D. Trump: An Entire Civilization Will Die Tonight – I Don’t Want It to Happen, But It Probably Will
History is not a field of national self-affirmation nor a tool of ideological manipulation. It is a process of questioning. The more societies invest in myths, the further they drift from understanding their past.
The invocation of History by those in power is not a guarantee of knowledge, but often a sign of ignorance. When History is used as a rhetorical tool, it turns into myth. And then, societies do not learn from their past—they repeat it.
The current President of the United States, apart from being far-right—with all that this implies for those who study history and approach the concept of Humanity with due respect—is also profoundly ahistorical. And, of course, the two go hand in hand. History itself confirms this truth, as a recurring trait of reckless leaders: precisely because they ignore history, they end up repeating its darkest patterns.
If Donald Trump possessed even a minimal degree of humanitarian awareness—empathy—and some basic historical knowledge, he would not have dared to utter such hubris. A statement that reveals not only the quality of his character, but also the poverty of his historical understanding.
On this occasion, and with reference to the civilization of the Persians—one of the most remarkable among the peoples of the East—which the arrogant American would be willing to flatten in a single night, we republish today an older text of ours, revised and condensed for a more substantive presentation. The text focuses in particular on the Battle of Marathon, the Athenian victory, the supposed dominance of Greek civilization, and the enduring myth that Europe was “saved” from Persian darkness.
Originally published on March 4, 2011, under the title: “The Battle of Marathon in Journalistic History.”
THE BATTLE OF MARATHON IN JOURNALISTIC HISTORY
(Historiography, Ideology, and Public Narrative)
On the occasion of the commemorations of the Battle of Marathon and the numerous media tributes, it is worth examining not the event itself, but the way it is represented within what may be called “journalistic history.” This distinction is not merely formal; it is fundamental. Historical science is one thing—ideologically charged narrative dressed as history is quite another.
1. Sources and reproduction: from history to compilation
The journalistic approach relies almost exclusively on established narratives, primarily those of Herodotus and, in modern form, Konstantinos Paparrigopoulos. The issue is not the use of sources per se, but their uncritical reproduction.
Herodotus, despite being called the “father of history,” does not meet modern standards of historiography. His work often borders on narrative construction, where exaggeration and moral storytelling coexist with factual reporting. The alleged transfer of hundreds of thousands of Persian troops raises logistical questions rarely addressed.
Journalistic history does not question such claims—it reproduces them.
2. The myth of “cultural superiority”
The dominant narrative frames the conflict as a clash between:
“free citizens” of the Greek city-states
and the “despotic masses” of the East.
This dichotomy is ideological rather than historical. Athens at the time had not yet developed the democratic system associated with Pericles. It was marked by inequalities and internal divisions.
Conversely, the Persian Empire was not a chaotic despotism, but a complex and administratively advanced state with a highly organized military structure.
3. The battle: strategy over myth
The outcome of the battle is better explained by:
Miltiades’ strategic planning
the element of surprise
terrain exploitation
rather than abstract notions of “bravery” or “civilizational superiority.”
4. Civilization: comparison or ideology?
The notion of Greek cultural superiority is deeply embedded but problematic:
Athenian society was strongly religious in structure
it relied on slavery and exploitation
its political system was far from ideal democracy
In contrast, the Persian Empire functioned as a multicultural system integrating diverse populations.
5. From antiquity to religion: selective continuity
Greek intellectual heritage did not pass unchanged into later eras. Christianity, particularly through Paul the Apostle, selectively adopted elements of Greek thought while rejecting others.
The preservation of ancient texts was equally selective.
6. The problem of counterfactual history
“What if the Persians had won?” belongs to speculation, not history. History deals with evidence—not hypothetical certainties.
Conclusion
The Battle of Marathon, as presented in public discourse, functions less as a historical event and more as a symbolic myth. Journalistic history does not investigate—it reproduces. It does not interpret—it confirms pre-existing narratives.
Historical science must challenge, compare, and deconstruct—even when myths are convenient.