1 Introduction

Written by dade on . Posted in 1: Forensic History

Fact Based History
Chapter One: A New Approach to History


The societies that now dominate the world already existed before you, I, or anyone else now alive was born.

We did not create them.

We inherited them.

The world was already divided into the entities called ‘nations’ with imaginary lines called ‘borders’ long before we were born. These nations had already set up policies and procedures that caused a large percentage of the world’s wealth to be diverted into industries that make and use the tools of war, which means the tools of mass murder and terror. People had already worked out training methods that could make children become ‘patriotic’ and willing to fight, kill, even accept death, if asked to do so, and even set of nuclear weapons that will destroy the entire world, if ordered to do so, in order to advance the interests of these strange entities called ‘nations’ that had existed for some 6,000 years before anyone now alive was even born. Giant corporations—many of which are larger than the great majority of the world’s governments—manipulate political systems and override the will of the people of the world in order to generate profits for owners, who don’t even have to disclose their names.

You and I didn’t get to vote about whether or not this was the way the world worked.

It already worked this way before anyone now alive was even born.

How did all of this come about?

What sequence of events caused the people in the past to put together these particular realities of existence?

Perhaps, if we knew this, we might have a start in figuring out what other options we have for organizing the realities of our existence, if we should ever decide there are things about this situation that don’t meet our needs. Perhaps, if we knew how conditions on Earth got to be as they are, when the important decisions were made, who made them, and why they made these particular decisions, we could use this knowledge to figure out other ways to organize the realities of our existence that might perhaps be able to meet the long-term needs of the human race better than the ones already in place.

The choices we have for the future depend mostly on what we have to work with now. Before we can know what we might do in the future, we have to understand how the foundational structures of the societies we were born into came to exist. We have to understand the sequence of events that led to the strange entities called ‘nations’ coming to exist, and how the decisions came to be made that caused the people of the world to divide themselves from each other with imaginary lines and then building weapons that can destroy the world to advance the interests of what they call ‘their nations’ over the interests of what they call ‘foreign nations.’

We have to understand the sequence of events that created other power structures as well. For example, what sequence of events led to the creation of giant, global, profit-making corporations with the power and authority to manipulate governments, change policies, and simply eliminate any governments that don’t meet their needs? What about the strange pieces of paper called ‘money’ that we depend on to get the necessities of life? How did all of this come to exist? How can we hope to understand where we might go in the future if we don’t understand how the realities of our world today came to exist and why they do the things that they do?

If we want to make a better world, we have to start by figuring out how and why our world came to work as it does today.


A New Kind of History


We have a great many wonderful new tools that we can use to build this understanding.

We are undergoing a revolution in the sciences that can help us understand our past as never before. Only very recently, people had to simply guess about the ages of artifacts. Now science can tell us exactly how old they are. Once people believed that no humans could ever know the ages of stars, the age of the Earth, how and when life originated on Earth, how and when the first humans came to walk on this world, or how or when the basic realities of our world came to be as they are now. These were mysteries that people thought we would only come to understand through religious contemplation and study of visions or answers to prayers. (People generally believed that an invisible being with superpowers that lived in the sky created it all with incantations.) Now, scientists have tools that can provide totally objective information about all these things and many others. DNA sequencers are verifying the antiquity of the human race (long claimed but never fully accepted by the mainstream) and allowing us to trace habitation and migration patterns that took place in ancient history. We can tell by microscopic bits of food residue on ancient cooking implements what people had for dinner tens of thousands of years ago, how they got the seeds for this food (we will see that many of the seeds were created intentionally by aggressive genetic manipulation, even many thousands of years ago), how they grew the food, and how they prepared and cooked it. In some cases, we can use very precise scientific tools to reconstruct events that took place hundreds of thousands of years in the past. We have tools that can reconstruct events much older than this, and give us great understanding of the activities of people who lived millions of years ago (far before the date that people considered to be the beginning of all existence only a few decades ago), with a great deal of precision.

We are also undergoing an information revolution. In the past few years, we have gained easy and ready access to more historical information than people have ever had in the entire time the human race has been on Earth. People have scanned billions of original records, historical documents, personal letters, journals, diaries, books, and other manuscripts onto public archives of the internet. Although this information has existed ever since the manuscripts were first created, people who wanted to refer to them couldn’t do this, in part because they wouldn’t have any way to even know that the great bulk of them existed, and in part because they would not have been allowed to look at the great majority of the documents even if they had known where they were. We have original documents that give us incredible insight into the nature of events that shaped the important realities of our existence, documents that even their owners didn’t know had any significance until computers had scanned the documents and provided their information to researchers.

