“Saddest was the input of a “worried” history profession, whose big-guns expressed concern. Again, this comes from a discipline that nearly wrecked itself over postmodernism and the banality that all truth is relative and constructed, and predicated on questions of race, class, and gender. Objecting to docu-dramatic, fictionalized account on grounds that dialogue either didn’t happen as it appeared on screen or was enlarged and expanded is like complaining that Gates of Fire is not Herodotus or that Mary Renault deviated from Arrian.”
In other words, why did the elitist academics of the Hip-ocracy who believe that all truth is relative all of a sudden demand that it was an “absolute truth” that the Path to 9/11 was factually incorrect? Because they are a part of the Hip-ocracy, that’s why.
He has more to say. Read it all.
Post a Comment