Was listening to Razorfist's arcade stream from last Friday - https://youtu.be/TmTY2d7nwAs
In it he talks a little bit about General Patton and how he was possibly assassinated due to his anti-Communist views.
Found that interesting and went to wikipedia where it doesn't talk about that - but has a whole section about "views on Race" where the writer declares him a racist. https://archive.ph/aww7m
Individually they were good soldiers, but I expressed my belief at the time, and have never found the necessity of changing it, that a colored soldier cannot think fast enough to fight in armor.
And then the writer goes on with THIS nugget
He also stated that performance was more important than race or religious affiliation:
I don't give a damn who the man is. He can be a Nigger or a Jew, but if he has the stuff and does his duty, he can have anything I've got. By God! I love him.
Which sounds completely anti-racist to me and, gasp, someone who believes in the merit of a person!
The section goes on to say he's also an anti-Semite and anti-Russian
The obvious question is WTF does this have to do with an objective AND NEUTRAL historical scholarly article - answer is NOTHING. But this garbage is appearing on more and more figures pages to retcon history.
That led me to the next check - a copy of wikipedia was made about 6 years ago, Infogalactic.com precisely because of this revisionist history even then.
Here's the infogalactic page as it was originally pulled from wikipedia in 2016 (with a few minor edits earlier this year) https://archive.ph/wip/ZHdWA
Note there's no race section.
Note also the section about the assassination controversy for his anti-communist viewpoints that is now omitted from the wiki page.
Tell me you don't actually believe this.
Sounds like Sergeant Hartman of blessed memory.
First mistake is assuming that the puke on Wikipedia is 'scholarly'. Rest assured that if you know anything about a given subject, the Wikipedia article will be apparent as the most laughable nonsense there is.
I don't know the veracity of these quotes but I would certainly like to hear how they are incorrect too.
I do find it very outlandish. You may disagree with my judgment, but this to me is like "Stalin was assassinated by a cabal of capitalist saboteurs".
I don't. It just sounded very John Birchy to me.
I don't know - this was the first I had ever heard of it so I was doing this thing called 'research'
Actually I don't presume it's 'scholarly' and I go in knowing it's got a leftist bent - especially in politics. What surprised me more that we've gone beyond leftist angles to outright marxist thought control and I've got the hard proof right here and not only did they defame the article and his memory with the marxist/racist 'lens' they even scrubbed the assassination story which would be 'inconvenient' to communist forces.
Wikipedia is a record of what the media have said. And a subset at that since they a long list of "unreliable" sources. An encyclopedia should be compiled with all due deference to primary sources, with media serving as only a suspect vehicle for those stories. On Wikipedia, if CNN or the NY Times said it, it's true. And they are unabashed liars.