Incorrect. I've been looking for over a quarter of a century, one way or another. In the Greater German Reich (where the 1944-45 KZs and subcamps were), in Poland, in the occupied Soviet Union.
I don't agree that all history books are "full of lies, deceptions and misrepresentations". Critically assessing different histories is the job in teaching and studying history at tertiary level.As a historian, you have an ethical responsibility to insure that what educators feed the children is true. Instead, our history books are full of lies, deceptions and misrepresentations. This leads directly to people like me.
It's not my job to devise history curricula for Key Stage 4 in the run-up to GCSEs, that's two whole levels down from where I'm at. I was introduced to critically assessing and comparing histories at the next stage up, A Levels (= Key Stage 5), at school, when I was no longer a child but a teenager. Current sixth formers seem to be getting that as well today, even though university is still a big leap up.
I've certainly had no input into curricula in whatever US state you went to school, blame someone else.
There's no 'legal enforcement' in your society or mine. You can think what you like and make all the enquiries you like ('do your own research'). As you know, that's now even easier, because of digitisation; it certainly makes teaching and studying easier.You also don't address the legal enforcement of these lies. Free inquiry is an imperative in a civilized society. The totalitarian state of affairs that currently exists is incompatible with the basic human freedom to think.
It's true that revisionism hasn't been accepted in fact-finding venues (academic disciplines, journalism, courts, government and parliamentary inquiries), but it turns out that saying something didn't happen is a lot less helpful that saying something did happen, and proving it.