There is certainly no shortages of histories and biographies of Stalin, one of the greatest mass murderers in history. His crimes, his murders were taken unlike his contemporary, Hitler, against for the most part, his own people. He did not have a policy of racial superiority or any underlying moral rationale for his crimes; his sole purpose was to achieve and maintain his power and in this, he is unique among the “big three” of mass murderers: Mao, Hitler, and Stalin.

Robert Conquest, perhaps the top historian of the Soviet Union has in this short book (just over three hundred pages), an excellent overview of Stalin’s drive, achievement, and maintenance of power. Although not as detailed as his other excellent histories which go deeper into the Stalin regime (The Harvest of Sorrow, The Great Terror: A Reassessment, Inside Stalin’s Secret Police: NKVD Politics 1936-39, etc.), Conquest along with Robert C. Tucker and Orlando Figes (and others) has provided a comprehensive analysis of the man and his times.

Conquest as always, manages to provide a certain analytical approach that can bring the reader up short: in this case, it is his comparison of the followers of Nazism and Communism. He quotes Hugh Seton-Watson’s comments that:

“Hitler’s Nazis were ‘fanatics with an ersatz religion,’ who rejected not only Christianity but also traditional morality as such. Nazism’s central feature was ‘moral nihilism’…. (it) is not only the central feature of National Socialism, but also the common factor between it and Bolshevism.” 

This statement is backed up by a review of leading Nazis, including Hitler, Goebbels, Mussolini, the dreaded Gauleiter of the Ukraine, Koch, and others who all started out as Socialist and ended up as either Fascists or Nazis. And it was not unusual after the war for die hard Nazi’s to reverse their coat and be taken into the Soviet camp. On one hand, the Nazis use race, the Communist used social origin as the determining factor for life or death; both were (are) based on “moral nihilism.”

Conquest is an outstanding historian, but for the amateur historian, his writing may be a bit too intellectual. He has a firm grounding in the Russian mindset and his analysis of Stalin’s legacy on modern day Russians is excellent. His works not only encompass history, as he has had published a collection of poetry, verse translation, fiction, and criticism so to read Conquest is to be exposed to a man of great intellect. A faster read but no less excellent Soviet historian is Orlando Figes brings a more human touch to his histories.

As one learns Conquest’s style, one is drawn increasingly to it and like a favorite composer, one eagerly looks forward to the next work of his that one shall read.

There are many beautiful locations in France and during a month-long driving trip across the country, one can find many of the wonderful locations shelter cemeteries commemorating the many battles that have been fought on French soil for centuries. One of the most peaceful is at the Verdun battlefield, that ten-month battle (twice as long as Stalingrad in WWII) where three-quarters of a million men were killed, wounded, or listed as missing. But the missing are not really all missing, for at the battlefield stands the Ossuary, a building of unique design. The cloister itself is 450 feet long and in the center is the tower, some 151 feet high which houses the great bronze bell. In front of the Ossuary are the graves of over sixteen-thousand French troops. As one walks around the great monument, one notices small windows set just above ground level and peering in, one sees stacks of skulls, or the various bones that make up the human body. These bones, the remains of over one hundred-thirty thousand French and German soldiers are some of those missing. Their bodies were simply blown apart, entirely or partially vaporized in the hail of artillery fire that stripped the surrounding hills of trees, animal life and even the topsoil.

I first read this book in the late 1970’s and I return to it every few years, each time learning more about the battle and being amazed at the ability of men to endure months of slaughter, in the snow and rain, often without food for days, covered in mud, trying to dig themselves deeper in the deep sucking mud in a vain attempt to escape some of the 37,000,000 artillery shells which were fired during the battle. The author puts a face on many of the combatants, using letters and diaries written at the time and long forgotten when their authors were destroyed later in the war. He was also able to interview veterans of both nations as well as widows and children which he mixes in to keep us focused on the humanity of the combatants.

Going further, the author portrays the key military leaders involved in the battle and how some jockeyed for advancement and how a few, such as General Petain, did what he could to save the army while at the same time showing a rare compassion for the lowly Poilu. While German general Erich von Falkenhayn designed the battle to bleed the French army dry using overwhelming fire power, in two instances he hesitated to act which could very well have brought not only victory at Verdun, but also for Germany in the war. In the end, both armies were bled dry but with a war on two fronts for the Germans with a poor ally (like being tethered to a corpse according to the German high command), command failures such as exhibited by von Falkenhayn were simply unacceptable.

Wars are always terrible, unimaginable for most people, but this history brings out not only the tragedy, but the sheer determination of men in war to survive and achieve. Reading this book will always make the reader thank any veteran they meet for what they were willing to do to keep the walls of society safe.

