Homestead mailing list

["Melody O." <melody AT crecon.com>]

At 10:56 AM 5/18/05 -0700, you wrote:
>
>>"Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present
>>controls the past." (_1984_ by George Orwell)
>
>I don't remember the context of that statement. Taken at face value, it 
>says that the past and the future are controlled by those currently in 
>power. I don't find that compelling. History books are rarely rewritten 
>with each power term. 

The quote comes from pg. 204 of the book _1984_.

History is being rewritten in some cases and ignored and neglected in
others.  The way to see it becomes clearer when you compare history
textbooks from 50+ years ago to the "social studies" texts of today.  I
found a high school history textbook used by my grandmother's baby sister
in my mom's storage unit.  The differences are stark.  The stories in the
old text were easily understood and interesting; in the new texts the
information is jumbled and dry.  The Founders were admired and revered in
the old texts; they are rarely mentioned in the new texts save for in
passing.  The Constitution once was actually taught in schools and the
Declaration of Independence memorized.  Today the kids rarely can separate
information from the two in discussions and have no real concept of what
each are about, let alone the events that surrounded them.

OTOH, the information must be distorted lest a second revolution occur.
Few understand that the tyranny the colonists was subjected to is happening
ten-fold today.  

>The future is only partially predictable from the 
>present. As the actions of the current US president have shown, we can no 
>longer depend on historical actions by a major political party to predict 
>the immediate or near future actions by that party.

Perhaps.  But like the article states, the events happing today and the
history that will be written tomorrow is not always the truth.  In fact,
after that article it could be said that history is written before it
actually happens.

Another snag is the fact that history is written by the winners.  In the
case of the war in Iraq, there will be no mention of the warped mentality
of those in power, i.e. the mass killings of innocents over suspected WMD
that weren't even there, mandated democracy, a new sovereign Iraq that is
still being occupied by the US military many months after the elections,
and many, many more illogical facts that are being exposed.  They may be in
the non-mainstream  papers today, but in ten years will be forgotten by the
history text writers.  Thus, the *true* history will be re-written to laud
King George the W unless some other power changes it.

>The perspective is encouraging. I wonder if Adams would feel the same had 
>he seen the events of the 202 years since he died.

I think he would.  However, to understand Samuel Adams means to know that
he was a rabble rouser.  He stirred people up to discontent and sometimes
didn't know when to hush.  He was definately not a mediator like Benjamin
Franklin was, and was more determined than Thomas Paine. 

Best wishes,
Melody