Giant computers are working 24 hours a day to index and cross reference this information, creating databases that allow anyone who knows any combination of the words used by people in the past or any information about events that took place during those times to find all relevant manuscripts for those times. Copies of documents that even the most dedicated researchers would not have been able to find only a short time ago can be made to materialize within microseconds on smart phones and computers which can be located anywhere on Earth.

For most of history, people in positions of authority could decide how future generations would see historical events. They could create their versions of history and order it placed into books and taught to children. Conflicting information could be banned and made unavailable. By repeating the made-up versions of history over and over, teaching the made up versions as facts, testing the children on their understanding of these versions of history, and tracking down and eliminating alternative views, they could make the past look any way they wanted it to look. Orwell, a professional propagandist who exposed the tricks of the trade to the world wrote: ‘Who controls the past, controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.’

Until very recently, the victors in struggles could depict the struggles any way they wanted. They could ‘control the past,’ giving them the ability to ‘control the future.’

Now, people can check out any information they suspect may be incorrect.

They can look up real records and documents and get them on the screens of their phones in microseconds. If the records are in a different language, computers can translate them and make them understandable as they are displayed. If they want to see the evidence with their own eyes, they can go to the internet and order scientific instruments that didn’t even exist a few years ago and do their own DNA studies, determine for themselves the date that documents they have were created, or otherwise verify information they believe may be incorrect in ways that would not have been possible at all by anyone, no matter how great their budget, only a generation ago.

If we really want to know the truth about our past, we now have the tools to figure this out.


War and the NEED to Create a False Version of History


We are learning that a great deal of what we were told is ‘history’ in the past is not a true and accurate account of the actual events that put us where we are now. New evidence is allowing us to see that a large percentage of the stories that have been taught and accepted as ‘the history of the world’ is actually made up and has no relationship with the actual events that shaped the realities of our existence.

A lot of these stories were made up for a very specific reason: They were created to trick people into agreeing to play a role in activities that they otherwise would have not accepted.

Let me explain:

The societies that were in place before you and I were born have powerful internal forces that push the people in them to organize and engage in the orgies of mass murder and death that we call ‘wars.’ (We all know this is true; we will examine the reason that these specific societies work this way when we are in a position to compare these societies to other societies that have existed in the history of the human race.) The people who run these societies know that wars can begin at any time. In order to make sure their team (or ‘nation’) will have the ability to participate in these activities, when the time comes, these leaders must arrange to have immense quantities of resources removed from the planet; they must then use a large percentage of the productive capabilities of the to process these raw materials into tools implements needed to carry out the required mass murder and destruction. People must make enormous sacrifices and give up many things that would have made their lives better in order to make sure the tools needed for war exist and are always there, ready to use.

People must do a great deal more than sacrifice material wealth to have war: at least some people must be willing to participate in activities that most people find truly horrible, including go out and commit mass murder under miserable conditions, while others are trying to kill them, and at horrible psychological and physical costs to themselves whether they ‘win’ or ‘lose’ the war. The people who are not fighting must train these people to kill, equip them to kill, and support them while they devote their lives to killing, or the activity we call ‘war’ will not be able to take place.

The people who run these societies know that people are far more willing to make the sacrifices needed for war to happen if they have a certain mindset. The people who run these societies have found that people will be much more likely to be willing to take on a role in the war machines if they can be made to think a certain specific way about the events of the past that put the them where they are now. For example, they are much more likely to be willing to participate if they can be made to think that wars in the past took place for noble and worthwhile causes and that the victory for the side that ‘won’ the war improved the world and created favorable conditions that could not have existed if the war hadn’t take place. (For example, most histories try to create the impression that the people of the world now have such wonderful benefits as freedom, justice, liberty, equality, and brotherhood, and that these benefits could not have existed if not for the perpetual wars that were fought in the past.) People are likely to sacrifice, fight, murder, and destroy at the risk of their own lives if they have a certain impression of wars in their minds, believing that all past wars were essentially struggles between the forces of good and the forces of evil, and that the forces of good always prevailed in these past wars.

An unbiased and objective account of the events that led to the realities of the world being as they are does not help generate this mindset. As we will see, wars take place for structural reasons that we can easily understand; the stories of good and evil are basically made up during or after the wars to make people think that the side that gained control of the land (or the side they are trying to get to gain control of the land) represents or represented the forces of good, while the other side represents or represented the forces of evil.