Re-reading Barbara Tuchman’s The March of Folly from Troy to Vietnam (originally published in 1984) and reviewing the foolish foreign policy decisions around the world since then, seems to give proof to the statement by John Adams that government, “is little better practiced now than three or four thousand years ago.”  Policy makers seem to delight in flying in the face of common sense, logic, and facts in pursuit of their policies. A wiser man than most, Jordan Peterson once said that when he makes a major decision, he does not look at the best possible outcome, but the downside cost if he is wrong. Too bad that statement is not hammered onto the desktop of every government policy wonk as a warning against their hopes and dreams.

In her book, Tuchman studies the times, forces and choices made by the Greeks who were given a horse, the Renaissance Popes, the British lost of the colonies and American leaders regarding our experience in Viet Nam. Of course, trying to separate fact from fable in the story of Troy is the most difficult, in part because the very ideas that a hollow wooden horse filled with one’s enemies willingly being brought into the city of Troy defies logic. Yet Tuchman does an excellent job of examining the tales from several sides and trying to understand how the leaders of Troy ignored legends, omens, and warnings. The result is well known and should serve as a warning against acting on the basis on ego and hubris.

In the period from just before the First World War until the early 1940s, Stefan Zweig, an Austrian born in the Hapsburg Empire, was one of Europe’s leading authors. His books cover biographies, poems set to music, novels, hundreds of articles, reviews, and more. Yet, in 1942 he and his wife committed suicide in South America over their distress of the state of the world and their view of the future.

Zweig believed that each generation would experience one trying movement, be it war, plague, inflation, or social disruption. But he believed that his generation which was raised in the structured, secure world of the late Hapsburg Empire was doomed to experience each of those trials, one after another which put it to a test seldom seen in history. That does not mean that he viewed all change as negative, for he saw the emancipation of women from their corsets and their entry into politics as positive; so too was the easy mingling of the sexes in sports, social events without chaperones, and the greater freedom of people to choose the direction of their lives. Yet he did not see or connect that that same freedom blended with youthful idealism and ignorance of the world could lead to dangerous movements such as Communism, Fascism and Nazism.

When Japan decided to go to war with the United States in 1941, it went with the realization that it could not win in a war of attrition. The average Japanese soldier (marine, aviator, etc.) had about four pounds of logistical support behind him (weapons, fuel, munitions, food, shipping, etc.) while the same fighter for the U.S. had over four thousand pounds. Admiral Yamamoto was correct when he said that Japan had awoken a sleeping giant.

The results of this disparity were shown early in the war, when after suffering a naval setback, Japan left over 150,000 troops stranded in New Guinea with the advice to live off the land. Unfortunately, New Guinea was not Western Europe or the Ukraine; instead, it is a hard land with little farmable land, but many high mountains, extreme heat, and humidity, covered in thick jungle with few roads. The result was that only about 10,000 Japanese military personnel survived the campaign. The stranded troops were left, as were so many other Japanese on dozens of isolated islands, to fend for themselves. The result was widespread examples of cannibalism.

James Badley in his book, Fly Boys, details the lives, capture and execution of several American flyers who were shot down over the island of Chichi Jima, a small island some 240 km. north of Iwo Jima. The aviators were all executed by the Japanese either by beheading or bayoneting and sections of their bodies were cut off and served, knowingly to Japanese officers in keeping with a belief that such action would strengthen the fighting spirits of the diners. For several decades after the war, the exact details of those actions were kept secret even though several of the Japanese officers were tried and either executed or imprisoned for their actions. The author, spend years and conducted many interviews with survivors, including Japanese veterans and surviving relatives of the executed Americans to build out the story.

Victor Davis Hanson in his The Father of Us All; War & History, Ancient & Modern gives due credit to The Age of Battles as one of the finest examples of military history as indeed it is. Since it was first published in 1991, Weigley gives a continual history of warfare, mostly in Western Europe, from Breitenfeld to Waterloo. Starting with the revolutionary tactics of Gustavus Adolphus and ending with the defeat of Napoleon, the author traces the continual quest for the “decisive battle” as a short cut to victory.

After the terrible bloodbath of the Thirty Years War, which left Germany devastated with millions of dead, it seemed as if Europe had made a conscious decision that warfare had to be restructured. One of the key steps to this process was Hugonis Grotius, the historical rules for the limitation of war were formalized. These rules were loosely going back to the rules of chivalry (which were never terribly effective) covered dealing with civilians, plunder, and more. Many rulers in Europe recognized that while war was not going to disappear, they could at least try to limit the overall damage. It was amazing that with the rise of nation states and greater concentration of power and wealth, those who ruled suddenly realized that they had a personal stake in limiting wars which could be dangerous to their position and existence.

The Thucydides’s Trap is when a rising poser threatens to displace an existing one.  This phenomenon began during the Peloponnesian War which lasted for decades and lead to the victory of a weakened Sparta over the devastated Athens.

