Military History Becomes Left-Wing Commentary

At the MRC, we work to make bias history. In the media, they’ve learned to bias history – even Military History.

The magazine by the same name has gone left. How far, as Johnny Carson fans would say? So far that the June issue included several letters skewering it for the “outrageous” switch from a balanced historical publication to another left-wing political outlet.

On a weekend where we honor our warriors past and present, it’s important to note that the left does not. And now they have taken their propaganda to a whole new audience and are trying to alter not just the future, but the past.

I’ve read MH for more than a decade and was infuriated with the magazine’s April issue. It included a Q&A with left-wing Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), a piece mocking the lessons learned from the Alamo, and an article about Napoleonic Spain that somehow included a discussion of the current war in Iraq.

I responded to the magazine and canceled my subscription – a gift from my parents. I wasn’t the only one in an uproar. The June issue included numerous letters, including my own, criticizing everything from the new design (“a dead ringer for Popular Mechanics”) to the fact that “almost every page includes editorial commentary.”

MH is published by Weider History Group, which also produces nine other history mags. I don’t read those, but if this one is any example, they are spinning history so fast, they must have dug up Joseph Goebbels to help them. Here’s what Hitler’s top PR man said on the topic: “It does not matter how clever it is, for the task of propaganda is not to be clever, its task is to lead to success.” It’s like the left’s new motto.

If you read any of Weider’s pubs, tell them how you feel. If you correspond with MH Editor Michael W. Robbins, you might be surprised that he uses an ironic quote from Democrat Daniel Patrick Moynihan as a signature to all letters. "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion--but not to their own facts."Here are a few sample responses to MH’s assault on reason and Robbins' use of his own facts:

  • Reader Greg N. Ripps, of San Antonio, Texas, criticized other publications for claiming “to publish articles on history but can’t resist insinuating a political or social message.” He went on: “Military History has stood apart from these with consistent quality of historical journalism – until now.”
  • “If I want to be exposed to defeatist commentary or liberal drivel, I will read Time or watch CNN,” wrote Jean-Andre Parmiter of Sherwood, Ark.
  • E. Allen Kendall was one of many who were appalled at the linking of Iraq to an article about the Napoleonic Wars. “I have just reached P. 44, the middle of an otherwise interesting article about the Napoleonic Peninsular War and, incredibly, it includes another editorial about Iraq!”

Thanks to all the men and women who protect us not just this holiday weekend, but every day. Thanks also to the families who hope and pray for their loved ones in uniforms to stay safe.

America won’t forget you. True Americans never will never abandon you. Even if Military History does.

Iraq Media Bias Debate History
Dan Gainor's picture