuff like "this particularly American sin of xenophobia" (like really dude, you know this much about history and you're gonna say that), but it's great criticism and something lots of people would do well to watch. He’s a great filmmaker, but I couldn’t get into this series. It really seemed to me that the goal was to spoon feed me ideas rather than to educate me and cause me to think. I love history and have a pretty dim view of US behavior towards the rest of the world (I have lived in the US all of my life), so it could have been a great match. The tactics felt very manipulative, however. Documentaries shouldn’t use background music to inform me of who the hero is or who the bad guys are. They should be relatively dry and factual. This series is a fantastic example of how it should not be done.

aaron-lebo 9y ago
I can only take it in doses, but it's invaluable from the perspective of if you wanted to represent the US as poorly as possible based on its own actions, how could you do it? He's a guy you can't watch with your blinders on, but the raw amount of material there is, and the coverage of events like Iran in 53, Chile in 73 is a good counterpoint to anyone who wants to suggest the US cares particularly about democracy, or has only been a force for good, that kind of rhetoric. Is there something similar that has less of a slant?
- ABCLAW 9y ago
  I find Chomsky's critiques of US Imperialism to be fairly dry, lucid and unemotional. However, it is difficult to perform a critique of America's moral standing and not be accused of having a slant, regardless of the sufficiency of your evidence or the strength of your argument.
emodendroket 9y ago
No work of history is entirely straight. Even if the presentation is dry, if you read two different historians on the same era you're likely to get a wildly different account. Was the War of 1812 a rousing success that united Americans more than they had been and demonstrated the ability of a republic to wage war without compromising its principles, or a catastrophic, foolish decision? I've seen both takes.

aaron-lebo 9y ago

I can only take it in doses, but it's invaluable from the perspective of if you wanted to represent the US as poorly as possible based on its own actions, how could you do it? He's a guy you can't watch with your blinders on, but the raw amount of material there is, and the coverage of events like Iran in 53, Chile in 73 is a good counterpoint to anyone who wants to suggest the US cares particularly about democracy, or has only been a force for good, that kind of rhetoric. Is there something similar that has less of a slant?

ABCLAW 9y ago
I find Chomsky's critiques of US Imperialism to be fairly dry, lucid and unemotional. However, it is difficult to perform a critique of America's moral standing and not be accused of having a slant, regardless of the sufficiency of your evidence or the strength of your argument.

emodendroket 9y ago

No work of history is entirely straight. Even if the presentation is dry, if you read two different historians on the same era you're likely to get a wildly different account. Was the War of 1812 a rousing success that united Americans more than they had been and demonstrated the ability of a republic to wage war without compromising its principles, or a catastrophic, foolish decision? I've seen both takes.