Why dont the many anons who claim that modern historians always get everything wrong and are only merely pushing some "leftwing" agenda, write their own books and articles to challenge these historians and add to the field of history?
>>18552734Gangstalkers abuse, harass, terrorize, threaten etc me for posting about history on 4chan because "I'm not an expert"
>>18552734Chuds are retarded and can't into higher education.
>>18552734They'd still be relying on the same sources as the modern historians they decry and quickly realize most of it isn't actually politically slanted
>>18552734Universities have leftwing bias
>>18552734Fuck Tucker.
>>18552743Not really, colleges have been captured. Pol Pot was the only guy who really "got it"
>>18552815most of what historians write is not in the sources but are inferences and interpretations, otherwise historians would not disagree ever.
>>18552734Leftists heavily gatekeep academia in general. Someone like Emil Kierkegaard for instance would fit right in as a sort of controversial but otherwise perfectly fine researcher but the best he'll get is getting published in Mankind Quarterly - an open journal. He's also the guy managing the official website hosting all of Arthur Jensen's publications etc. and I think what happened to him is a good example of what happens when you're this defiant guy. His side of the debate in the IQ controversy was matter of fact correct. However as this was going on he was chased out of Berkley by terrorists and local police enforcement basically said they can't do anything, was cut off from public grants because le raycism bad, effectively didn't have a single doctoral student under his wing etc. etc. all while his opponents did enjoy it until the rest of their lives. Philip Rushton was meant to get Noble Prize but so many academics(who were wrong) started heckling that it was rescinded. We're talking about psychologists, not historians, but what exactly makes you think history is any different? You can write an article to an open journal but nobody will care about it. You can write a book as an amateur historian and there's a lot of them out there but likewise nobody will care. At the same time, you will not hold out in academia because your research will not get grants plain and simple so your contracts will be cancelled and you won't be able to find new ones(times of easy tenures are behind you) so have fun delivering highly researched historical work alongside working a dayjob, it'll be compared to people for who producing academic papers and books is the dayjob.It reminds me of people who were telling dudes banned by visa or mastercard that those companies have a right to do so. Just start your own payment system and when it'll get debanked start your own banks and when thise will get declared illegal start your own government I guess.
>>18552734If you are asking why the people who think the entire study of history has been corrupted with an institutional agenda won't pick up the pen and create an institutional agenda of their own, then you are missing the point of that criticism. It's really more of a gripe. Short of an apocalypse nothing could fix a problem of that magnitude, which is consequently what most people who genuinely hold this belief desire to see happen. It's not a right or left specific gripe either, certain leftist circles are all in on Posadism, they even had a whole altchan with a name referencing the idea of living in a Bunker while the bourgeois and enemies of the workers committed mass suicide in a nuclear holocaust.
>>18552734The vast, vast majority of right wing people, especially among the normie population, have a degraded and instrumental view of education that naturally precludes the kind of long, laborious study required to reach any position of seniority and influence.The past three decades of mainstream right wing discourse, if not more, has been urging people to eschew higher education, certainly to avoid anything from the liberal arts, and to instead take up a trade. It has left them so completely intellectually impoverished that the capable few, let's call them the chuds, have had to reach far back into history to cobble together a philosophy for themselves. If you speak to a chud, a proper chud that is, you're likely to hear some mix of Aristotle, Nietzsche, Spengler, Evola, etc. There's an intellectual foundation there. The average rightoid, who comprises the majority of /his/, has no such foundation on which to draw, thus they have absolutely nothing to offer academia or even society as a whole, beyond epic quips about feminism.
>>18552734They actually do, there's a ton of retards publishing their drivel on amazon. Lefties too.>>18553259This is also true.
>>18552734Because they are retarded and universities are woke apparently.
>>18553442I don't know if you can even group together the average conservative with the average Evola reader. Their values and worldview differ so much that they would look at each other and say "this guy is not a member of my tribe". They might hold similar views on sexuality and race (if even that), but they have nothing in common otherwise. The average conservative would resent the chud for his intellectualism and for his deeply unchristian (or at least unprotestant) worldview, the Evolian chud would just think the conservative is part of the low IQ unwashed masses and basically a retarded slave.
>>18553259>Leftists heavily gatekeep academia in general.How?
>>18552734Because those anons unironically use sources like Zoomer Historian to "learn" about "history". Essentially they are posers whose brains are rotted by /pol/
>>18554420He got expelled for calling a classmate a nigger therefore leftism is oppressing him o algo.
>>18552734Right wing ideology is inherently about denying reality.