Often, an objective account of the events that transpired do not support the desired mindset. When this happens, the a new version of the accounts has to be created to keep the description of the past consistent with the desired mindset. The people who were victorious in the struggle write the histories. They can specify exactly how each event is to be portrayed, which events are to be left out, and which events that didn’t actually take place have to be made up, to portray the war correctly for future generations. If this is done properly, future generations will think that the latest war and every war that preceded it was fought for good and noble purposes, and that war, itself is a good thing, something they should be proud to be a part of.

What if the war was fought for some purpose that objective readers would not think is noble at all? This is not a problem: the victors write the history. They can create stories that make themselves appear to be wonderful, kind, noble, altruistic, and benevolent. They can depict the losers as horrible, mindless, inhumane monsters, not worthy to breathe the same air as the victors: there is nothing the losers can do about this; they were either exterminated or subjugated, and have no say over the accounts told to later generations.

The truth is that war is a horrible thing. Many young men of fighting age, when they enlist to support the cause, quickly find out the truth. Their only way out is to kill themselves, so suicide is often largest causes of death for young men who become soldiers. (If you doubt this, call any phone number that has anything to do with veterans: the first thing you will hear is a message begging you, the caller, not to kill yourself.) Millions of people have to be involved in many very unpleasant activities for long periods of time to make sure that wars can take place. To make them willing to do these things, or even accept them while all the people around them do these things, their minds have to be prepared from a very early age. They have to believe that the wars are actually good things, they make the world better. (Each story of war, written by the victors, is basically the same: the victors were good, the losers evil.) Logic and reason tell us that war is not a good thing. Anyone who has been in a war will tell you that war is not a good thing. The truth conflicts with the desired mindset, so the truth becomes irrelevant. A version of history is made up to create the desired mental impression.

This version of history is really not a real history of the human race, it is simply a long collection of propaganda stories designed to glorify and praise the most horrific and inhumane that are within the capability of the human race: war. It portrays war as the source of everything good and descent that exists or has ever existed, from brotherhood, equality, and liberty (the French and other revolutions of the 1700s supposedly brought these things) to the amber waves of grain that feed the people (courtesy of the wars that wiped out the ‘savages’ who lived in the Americas before the land was ‘tamed’ by ‘civilized people.’) These histories don’t even mention any of the important events that need to be understood in order to understand why the realities of the world are as they are today:

When did humans come to exist on this world (in other words, when did human history start)?

How did people live early in their existence, before the entities called ‘nations’ came to exist?

How many people lived during the period of time before ‘nations’ came to exist?

What did these people accomplish?

What changed that caused them to decide to organize their existence around the principles that dominate the societies of the world now?

How did these decisions affect the way people lived?

How and why did the various entities with power and control over important decisions in the world today come to exist and gain the power and control they have now?

How and why did the realities of existence change as these entities gained power and control over time?

What really happened in our past?


Why The Realities of Information Transfer Changed


Until very recently, the people who want to get people to think a certain way about history could get away with making up just about any stories they wanted, then teaching them to children as facts. If these stories were told to children, starting at an early enough age, and the great bulk of information available to curious people conformed to the stories, most people would never hear anything that conflicted with the official versions of the past. If they did occasionally hear remarks from people who didn’t believe the official versions, or from people whose parents or grandparents were there and could tell people what actually happened, they would never get more than isolated and unverifiable information from these outside sources. The official stories would be told and retold so often that they would become accepted as fact.

Until very recently, we couldn’t do anything about this because we didn’t have access to objective and unbiased information. The people who controlled society and wanted to promote a mindset suitable to war could ban contrary information, censor or redact any stories that went against the official versions, silence people with ridicule and lawsuits who proposed that science disproved the claimed histories (Darwin chose not to publish his more controversial ideas for this reason and Galileo spent is late years in court or jail trying to defend science) or arrest and execute people who made claims unacceptable to the authorities (Socrates and Sir Thomas More were both executed for their unacceptable views).

People would not be able to create effective arguments against the official versions of history because they had no hard evidence that these versions were wrong.

But certain events that happened very recently have changed all this.

At 7:15 GMT, October 31, 1952, an event occurred that forced the militaries of the world to change the way they transferred information. The specific realities of this event forced them to accept an information system built on something called ‘open architecture,’ which basically means that the transmission capabilities and nodes of communication were no longer created by government entities and could no longer be controlled by government entities. (See sidebar for more information.)

