I appreciate this more reasonable, less emotive explanation for your stated views. But now that I better understand where you're coming from, I see your sense of history is flawed because it passes over Jewish Power and its intervention into world events as if it didn't exist. Who were the Bolsheviks, who controlled the USSR, who egged the UK and US into WW2, what promise was made to found Israel, and looking back, who seeded the 19th century robber barons, who seized control of the Fed to insure they kept control of America's money power? Who is still calling the shots in the US, UK, Germany where politicians fawn over Bibi like he's a shining light and example of a new Churchill? Finally who did Churchill owe money to that kept him in line to Zionist wishes?
You think you're rigorous, but your version of historiography is full of kosher approved holes. That's why you need to read some revisionist history.
You're right that my knowledge is somewhat thin about the various kvosts (Georgian etc.) in the circa 1917 USSR power struggle and the exact role played by Churchill, but that was a side discussion, hardly central to the Libertarian issue, where simply my image of a Individual actually true to Lib principles would be Ron Paul, while others kept trying to ridiculously shove the Koch Brothers down my throat. But I'm interested in filling in the gaps in my understanding of that history, particularly one that's not "kosher approved". How about suggesting a source?
It was your other critic who cited the Libertarian issue. I was strictly critiquing from a revisionist p.o.v. As an aside I will add that Ron Paul was someone I liked during his tenure. Maybe I even voted for him once.
When it comes to WW2 revisionist history, Mike King's The Bad War is the easiest to tackle. Unfortunately it's banned by Amazon. The style is not academic, which may or may not appeal,so be forewarned. There are other historians and other publications more intellectually demanding. The Barnes Review is also an easy read magazine, which began w/ WW2 criticism, but now covers the gamut of controversial historical events.
I appreciate this more reasonable, less emotive explanation for your stated views. But now that I better understand where you're coming from, I see your sense of history is flawed because it passes over Jewish Power and its intervention into world events as if it didn't exist. Who were the Bolsheviks, who controlled the USSR, who egged the UK and US into WW2, what promise was made to found Israel, and looking back, who seeded the 19th century robber barons, who seized control of the Fed to insure they kept control of America's money power? Who is still calling the shots in the US, UK, Germany where politicians fawn over Bibi like he's a shining light and example of a new Churchill? Finally who did Churchill owe money to that kept him in line to Zionist wishes?
You think you're rigorous, but your version of historiography is full of kosher approved holes. That's why you need to read some revisionist history.
You're right that my knowledge is somewhat thin about the various kvosts (Georgian etc.) in the circa 1917 USSR power struggle and the exact role played by Churchill, but that was a side discussion, hardly central to the Libertarian issue, where simply my image of a Individual actually true to Lib principles would be Ron Paul, while others kept trying to ridiculously shove the Koch Brothers down my throat. But I'm interested in filling in the gaps in my understanding of that history, particularly one that's not "kosher approved". How about suggesting a source?
It was your other critic who cited the Libertarian issue. I was strictly critiquing from a revisionist p.o.v. As an aside I will add that Ron Paul was someone I liked during his tenure. Maybe I even voted for him once.
When it comes to WW2 revisionist history, Mike King's The Bad War is the easiest to tackle. Unfortunately it's banned by Amazon. The style is not academic, which may or may not appeal,so be forewarned. There are other historians and other publications more intellectually demanding. The Barnes Review is also an easy read magazine, which began w/ WW2 criticism, but now covers the gamut of controversial historical events.
Thank you. I''ll look around; anything banned by Amazon likely has some countercultural value.