Spin baby spin!!

 When I returned to study for a teachers degree some years ago the college I attended had a ruling of only using reference books of  a relatively recent 'pedigree', I think the limit was 20 years.

I remember having a problem with it at the time simply because in my opinion post-modern scepticism towards truth has damaged the 'objectivity' of research immeasurably, particularly within the past few decades, and as a consequence many/most of my references stretched back further than was 'offically' sanctioned. As far as I was able to discern only one academic punished me for my sin and the subject was of little consequence to me so I chose not to make a big issue.

Any insertion of the subjective impulse into research (usually in the form of a political or personal 'narrative' [a word which in its current usage makes me want to scream]) has afforded me grave misgivings regarding 'contemporary' reliability in academics and it appears I am not alone:

 The politicisation of history—in the words of Henry Reynolds, history “should aim to right old injustices, to discriminate in favour of the oppressed, to actively rally to the cause of liberation”—is the major cause of a decline in interest in the subject by the current generation of students at school and university, and a consequent decline in the number of jobs for historians.

We have unfortunately arrived at a place where it is hard to know what, who or why to believe anything anyone says publicly anymore. People are too scared to speak truth in case they are sued over some discriminatory imagining, or leaders say one thing to one group of people and the opposite to another all the while quoting from 'research' or 'statistics' churned out by tame scientists and which have been altered to suit their argument.

Its a mess.