- Shopping Bag ( 0 items )
Posted March 15, 2007
Mostly Sensationalist Revisionist Trash...
Having seen this title at a local Barnes & Noble, I expected another mainstream typical pro-Western book with a mercilessly anti-socialist POV. I was actually surprised, seeing as though Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and Stalinist dictators such as Ceausescu and Kim Il Sung were included (as they rightly should be), yet Tito, Guevara, and (surprisingly) Castro were excluded (as they rightly should be) as were socialist-aligned leaders such as Allende and the Sandinistas. Even US-backed fascist dictators such as Batista, Diem, Pinochet, and Ayatollah Khomeini were included! But why were such leaders as Alexander the Great, Shaka, and Kaiser Wilhelm included? (And why were contemporary Persian emperors, or European colonial governors, or Tsar Nicholas II excluded?) Sure all three were conquerors, but including them but excluding their rivals (who were usually way worse) is unfair bias! Alexander of Macedon was actually progressive for his time. Shaka was a military genius and a hero to the Zulu and other Bantu peoples, and a resistor of European imperialism. Of course, Kaiser Wilhelm is falsely blamed (yet again) for starting WW1. Actually, for those of us who do not read Anglo-French revisionist history, we KNOW that WW1 was started by a terrorist attack against the Austrian archduke by Serbian nationalist terrorists and the Austrian retaliation. Kind of like what the US did in Afghanistan after 9/11 or the Israeli intervention in Lebanon after the Hezbollah Crisis. Blaming Germany for STARTING WW1 is like blaming Canada for the US invasion of Iraq or blaming America for the Israeli occupation of Lebanon. So it is clear that the author does NOT have an anti-communist bias (as evidenced by his exclusion of Tito and Castro) or a pro-West bias (as evidenced by his inclusion of Alexander the Great), or an anti-West bias (as indicated by his inclusion of Shaka). Worse, the author has a crude Anglo-American bias. He is nothing more than a stooge of the British Empire! Consider the complete abscence of British rulers! Also note how he includes Ivan the Terrible and Catherine the Great but conveniently forgets Bloody Nicholas, the last czar known for his rabid anti-semitism and pogroms and whose autocratic rule set the stage for Lenin and Co. (But czarist Russia was on jolly olde England's side during WW1, so Czar Nick gets a pass!) Or how Napoleon is included but revanchist Clemencaeu, whose hatred paved the way for Hitler and the Third Reich, gets a pass. I do not recall any leaders from the British or Ottoman empires, two most evil empires before the Soviet Union and 3rd Reich getting mention. And how come not one American president is mentioned (forget Carter, Reagan, Bush I & II, or Clinton)? What about Andrew Jackson, McKinley, T. Roosevelt, Wilson? Why weren't Kim Jong Il, Mullah Omar, and Osama bin Laden included? Why wasn't Kemal Ataturk, the first Fascist dictator of modern times included? It is clear that Nigel is an Anglo-American historical revisionist. Basically, British and their Colonies, Turks, and Zionist Israel = Good Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, Arabs, Zulus, Boers, Prussians = Evil according to this propagandist.
1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.Was this review helpful? Yes NoThank you for your feedback. Report this reviewThank you, this review has been flagged.