politics Archives - Tales of Times Forgotten

“Rewriting History” Is Not Inherently a Bad Thing

There seems to be something of a trend going on right now in politics where people have developed a habit of accusing their opponents of wanting to “rewrite history.” I’ve mostly seen conservatives accusing progressives of this, but I’ve also seen a few cases of progressives accusing conservatives of it without further clarification. In all cases, people who accuse other people of wanting to “rewrite history” portray this as something unambiguously bad.

The problem is that “rewriting history” is not inherently a bad thing. In fact, “rewriting history” is literally a historian’s job description. It is inevitable that each generation will rewrite history and there is really nothing anyone can do to stop it. It is, however, extremely important that the people who rewrite history do so honestly, using correct evidence and correct methods of interpretation. When we talk about “rewriting history,” what matters is not whether people are doing it, but how they are doing it.

What It Means If Biden Recognizes the Armenian Genocide

On 21 April 2021, The New York Times published an article reporting that President Joe Biden plans to declare that the mass murder of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire between 1915 and 1918 was an act of genocide. The declaration is planned to take place on 24 April, which the Republic of Armenia has designated Armenian Genocide Remembrance Day.

This declaration will mark the fulfillment of a campaign promise that Barack Obama made in 2008 but never fulfilled and a campaign promise that Biden himself made last year. The declaration is controversial, however, because it may further harm the United States’ already-frayed relationship with the Republic of Turkey, whose government officially maintains that the genocide never happened. As a student of history, I thought I would give some background on the Armenian Genocide and what Biden’s declaration might mean.

Elon Musk Declares Himself “Imperator”?

On 12 April 2021, Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, who currently has a net worth of approximately $175 billion, changed his Twitter bio to say “Technoking of Tesla, Imperator of Mars.” This change immediately sparked headlines in Newsweek, NDTV, and dozens of other news outlets. Ordinarily, one person—even an ultra-wealthy CEO—changing their Twitter bio probably wouldn’t make the news. Elon Musk, however, has a massive cult following of adoring fans who, for the most part, wholeheartedly believe that he is a brilliant, forward-thinking, polymathic genius who is single-handedly ushering in a new era of technology and freedom. Thus, everything he does automatically attracts attention.

I’m sure that some of Musk’s fans are reading this. I hope they will forgive me for the fact that I am not one of them. Indeed, I think that Musk has risen to where he is to a large extent through exploitation, that he isn’t nearly as personally brilliant as most of his fans think he is, that he has an obnoxious personal ego the size of the planet Jupiter, and that he is generally a rather odious person. I do, however, want to talk about Musk’s updated Twitter bio because I think it reveals a lot of startling things about how Musk thinks of himself and his position in the world.

Transgender People Exist—And That’s Ok

If you’ve paid any attention whatsoever to the news over the past few years, you have almost certainly heard about how a lot of conservatives are really mad that transgender people exist. They routinely insist that acknowledging the existence of trans people is “gender ideology” and that it goes against both science and the Bible. They insist that there are only two genders—male and female—and that a person’s gender is determined by their chromosomes and can never, under any circumstances, truly be changed.

In this essay, I intend to demonstrate that these arguments are, in fact, incorrect and that the existence of more than two genders is totally compatible with both science and the Bible. This essay has taken me nearly a month to research and write, so it will be quite long and will incorporate evidence from a wide range of different fields, including biology, neuroscience, history, anthropology, and religious studies.

The Debate about Classics Isn’t What You Probably Think It Is

On 2 February 2021, The New York Times published a profile piece written by Rachel Poser titled “He Wants to Save Classics From Whiteness. Can the Field Survive?” The subject of the article is Dan-el Padilla Peralta, an Afro-Latino associate professor of classics at Princeton University who argues that the field of classics as it is currently constructed is deeply embedded with systemic racism and serves to reinforce white supremacist hegemony. Padilla wants to radically reshape the field by rooting out aspects that reinforce white supremacy and rebuilding the field in a new way.

This profile piece triggered an unceasing deluge of op-eds published on various platforms purporting to “defend” the discipline of classics from Padilla’s supposed attacks. These op-eds almost invariably display complete ignorance of the conversation that has been taking place within the discipline of classics over the past few years and ignorance of what Padilla is actually proposing. They reduce the conversation to a ridiculous caricature according to which evil, radical leftist scholars are trying to bring an end to the study of ancient texts altogether.

Many people who are not directly connected to the field of classics are learning about the controversy solely from these op-eds and coming away with the egregious misimpression that this is really what is happening. In this essay, I want to explain for my general readership what is really going on within the field and what sorts of changes people are really advocating. (I would write an op-ed, but no one would publish it, since I’m just a twenty-one-year-old undergraduate.)

