I’ve spent the last few years devouring Soviet history. Books, papers, blog posts, podcasts, all of it. I can’t get enough. Not to brag, but I do feel as though I’ve achieved a certain level of understanding about the USSR, its history, and eventual collapse. But I’ve also put the work in.

And yet, whenever I engage people I know IRL or online, I’m amazed by how doggedly people will defend what they just inherently “know”: that the Soviet Union was an evil totalitarian authority dictatorship that killed 100 million of its own people and eventually collapsed because communism never works. None of these people (at least the people I know IRL) have learned anything about Soviet history beyond maybe a couple days of lectures and a textbook chapter in high school history classes. Like, I get that this is the narrative that nearly every American holds in their heads. The fact that people believe this isn’t surprising. But what is a little surprising to me is that, when confronted with a challenge to that narrative from someone they know has always loved history and has bothered to learn more, they dig their heels in and insist they are right and I am wrong.

This isn’t about me, I’m just sharing my experience with this. I’m just amazed at how Americans will be completely ignorant about a topic (not just the USSR) but will be utterly convinced their views on that topic are correct, despite their own lack of investigation into that topic. This is the same country where tens of millions of people think dinosaurs and humans walked around together and will not listen to what any “scientist” has to say about it, after all.

  • cynesthesia
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    deleted by creator

    • zifnab25 [he/him, any]
      ·
      10 months ago

      Literacy isn't just reading words and knowing what they mean, it's being able to evaluate contradictory claims and integrate knowledge.

      That requires research and experimentation, which is very different than literacy.

        • zifnab25 [he/him, any]
          ·
          10 months ago

          You're illustrating my point. You've linked to an abstract on a metric referencing data you haven't seen and analysis you haven't evaluated. You've successfully comprehended the contents of the resource without evaluating its accuracy or logical consistency.