Rethinking American History, Completely
Thomas Woods' superb new book delivers much more than it promises. Woods offers his book as a guide to "those who find the standard narrative or the typical textbook unpersuasive or ideologically biased." This suggests that Woods has principally students in mind as his audience; but many others will benefit from reading the book. Woods displays a remarkably broad knowledge of the latest specialized research on various episodes of American history. This permits him, again and again, to raise illuminating points that will instruct even knowledgeable readers. [Full Article]
Comments (8)
I bought this book based on your review. I've got to say, "Thanks!"
Easily accessible even by the most reticent historiophobe, Woods leads us through the land mines of political correctness to the promised land of real history.
I've got my wife & kids reading it now, and they think that CNN stands for Crazy neurotic nutjob!
Thomas Woods for President!
Published: December 29, 2004 12:35 PM
I just finished this book.
Although I found it to lean slightly to the right of center (probably best, to sell more copies), it was excellent. It is a quick read, with nary a wasted word. It is as succint a story of the US as you will find. When I finished, I only wished it were longer, but Woods makes excellent use of sidebars to direct the reader to more detailed reference material, including some Austrian School works.
Plus, it's inexpensive too. Just get it and read it. Well worth it. When you finish, you will be pissed about what has happened to this country, but thankful that someone has taken the time to chronicle it all.
Published: December 29, 2004 12:44 PM
I must confess that I have not read the book, only the review. Although I consider myself an Austrian in economic terms, I think the isolationist view of many Austrians to be wrong. Any reading of the brutality of the Germans and Japanese prior to our entry into the war and both nation's programs to acquire WMD's brings chills to the idea that the world would have been better off had America not entered the war. Both societies would have returned the world to the most coercive system imaginable, surely something anathema to Austrians. A German victory in Europe and Japan in Asia would have isolated America and ensured our capitualtion, too. I am haunted by the similarities between the 1930s and today. In the 1930s the WWI Allies had the power to prevent a second world war. Yes, it would have meant confronting the Germans militarily, probably over the occupation of the Rhineland, but it would have prevented a second European war and millions of deaths.
Published: December 29, 2004 1:12 PM
Patrick,
I think you would find some interesting thoughts on that subject in this book. There is a difference between 'neutrality' and 'isolationism.'
There is good presentation on how some of the actions that Wilson took before, during, and after WWI may have contributed to WWII. Looking soley at WWII without looking at what went on ealry in the century is ignoring some important context.
Not saying that WWII wouldn't have happened without US intervention, but a case can be made.
Published: December 29, 2004 2:43 PM
How can anyone defend persecuting people for their political persuasions no matter how stupid they might be ?
That is what Joseph McCarthy did, so long as people not are a threat to the safety of their nation they should be allowed to hold to any political idea they want to.
One can be a nonrevolutionary marxist.
Published: December 29, 2004 5:13 PM
Patrick, you depend upon government to make all your decisions for you?
If you want to go to war, go right ahead. Raise some money, buy supplies, fund an expedition of like-minded individuals.
Government is always the lease efficient way to organize any project. Government intervention always leads to more government intervention. Why is "war" any different than any other effort?
The only thing government does is coerce people to contribute to the "war effort" who do not agree with that effort. I have no wish to have a conscript at my back in a firefight. Nor, for that matter, do I wish a firefight in the first place.
Oh, I forgot. One more thing governments do: They force other people to die for causes the politicians consider valid. As Brad Pitt stated in the latest Trojan War movie, "A king who fights his own battles. Imagine that."
Published: December 29, 2004 9:23 PM
David Gordon writes that "Roosevelt's efforts to provoke a German declaration of war failed, but he succeeded in getting America into the war through the "back door." Now I agree with virtually all that he wrote, including how disasterous it was to enter WWI. However, let us consider what would have unfolded had America not been brought into the war in 1941. Germany had almost defeated England without our aid, and would likely have defeated the USSR as well, had it not been for our support. This was not only a mater of materiel, but also of the hope of our joining the fray.
Where would America have been, had the Axis conquered Europe? Wouldn't the current conversation be taking place in German? I submit that the sooner America entered that war, the sooner it could have been won (and even have been prevented).
Now I concur with the positions taken by David Gordon, and the theories on which they are based. Why then do I view our entry into WWII as an exception to avoiding foreign entanglements? It is because war is required when our survival is threatened--survival trumps morality.
Published: December 30, 2004 7:26 AM
I learned of the post-WW II forced repatriation of Russians to Stalin's Soviet Union from reading Solzhenitsyn, who met some of these people in concentration camps.
Published: December 30, 2004 3:11 PM