So You thought you understood?

[J.von Canon]

World War I;so you THOUGHT you understood it and it's results today???
I've just reread the newly published book CHURCHILL,HITLER,AND THE UNNECESSARY WAR by Patrick J. Buchanan-and it is incredible...
You will have to know a bit more than "helmets and medals" to have a grasp on it though.
The "conventional" folks have been quick to attack it but cannot manage anything better than name-calling.Mr.Buchanan is probably the best read historian alive in the U.S. who has a political background.
If you ever wondered how modern Britain,the U.S.,Germany,and the Western world in general have arrived in the confusion of today's post world war problems-this book lays it on the line...

[Larry deZeng]

I have had a great deal of respect for Pat Buchanan ever since I first saw him on "Crossfire" with Bob Novak during the early 1980's. He is too far to the right for the mainstreamers, and then made things worse by making a few remarks about the Holocaust, Jews and Israel that were twisted out of context by his political and idealogical enemies. He was never able to recover from the ensuing turmoil and has drifted into relative obscurity since 2000. This book has helped him fight his way back, and we are starting to see him in guest shots on the cable news shows. Pat tells it like it is, the liberal left and the politically correct crowd be damned. A deeply intelligent and very gutsy guy.

[Anthony N]

Sounds interesting.
I think though that his so-called right wing politics would be seen in some European countries, especially the U.K., as being liberal & politically correct.
After all he opposes American imperialism & obviously therefore American involvement in overseaes hostilities. If you add this to his desire to strip down government beaurocracy then i'm afraid we would call him a liberal!
Sounds like an interesting read though, might check that one out.

[Larry deZeng]

Yes, A.N., he's an isolationist and holds other positions that might be seen by some as to the left rather than to the right. Pat is also for sealed borders, tough (but fair) handling of illegals already in the country, strict interpretation of the Constitution, shrinking the federal government (as you already pointed out), state's rights, the booting of pro-Israel lobbies out of Washington so they no longer can influence U.S. foreign policy, a strong armed forces that is retained within the country's national borders and not deployed all over the world to enforce Washington's dictates to other nations, etc. I guess if that last one results in Russia or China taking over America's supposed position of power in the world, then so be it. They can have it.

So you are correct. His is a different approach to a lot of things. But here in the U.S., a conservative isolationist is usually viewed as someone to the right and probably to the far right.

[Anthony N]

Yes, A.N., he's an isolationist and holds other positions that might be seen by some as to the left rather than to the right. Pat is also for sealed borders, tough (but fair) handling of illegals already in the country, strict interpretation of the Constitution, shrinking the federal government (as you already pointed out), state's rights, the booting of pro-Israel lobbies out of Washington so they no longer can influence U.S. foreign policy, a strong armed forces that is retained within the country's national borders and not deployed all over the world to enforce Washington's dictates to other nations, etc. I guess if that last one results in Russia or China taking over America's supposed position of power in the world, then so be it. They can have it.

So you are correct. His is a different approach to a lot of things. But here in the U.S., a conservative isolationist is usually viewed as someone to the right and probably to the far right.

Fascinating stuff Larry, thanks for that, appreciate it.
I think that many see our Conservative party as being akin to the Republicans & our Labour party as akin to the Democrats. That would seem to me to be too simple a comparison.
The further we get from the Reagan era the more difficult i find it to see Reagan as the very right wing politician he seemed to be at the time (in terms of what we in the U.K. would class as right wing). A recent documentary i saw on Reagan & the ending of the cold war was quite astonishing. He really made it his personal mission to end the cold war, even to the point where he cleared a room of all political advisors & security & started to thrash out a deal with Gorbachov one to one. Extrordinary stuff which seems so far removed from what i would see as a right wing attitude towards dealing with communist Russia.
I was fascinated to read from someone that Pat Buchanan was more like a republican of the first half of the 20th Century. It certainly makes me want to learn more about him. Any suggested reading?
Anthony

[stonemint]

One of the central themes of the book was that the Western powers went to war to liberate Poland, with the end result being that Poland was enslaved by another tyrannical regime, thus defeating the purpose for going to war in the first place. This thesis caused much indignation from US academicians, who said that while Buchanan was hard on communism, he was "soft" on nazism.

