Do you think your father would disagree that history is written by the victors? Even today, there are two major factions in the US where the two sides not only disagree about what to do, but why, how, and even what things happened this year. No person is without bias, so clearly your father has to pick one of the viewpoints to write into history. Sure, major conflicts with two viewpoints are discussed in history class (like the Civil War), but what about the less obvious viewpoints?

I see this especially in writing about economics and markets, where 90%+ of the things people read, including the predominant views, are in my opinion partially or completely incorrect. You will often see a bunch of articles describing how the bear market has a ways to go at the very bottom, and vice versa, not to mention the pattern of headlines writing "Dollar falls 3% as <unrelated event happens today>." So aside from charts, I find there to be little else of use in studying economic history. Although Ray Dalio has some good data and a pretty reasonable first-principles based analysis of major historical economic cycles.