Since that time, there have been sixteen cases of the same type since then and in twelve cases the result has been war. Some of the cases are easy to recognize, such as Japan vs. the U.S. in the Pacific, or the rise of Germany vs. the U.K. after 1900, while others are more distant such as the Dutch Republic vs. Great Britain during the mid- to late 17^th century.  The three most recent cases when no war was the result was between the U.K./France vs. Germany for political influence in Europe, the Cold War and surprisingly, the rise of the U.S. and the perceived threat to the U.K. during the early 20^th Century.

The first third of the book is a devastating review of the rise of modern China; it’s huge growth in GDP, the strength of its economy, the expansion of its military, etc. as compared to the sluggish performance of the U.S.  Despite the “pivot” in American foreign policy under President Obama, little of concrete value has been achieved; the North Koreans have more arms, the Chinese have claim more of the sea and built numerous “island” which contrary to their promise, they have militarized, and our “allies” have been forced to bend to Chinese demands through the use of their great economic power in the region. 

Martin Amis wrote, “The chief demerit of the Marxist program was its point-by-point defiance of human nature”. Yuri Slezkine creates a solid argument that Marxism was a change of faith and that it was a cult, filled with dogmas that defied logic and human history.  Could a parallel be drawn between Marxism and the early Church?  Both were fueled by dogmas, their gospel was spread by zealous “preachers” who devoted their lives to their new religion; they both had martyrs, a hierarchy of disciples and believed that they were able to create a new and better world.  Marxism went one step further in that it’s view of human nature was entirely against the course of history, but their dogma answered “history” in that the nature of man had been corrupted by all societies throughout history.  Thus, while claiming to be founded on “science”, the dogma of Marxism discounted all known evidence.  With that dogma, they unlike the Church, claimed that they were able to create a “new man”, freed from the chains of the past, of the “artificial” realities of the world, able to create a world filled with happy, satisfied, productive individuals.

Of course, no one believed that true Marxism could be achieved overnight, and so there had to be a period of the dictatorship of the proletariat.  During that time, priests, aristocrats, kulaks, capitalist, the majority of academics and others needed to be purged. The bourgeois institution of marriage was also to be amended so that women would not be oppressed.  The failure of the Soviet experiment of easy divorce quickly created a problem so the need for the family was recognized (at least until the children could be raised almost entirely by the State).  And, this helped to eventually be a major problem for the longevity of Communism, for parental influence could not be entirely countered.

History can be the best of subjects or the worse depending on your individual mindset, for any event in history can be a huge puzzle that can and does cause debate years and years after any given event. History is not as bad as the saying about economics (ask four economist a question as to what will happen and you will receive five opinions), for at least with history there are certain proven facts, records, confessions, etc.

In this historical novel, the author pulls on diaries, interviews, memoirs, and other sources to provide the reader with an excellent overview of numerous personalities (Churchill, Halifax, Goebbels, Goring, Beaverbrook, and others), their strategies, fears, personalities, and so on and how by interacting with one another, they created the saga of the Battle of Britain. How close to defeat was England at that time and how great the burden on the shoulders of men like Churchill, Beaverbrook, and others as they had to hold together and create a national will against not only the forces of Hitler, but also against those within their own country and even cabinet who wished to take a different course. How easy it would have been to simply make some sort of deal with Hitler in the vain hope that he, who had broken every agreement, could be trusted.

Over the decades, I have read many books, transcripts, interviews, done personal interviews, etc. regarding the killing squads and death camps of the Nazi regime. “How” I wondered, “could a cultured nation like Germany march so easily into the brutal murder of millions of individuals who the deemed as sub-human?”  This is certainly not a new question as it has been debated for decades, by those who like Hannah Arendt’s “banality of evil” theory to those who felt that there was some sort of missing component to the German soul. Perhaps there were two types of killers, especially in the SS; the bureaucrats such as Eichman and the officers who stood at the receiving dock at Auschwitz, and those who murdered by executing men, women, and children in the killing pits of Ukraine, Poland, and the rest of Europe. Could they have been indoctrinated by their SS training to believe that they were doing good, freeing the world of vermin to create a better world? But, what about the Police battalions? They were made up of ordinary police officers, men trained up uphold the law, yet they were able to overcome their training and became killers as deadly as the SS Eizengruppen. There were also sadists such as the hardened criminals and perverts of the Kaminski Brigade and the 36^th SS division under the command of Oskar Dirlewanger, but even they were viewed with distain by the regular SS divisions. It was a question that is still debated today by historians, psychologists, and others; was it due to their training, beliefs, or a mass psychosis. Somehow another group of men, who were under strict military control managed to become even worse that the groups I have mentioned; that group is the officers and enlisted men of the Imperial Japanese Army and Navy