Whether you like it or not, and I don't, "everything is political" is the world that has been foisted upon us by the total state
But then especially you must guard against believing things simply because they are politically convenient, rather than because they are true.
His opinion may be mainstream within medieval studies, but progressives also want to cancel medieval studies for being racist.
That does not make medieval studies either racist or reactionary. That's really accepting their framework.
History has a reactionary bias.
History has no bias, that's the best part. You can cite many facts that put 'reactionaries' in a bad light, and progressives, and conservatives, and everyone.
Every history book has a self-evident bias inherent in the author's choice of language. Thucydides has a clear, although still critical, bias towards Athens and democracy.
But you talked about history itself, what actually happened. That has no bias. Individual books can have worse than just biased language. As for your claim regarding all of history. It would show that 'reactionaries' were right on some things, and wrong on some others.
One cannot evaluate history honestly without shattering progressive narratives, and Western peoples are soaked in progressivism, which means history cannot be approached apolitically. To deny these political pressures is to be a fish denying water.
But then especially you must guard against believing things simply because they are politically convenient, rather than because they are true.
That does not make medieval studies either racist or reactionary. That's really accepting their framework.
History has no bias, that's the best part. You can cite many facts that put 'reactionaries' in a bad light, and progressives, and conservatives, and everyone.
Every history book has a self-evident bias inherent in the author's choice of language. Thucydides has a clear, although still critical, bias towards Athens and democracy.
But you talked about history itself, what actually happened. That has no bias. Individual books can have worse than just biased language. As for your claim regarding all of history. It would show that 'reactionaries' were right on some things, and wrong on some others.
One cannot evaluate history honestly without shattering progressive narratives, and Western peoples are soaked in progressivism, which means history cannot be approached apolitically. To deny these political pressures is to be a fish denying water.
Then you're trading one set of lies for another.