The event that ended the ability of the official establishment to get away with altering history:

At 7:15 GMT, October 31, 1952, military contractors detonated a new kind of nuclear bomb, one that was far more powerful than any bomb ever detonated before and blew the entire island used to conduct the test—Elugelab—off the face of the planet Earth. This weapon, code name Ivy Mike, used the energy in a conventional atomic bomb to trigger a much larger second stage that worked on a new process, creating reactions that had never taken place on the planet Earth before. The second-stage explosion had an unexpected effect:  it reversed the magnetic field in the ionosphere for a microsecond. This led to a gigantic pulse of electromagnetic energy (or EMP) that induced enormous electrical currents in any conductors under that part of the ionosphere.

Communication systems at the time relied on large numbers of relatively small wires. These wires had very low capacities to carry electricity and the enormous currents of the EMP melted them, destroying the communication systems entirely.

The military contractors working on the project saw a profit opportunity:  they could get funding for new communication systems to replace the ones that they knew couldn’t survive nuclear war. (Chapter 13 goes over the chain of events that led to the internet in great detail. There is no doubt it was created for military purposes.)

The new communication system was initially called  Arapanet. It relied on a large web of connections between various ‘nodes,’ with routing systems which would ensure that messages got through even if a large percentage of the nodes and connections were destroyed. To make sure that the nodes and connections were not all the same (and therefore potentially vulnerable), the creators of Arapanet used something called ’open architecture:’  All of the users of the system would create their own nodes and connections to their own specifications, with general protocols making sure they all worked together. This led to the internet.

We will go over the events that led to this system and the exact reason it has its current capabilities much later in the book, but here is the point of this sidebar:  the communication system could not do what it had to do—allow communications during nuclear wars—if any entity could prevent any part of any message from getting through. In other words, if the military that created this system could censor it, it wouldn’t be able to do what it had to do. A part of the technical requirements for this kind of communication system is uncensorability. We can see that it is not censorable for ourselves, by going to websites that the government that created this system would definitely censor, if it had the ability to do so.

The practical realities of nuclear warfare forced them to accept an information system that they could not transfer. Now, this information system is in place. It was created in order to make war practical under the most terrible conditions imaginable. But, now that it exists, the people of the world can use it for other purposes. We can use it, if we want, to create a forum for new information that will bring the people of the world together, help us understand why the people of the world are divided from each other by imaginary lines that people build nuclear bombs to protect, help us figure out other options, and, if we want something else, help us change the realities of existence so that this communication system is never needed for its intended purpose.

This has changed the realities of information transfer worldwide. Only a few years ago, people would have to get the permission of their governments before they could even contact people in many other ‘nations;’ any communication would take weeks and they would know that any letter they sent across the imaginary lines would likely be opened and read by government officials on both sides of the line. They knew that if they gave any information expressing doubt about official versions of events in their own ‘nations’ or curiosity about the way the same events were being portrayed in the other nations, they would likely be put on watch lists and monitored from then until the end of their lives. Now, anyone can go to websites that allow them to communicate directly in real time with people anywhere in the world.

Now, if people want to know the truth about pretty much anything, they can go to information sources that are not under the control of any governments or, for that matter, under the control of any human beings: giant machines sort through immense volumes of information, including documents that have not seen human eyes since they were created, perhaps thousands of years ago, and answering whatever questions people may have about the topic.

The practice of banning documents that governments don’t want people to see has basically disappeared: it is no longer possible to do this effectively and any attempt to do it only calls attention to the documents and make people want to look at them more than ever. (The claims of censorship in countries that were historically called ‘repressive’ are frauds: I travel a lot and have always been able to get to websites that I am looking for. It is possible for governments to fill up search engines with garbage to make it hard to find the websites, but not possible to prevent access to information that people know exists, for the reasons explained in the sidebar.)

People are taking advantage of this new freedom: they are posting billions of documents on pubic forums which would never have been available to the public before. This includes official documents that explain policies that the public never knew about, records of genocides, atrocities, intentionally set plagues and famines, and other activities committed by the ‘winning side’ in wars that the winners didn’t want people to know happened.

