History Part 2

My first Post in this series simply called HISTORY was always going to be Part One but I thought about it and dropped the Part One words from the Headline because I wasn’t sure when I was going to do the next one and how many there will be.

This is it now and I can say that I expect the series to go up to Part 6 or thereabouts.

This one is also like the first One different from what will follow in the Parts to come and I want to establish certain principles of history that is quite obviously unknown or not generally understood. Maybe they are only my opinions but I shall leave every reader deciding on his/her own conclusions.

The first point is that though it should not be so any opinion of recorded history largely depends on who wrote the book and/or who reads it. AND [kindly note the capitals] unfortunately it also depends on when it was written and when it is read.

In my own reading career I once read Memoirs of General Grivas on the Cyprus wars between Greeks and Turks. I couldn’t make up my mind who to support. When I read the book again 20 years later I still could not take sides between Grivas and Makarios and be honest with myself.

In the early sixties I read Glimpses of World History by Jawaharlal Nehru and was impressed. Thirty years later I was even more impressed by the great Man when I read the book again. I put him above Gandhi on the World scales of measurement of greatness. The strange anomaly in our country is that many people remember Gandhi [some despise him and some adore him; personally I don’t see him as any great figure in History] but very few ever read anything on Nehru.

My third and last example on the point should suffice.

Having been an adult life long supporter of a multi racial but united South Africa [classified as an extreme Liberal which I was not, though I was a Paton admirer and Fan] I could hardly wait to buy my personal copy of Long Walk to Freedom by Nelson Mandela.

I tried to read the book; put it aside several times and tried again and again but something didn’t gel; it became obvious that it was not Mandela’s own writing though it was enthusiastically promoted as the words of the “Great Icon.” I put the book aside for a number of years and re-read it after his attack on America with the warning about Gadaffi that “your enemies are not our enemies,” and after he had informed his successor, a wimp of a man called Thabo Mbeki, to give the prisoners the vote in M’Beki’s election to the Presidency in 1999. That time I managed to get through it with a feeling of despair for our country growing in my mind. The book was nothing more than a personal song of praise to an enormous ego in a large vacuum of utter emptiness.

I have learned to read all history as the opinion of one person. This is therefore, the way you can and should, read this. It is an opinion and I would like to hear from you before I go onto a very important Part Three about parallels and repetition of history.

You may read this Post in the meantime:

http://thefederalist.com/2015/07/20/europe-is-partying-like-its-1939/

 Ike Jakson

In Americus GA saka Americoon

ikejakson@gmail.com

 

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

8 Responses to “History Part 2”

  1. NEO Says:

    A few points, Ike.

    1) Yep, History is.

    2) Best review of Mandela I’ve read.

    3) It’s a good article, mostly The Federalist is, but it’s unfair to Chamberlain, who had some really good reasons for Munich, which is much more than Obama (and Europe) can say.

    Stay well, Neo.

    • Ike Jakson Says:

      NEO

      I deeply appreciate your participation and see your point. Don’t take offence please. I am doing this mostly from memory and for myself, really. You have noticed that the intention is to build a series. I will go wrong often and hope you will return to correct me when I do.

      IkeJ.

      • NEO Says:

        No, none taken, Ike. In fact 10 years ago I would have agreed. I’ve learned much in the last few years about Chamberlain and Churchill, and the run-up to war, and that’s reflected in the comment.

        As for going wrong – Don’t we all? And we depend on out readers to help us out.

      • Ike Jakson Says:

        Thanks Nebraska

        That’s very gracious of you. I always marvel at your depth in similar works but the series I am planning will be more of a lesson to school going youngsters to learn to read, and read both sides of the story and between the lines as well. I hope to find you at my side right along until I complete the series.

        IkeJ.

      • NEO Says:

        No problem that I can see, Ike. I’m sure I’ll enjoy them. 🙂

      • Ike Jakson Says:

        Thanks Nebraska

        I shall let you know when the next one is in and I am looking forward to whatever guidance you may want to provide. IkeJ

      • NEO Says:

        🙂

  2. History Part 3 on Parallels and Analysis | Jaksonian Philosophy Says:

    […] said in History Part 2 that any interpretation of history depends on who wrote the book and/or who reads it as well as […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: