Like was it a meaningful debate or a flat out flame war? And what was the main theme you were arguing over?

  • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 day ago

    That historical events can be approached and assessed without contemporary extrapolations. But to boil down years of internets, including old ezboard forums, I’d say it’s been over the Clean Wehrmacht theory/myth.

    I used to be really into WW2 history communities and I would routinely approach things objectively and piss a bunch of nerds off who pervert history and just want to obsess over how Hitler could’ve won.

    So I have argued far too much with people who hate Hitler just because he lost the war to Stalin. Like, primary sources would mean nothing. I’d have correspondence transcripts from commanders and diplomats, and they’d have their latest Hearts of Iron game run.

    • AskewLord@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 hours ago

      those folks aren’t interested in history, they are interested in fantasy.

      for a lot of folks, that’s all history is, or why it’s fun, it’s the fantasizing about it. It’s not the boring staid work of a true historian who is looking at boring crap like cargo manifests to piece together the reality of history.

      • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        They’d sure extrapolate into conclusions for contemporary society and modern politics from those fantasies, which was the usual source of contention to start arguing.

        For some reason they’re ceded the right to call what they’re doing history and not fantasy. Hence things like the Clean Wehrmacht theory become more than fantasy to folks.