10 February 2009

48 Liberal Lies About American History

Larry Schweikart wrote a fantastic book called "48 Liberal Lies About American History". Some of the things that he goes over is:
  1. 3rd most common image in the top 20 American History Books of the 20th Century sections is of the Klu Klux Klan - As if America is STILL a Racist country.
  2. Virtually all the Text Books identify Lee Harvey Oswald (Kennedy's Assassin) as a Deranged Marine, when in fact he should be portrayed as a Communist - As one of the top 20 does.
  3. Most of the most commonly used books have 1/3 to 1/2 the 48 Liberal Lies, as if their Agenda is to portray the U.S. as some Evil, Oppressive and Racist country.
  4. Lie #19, The Rosenbergs were not Spies and were Wrongfully executed - One of the books even says that they were not major spies, even though they sold Nuclear Bomb Schematics and Diagrams to the Soviets. Nikita Kruschev himself said the Rosenburgs were instrumental in advancing their nuclear bomb program.
  5. Lie #41, The Trans Continental Railroads required Government Subsidies to survive. Even though the ONLY profitable Trans Contintental Rail Road (the Great Northern Railroad) was a completely private railroad, built entireley with private funds by Canadian James J. Hill. It was also the only railroad that survived the crash of 1873.
  6. Lie #45, LBJ's Great Society had a great impact on the poor. By the 1990's when the impact of these programs was actually observed, it intoduced 2 generations of drastic levels of family breakups and illigitamacy. Most gains started with John F. Kennedy's Tax cuts and stopped with LBJ's "War on Poverty" and Government spending.
  7. Lie #9, McKail Gorbachev's Reform policies led to the Collapse of the Soviet Empire and the end of the Cold War. It was Reagan's military buildup and pressure that caused the Soviet's Collapse.
The book looks to be a very interesting read, and provides a great insight as to why most Americans, especially the "Better Educated" Americans think the way they do about our country.

The Following video gives a bit longish 45 Min. Interview with the Author, but I find it very interesting. Being a history buff, I guess I'm a bit biased, but hopefully you'll like it as much as I did.

35 comments:

PushBackNow.net said...

This should be a high school textbook.

Left Quandary: Blame Bush
or Ask For Help

Reader said...

Maybe if YOU were better educated you would know how to spell "illegitimacy" correctly. As for point number 3, are you kidding me? One of the best things about America is that we acknowledge our mistakes! Do you want us to be like communist China and deny the problems of racism and oppression that have occurred throughout American history? America IS a racist country. Almost every country grapples with issues of racism and equal rights. America is just honest. And it sounds to the casual observer that you would rather children be fed lies about America rather than the truth about our great nation.

NoSocialism.com said...

America IS a racist country???
Have you seen our president?  You do realize that the majority voted for him right?  How do you extrapolate the views of a small minority and impose it amongst the Majority?
Problem is TRUE history isn't taught.  Did you know for example that the FIRST person to SUE FOR THE RIGHT to own slaves was a Black Man?  Before his lawsuit the vast majority of hands in bondage were indentured servants, who were freed after 7 years.  Why is that little tidbit kept out of our history books?
Why is it that Paul Revere's ride in the History Books don't mention the black man that rode with him that day?  That the first skirmish went against a church group that included blacks AND whites fighting and dying side by side against the British?
That the 2/3rds clause in the constitution was designed to KILL the practice of Slavery in the south.. why is THIS not taught?

As for my typo, you outed me I write hundreds of thousands of words without a Spell Checker and occasionally make a mistake.  Guess I need to be better educated.

guest said...

Hilarious!  I loved the interview!

Asael90 said...

what do you think of howard's zinn book?

NoSocialism.com said...