Other information on the internet help us look at history in more depth than ever before. People are scanning private libraries that include private diaries and personal letters onto the internet. Computers are digitizing these documents and entering the words they contain into search engines. If you are curious about a certain event, you can enter search terms that some machine in a far away country associates with a personal diary entry written hundreds of years ago, and pull up the diary and read it and this may well be the first time anyone has read it since it was written. (Later in this book you will find many such letters and diary entries that tell us what really happened during critical events in our history.)

The internet has also given scientists freedom they never had before: they don’t have to get their research approved by third parties, like journals (under the control of academic foundations that were created to protect the professional reputation of the prevailing view about certain topics. They can simply write up their results and publish them. If scientists have evidence that tells us that people who had done research in that particular field for decades were wrong, they can make this information available to everyone so that we can judge for ourselves what we believe.

A great deal of the new information available due to the recent changes in information structure conflict with things we have been raised to believe are true. As more and more information becomes available, people are starting to put it together to create versions of important events that took place in the past that are based on this new evidence and show that the old stories that have been accepted for hundreds (or even thousands) of years are wrong.


Forensic History


I got my introduction to this kind of analysis when I read Kirkpatrick Sale’s book ‘The Conquest of Paradise.’  When I went to school, every child was told the story of Columbus ‘discovering’ America. I was told there were ‘a few isolated bands’ of ‘primitive savages’ in the western hemisphere when he arrived, but none of the information in the history books I was required to read would have led to the belief that there were any true human beings in that part of the world.

The books said it: Columbus was the first true human being to see the western half of the planet Earth. He is therefore credited with ‘discovering’ it. After he ‘discovered’ these lands, I was told, the first real groups of humans arrived. They began to do something I was told is called ‘taming’ and ‘settling’ the land. The history of these new lands then became pretty much the same as the history of the eastern hemisphere: a series of wars and story of endless violence, where good people eventually defeated evil and established the wonderful paradises of equality, brotherhood, freedom, liberty and justice for all that are now in place.

When I first read ‘The Conquest of Paradise,’ I was shocked. All the books called ‘history books’ that I had been required to read told one story; the teachers in classes and library references reinforced that story and all of the people who I had been told were ‘authorities’ confirmed that the official story was the way history happened. Since all of my peers had been taught the same way, they all accepted the same story. The hard evidence told me that this version of history was actually made up nonsense, with almost nothing that was claimed to have happened actually happening, and a great many critical events that did take place excluded in order to create a distorted picture of history. I trusted the people who had taught me these things. I couldn’t believe that all of these people could possibly all be in on such a massive fraud. (One particular face comes to mind, my fourth grade teacher, Bonnie Irene Pray. She was so kind and loving. How could she have been involved in trying to trick children into believing lies?) 

I was inclined to believe that the author of Conquest of Paradise, Kirkpatrick Sale had to be the liar and that his version had to be the false one. I went to the internet and looked up the references he gave, in an attempt to find evidence that he was wrong. The references were there and said exactly what he claimed they said. I then followed the links on these sites which took me to scans or photographs of the originals, with information about the current location of the documents, the way they came to be found and placed there, and the names and phone numbers of the current curators. I travel a lot and actually went to some of these places and looked at the documents with my own eyes, to verify that they really did exist.

Over the past decade or so, many people have followed up on the historical record involving this particular historical event. They have shown that the official version is a false version of history: the events that have been taught to children as historical fact for centuries did not actually happen and many important events actually did happen that have been intentionally hidden. For example, these lands were not deserted except for ‘a few isolated bands of savages’ when Columbus arrived at all: they were densely populated with people who lived in advanced and well-organized societies, and had been living that way for at last 49,475 years before Columbus arrived. (Columbus own words, preserved in books that have been banned ever since they were written and are only available now, for the first time, due to the internet, testify to the large numbers and the order in their societies; many other people who were there and whose words have been banned for centuries confirm this.) The first people to arrive from the eastern hemisphere didn’t bring civilization at all, they brought terror, misery, horrific environmental devastation, repression, and mass murder to people who had no experience with these aspects of existence before people from the eastern hemisphere arrived. The evidence about this particular event is now so clear that a great many education professionals are working together to get the holiday called ‘Columbus day’ renamed, believing it is not appropriate for children celebrate anything having to do with this man. (After what I have learned about the actual events, having a ‘Columbus day’ in America seems a lot like having a ‘Hitler day’ in Eastern Europe.)

People have looked at the record of this particular event very closely. They have shown that the official story is basically made up.

But this is only one part of history. What about the rest of it?

