I picked up an academic textbook about ancient Egypt and flicked through it—I didn’t learn much about ancient Egypt, but I learned a lot about academia. I did a similar thing a few months ago with a textbook from the same series, sort of a basic undergraduate overview, about the English Civil War—at the time, I noted that it started from a presumption that everything was economic (it wasn’t Marxist but it had a Marxist inflection) and it also claimed religion wasn’t a factor in England at the time (except it was a huge factor in the war, as they later had to admit).
With the Egypt book the problem was slightly different, the book basically refused to accept that there was any degeneration in Egyptian art or culture over a 2,500-year period; it was only at the very, very end when Egypt was a Roman province (being owned by the Greeks before) that there was any concession that Egyptian culture had ended. Before that, Egypt had been invaded by “Libyans”—yet this was not presented as an invasion, despite the fact that the Libyans subdued and mated with the population. Similarly, uprisings against the Greeks were “never based on national resentment”.
This is in all post-1945 academia: there are no invasions, there are no races who mix with each other, there is no degeneration—civilisations do not have lifecycles, they are not born and do not age and do not die; they just fade out at a certain point, but you couldn’t call it degeneration. It’s the democracy—all the above concepts are forbidden, so they didn’t happen. When the Americans were in Vietnam in 1968 they were “mixing” with the Vietnamese or something—it definitely wasn’t a war. All that happens is constant progress that gets better and better—nobody is born, nor ages, nor dies. It’s just not reality—and it’s all academic history books, they all deny invasions take place and cultures degenerate and peoples are exterminated.