What Is History Resolved?

I have found that many historical conclusions are wrong and are proven so by the passing of time and the availability of recordings after that historical event. In the last eighty years, historians and publishers have found themselves like-minded and have taken this opportunity to draw conclusions that are contrary to the facts. They do this to put forth “history” that agrees with their political views and not the facts; this is because the logical conclusions are embarrassing to their favored party. These political views are almost always liberalism and the home to liberalism – – the Democratic Party. Once history has been bent and published to suit their goals it is then deemed “settled” which means that every reporting of history thereafter must agree with them or they will be shouted down by the all-powerful media.

History must be recorded without political or other influencing traits; it shouldn’t take on the traits of propaganda. This is the reason that history must be resolved with logical and common sense conclusions: Thus, the need for HistoryResoved.com 

Currently, I have found myself joining the ranks of the elders. As such I have the opportunity to RESOLVE some of the many errors in the recording of historical events because I have first-hand contemporaneous knowledge of them. This means that I can meld historical events with my oral history and hopefully give them legitimacy. My oral history will be much more accurate because it hasn’t been passed down the ages as if it is a game of Telephone (where a phrase is giving to one person who passes it to another, and another until it gets to the end where the original phrase has been totally destroyed). I get my history from my life: I remember when there were only 48 states in the United States, TVs were rare (we didn’t have one and I didn’t know anyone that did), telephones were party lines (more than one family with the same phone number, each family had a distinctive ring, like 2 rings pause 1 ring: Oh, it’s for us), computers were only used by scientist, and the internet wasn’t even a thought.

Of course, oral history is an oxymoron; history means recorded events, oral ones exist only briefly in the air and profits only each person that hears it. If the events are not set in stone, so to speak, then how do we know it is accurate?

Historians today’s historians, propagandist, will try to disprove my conclusions using the overused tool of switch and bait. I can’t cover every little detail in my posts. The distractors will point out some point of minutiae that was not addressed adequately and say, “See he didn’t take that into account.” These are distractions and distortions and will not be a factor in the primary supposition.

A prime example is my essay titled; What’s wrong with the Republican Party: from Lincoln too (but not including) President Trump..

(Total 1,297 , 3 Latest)