[Larry deZeng]

Anthony N. wrote:

I was fascinated to read from someone that Pat Buchanan was more like a republican of the first half of the 20th Century. It certainly makes me want to learn more about him. Any suggested reading?

Buchanan is a very prolific author. A quick run through Amazon.com (U.S.) reveals at least 10 major books, and I know he has also written countless articles in magazines, journals, newspapers, etc. He was a speech writer in the Nixon White House back in the 1969-74 period. I tried to find a biography on him, but there appears to be only one:


Street Corner Conservative: Patrick J. Buchanan and His Times (Paperback)
by Joseph Scotchie (Author)

I have never read it, but it could be a place to start.

--Larry

[münster]

Death of The West was good

http://www.amazon.com/Death-West-Pop.../dp/0312285485

I loved every minute of it!

[Anthony N]

Thanks guys, i better do me some reading.

[Anthony N]

.

[Willi Z.]

I look forward in getting a copy of his recent book. From the interviews I have seen I know I will agree with his premise.

[J.von Canon]

Buchanan

As are ALL "Prophets",Mr.Buchannan will be taking hits galore.
But he is also what I would call a real patriot(and that word has been so overdone by many not deserving the label).
He decries the (now)American abandonment of staying out of foreign entanglements as warned by the nation's founders UNLESS directly affecting the home turf.
The U.S.A.is (now)by treaty going to war if even certain (former)Soviet republics request our military "presense!!!
"It's absolutely nuts what has been passing as national policy since F.D.R.'s machine took office...
There is much,much more too.

[Larry deZeng]

And that (Post #12) is exactly why I voted for him in 2000, Mr. Canon, even though I knew he had no chance of winning. Our post-World War II foreign policy has left us a bankrupt and deeply divided nation. Sadly, few see this and fewer care.

[BrianK]

It is quite astounding, really, to see the criticism of Mr. Buchanan's book as pro - Hitler. As if any attempt to negotiate or forstall war with Hitler must necessariily have been "pro - Nazi". Now made a figure whose past existance justifies intrusion into every foreign conflict, as in "Mervin Mugwump, the Hitler of Africa, (or the Middle East or Indonesia, etc.) must be eliminated, by any cost to the US, in men or rmoney, to preserve world order." Hitler's current enduring blot on world history is that the invocation of his name is used to justify a seemingly unending series of world conflicts.

[JC ESQ.]

Just reading this book now, I certainly think it's one of the most important historical books I've read (other than Ordinary Men which if, like me, you are interested in the sociological and pshycological effects and the people is a must read).

Coming from a lower middle class family from the Home Counties of dear old Blighty, I've been brought up by my father (born 1939, house bombed, didn't see his father until 1946 etc.) who is a staunch Churchillian (I think that's a term) and although doesn't hate "The Nazis" would never have a bad word said against the "greatest Britain" who's far better than any Prime Minister we could ever hope for.
And of course he is exactly what the British media would hypocritically label a Bigot. (You know, hates anyone slightly camp or darker than moderately tanned)

But after working in East London, interviewing thousands of people from every country you could think of for the Olympic Security I managed to further open my eyes and shed the views I'd been brought up with.

So I turn to books like this, books which are important for the "little Englanders", reading the comments on news stories about Churchill and the Soviets on Daily Mail news stories really makes you realise how poorly history is taught in this country.

The great Stalin who killed millions more than Hitler, the "man of the century" who gave Stalin back thousands who'd fled, who ordered the bombing of German cities purely for vengeance sake, and who starved millions of civilians from India to Holland and of course Germany from 1918-1920. But as always History is written by the Victors and so in British schools we sweep these things under the carpet, and let the people believe that there were only two bad men in History that Nazi bloke with the funy moustache and the Kaiser geez with the pointy hat.

And Stalin, well he was our great Ally who destroyed those nasty Nazis, and then pissed the yanks off a bit.

And the opinion of churchill from the time with no hindsight? "I just remeber my Father saying 'He'll lead us into another war and get our boys killed'" Recalled by my grandmother, an East End of London teenager who lived throughout the Blitz.

I'm in no way saying the Nazi regime wasn't an awful terrible thing, but if you're going to teach history, teach the truth..... all of it.




Hmmm typed more there than I intended.