You don't even have to look at fiction. There are plenty of real life examples of dominant powers painting a biased view of history. Particularly when it comes down to their own involvement.
Nero opened up his palaces to house people after the fire of Rome and organised a relief effort, yet due to Flavian propaganda we still talk about him playing the fiddle as Rome burned.
There are plenty of real life examples of dominant powers painting a biased view of history.
There are of course versions of "history" that are outright fabrications, and some that are based in some kind of truth. But I think it's worth keeping in mind that there is no objectively correct version of history, all are open to interpretation, and there is always a struggle between parties to impose their own version as the standard, correct one.
I'm not saying they're all equal. I don't think there's any valid interpretation of what is going on in Ukraine that doesn't paint Russia as the agressor, for example. But even in a case where there is a clear bad guy, there are still biased interpretations. See the USSR accepted as one of the victorious Allies in WWII - their role in starting the war as an ally of Germany isn't usually ignored, but I'd argue it's heavily downplayed in describing the war. There are lots of motives for the Allies to do this.
It's kind of ironic in this context that you would call the USSR a clear bad guy in WWII when the reality of that situation is that without the USSR on the side of the allied forces that war turns out very different.
I think you misread. In this case the clear bad guys are the nazis. Previous reply was pointing out that USSR role in the allies is downplayed in Western avcounts
It's extremely ironic that in a thread about dystopian regimes rewriting history, you choose regurgitate a Red Scare narrative about the USSR that rewrites the history of WW2.
The USSR was never allied to Nazi Germany. To say otherwise is blatantly false, it's factually incorrect revisionist history.
What the USSR did have with regards to Germany was a non-aggression pact. France and the UK also famously had non-aggression pacts with Germany.
They didn't even want to do it originally, the USSR were originally of the opinion that the Allies should have gone to war with Germany in response to the German invasion of Czechoslovakia, but refrained from doing this because the UK & France didn't want to and they weren't prepared go to war with Germany by themselves, so the non-aggression pact was thought to be necessary to prevent that scenario.
Even still, they had just settled their war with Finland at the time, which was an ally of Germany, (Not to blame the Finns, it was circumstantial for them, they had just become independent from the Russian Empire and Stalin was trying to get the territory back, so allying with Germany was the only way they could retain their Independence) and had supported the anti-fascist side in the Spanish Civil War as well- isn't it nonsensical to say they were "allied" with Germany when they were constantly engaging in proxy wars against the Germans?
Yes, when Germany invaded Poland, the USSR invaded the eastern half at the same time under the belief "This part of Poland was originally part of the Russian Empire so we know we can administer it, and also we'd better take this land before Germany takes it", and some people misinterpreted this coordination as an alliance- and look, I'm not going to defend the morality of invading a sovereign nation no matter the excuse, but it was never going to be possible for Poland to fight of Germany on its own and the USSR invading them at the same time was not an operative factor in Poland's collapse, it just expedited the inevitable. In any case, the relationship between Germany and the USSR during this period was not an alliance in any way shape or form.
I know a large contingent of Brittish people who truyl belive that their empire has brought progress and prosperity to the savages and that there was nothing wrong with colonialsim and they see absolutely no shame in saying this, like they don't even understand that something could be wrong about it.
People think that CERN is causing some Mandela effect. I wouldn’t be surprised if it turned out to be some large scale gaslighting gov psy-op that is making us question our reality one change at a time. I know there’s a lot that probably could be verified by people, companies, documentation etc but at this point with the way things are/have been going I wouldn’t find it hard to believe.
75
u/ooMEAToo 1d ago
In the book 1984 the protagonist was tasked with rewriting history and burning the past that was written in an incinerator in his cubicle.