Who Controls The Past Controls The Future

Throughout the history, people had been debated and lots of claim occurred accordingly due to their different thoughts, beliefs, and values. To prove their claim was correct, they had found out and collected from evidences, testimonies, or even a prediction from what happened in the past. Accordingly, however, the denial was also created to the claim. The people who denies about the claim had demonstrated and analyzed the validity of evidences and they had judged that the claim was wrong. From these processes, the claim which has more sufficient and precise evidences had been survived and recorded as a history. In different perspective, however, it indicates that the historical evidences must remain to prove the historical fact. Then, what if the crucial evidence that can decide the fact is manipulated by someone who has the power to control the present like dictatorships. Because the past, present, and future are all relevant, it will bring an enormous consecutive difference, respectively.

With reference to the movie “Denial”, the claim “who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past” can be obviously identified that it is almost true. The reason why it is written as “almost” is because it depends on the power of whom controls the past or the present. Those who are in power can rewrite the history and therefore control the conception of who is right and who is wrong. It indicates that the authority and position of one is the most important part to claim because the domination depends on how they are trustworthy. Thus, to express their voice, the leader should show how much public confidence they have, and for public confidence it requires a lot of people who have same thoughts with him/her.

In movie “Denial”, for example, David Irving and Deborah Lipstadt disputes about the holocaust existence on the court. They are both credible people from their positions and each of them has a great number of advocates. Thus, it was the situation that the result of judgement would have far-reaching effects. In other words, the judgement has made in the present could change the historical fact that had been believed so far. So, if the argument of David Irving was succeeded, the recognition about the holocaust existence which is now approved as a historical fact would have been completely different. Moreover, it would have led not only the people today but also the new generation in the future to be misinformed about the holocaust.

The second reason the claim is true is because policy can be modified through controlling the past. It is also based on the power of one’s position but it is one of the methods to express their disposition of political inclination. They can gain the knowledge or solution by the experience or the record from the history and therefore applying them to the present policy is conceivable. Also, it would confer greater credibility to the present. For example, when communist rule reached its peak of power, the government was compelled to recreate history in a manner consistent with the current government’s goals. Therefore, by controlling past perceptions, one can give more credibility in the modern policy.