Discussion

It seems my review of Dan Carlin's Ostfront podcast has begun some interesting discussions.

I think this reveals a few interesting things.

First, blind nationalism is dangerous. Mr. Kuznetsov seems to take issue with any criticism of the Russian brutality on the eastern front. Of course, as a Russian, and one whose family fought and died valiantly in the war, is biased. A review of his site will quickly reveal that.

I am amazed at how dismissive he is of any critical research. Anything quoted from a German diary is referred to as propaganda or flat out lies.

In fact, anything that questions the Russian motives - never mind the Soviet regime was led by one of the most brutal men in the history of the modern world - Joseph Stalin - is dismissed as flat out lies that were popularized by the cold war.

The problem is that the discussion degenerates into a one sided argument. Anything that questions Russia and Stalin is deemed lies if they don't reflect Russia in a noble light.

Of course, this goes against everything I have ever been taught.

Luckily, I have had excellent history professors and friends, who do not blindly follow one path of thinking or one mode of historical thought.

This leads me to the second thing this discussion revealed: the importance of questioning events and looking at them from multiple perspectives.

While Mr. Kuznetsov appears to dismiss anything that does not agree with his point of view, I was always taught to analyze several sides of an issue - even if they are wrong - and then make an informed decision.

This is what I feel that Carlin does so well in his podcast series on the eastern front. He spends plenty of time looking at the event from the Soviet and Nazi point of view, placing blame on both sides and examining atrocities done by each side as well.

I recall studying Hiroshima. Had I used Kuznetsov's line of thinking, I would simply have dubbed anything from the Japanese perspective as false or blown out of proportion. And if something was true, well, then the Japanese had it coming because of their refusal to surrender.

I can see that side. But I can also see the Japanese side under their emperor. I can see Truman's side. I can also see those who opposed the bombing and offered various alternatives - continuing to bomb them and then invade or exploding the bomb at sea.

The point is to examine various points of view to enhance one's understanding of an issue.

Not to just dismiss whatever questions or threatens your world view.

That's dangerous.