Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts


Go Back   Vanguard News Network Forum > The Struggle > The Verbal War
Donate Register Multimedia Blogs Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Login

 
Thread Display Modes Share
Old June 14th, 2011 #1
Leonard Rouse
Celebrating My Diversity
 
Leonard Rouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: With The Creepy-Ass Crackahs
Posts: 8,156
Default Is the self-description of realist historians as "revisionists" counterproductive?

In general usage, the term "revisionist history" has nothing to do with the Holohoax. It's used to indicate an alteration of the facts, after the fact. The implication is that one is moving from fact to fiction.

When 'hoax busters use the term, they imply the opposite, that they're moving from a state of fiction to one of fact.

That's great, but one has to be fairly knowledgable already to understand this. For someone coming in cold, it looks something like "Flat Earth Society" except serious. It's very, very strange looking.

Yes? No? Do you believe the label is helpful, harmful, or neutral?
 
Old June 14th, 2011 #2
littlefieldjohn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,105
Default

Unfortunately the label 'Revisionist' has almost become a byword, an epitaph for notoriety, used to demean or insult.
Reformer has less of a stigma attached to it.
They aren't actually revising anyway inasmuch as reforming, imo.

Last edited by littlefieldjohn; June 14th, 2011 at 05:02 PM.
 
Old June 14th, 2011 #3
Leonard Rouse
Celebrating My Diversity
 
Leonard Rouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: With The Creepy-Ass Crackahs
Posts: 8,156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by littlefieldjohn View Post
Revisionist has almost become a byword, used to demean or insult.
Reformer has less of a stigma attached to it.
I didn't think to ask for alternatives.

My kneejerk is that "reformer" is much preferable. Good one.
 
Old June 14th, 2011 #4
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default

I don't think it's well chosen. To my ear, 'revisionist' at best smacks of someone going back and revising details. I don't see it as changing facts after the fact, as you say, but as correcting mistakes made by earlier historians.

I don't think 'revising' is big enough to cover what is actually going on. The 'revisionists' are refuting massive lies; decades-long campaigns of slander against entire peoples.

Last edited by Alex Linder; June 16th, 2011 at 10:35 AM.
 
Old June 14th, 2011 #5
Thomas de Aynesworth
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,752
Default

There's really no other word for it, revisionism is a common practice by historians and happens in almost every conceivable topic in historiography.
 
Old June 15th, 2011 #6
Leonard Rouse
Celebrating My Diversity
 
Leonard Rouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: With The Creepy-Ass Crackahs
Posts: 8,156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
I don't think it's well chosen. To my ear, 'revisionist' at best smacks of someone going back and revising details.

. . .

I don't think 'revising' is big enough to cover what is actually going on. The 'revisionists' are refusting massive lies; decades-long campaigns of slander against entire peoples.
Yes! It can also be read as jot-and-tittle-ism, which downplays the scope of the work.

I don't mean to imply too much: the response to revisionism is pretty much controlled by the enemy, through framing via media/education. Still, it doesn't seem the best marketing, and it's something the enemy doesn't control.
 
Old June 15th, 2011 #7
Kamerad Q
Senior Member
 
Kamerad Q's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 786
Default

We must define ourselves, and create a reality that is congruent with nature as best we can. Passively accepting enemy definitions is pure folly. When the MSM definitions are incongruent with how we define ourselves their bias becomes transparent, thus undermining the propaganda's effectiveness. Define positive things by positive affirmations, and with that understanding here are some suggestions: Historical researchers, historical investigators, historical fact finders, independent historians, historical fraud detectives, disinformation correctors, and finally; objective historians as opposed to corrupt historians beholden to the prevailing power of the times for their substance.
 
Old June 15th, 2011 #8
Leonard Rouse
Celebrating My Diversity
 
Leonard Rouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: With The Creepy-Ass Crackahs
Posts: 8,156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamerad Q View Post
historical fraud detectives, disinformation correctors,
I really like the idea here. "Disinfo Detectives"

Frame the enemy from the outset. Don't leave it open to (mis)interpretation.

Last edited by Leonard Rouse; June 15th, 2011 at 12:14 PM.
 
Old June 15th, 2011 #9
Kamerad Q
Senior Member
 
Kamerad Q's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 786
Default

I prefer your variation too. Now that we know professor Moriarty's method perhaps a compendium of corrupted words should be compiled with the necessary corrections, so that clarity can be restored? Xenophobe to xenoscientia, and, or magishomogeneousdefensor. Those opposed to the latter are homogeneousphobes in dire need medical treatment.

 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:16 AM.
Page generated in 0.28370 seconds.