≡ Menu

Long Read of the Week: The Fake History of the 20th Century

“For Americans desperate to hate their grandparents. . . .”

[The Jackie Robinson hugged by Peewee Reese Myth] wasn’t just a harmless myth. For decades, ordinary people in Cincinnati were tarred as hateful racists in order to further a specific narrative about America. They weren’t the only victims of myths related to Robinson. Enos Slaughter of the St. Louis Cardinals has been villainized for decades for slashing Robinson with his spiked cleats during a play at first base. But Slaughter always insisted the injury was accidental, and sportswriters at the game from both St. Louis and New York City agreed, saying that nothing appeared deliberate about the incident. Similarly, in the 2013 film about Robinson, Pittsburgh Pirates pitcher Fritz Ostermueller is portrayed intentionally hitting Robinson in the head with a pitch before insulting him with a racist comment. In reality, the pitch hit Robinson on the wrist and there is no evidence of such an insult at all.

But all three myths will live on, because they are useful. They promote a certain story about America: That until very recently the country was overwhelmingly bigoted and hateful, and good for very little else. In fact, America’s entire 20th-century history, as it is taught in schools and portrayed on screen, is essentially “fake.” It is a sequence of myths atop myths, created to make Americans hate their ancestors and their history.

A full list of these myths could fill several books. For now, we will illustrate the point with some central examples.

The Tulsa Riot

As America steadily replaces pride in its achievements with a new white guilt national ideology, the nation has craved greater atrocities to further fuel a deep sense of shame. Lynchings and segregation were bad, but they lack the electric spark of a Kristallnacht.

For Americans desperate to hate their grandparents, then, the Tulsa Riot of 1921 has become the perfect symbol. Over the past few years, the riot has been promoted with a strange amount of glee. It was used to open HBO’s awful “Watchmen” adaptation, and both the press and President Biden made a major show of the riot’s 100th anniversary last year. Biden’s remarks on that anniversary repeat what is, essentially, the mainstream understanding of events:

[T]he mob terrorized Greenwood [the black neighborhood affected by the riot] with torches and guns shooting at will. A mob tied a Black man, by the waist, to the back of their truck, with his head banging along the pavement as they drove off. A murdered Black family draped over the fence of their home outside. An elderly couple knelt by their bed, praying to God with their heart and their soul, when they were shot in the back of their heads. Private planes dropping explosives, the first and only domestic air assault of its kind on an American city here in Tulsa.

10,000 people were left destitute and homeless, placed in interment camps. As I was told today, they were told, “Don’t you mention you were ever in a camp or we’ll come and get you.” That’s a survivor story. … The death toll records by local officials said there were 36 people. That’s all, 36 people. Based on studies records and accounts, the likely number is much more than the multiple of hundreds. Untold bodies dumped into mass graves.

But as Scott Greer wrote for Revolver last year, every part of Biden’s statement is a gross factual distortion. Even the most exhaustive investigation of the event could only confirm 39 deaths (13 of them white), with the supposed “hundreds” of other victims lacking bodies, causes of death, or even names. There is little evidence of any aerial bombing happening. The “internment camps” were temporary housing for those displaced by the massive fire (apparently they were supposed to just be left without shelter?). Lurid tales of elderly couples executed while praying have remained just that, lurid tales, a kind of racist pornography passed down through the years without any serious effort to verify them. . . . .

Then there’s Emmett Till . . . .

. . . . And Matthew Shepard

. . . . And Central Park Five

. . . . And Stonewall

. . . . And author John Grisham’s reversed racial lives in the book and film “A Time to Kill“ . . . .

In other words, Grisham took an authentic (and in America, disturbingly common) crime, and replaced it with a lurid fantasy that in reality almost never happens. According to the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics, entire years have passed where there are zero white-on-black rapes in America.

RTWT at The Fake History of the 20th Century – Revolver News

Comments on this entry are closed.

  • Denny September 1, 2022, 11:24 AM

    “History is written by the victors.”
    It’s more than evident by now that Marxism has won in the U.S.A.

    • Vanderleun September 1, 2022, 11:34 AM

      Not just yet I think.

      To paraphrase Robert Frost:

      There will be more than Marxists broken
      Before God’s last “put out the light” is spoken.

      • Denny September 1, 2022, 11:54 AM

        Van, please believe me, I hate to be pessimistic, but I’m getting very
        tired of getting kicked in the gut with fake news from the MSM and our growing number
        of rotten politicians. I had great hopes before the so-called pandemic, – but not any more.
        I pray every night in hopes you’re right, but I know that the Babylonians
        hauled every single Israeli that they didn’t kill, some with tattoos and rings in their noses,
        back int0 slavery.

  • Mike Austin September 1, 2022, 11:38 AM

    Nonsense and mendacity and fake history are as old as Sumer. There is no getting around this. Historians are trained to separate—as best they can—fact from fiction. This is extremely difficult to do. Five men view the same incident and have five differing onions of it. Which one is correct?

    “Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres” is the first line in Caesar’s “Gallic Wars”. We know that Caesar conquered Gaul, not just because he said he did but because of hundreds of others who lived when Caesar lived and wrote about it. As for the methods used to conquer Gaul, our only real source is Caesar himself. How much of his history is true? How much is false? How much is contrived to benefit Caesar? We don’t know.

    Skip forward 2000 years. Even now there are thousands upon thousands of documents concerning the 20th century hidden away in government archives around the world. What would they reveal? Would they change what we think about, say, World War II? How should we interpret them if they are ever released?

    I once taught at a high school in Buenos Aires. The science teacher was extremely well educated, a firm atheist and a believer in evolution. He and I would debate the question if Creation should be taught in schools. He said no, as Creation was obviously contrived. His source for this was the Scopes Monkey Trial (1925) and especially the play “Inherit the Wind” about that trial written by Jerome Lawrence. He had no idea that Lawrence had completely made up most of the dialogue and events in his play. To the teacher, “Inherit the Wind” was History. Take a guess what he would teach in his class.

    “What is truth?” asked Pilate. Our own time answers, “Who knows?”

  • Gagdad Bob September 1, 2022, 11:38 AM

    Dávila: The falsification of the past is how the left has sought to elaborate the future.

    • Vanderleun September 1, 2022, 11:42 AM

      God, I love that philosopher more than I love life itself sometimes.

  • OneGuy September 1, 2022, 11:54 AM

    The history is written to incense. The rape issue is interesting in that black on white rape is more than just common it is epidemic where the reverse is almost zero. But that is a non-story because it not only doesn’t support the agenda it destroys it.

    An interesting event in the news: A white female police officer in Cincinnati was heard to use the N word aimed at a black man who walked past her police car and gave her the finger. She was fired for that “hate crime”. It was indeed stupid and poor judgement. But I thought it was interesting that a black man walking past a white police officer and giving them the finger doesn’t seem to be hate or racist. Who gets to decide that?