I think the problem with Zinn, is that he allows his personal experience in the war (WWII) to be extrapolated to almost every war event in history.  He's obsessed with showing that the reasons things happened, were not so much to win a war, but to advance political careers. 
As an example, he makes a case on one of his books against the bombing of Hiroshima, yet he doesn't take into account the MASSIVE numbers of US casualties inflicted on the U.S. just in taking Midway and some of the other outlying Islands around Japan.  Did he think that the Japanese would fight with LESS ferocity when we actually got onto the Mainland?  There were around 150K to 240K people killed in the two Japanese Nuclear Bombings, let's say that estimates were overblown when they said that it would have cost 50,000 American lives and 150,000 Japanese lives.  Even if those numbers were overblown, and we would have only lost half those American lives.  Should we have sacrificed 25K American lives, for the sake of saving a few of theirs?  I don't think ANY country would do that.
He even goes as far as to suggest that the Japanese were ready to surrender anyway and we didn't have to go to that extreme.  Well if that's true, why were they still not ready to surrender even after the first bombing?  Simple, they ALSO had scientists who knew Einstein's theories, and had NO IDEA that the U.S. had built up MASSIVE electrical generating capacity to make enough fuel for 2 Bombs (I think it required almost a 1/4rd of our Total National Electrical Output at the time - don't remember the exact numbers), so they thought there was no way we could drop another one on them for at least a year or so, giving them that much time to gain the upper hand in the war.
Only after we dropped the second bomb on them did they realize they had miscalculated and were now unsure.  It would have taken us around a year or so to enrich enough fuel to go at it again, but they were not taking any chances and finally surrendered.  This is enough, I think to illustrate the fact that they WERE NOT ready to surrender and without the Bombs, many, many more lives would have been lost.
Zinn's other criticisms of wars from Vietnam to Iraq, I think is colored by the fact that he's a self proclaimed Socialist and with the U.S. being the number one Capitalist country on the block, he's going to attack any policy that the U.S. has made.
On another note, I find it illustrative that many prominent Jewish Socialists, from Marx to Zinn have failed to realize that Socialist  Ideals tend to be in direct conflict with their own race and their own interests.  The two biggest socialist countries, The United Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR) and The National Socialist German Workers Party (Nazi's) certainly didn't do anything positive for the Jews, yet many Jews still support Socialists.... I don't get it.  Do they hate their own race and religion?

be moderate said...

first, the killing of 100,000 plus people (most of which were civilians) is never morally acceptable.  you cannot prove that dropping the atomic bombs were ever a good thing.  human life is sacred and should not be destroyed for political gain, no matter what the cause.  Second, socialism had nothing to do with the killing of millions of jews, that was an insane plot created by a few unstable men.  There are many socialist countries like sweden, china, and chile that dont kill jews.  blaming a political system for the tragedy that was the holocaust, is ignorant and stupid.

be moderate said...

just because a black man tried to own slaves doesn't mean that it is right.  and just because our president is black doesn't negate the fact that there are thousands of racist people who acuse him of not being an american and "practicing islam"

be moderate said...

whoever gave this man his college degree should probably
be fired...

NoSocialism.com said...

Let's see, if you're a leader and you're told, "By killing 100,000 of our enemies with a Bomb or Two, it will save 50,000 OUR Solders and another 150,000 of theirs"  You would sacrifice nearly a quarter million people to stand on YOUR principles?  Nice.  Truth is though, you most likely will never be in that position, having people's lives in your hands. Knowing that every Island you take from the Japanese will cost you another 10,000 lives of your own countrymen.  You can Monday morning quarterback all you want, but you'll never REALLY know what it's like to be in the game.
And YES the Political System of Socialism WAS responsible for the deaths in the Holocaust, just like the Political System of Socialism was responsible for the deaths of Millions under Lenin, Stalin and Mao.  Just as the Political System of Absolute Monarchy was responsible for the death's of Millions, hundreds of years ago.
ANY system that allows a few at the top... or ONE at the top, absolute power over all those below, has the potential for being corrupted by a few crazy loony tunes.  Only a Republic Style Government, with representative democracy has any chance of surviving over the long term.  Pure Democracies are no better than Mob Rule and Socialism is no better than a Monarchy.  The Republic lasted for nearly 2000 years in Rome, and gave the Romans a level of Power, Education and Prosperity unheard of at the time.  Just as our Republic has made us the most powerful nation on earth in just over 100 years.

NoSocialism.com said...

