>out of india theory>Rurik was russian>Stab in the back myth>Holocaust denial>Armenian genocide denial>Roman elite was germanic>Yakub>Black israelitesDoes anyone study history for the genuine insterest of knowing what happened in the past? It feels like the very act of going out to study history is a filter that attracts only people who are either fanatic nationalists or "philosophers" who want to retroactively apply their political theories to history, neither of wich care about the truth but whatever "feels" like the truth
>>18004445Those represent real viewpoints of people, you don't have to take them at face value but you do have to cope with a world where they really exist and have rights. That's why your own perspective and your ability to know what really happened, at least in the broad strokes, is important.
>>18004445None of these viewpoints come from the academic study of history. Yes, amateur historians are often grifters or idealogues, what's new?
>Austria victim theoryIs also a good one.
People drawn to history often want moral lessons. It's always been this way.
>>18005576Austria is the Jesus of Europe.
>>18006532>trying to steal Poland's messianic shtickHOW DARE YOU
