Margaret MacMillan "The Uses and Abuses of History" [FULL]

Historian Margart MacMillan joins Allan Gregg to talk about her latest book "The Uses and Abuses of History," which examines dangerous use of history by nationalistic, religious and ethnic leaders.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• TVO
• TVOntario
• Allan
• Gregg
• Margaret
• MacMillan
• Paris
• 1919
• history
• Canada
• Hitler
• Nazi
• World
• War
• II
• Two
• Treaty
• of
• Versailles
• documentary
• movie
• book
• Uses
• Abuses
• History
• Bush
• Blair
• Hussein
• Afghanistan
• Stalin
• Nixon

[suddenlyitsobvious]

@amaxamon

This utterly onbvious situation has remained occult to the masses because they prefer keeping things simple in a deluded world of make believe.

If you don't understand that the wars were CREATED, DESIGNED, ENGINEERED, you'll have to resort to statements such as the one I quoted at the start, which is basically a propagandistic banality from the average history course that completely fails to address the larger picture.

[suddenlyitsobvious]

@amaxamon

...push towards a one world system. Making the world 'safe for democracy' has been a constant rationale.

It's really amazing so many people are in denial of this impending one world system, deeming it paranoid to entertain any thoughts whatsoever about the obvious AGENCY, the design and engineering of this global unit.

And of course even crazier the thought that a small number of people could control and stage world affairs completely circumventing democratic controls.

[suddenlyitsobvious]

@amaxamon

'The propagation of German kultur and ideals was the basic motivation for both world wars. '

The reason for both wars was to play the nations against each other, destroying them while making a killing and setting the stage for global centralized control.

Indeed, since the League of Nations it's obvious to what extent Orwell's desciptive 'war to end all wars' is accurate.

Both world wars are the real motors behind the UN, behind structures such as the E.U and the neverceasing...

[amaxamon]

@EdwardRommel People refuse to accept this. The propagation of German kultur and ideals was the basic motivation for both world wars. The philosophy had its roots in the 19th Century and it took something like 100 years to take it out of circulation.

[EdwardRommel]

@Th3Wab3

The economic value to being imperialistic or to having colonies has been questioned. Just as American slavery was said to be not a benefit to the average white southerner but rather to an elite group of large landholders...so is the same about European colonialism. It mainly benefited the large landholders

.

Indeed, the German colonies were all mosquitoe infested money-losers that had to be subsidized by the German Govt. and places where no Germans wanted to visit.

[Th3Wab3]

@EdwardRommel "Germany somehow managed to provoke enmity in virtually every country in the world by 1914. That's not an easy thing to do!" i sure at the particular time Europe was in that standing what with it incessant imperial/colonial expansion... i'm sure the world didn't enjoy being dominated and at the top of the list would be England, France, Spain, Germany...

[Th3Wab3]

@EdwardRommel well i think the error in that statement is in determining that "German Free Trade" had anything to deal with a government intransigence. German nationalism was nothing like British if any claims were made for nationalism Britain appeared to have the greatest coalescence.. post Bismark Germany was fragmenting back to its previous state.. Prussian expansion or Self determinism played a stronger role than any Austro-German Alliance..

[Th3Wab3]

@EdwardRommel as i intended to highlight German expansion most certainly threatened the British way of life.. these free trade systems and politics were more greatly related created and accepted by Britain German influence or reform would not completely comply to the vision that Britain had established.

[EdwardRommel]

@Th3Wab3

the British Empire practiced free trade wheas the German Empire was very protectionist with tariffs ans state owned monopolies like the German railroads. Even Americans had difficulty in dealing with the German Govt. on both trade agreements and also in International law issues like the Venezeula debt crisis of 1902 and the Manilla bay incident of 1898.

Germany somehow managed to provoke enmity in virtually every country in the world by 1914. That's not an easy thing to do!

[EdwardRommel]

@Th3Wab3

There is a fundamental difference between Pan-Germanism and Pan-Slavism...and it is this "In 1914 Teutonics occupied and ruled Slavs ...but Slavs did NOT occupy and rule Tuetonics".

So Pan-slavism was about Slavs being ruled by Slavs.

Pan-Germanism was about expanding Germanic rule over Slavs.

That's why fundamentally the Allies were in the right and the Dual Alliance of Germany and Austria was clearly in the wrong. Germans should not rule slavs.