Similar Posts
Biden’s Doublespeak About Ending Yemen War -Abby Martin
Abby Martin explains what President Biden really means by the duplicitous language in his major Feb. 4 foreign policy speech on ending the Yemen war.
Ukraine: Russian Crimes, American Hypocrisy – Wilkerson and Jay
The billionaires of the U.S., Russia and Ukraine are all willing to sacrifice the sons and daughters of working families in wars for profit and hegemony. Col. Lawrence Wilkerson joins Paul Jay on theAnalysis.news.
Russian Doomsday Machine an Answer to U.S. Decapitation Strategy – Daniel Ellsberg on RAI Pt 5/13
The U.S. military still thinks that a nuclear war can be won by targeting Russian leadership in a bizarre Dr. Strangelove logic; it’s a recipe for unmitigated catastrophe, says Daniel Ellsberg on Reality Asserts Itself with Paul Jay. This is an episode of Reality Asserts Itself, produced November 4, 2018, with Paul Jay.
From Rafah to an Abyss – Israel to Continue Attack on 1.4 Million Palestinians – Joshua Landis (part 2/2)
In part 2, Joshua Landis discusses Hamas’ recent ceasefire proposal and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s planned ground incursion into Rafah. Netanyahu has rejected international calls to abandon a military onslaught on the densely populated area around the Rafah Crossing, where 1.4 million Palestinians from all over the Gaza Strip are seeking shelter in a 64-square-kilometer area. Landis contends that Bibi’s explicit repudiation of a two-state solution, as well as lack of plans to guarantee the safety of civilians before launching an invasion of Rafah, does little to assuage concerns about the continued ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from the Gaza Strip.
Full Interview – Powerful Christian Nationalists in Military See Trump as Vehicle for Authoritarian Religious State – Mikey Weinstein
Christian fundamentalist nationalists in the senior ranks of the military, see Trump as an instrument of God’s plan to create an authoritarian Christian state. The military allows active proselytizing and recruitment of soldiers, contrary to the constitutional separation of church and state. Many of these officers and soldiers were involved in the events leading up to and on Jan 6th, which has been described as an attempted coup. Mikey Weinstein of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation joins Paul Jay on theAnalysis.news
Biden’s China Policy: A More Polite Trump – Amb. Chas Freeman
Retired Ambassador Chas Freeman, Nixon’s translator during his 1972 trip to China, says U.S. policy to China remains a desire to hold on to primacy globally and regionally. Biden’s approach so far is not much different than the aggressive posture of Trump. This interview was originally conducted on March 12, 2021.
Have long enjoyed Gerald’s analysis. But it was only with this interview that I realized how exciting and profound a scholar he is.
This has been a very interesting analysis. Notice that this is written in the past tense. Now if I wrote, “This is an interesting analysis” it takes on a whole different meaning. Same idea with the writing of history when the historian draws a line between the past and the present. The past is portrayed as radically different than the present and there’s an invisible barrier that can never be crossed because the past is gone forever and never to be lived again by anyone. Then what is history? If you look at the classical historians they were the ones that wrote a grand story of an event that took place in the past and wrote the story to be read in the present. Much of it was written as a tall tale and if read today might be considered a work of fantasy, even a made up fiction. But somehow it’s believed to be true enough to be considered that it really happened. Even if there’s a giant and a three headed monster involved in the narrative. So the question becomes what are the facts in the history so there is truth behind the story? This is where stuff gets tricky because someone might ask, “What really is a fact?”
I don’t mean to sound tedious but history has been written the old way, the grand narrative way, for more than 3000 years and it’s not until we get to the last couple of hundred years that history starts to concern itself with uncovering the facts behind any truth. So when a historian goes to an archive and starts looking at accounting records and finds records about the slave trade then slavery becomes a fact. It really took place. There are records available and are even viewable on google scholar that illustrate slavery happening in real time. Now why did slavery take place? One approach would be to say that slavery became an economic necessity because there was a scarcity of labor in the new world. This might be true but does it really explain slavery? It’s not until you start looking at the belief of race, quite the vogue expression in the 19th century, and a desire to explain slavery as it stood back in the 1850s, that you find one dominant group, namely the southern white slave holders, considering themselves superior over blacks because of their race and running an entire economic system in the south through slavery.
If the writing of history is pushed back to the grand narrative event form then there will be a history that will be less true, more fantasy like, and more twisted to fit a mould created to deceive people. In this situation history will become just plain old bullshit. But if you want a real history you have to have facts to make it up, dress it up, take it out on a night on the town, and come home on the Mail Wagon at the crack of dawn.
Whereas Nietzsche elsewhere lamented a lack of historical perspective, he also compared the historian to the crab: he looks backward so long he begins to think backward too. In the interest of simplification it seems to me you are taking the history as more than it need be to the point it confuses. Or confuses your comment because I’m not quite sure what your point is. I’m not so sure Tacitus didn’t employ facts in his histories. And Howard Zinn made clear who makes real history: the collective actions of ordinary people and their quest for justice.