They never mention that rabid communists poured into Kent State and set fire to the ROTC building with the cadets still inside.
The Cadets managed to escape, but we're not talking about peaceful hippies at Kent State. We're talking about rabid, pro-NVA, communists. That's why the National Guard was called in. The committed a terrorist attack.
I won't give the Ohio National Guard a break on how utterly incompetent they were. The shooting ended up being mostly their fault because they literally got lost and confused.
Another thing you might not know is the most of the people who were killed in the shooting were killed from stray rounds. Many NG's tried shooting warning shots over the heads of the protesters, and that clipped people who were just walking around on campus.
This guy? He wasn't anywhere near the protest. He was somewhere around 500 yards away, while the Guard unit had trapped itself at the bottom of a hill.
They are Leftists. Liberals are the people who founded the country. Thomas Jefferson is a Liberal. John Adams is a Liberal. Liberalism opposes big government. This is why "Economic Liberals" are people who demand little to no government intervention in the economy.
The 'political liberal' is the result of Franklin Roosevelt obfuscating the word. He campaigned as a Liberal and claimed that Hoover was recklessly spending America into a disaster with his interventionist policies.
As Roosevelt took over the country and turned it into a one party state, he effectively ruled it as a Democratic Socialist, and instantiated Fabian Socialism as an economic policy through Keynesian Economics. The country has been slowly struggling to pull away from Fabian Socialism ever since, with gains every now and again.
Leftism is fundamentally illiberal. This is why Liberals like the Marque De Lafayette in Revolutionary France were hunted and demanded to be executed by the Leftists who ran the ran the country. They didn't call themselves dictators or a revolutionary oligopoly. They called themselves the "Committee of Public Safety"... because Leftists always lie.
Honestly, I've been slowly picking up on it, and there's unfortunatley a lot of reading that I still have to do. It seems like a lot of initial primary sources have been intentionally ignored to form narratives, but primary sources are definitely a good take to understanding all the different perspectives that one side or another may have had in history.
However, in recent memory I'd say good historical introductions involve
Tik History going over details around World War 2. That link is his mammoth work about the links between National Socialism and Socialism, but there's plenty of others.
"Immigration And Culture" - Thomas Sowell - Goes over how human societies form in relationship to immigration, and how societies respond to immigration. Lots of historical examples and Leftist narrative debunking.
"Conquests And Cultures" - Thomas Sowell - Goes over how human societies respond to conquests and subjugation. Lots of historical examples and Leftist narrative debunking.
"Basic Economics" - Thomas Sowell - Goes over economics, but also completely destroys a whole litany of narratives that were spun by the Left, and how the terrible results were inevitable due to... basic economics.
"The Vision of the Anointed" - Thomas Sowell - Goes over the history of Leftist narrative spinning and intellectual fads, their disastrous consequences, and why they never seem to learn, or even face consequences.
"Intellectuals and Race" - Thomas Sowell - Goes over the history of racialism both in the US and abroad, and how the intellectual class uses racism and racialism in order to effectively guarantee positions in intellectual hierarchies with it, bringing near ruin upon the larger society in doing so.
"Gun Control" which is a book written in 1965 spanning the history of gun control efforts in the early 20th century (there is a lot of forgotten history in regards to that subject)
"For The Common Defense: A Military History of the United States" which is an excellent book on the military history of the US up until the 90's and shows it's roots in conflict, and doesn't try to paint a rose-tinted-lens on any side
"Goldwater: The Man Who Made a Revolution" which shows how Barry Goldwater rose to stardom politically, and even though it was written decades ago, the Left's response to both him, and Reagan, and Trump are startlingly similar.
"Anarchy USA" - A film by the John Birch Society which goes over the history of both Leftist uprisings and the Leftist revolutionary involvement in the Civil Rights movement.
This is the John Birch Society - Which goes over the history of JBS, but more importantly, shows the tactics and strategies of Leftists which were actively seeking to destroy them at every available turn. It gives you a flavor of just how familiar the Left's strategies really have been.
"Conscience of a Conservative" is basically Barry Goldwater's treatise on Conservatism, so that you understand how American Conservatism is supposed to work in contrast to the narrative spun by the Left about what Conservatism means to them.
In addition to that, I'll always recommend 2 others if there's even a chance that you are interested:
"Knowledge and Decisions" - Thomas Sowell's masterpiece, but it is not an easy read. I would consider it one of the most important books written in the English language. It actually strives to, and genuinely answers, a fundamental question about human nature, and how people take information, reference experience, make decisions, and retain that as knowledge.
"The Might Of Nations" - by J. G. Stoessinger - It is probably one of the finest political science books I've ever read. It does a very deep dive on how people and societies create what are called Nations, how they work, when/why they emerge, and how this all interacted with the late 20th century and the collapse of the European Empires, and the Cold War
They never mention that rabid communists poured into Kent State and set fire to the ROTC building with the cadets still inside.
The Cadets managed to escape, but we're not talking about peaceful hippies at Kent State. We're talking about rabid, pro-NVA, communists. That's why the National Guard was called in. The committed a terrorist attack.
I won't give the Ohio National Guard a break on how utterly incompetent they were. The shooting ended up being mostly their fault because they literally got lost and confused.
Another thing you might not know is the most of the people who were killed in the shooting were killed from stray rounds. Many NG's tried shooting warning shots over the heads of the protesters, and that clipped people who were just walking around on campus.
This guy? He wasn't anywhere near the protest. He was somewhere around 500 yards away, while the Guard unit had trapped itself at the bottom of a hill.
That includes the word Liberal.
They are Leftists. Liberals are the people who founded the country. Thomas Jefferson is a Liberal. John Adams is a Liberal. Liberalism opposes big government. This is why "Economic Liberals" are people who demand little to no government intervention in the economy.
The 'political liberal' is the result of Franklin Roosevelt obfuscating the word. He campaigned as a Liberal and claimed that Hoover was recklessly spending America into a disaster with his interventionist policies.
As Roosevelt took over the country and turned it into a one party state, he effectively ruled it as a Democratic Socialist, and instantiated Fabian Socialism as an economic policy through Keynesian Economics. The country has been slowly struggling to pull away from Fabian Socialism ever since, with gains every now and again.
Leftism is fundamentally illiberal. This is why Liberals like the Marque De Lafayette in Revolutionary France were hunted and demanded to be executed by the Leftists who ran the ran the country. They didn't call themselves dictators or a revolutionary oligopoly. They called themselves the "Committee of Public Safety"... because Leftists always lie.
Honestly, I've been slowly picking up on it, and there's unfortunatley a lot of reading that I still have to do. It seems like a lot of initial primary sources have been intentionally ignored to form narratives, but primary sources are definitely a good take to understanding all the different perspectives that one side or another may have had in history.
However, in recent memory I'd say good historical introductions involve
In addition to that, I'll always recommend 2 others if there's even a chance that you are interested: