excerpt from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_history
Obviously the victors do have advantages in promoting their version of events, even if they don't erase their enemies completely from existence. The victors may have control over the churches, the courts and schools. This may give the ruling elites nearly total control over the molding of consciousness and discourse over those they rule. In dictatorships, ruthless censorship allows only the state-approved version of events to be made public, and much that happened remains secret if it proved hurtful to the ruling elite. Liberal democracies are not immune however. In the West for example, the concentration of media into ever fewer hands has given the captains of major media and the Public Relations industry increased control over the parameters of public discourse which form the boundaries of debate we all have in classrooms, and even with friends and co-workers on matters such as war and politics.
Related quotes:
“History is written by the victors.” -Sir Winston Churchill
“The whole history of the world is summed up in the fact that, when nations are strong, they are not always just, and when they wish to be just, they are no longer strong.” -Churchill
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it," from Reason in Common Sense, the first volume of his The Life of Reason. -George Santayana
So, part of what I think is happening now is that those who are attempting to be (or are) the victors are already busy at rewriting (and repeating) historical mistakes.
There are similar quotes by Plato, Confucius, Aristotle, Hegel, and the list is large. In essence, these philosophers are also repeating historical quotes of their predecessors.
The snake eats its tail (again).
Klue: Do you mean people all over the world were nicer to each other before 9/11? Or just after (and because of 9/11) there was a large sympathy factor were people were all helpful to those who suffered?
What (or who) can't be benevolent?
