THE controversy over the alleged misrepresentation of historical facts in a research paper published in a journal has sparked discussions about the manipulation of history.
The practice of rewriting history goes back a long way. It is often done by those in power or those with connections and clout.
The Soviet Union, under the orders of Joseph Stalin, engaged in the falsification of a number of documents and photographs; a reprehensible attempt at concealing The Great Purge that took place in 1937.
Revisionism was also visible in the many decades of denials of the atrocities committed by Japanese soldiers during World War II.
Knowledge plays a vital role in preventing these things from happening.
It acts as a barrier to misinformation and misinterpretation, ultimately fostering a well-informed public, and a just and equitable society.
It is not just about absorbing facts. It is about developing critical thinking, fostering cultural awareness, and empowering us as a collective to actively engage with the past and the present.
However, the quest for historical truth is not without challenges.
While the absence of a dominant power may carve out a pathway for diverse perspectives to emerge, the outcome is highly dependent on the commitment to transparency and accuracy.
An academic setting that is vibrant and encourages rigorous research which challenges historical narratives contributes to the discovery of new truths.
Ultimately, the pursuit of maintaining historical integrity requires commitment to transparency, accuracy, and the recognition of multiple viewpoints.
American historian Henry Steele Commager said that "history is a jangle of accidents, blunders, surprises and absurdities, and so is our knowledge of it, but if we are to report it at all, we must impose some order upon it".
Historical events are often interpreted through the lens of one's emotions, which significantly influence how narratives are shaped, sometimes leading to the possible misalignment of objective facts.
Acknowledging this rather than claiming the truth as absolute ensures that the tradition of historical reinterpretation remains healthy.
When navigating the waters of historical discourse, we must exercise caution, recognising that we have the responsibility to uphold the truth and resist from manipulating history for personal gain.
I firmly believe that as time passes, history reveals itself. This happens when time removes prejudice. As long as there is prejudice in how history is interpreted, it will always have a biased angle.
As time moves on, it eventually cuts off all ties to that specific period: history becomes more impartial. We have seen this repeatedly.
The people who try to distort and manipulate history to fit a political or religious agenda are sadly the ones who end up being stained in the pages of history.
* The writer is a corporate leader, speaker and author