An interesting historiographic observation. (Exaggerations of conflict, the every-day. )
I’m wondering if there is an implicit thesis here that bad historiography is in some way feeding our expectations about war and conflict.
What is also interesting is that in our democracies the entire history of Palestine-Israel is always invisible. What is visible and the real talking point is the last missile strike or stabbing or settlement. (At most there is an appeal to the 1948 accord, with the assumption that this is and was an indisputably legal moment that established a an indisputable new order. But we can also say that the 1948 accord was a moment of law that originated outside the law — an extra-legal legalism.)
But in general the immediate present is entirely amputated from the history of the chain of causes that leads up to it.
No matter how well the intelligentsia understand history, in our democratic polities policy is driven by a highly selective artificial amnesia. And never by the intelligentsia.
We seem to live in a world where brute force and overwhelming strength determine the facts on the ground and create history (ie, the everyday conditions of billions of people) because the discussion of history and its interpretation has no legislative force.