No, “Edelweiss” Is Not an Austrian Folk Song or a Nazi Song

There are a lot of popular misconceptions about the song “Edelweiss.” Many people think it is an age-old Austrian folk song. Many people even think that it is the national anthem of Austria. Other people have gotten the bizarre impression that it was composed as a Nazi song or even that it was the national anthem of Nazi Germany.

In reality, the song “Edelweiss” was composed by the American composing duo Oscar Hammerstein II and Richard Rodgers as an original song for the 1959 musical The Sound of Music. Although Hammerstein and Rodgers were trying to imitate the overall genre of folk music, they did not base their song on any preexisting lyrics or melody.

What Would the Ancient Greeks Think of Donald Trump?

The current occupant of the White House is such a unique and peculiar figure in the history of the United States that many people have wondered what various people from history would think of him. I’ve encountered a number of questions dealing with this theme on Quora. For instance, many people have wondered what the Founding Fathers would think of him. What would Cicero think? What would Socrates think? There are so many different questions and scenarios that people have been asking about. Today, though, we’re going to look at the question of what the ancient Greek public at large would think of him.

It is extremely difficult to say what the ancient Greeks would think of Donald Trump, partly because the ancient Greeks lived in a world that was so drastically different from our own. If someone brought all the people who lived in the Greek world during the Classical Period (lasted c. 510 – c. 323 BC) back from the dead today, they would barely even recognize the world we live in.

Furthermore, the ancient Greeks were as diverse in their thoughts as any people from any time period, so, obviously, opinions pertaining to Donald Trump would vary quite considerably from person to person. Some people would probably like Trump, while others would detest him.

Anything that we say on this subject will necessarily be speculation, since, obviously the ancient Greeks are all long dead and it is impossible to say for certain what their opinions would be. Nonetheless, I think we can plausibly speculate about how the majority of people who lived in ancient Greece would most likely view Trump, if they were suddenly brought to life today and told about him.

What Do Conservatives Really Mean When They Talk about “Western Civilization”?

The concept of “western civilization” has become something of a major political talking point among conservatives in the United States in recent years. Conservative commentators claim that western civilization is a glorious, wonderful thing that progressives are working tirelessly to destroy and conservatives are fighting honorably to protect.

In this article, I intend to take a deep dive into what conservatives say about “western civilization.” I’m going to examine their claims and assess how accurate these claims are. I’ll look at the things conservatives say make western civilization “unique” and “special” and see how “unique” and “special” these things really are. In the end, we will all see together what exactly “western civilization” really is.

For the Last Time, Donald Trump Isn’t the Modern-Day Julius Caesar

One thing I have discovered is that people really love to directly equate Donald Trump with various historical figures from the ancient world. As I discuss in this article from December 2019, Trump’s evangelical supporters are constantly comparing him to Cyrus the Great, claiming that he is God’s vessel appointed to fulfill God’s will by enacting conservative policies. Meanwhile, people who do not like Trump seem to habitually joke about Donald Trump being Caligula or Nero.

Both Trump’s supporters and his fiercest enemies, though, love to compare him to one man in particular: Julius Caesar. This obsession with equating Trump with figures from ancient history annoys me because it inevitably leads to the distortion of history to suit the needs of the present.

Here Are a Few of the Major Cultural Sites in Iran that Donald Trump May Be Threatening to Destroy

On Saturday, 4 January 2020, Donald J. Trump, the current president of the United States of America, announced on Twitter that the United States has targeted fifty-two Iranian cultural sites and that, if Iran makes any move against any American or against any American asset, the United States will destroy those sites. Trump declared, over the course of two tweets, the following words:

“Let this serve as a WARNING that if Iran strikes any Americans, or American assets, we have….”
“….targeted 52 Iranian sites (representing the 52 American hostages taken by Iran many years ago), some at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture, and those targets, and Iran itself, WILL BE HIT VERY FAST AND VERY HARD. The USA wants no more threats!”

Donald Trump is literally holding Iran’s cultural sites hostage, threatening to destroy them if Iran does not comply with his demands. This sounds more like the kind of threat you’d expect to hear from the Joker than from the president of the United States.

Destroying Iranian cultural sites would certainly constitute a war crime under international law. The United Nations made this very clear in 2017 when they adopted a resolution for the protection of heritage in response to the deliberate destruction of cultural sites in Iraq and Syria by the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). You know you live in a messed-up world when the president of the United States is literally threatening to do what ISIS did.