First of all, it's not that a Black Man TRIED to own slaves, he INTRODUCED Slavery into the Colonies.  Without his lawsuit, they would have continued with the practice of Indentured Servitude, were you are freed after 7 years.
As for Idiots that think that Obama is "Practicing Islam" and the idiots who are racists, guess what.  You will ALWAYS have a certain percentage of the Population that are IDIOTS.  However, just because that small minority is there, doesn't mean you can extrapolate that to the general population.  Most people are good and kind and try to do the right thing, but what people don't like about this president is the fact that things are not improving under him.  He's taken all of Bush's STUPID policies and accelerated them.  The Deficits, the Bailouts, the Cronyism.  It's all gotten WORSE under Obama, the Government is even MORE shadowy than before.  That has NOTHING to do with Racism, what it has to do with is a man not living up to the Lofty promises that he made the American People.  If you're trying to make this into a Racist issue, perhaps the REAL issue is that you're racists against whites and feel that ANY complaint, no matter how justified has some hidden racial undertone.

Ms. conservative said...

This book is great and what schools should be teaching teenagers like me in school, not made up hippy garbage. Liberals are idiotic crybabies who don't know anything about America. If you hate it so bad then LEAVE. Conservatism is what made our country great, and socialist hippy freaks are ruining it for all of us. There are so many things I could say as a 16 year old girl living in rural America, but giving my two cents worth would take too long. Day in and day out of the principals office after arguments with my history teacher, I know I am right, and yes I will defend my ideology to my grave!!

Guest said...

So what you're saying is that anyone who has a problem with their country should just pack up and leave as opposed to trying to change their society? Would you have said that to the founding fathers of America?

NoSocialism.com said...

Actually, our founding fathers wanted to do something that had never been done before.  They created a Society that elevated the Individual.  Freedom, like no other country had offered freedom.  Freedom to keep the fruits of our Labor, Freedom to create and to build, no matter what "Class" of society you came from.  
Many of these Liberal Progressives want us to revert to the days of old where an "enlightened" Elite make the majority of decisions for the masses.  A Society where THEY are the new kings.  THEY protect their markets and their businesses, so they don't have to worry about some scruffy start-up taking their market share.  THEY Make the rules, for US to follow.  THEY exclude themselves from the rules they create.
Problem is, this kind of society ALREADY exists.  Over in Europe, where the people are "Protected".  Sure most can never aspire to own a Ford Explorer like an American, or live in a 3000 Sq. Ft. home, like an American, but they don't starve.  (Not that Americans Starve, but that's not their point).  So unlike the Founding Fathers, Liberals today have a choice, they can go over to Greece and live in the Utopia where Government workers get to retire at 50, and everyone gets free health care.  Sure they're all broke and the country is bust, but again, that's not the point.  EVERYONE gets to share.  Even if it's MISERY.

Monkeyman said...

You go girl!! Even in the face of objective facts against your ideology, you just make sure to shut up your mind and deflect those facts like a Star Destroyer!!

NoSocialism.com said...

 So Monkeyman, exactly what facts are we talking about here?  I love how these guys come to my blog and posts, yet expect the rest of us to read their minds as to what they're thinking.

No said...

"However, just because that small minority is there, doesn't mean you can extrapolate that to the general population."

You do this in almost every comment you make.  Choose your words wisely.

NoSocialism.com said...

I DO choose my words wisely, and unlike you I don't post anonymously.  Sometimes things bare repeating and If I deem it so then I do.

Phil Johnson said...

In the 1700's, conservatives took the Royalist position, in the 1800's conservatives were the pro-slavery faction, in the 1900's conservatives were against womens equality, medicare, social security, integration of the races, civil rights reform and gay rights. In other words, they are ALWAYS ON THE WRONG SIDE OF HISTORY! This book is a joke and so is its author.

Marc Rodin said...

The fact that you seem to think Reagan's Military build up could single handedly lead to the collapse of the Soviet Union and claim to be a history buff straight faced would be laughable, if it did not represent a major decay in logic. Their nuclear arsonal was still far larger than ours, and there military, while weaker, was nothing to laugh at. Plus, consider the that it is far more expensive to launch an invasion than to defend, I'm not sure that is a war we could have won. I won't deny that the military build uo helped somewhat, but to cite it as the only cause, ignoring the complex issues inside the country such a nationalism, indicates mental retardation. If this was true, China would have collapsed long ago, as we still spend three times what their military spends, and our web of military alliances makes up well over half the world's military spending.

ariadne etienne said...

