Grand unified books thread

[sbr]

I'm not sure many, if any, of those books made it across the pond.

I think many of them were American.

Even ones that weren't so dogmatic on the Cold War took a very negative view of Truman. His reputation's been transformed since the 80s. At best he was seen as a well-meaning blunderer, compared to the cheerful misdirection of FDR.

I'll give you the part about Truman (the biography McCullogh did on him in the early '90s is really good).  Having read one book about the Cold War you already have me beat, but i find it hard to believe there are even a small number of American books that give the US even the majority of blame for the CW, much less all of it.

[Sheilbh]

All of it was probably an overstatement on my part...

[mongers]

That's a simplification but I believe that was roughly the standard historical view from the late 50s until the 70s and 80s.

The argument was that the Cold War wasn't caused by the Soviet/Stalinist system's expansionism and the West's desire to counter it. Rather the US bore a lot of responsibility for the breakdown of the wartime alliance. A lot of this was to be blamed on Truman's bungling and incompetence, whereas Roosevelt was more able to manage the Soviets in the war and would've been able to manage them into the peace too.

Hmm, that's not what I 'learnt' during the 80s.

Maybe in part your reading of it stems from you interest in US domestic politics, where soundbite accusations subsequently made against Truman was that he, FDR and the democrats were somehow soft on communism in general and gave the Soviets Eastern Europe.

Most of what I what I've read about the early cold war is certainly biased towards a foreign policy centric view of what went on, but it's always seemed to me to have the central thread that the Soviets were expansionist, hence Bevan's tireless efforts to re-entangle the US in European affairs, as a for instance.

Perhaps there's a whole raft of left-wing material that blames the West/America for the start of the cold war ? 

[Sheilbh]

Most of what I what I've read about the early cold war is certainly biased towards a foreign policy centric view of what went on, but it's always seemed to me to have the central thread that the Soviets were expansionist, hence Bevan's tireless efforts to re-entangle the US in European affairs, as a for instance.

Perhaps there's a whole raft of left-wing material that blames the West/America for the start of the cold war ? 

That was the official version and is, I think, the common version now - a lot of what Thomas says in more detail agrees with Judt in Post-War.

I don't think they blame the Americans for the start of the Cold War so much as assign a significant chunk of the blame. There were provocative actions by the USSR, but the American cancelling of lend-lease and difficulty with providing the USSR a reconstruction loan were a sign of the end of the wartime alliance, in addition they were badly handled by the US government.

The proposed American system of global international and economic governance was a spreading of the American economic system which would allow significant American influence in other countries, which the Soviets would legitimately want to counter. Similarly the Soviets after WW2 had genuine defensive reasons for wanting to avoid some of the American or British plans for Eastern Europe (Britain wanted a cordon sanitaire again) or for wanting those states under their control. Underpinning a lot of it, I think, is a nostalgia for FDR who could deal with the Russians while Truman just failed.

The argument isn't outrageous, many of its points were around at the time. It's sort of a mix of naiver New Dealers like Byrnes and Wallace with more cynical (normally British) mandarins who thought the Soviets should have a sphere of influence and that would satisfy them.

[mongers]

Did I mention the five The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy books combined into one 'trilogy' are on amazon.co.uk in kindle format for under £2.50.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B009OCBX38/ref=docs-os-doi_0

[CountDeMoney]

Stop reading so much anti-American Stalinapologist pooh by snotty expats and snooty Euros, Shiv.  It'll rot your brain.

[jimmy olsen]

7 weeks, 200 pages a day, I've finished my reread of the Wheel of Time just in time for the last book!

[Grey Fox]

7 weeks, 200 pages a day, I've finished my reread of the Wheel of Time just in time for the last book!

You beat me, I finish book 13 a month ago. Took 2 years to read them all.

[jimmy olsen]

As I always do I broke down and bought the prologue, I'm reading it right now.  It's fucking awesome!

[Grey Fox]

It's out next tuesday + shipping. I can wait.

[jimmy olsen]

I won't be able to start until Thursday, unless I manage to find a copy at the San Francisco Airport

[Razgovory]

Perhaps there's a whole raft of left-wing material that blames the West/America for the start of the cold war ?

Oh yeah.  Course, much of it was written in the Soviet Union.  There was a steady stream of it from communists in the West as well, even after they stopped being guided by Moscow.  I imagine they were more influential in Europe then they were in the US, but there were enough of them writing in the US during the later half of the Cold War.

[Gups]

Most of what I what I've read about the early cold war is certainly biased towards a foreign policy centric view of what went on, but it's always seemed to me to have the central thread that the Soviets were expansionist, hence Bevan's tireless efforts to re-entangle the US in European affairs, as a for instance.

Perhaps there's a whole raft of left-wing material that blames the West/America for the start of the cold war ? 

That was the official version and is, I think, the common version now - a lot of what Thomas says in more detail agrees with Judt in Post-War.

I don't think they blame the Americans for the start of the Cold War so much as assign a significant chunk of the blame. There were provocative actions by the USSR, but the American cancelling of lend-lease and difficulty with providing the USSR a reconstruction loan were a sign of the end of the wartime alliance, in addition they were badly handled by the US government.

The proposed American system of global international and economic governance was a spreading of the American economic system which would allow significant American influence in other countries, which the Soviets would legitimately want to counter. Similarly the Soviets after WW2 had genuine defensive reasons for wanting to avoid some of the American or British plans for Eastern Europe (Britain wanted a cordon sanitaire again) or for wanting those states under their control. Underpinning a lot of it, I think, is a nostalgia for FDR who could deal with the Russians while Truman just failed.

The argument isn't outrageous, many of its points were around at the time. It's sort of a mix of naiver New Dealers like Byrnes and Wallace with more cynical (normally British) mandarins who thought the Soviets should have a sphere of influence and that would satisfy them.

I don't agree that this Judt (in Post-War or elsewhere) assigns any blame to Truman or to the west for the Cold War. He considers the CW to have been inevitable. The alliance between the west and the SU was, in his word an "aberration". Emnity between the capitalist, liberal democracies and an authoritarian, communist one was the natural state of things. Thus there is no blame to attribute, save to those naive enough to believe that the cold war was avoidable.

[The Brain]

The Cold War was avoidable. The West could have gone Communist.

[Admiral Yi]

Shelf, are you saying that ending war time lend lease after the war was over was considered by some a provocative and confrontational act?