Your Email:

Subject:

Message:
Entry: The Past Is Another Country--Counter-factual History and the Buchanan Controversy Link: http://www.takimag.com/site/article/the_past_is_another_country_counterfactual_history_and_the_buchanan_controv#30082 Post contents: Mr Hadar wrote: "Americans should recognize that by pursuing such Churchillian-like policies and overextending and overstretching their military and economic resources around the globe, the U.S. could find itself in the same position into which Britain was forced into after W.W.II—a has-been global power." and We 9anti-war libertarians and America First Paleos) don’t like it when the neocons do it: every conciliatory diplomatic move is compared to “Munich,” every leader they want to depose in a “Hitler,” every civil war in which they want the U.S. to intervene is the first stage is in genocide, and all their critics are “appeasers,” “isolationists,” etc. And I’m not so sure that is makes a lot of sense for us to turn the tables on them and mirror image their dubious intellectual exercise..." You have correctly put your finger on the political objective of Buchanan's book. I would agree that Buchanan's analysis is flawed by his apparent admiration for the British Empire, and the Holy Roman Empire--ie, the Austrian-Hungarian Empire. YOu are also correct that both empires were falling long before WWI. Churchhill was motivated by his desire to prop up and protect British Imperialism, and ironically for me---a dedicated anti-communist---I must agree that in that sense Marx and Lenin were right in the sense that Imperialism leads to constant war. Particularly I must disagree with Buchanan that the dismemberment of the Hapsburg Empire put millions of Germans unfairly into Slavic nations against their will. Most of these German "minoriites" forcably displaced the native populations in attempts to "Germanize" other populations against their will. For instance, the "Sudenland"... These German "minorities" had no claim to the lands they sat on, and no right to dispute the democratic governments that followed the breakup of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire. The "plight" of the German minorities might be compared to the "plight" of whites in the American South, who found it uncomfortable to live among the majority of their former slaves. Slavs in this case. Of course, we might lose site of the political importance of Buchanan's book in disputing the details of this analysis, and his obvious bias toward the British/Holy Roman Empire that detracts from his analysis. The BIG objective is to undermine the moral authority of the neo-cons in their comparison to US occupation and intervention in the Mideast to their "War against Terror." In that objective, I share hope that Buchanan succeeds, as we all must do. Sent at: 2008 12 01