I don't think you've ever picked up a history book, unless it was one written by a fascist (those don't count, they haven't won any wars).

NoSocialism.com said...

When did I say that Reagan's Military build up "single handedly" led to the collapse of the USSR? No, it was a LOT of things, but here's the biggest thing. Reagan knew that the Soviet Union's Hard currency reserves were COMPLETELY dependant upon Oil and Gas, so he worked with Europe to deny the Soviets funding for Oil and Gas Projects, put together a secret deal with the Saudi's to drive the price of oil down to nothing (it ended up at around $8.00 a barrel ... vs $80.00 when he took office and well above that today), then to top it off, he failed to renew preferential pricing deals for Grain that Carter put together for them, requiring the Soviets to pay full price and further draining their Hard Currency reserves. The ECONOMIC War COMBINED with the Military Buildup that they tried to keep up with us on, is what caused the collapse of the Soviet Union. This is an undeniable fact.
http://wais.stanford.edu/History/history_ussrandreagan.htm

NoSocialism.com said...

I LOVE your well thought out Argument, no one can possibly refute the INCREDIBLE facts you've posted here! Just goes to show you're Mind is that of an ABSOLUTE Genius. Just like our President.

NoSocialism.com said...

Only Conservatives in the "Wigs" and the Democrat Party took the Royalist Position. The Republican Party was FOUNDED upon abolishing Slavery and Giving EVERYONE including women the right to Vote.
If you don't have this BASIC understanding of the Republican Party, you really shouldn't be posting on this board.
At the time "Conservatives" in both the Wigs Party and the Democrats, were opposed to the "Liberal" Republican Party Agenda. However, Republicans have always considered themselves "TRUE CONSERVATIVES" because they upheld the vision of the founding fathers who dreamt of a Nation of Free peoples from across all spectrums. Keep in mind that when Paul Revere rode screaming out "the British Are Coming" his Black partner, Prince Estabrook rode in the opposite direction http://fxn.ws/Q7z8dx, the Republican Party was trying to stay true to the Original Founders.
So in 1866, Abe Lincoln, the nations FIRST Republican President gave ALL MEN, including Blacks, Latinos and even American Indians the right to vote. Later, during the 1900's Republicans AGAIN led the charge to give Women the right to Vote, culminating in 1920 with the amendment to the Constitution that made it possible. All along the way it was always Democrats who were in opposition.

Roberto Aponte said...

I find it funny that you think the Nazis were actually socialist...


Ever heard of the term FASCISM?

NoSocialism.com said...

Excuse me? Do you even know WHAT NAZI Party Stands for? Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei. In English, it's the "National SOCIALIST German Workers Party"
HELLO, it has SOCIALIST in the name, but you're saying that they're NOT socialist?
I didn't say they were Communist.
Also, Socialist governments control private industry, take a look at the following description of Fascism, "...Regimenting all insdustry, commerce, ect..." Does THAT sound to you like a Capitalist system or a Socialist system?

From Discontionary.com:
fas·cism   [fash-iz-uhm] Show IPAnoun1.( sometimes initial capital letter ) a governmental system ledby a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressingopposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce,etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and oftenracism.2.( sometimes initial capital letter ) the philosophy, principles, ormethods of fascism.3.( initial capital letter ) a fascist movement, especially the oneestablished by Mussolini in Italy 1922–43.

LOL said...

You really are an idiot.

NoSocialism.com said...

Another Brainiac with irrefutable "Facts"....

LOL said...

another DuDe with cApitAliZation Issues

NoSocialism.com said...

AGAIN! You don't speak, you drivel. You say nothing and count it as an argument. Go bother someone with less of a brain.

LOL said...

It would be tough for me to find someone like that.


OH SNAPZZZZZZZ

NoSocialism.com said...

Oh Snap, still nothing intelligent, Zero points.

;) said...

That's not what yo momma said

NoSocialism.com said...

What are we 5?!

5 said...

Yo momma loves Five Guys... and I'm not talking about the burger joint.

Post a Comment

Our Sponsors

 
Design by Wordpress Theme | Bloggerized by Free Blogger Templates | Macys Printable Coupons