Revisionism

While reading “Revisionism Revisited” the first time, I was completely confused. After reading it over a few times, I realized the message it was trying to portray. Revisionism, it seems, really only matters to the people who read and believe what is being revised. History can’t be changed, what is done is done. But what can we take to be the truth? As in the Wright Brother’s example, it is widely accepted that the two brothers were the first to actually fly an aircraft. After reading the article, it may just be that another man should have gotten the credit. It makes one become skeptical of how deep they should read into factual dates and events.
Revisionism shouldn’t be taken as skepticism, though. I felt that classifying it solely as a conspiracy theory undermined the real basis. As I said before, it is completely up to the individual to make the decision whether what they are reading is historically correct. We also can’t just shoot down people’s ideas and thoughts for the very beginning. We need to take time to think about what is being said and what stance we take on it.
Overall, the point that Mortimer was trying to convey wasn’t very clear to me. I’m not big into politics, so as soon as he started out with talking about George Bush, I was lost. I felt also that he was trying to talk himself and his views up way too much, which made him come off as slightly arrogant and closed minded.