Any society with forces that push toward war basically has to come up with a politicized version of history in order to keep people in the state of mind that is needed to keep people accepting this activity. The events of late 1400s in the Caribbean sea are not the only events that have been altered, or ‘columbused,’ to create a totally inaccurate representation of the events. As we will see in this book, human history is far longer, richer, and more diverse than the history books would have you believe. We have been on this world far longer, we have accomplished far more, and we clearly have far greater capabilities than the orthodox histories try to make us believe. The huge majority of the stories that have been told for centuries as ‘the history of the world’ are demonstrably wrong.


The Importance of Understanding How the Human race Got Where We Are Now


Why do we care about this?

Why can’t we just let people believe the stories?

What harm does it do?

It actually does a lot of harm.

The human race is currently in a very dangerous situation: 

Our ancestors have organized our existence in ways that allow people to gain great personal wealth by doing things that harm the human race as a whole, like raping the world of its resources, or organizing, starting, and running the organized orgies of mass murder and destruction called ‘wars.’  People respond to these incentives and do things that damage the world and harm the human race. As time passes, the damage accumulates. As technology advances, people find more and more efficient and effective ways to do the very dangerous things that the realities of these societies pay these people to do.

We are now at a point where people have the ability to do things that will destroy the world and render the human race extinct. They can make personal profits by doing things that move us closer to this end. If we continue down this same path, and things keep operating as they do now, we will destroy ourselves and our world. If we let it go this far, nothing else matters.

What if we don’t want this to happen?

What if we don’t like the path that our ancestors created, marked for us, and have told us to follow?

There are other paths.

If we want to understand these paths, we have to understand the paths that were taken to get us to our current place in time. If we want to understand the options we have for the future, we have to understand the past. The made up versions of history can’t help us here: we have to know what really happened.

This book is a part of a series of books that deals with the nature of human existence, the way they got to be as they are now, and our options for the future. The focal book of this series, Possible Societies, shows that we have a great many paths that we can take into the future. I originally started Forensic History as a part of this other project: the best way to prove that the human race is capable of organizing the realities of existence differently is historical: If we have done this in the past, this is proof that it is possible to do it. If it is possible, it makes sense to examine all of the different options that are possible, then decide which one best meets our needs.

As I did more work on this particular topic, I found more and more information that was incredibly interesting in its own right. I thought a lot of people would want this information, so I expanded the book far beyond its original scope. Eventually, I decided it deserved to be a book of its own.

Regardless of whether or not we decide to explore the different ways we can organize our existence (the topic of Possible Societies), we need a new kind of history. The human race is currently in a very bad situation. We need to know how we got into this situation. We need tools that can help us understand our options moving forward so that we—the members of the human race, acting collectively—can decide what we want to happen in the future.

This book is an attempt to make a start in the right direction.

We have access to tools that can allow us to reconstruct the events of our history. We can go back before the time that the entities called ‘sovereign nations’ existed and come to understand how people lived. We can understand how, when, and where the first groups that organized their existence this different way appeared and how the idea of ‘nations’ spread to the world, once it got started. We can understand the exact same things when dealing with joint-stock corporations.

The truth is not always pleasant. In fact, sometimes it is very unpleasant. In her book ‘My Life On the Road,’ Gloria Steinem points out the difficulty of correcting false versions of past events to the people she talks to. One of her most famous quotes is about this issue: ‘The truth will set you free, but first it will piss you off.’ We don’t like to hear the truth about people and institutions that we have been raised to respect and admire, particularly when the truth shows that these people and institutions are not worthy of the respect and admiration we have given them. People who have come to believe the things they were told growing up don’t like to be told that their beliefs are wrong.

But the first part of the saying is also correct: the truth really can set us free. If we don’t understand how we got where we are now, we won’t know for sure where ‘here’ is and where we can go from here. If we understand the truth, we will understand where we are, what options we have going forward, and what tools we can use to help us move toward a better world. The truth can set us free.

Keywords: forensic history, fact based history, true history, history without lies, verified history, documented history, biased history, unbiased history, forensic analysis, natural law societies, Sovereign law societies, Socratic societies, Socrates, Alexander the Great, Caesar, Plato, Aristotle, Reforming societies, rebuilding societies, repairing societies. non-destructive societies, nondestructive societies, fixing war, ending pollution, ending depletion, making the world a better place, leasehold ownership, private ownership, government ownership, corporate ownership, preventing extinction.

Trackback from your site.

Leave a comment