6 ms·

You need to learn some history instead of propaganda. Both people and ideas were highly filtered in circulation. That's a fact.

coldtea 5y ago
>You need to learn some history instead of propaganda. Just don't trust the history of your national side -- or the winners, in most cases.
- randomeat 5y ago
  WW2, for example
  - coldtea 5y ago
    Especially that. What with provoking the Japanese before Pearl Harbor to get an excuse to join the war, the propaganda over decades to dismiss the importance of USSR in the fall of Nazi Germany, Dresden, the reasoning behind hitting Hiroshima and Nagashaki, the cozying up with "ex" Nazis in West Germany (now an ally), and tons of other dirty laundry... What, you expected at least this to be a clear cut "pure good vs pure evil" affair, the way "sanctioned" national histories retell it? Here's but an example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_St._Louis#The_%22Voyage_of_the_Damned%22 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_St._Louis#The_%22Voyage_of_... https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2017/06/american-nazis-in-the-1930sthe-german-american-bund/529185/ https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2017/06/american-nazis-in-... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2001/04/hitlers-willing-business-partners/303146/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2001/04/hitlers...
    - randomeat 5y ago
      Minor in comparison to the larger propaganda over that war
    - reducesuffering 5y ago
      > provoking the Japanese before Pearl Harbor to get an excuse to join the war Not sure really any significant group of historians push this. Japan invading China is basically universally condemned, they signed the Tripartite pact with Nazi Germany, and you think it's the US' fault they decided to stop airplanes and oil to that regime?
      - worrycue 5y ago
        Correct me if I’m wrong, I did not study US history as part of my education, but wasn’t the attack on Pearl Harbour sold to the American public as “unprovoked”?
        reducesuffering 5y ago
        Yes as is the general historian consensus around the world. There are some that try to make a case that the US also had done bad things, like force open Japan's ports 80 years prior, and then stopped trading oil and airplanes to Japan, as "provoking" a bombing attack. However these are probably the same people that think Russia is being "provoked" into invading other countries... Essentially though, Japan had imperial ambitions across most of East and Southeast Asia, knew the US wouldn't allow them much more conquest, and miscalculated that attacking first would be the best chess move to negotiate and secure the rest of the Asian territory they wanted.
      - coldtea 5y ago
        >Not sure really any significant group of historians push this. No, just the accurate ones. The state sanctioned historiography pretends it's not a thing. >Japan invading China is basically universally condemned, they signed the Tripartite pact with Nazi Germany, and you think it's the US' fault they decided to stop airplanes and oil to that regime? Yeah, the kind US that warred in the Philipines, and toppled/established/promoted regimes all around the world for the whole 20th century (and the 21st) got so upset at Japan invading China... The same Japan they earlier attacked as a sovereign state and forced-open to their trade and terms, just because they could... (Who invaded whom first here?)
mbeex 5y ago
It depends. The general shortage implied a relatively high average level of knowledge. I grew up in Eastern Germany. At the time I started my studies, the country routinely created clones of the early 8086 PC. As a common user, you got a manual, describing things down to machine language. 'opcode hunting' (finding the assembly instructions from previously unknown opcodes) was kind of a competition among us aspiring physicists and mathematicians.

coldtea 5y ago

>You need to learn some history instead of propaganda. Just don't trust the history of your national side -- or the winners, in most cases.

randomeat 5y ago
WW2, for example
- coldtea 5y ago
  Especially that. What with provoking the Japanese before Pearl Harbor to get an excuse to join the war, the propaganda over decades to dismiss the importance of USSR in the fall of Nazi Germany, Dresden, the reasoning behind hitting Hiroshima and Nagashaki, the cozying up with "ex" Nazis in West Germany (now an ally), and tons of other dirty laundry... What, you expected at least this to be a clear cut "pure good vs pure evil" affair, the way "sanctioned" national histories retell it? Here's but an example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_St._Louis#The_%22Voyage_of_the_Damned%22 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_St._Louis#The_%22Voyage_of_... https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2017/06/american-nazis-in-the-1930sthe-german-american-bund/529185/ https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2017/06/american-nazis-in-... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2001/04/hitlers-willing-business-partners/303146/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2001/04/hitlers...
  - randomeat 5y ago
    Minor in comparison to the larger propaganda over that war
  - reducesuffering 5y ago
    > provoking the Japanese before Pearl Harbor to get an excuse to join the war Not sure really any significant group of historians push this. Japan invading China is basically universally condemned, they signed the Tripartite pact with Nazi Germany, and you think it's the US' fault they decided to stop airplanes and oil to that regime?
    - worrycue 5y ago
      Correct me if I’m wrong, I did not study US history as part of my education, but wasn’t the attack on Pearl Harbour sold to the American public as “unprovoked”?
      - reducesuffering 5y ago
        Yes as is the general historian consensus around the world. There are some that try to make a case that the US also had done bad things, like force open Japan's ports 80 years prior, and then stopped trading oil and airplanes to Japan, as "provoking" a bombing attack. However these are probably the same people that think Russia is being "provoked" into invading other countries... Essentially though, Japan had imperial ambitions across most of East and Southeast Asia, knew the US wouldn't allow them much more conquest, and miscalculated that attacking first would be the best chess move to negotiate and secure the rest of the Asian territory they wanted.
    - coldtea 5y ago
      >Not sure really any significant group of historians push this. No, just the accurate ones. The state sanctioned historiography pretends it's not a thing. >Japan invading China is basically universally condemned, they signed the Tripartite pact with Nazi Germany, and you think it's the US' fault they decided to stop airplanes and oil to that regime? Yeah, the kind US that warred in the Philipines, and toppled/established/promoted regimes all around the world for the whole 20th century (and the 21st) got so upset at Japan invading China... The same Japan they earlier attacked as a sovereign state and forced-open to their trade and terms, just because they could... (Who invaded whom first here?)

mbeex 5y ago

It depends. The general shortage implied a relatively high average level of knowledge. I grew up in Eastern Germany. At the time I started my studies, the country routinely created clones of the early 8086 PC. As a common user, you got a manual, describing things down to machine language. 'opcode hunting' (finding the assembly instructions from previously unknown opcodes) was kind of a competition among us aspiring physicists and mathematicians.