Would be interesting
Random thoughts related to
order and beauty and all that shit.
It would be interesting to see a history of the world or the US, written with a HARD DETERMINATION to avoid all shared lies and destructive abstractions. No nonsense about "rights" or "laws" or "civics" or "constitutions". Just use the basic OBSERVED universals of behavior by individuals and organizations, as documented by Machiavelli and Parkinson.
The usual school history course, whether "left" or "right", starts from the same set of shared lies.
Example of shared lie: We killed all the Injuns. Left version: This was bad. Right version: This was good.
Fact: The warlike Injuns were killing each other long before we arrived. Tribes were completely genocided, empires rose and fell, forced mass migrations ("Trails of Tears") were common. The new Euro tribe sometimes made war against the old tribes and sometimes lived in peace. Some of our wars were really fought against England or France, with some tribes taking the colonial side and other tribes taking the English or French side. Victorious tribes often enslaved conquered tribes. Cherokees, who had long experience with slaves, became prosperous slaveholders in Dixie. When we forced them into Oklahoma, they brought their slaves along and became prosperous slaveholders again.
I've found that books written from 1880 to 1910 tend to be most objective and free from lies. This is true in religion, politics, economics and science. In some cases the
solutions given by those writers were wrong, but usually the
analysis of a problem was right.
Why was that period optimal? The endpoint is obvious.
Wilson cranked up Deepstate in 1913, turning Lady Edgar loose to blackmail everyone and create "terrorists" of all flavors, and rigidly moving all schools and media and corporations in unison to serve globalism.
The start in 1880 is not so clear. Maybe the globalism of Madman Lincoln had faded out? But that wouldn't explain the optimal period in science.
Labels: Parkinson, Shared Lie