Hypothetical future revisionist history

I was thinking about Holocaust and moon landing deniers and I was wondering if in the future people in the USA will deny that black people were ever made to sit in the back of the bus, barred from living in certain neighborhoods, required to go to separate schools, drink from separate water fountains, etc.

“No, that never happened. That’s propaganda made up to make white people look bad.” “There were no colored schools, churches, neighborhoods, water fountains. If there were, it’s because black people CHOSE to live, go to school, drink there.”

There’s documentary evidence of the Holocaust, including people who were there (now mostly very old), books written, aerial photographs, the testimony of the soldiers who liberated the camps–but some say it’s all lies. Same with the moon landing.

I can see the history of Africans who became African-Americans undergoing similar revision in the future as those people who were adults in the 50s and 60s die off.

I don’t have much hope for the future of our country.


People ALREADY do what you described. :mad:

Possible, but hopefully relegated to the future tin-foil-hat brigade and no one else. I make no predictions, though. This could get ugly.

You mean they say black people were never abused or denied rights because of not being white? :confused:

It starts with some damn fool saying slavery was a choice.

Oh yeah… now I remember. :frowning:

You mean the Disney movie “Song of the South” was a lie? Zip a dee do dah…

But seriously, what is a holocaust "denier’? Yes it happened. But notice how other “nice” countries like France and Poland happily sent away their Jews and were also happy to get rid of gypsies but you almost never read of that.

It wasnt just the Germans who thought they were a “master race”.

Well, it sort of was…for white people. I’m talking endentured servants from europe who agreed to years of slavery in exchange for a ticket to the new world.

I’m wondering about something more blatant than reinterpreting events. I’m wondering about complete denial, saying there were never colored-only water fountains or schools, that black people could always vote and live anywhere they wanted to, that Rosa Parks is a made-up character who never existed, that pictures of the March on Washington were photoshopped.

I believe that if thump told the MAGAbots today that there was a March on Washington but only1,000 people attended and the photos were faked (with techniques prior to Photoshop), and that Rosa Parks was a fictional character in a novel or a movie, they would absolutely buy it.

I can already tell you that there’s a lot of overlap between people who would do something like this, and the people who believe that crime would disappear if parents could legally beat their children once again. :dubious:

Sure it’s going to happen. Facts don’t matter to an amazing number of people.

There are an unbelievable number of people who claim the Civil War had nothing to do with slavery. But just read the South Carolina secession proclamation. It consists of two types of statements: 1. South Carolina is allowed to secede. 2. They are really, really mad at non-slave states not returning fugitive slaves. All the CSA states made a big deal about “preserving their peculiar institution.”

Yet people say it was about tariffs, “state rights”, etc. Note that even if you fantasize that state rights has nothing to do with slavery, note that SC is complaining about other states invoking their “state rights”!!!

If you can skip over this a hundreds of other statements and documents made at the time, you can just flat out ignore the drinking fountain pictures, the laws enacted, and on and on. All such statements are of course prefaced by “I’m not a racist but …”

You continue to be a cautionary tale.

Personally, I don’t think American history is going to forget about the civil rights movement. Because it has a popular narrative; black people didn’t have their rights and then we fixed the problem. People love a happy ending.

What people want to forget is that it was a struggle. All of the people who were trying to achieve rights for black Americans were being opposed by other people who were trying to maintain the system that denied black Americans those rights.

The popular memory of the event is that there was a time when everyone was part of a racist system. Then a few heroic people noticed this and pointed out that racism was wrong. And everyone else said “Wow, I never realized how bad racism was. Thanks for pointing it out. We’ll all immediately stop doing this. We’re good people who welcome the chance to become even better.”

Everyone wants to identify with the people in the movement. Nobody wants to see themselves as somebody who would have opposed civil rights.

In 20 years, it will be the same with homophobia.

I also think that Ronald Regan’s is remembered as being much more popular now than he actually was.

I’m old enough that I’ve lived through the civil rights struggles for black people, women, gays, and transgendered people. And all of them were real fights with people on the other side loudly opposing the cause.

A decade after the fight was over and everyone could see that the world hadn’t ended as predicted, nobody wanted to admit they had been on the other side. Everyone wanted to claim that they had always supported the cause.

[QUOTE=leahcim;21269892I also think that Ronald Regan’s is remembered as being much more popular now than he actually was.[/QUOTE]

I agree.

I was a young adult in the 1980s, and I’ve had millennials say, “I sure wish I had been alive during the 1980s.” I tell them, “No, you don’t. Yes, the culture was interesting and fun, but we also had Reagan, AIDS, Chenobyl, the Cold War, etc. Be grateful you missed it.”

My generation often said, as kids, that the 1950s would have been a lot of fun. Yeah, same kind of response.

We’re already seeing historical revisionism by people on this very board claim that Jimmy Carter was the no-war President and that Barrack Obama was the no-scandal President. Also Canada has only fought in self-defense, Canada burned down the White House, Canada never had troops in Iraq.

…or indeed about the ships of (Jewish) refugees turned away from the US. Or how many in the US were sympathetic to ideas of white supremacy and eugenics at the time (more so even than today :eek:)

If your point is just that racism went a lot further than just the Nazis, you’re absolutely right.

Holocaust deniers fall into a few camps, but most generally when we talk about holocaust deniers, we’re talking about people who deny the existence of the holocaust, its goals, or its scope. They deny that places like Auschwitz were used as extermination camps, deny that there was an intentional genocide of Jews, Romas, and others, or claim that the death toll was not what it was and was normal for wartime. Here’s a nice overview.