Mention Based On Books Modern Times: The World from the Twenties to the Nineties
| Title | : | Modern Times: The World from the Twenties to the Nineties |
| Author | : | Paul Johnson |
| Book Format | : | Paperback |
| Book Edition | : | Revised Edition |
| Pages | : | Pages: 870 pages |
| Published | : | June 1st 1992 by HarperPerennial (first published 1983) |
| Categories | : | History. Nonfiction. Politics. World History. North American Hi.... American History |
Paul Johnson
Paperback | Pages: 870 pages Rating: 4.26 | 2342 Users | 178 Reviews
Representaion Toward Books Modern Times: The World from the Twenties to the Nineties
An agnostic wag once said, "Any fool can make fun of evangelicals, but if you really want to see a crazed doctrine, look for a conservative Catholic, preferably a conservative Jesuit." This certainly holds true for Paul Johnson, who mars what could have been a superbly written book of breathtaking scope, with points of view that aren't merely limited or blinkered, but downright crazed at times.In the first couple chapters, I was ready to give this book an instant 5 stars, due to the author's ability to integrate economic, cultural, and political trends in a coherent whole. I did not begrudge him his tendency to paint all collectivist thought with a broad brush, if only because the world needed an appropriately sober look at the crimes of Lenin as well as Stalin.
But by the time we get to the 1930s, Johnson's oddball rejection of all modernist trends became a bit much to take. If he had been a traditional social conservative, or an economic conservative of the Stockman-Laffer school, one could accept his biases and move on. But Johnson is just plain weird, combining a Libertarian-like view of the power of the individual and a rejection of economic collectivism, with a near-devout belief in the power of empire. He rightly chides particular failures of the British empire in decline, like Anthony Eden's 1956 failure at Suez, but at the same time longs for a British and an American empire that would assert itself without regard to the consequences.
In his review of the 1930s, it's no surprise that he'd call FDR an aristocratic publicity-seeker and populist quack, and he'd be right in part. It's also predictable that he'd link the elder Philby's adventures in the Middle East to young Kim Philby's dalliances with the KGB. But to link all strands of 1930s liberal thought to the gay dilettantes of the Bloomsbury group in the UK? Not only does this hold a latent homophobia which Johnson displays throughout the book, but it attributes too much power to this group, in the same way modern conservatives are sure all 21st-century left-wingers have read Saul Alinsky. It just ain't so, folks.
Johnson's fractured-funhouse view of current events veers out of control as we hit the 1950s and 1960s. His analyses of Castro and other socialist "heroes" are traditional conservative views, not that far off base but not particularly interesting. But his demonization of former UN Secretary General Dag Hammarskjold as the man who allowed Third World risings and non-alignment to get out of hand is downright laughable. Memo to Johnson: whether the Soviets manipulated Third World struggle or not, the traditional empires were bound to fall - there wasn't a thing the US or UK could have done to retain their protected domains. At least Piers Brendon, the author of 'Decline and Fall of the British Empire', understood this far better than Johnson did, and provided a far more accurate narrative of the British geographical decline in the 20th century as a result.
The last 100 pages of Johnson's book are comical enough to skip entirely. Of course the strikes at the end of the 1970s doomed Britain, but only a fool still sees Maggie Thatcher as a savior. Of course the liberal media manipulated Watergate, but to try and call John Sirica a "judicial terrorist" is beyond the pale. Face it, seeing Nixon and Reagan as unvarnished heroes of the century, while seeing Jimmy Carter as an unvarnished villain, is a nonsensical two-dimensional view of the world.
Even in the latter chapters of the book, I enjoyed seeing Keynesianism get a tweaking, I loved the way Johnson linked Jean-Paul Sartre with Nazism and commented that all romanticism is close to fascism (which I certainly believe to be the case with Rousseau, Goethe, Schiller, Byron, Shelley, etc.). And I loved his quote about Utopianism being not that far from gangsterism. But Johnson ruins what would have been a provocative book in the Christoper Hitchens tradition with a series of loony conclusions about human behavior that are downright unsustainable, no matter what your political or economic beliefs may be.
Define Books Supposing Modern Times: The World from the Twenties to the Nineties
| Original Title: | Modern Times |
| ISBN: | 0060922834 (ISBN13: 9780060922832) |
| Edition Language: | English |
Rating Based On Books Modern Times: The World from the Twenties to the Nineties
Ratings: 4.26 From 2342 Users | 178 ReviewsComment On Based On Books Modern Times: The World from the Twenties to the Nineties
Finally finished this one! It's such a thick read that I had to read a chapter at a time interspersed with other reading. Modern Times is a history of the 20th century, or, more precisely, from Einstein's theory of relativity to the Gulf War. Paul Johnson is a British Roman Catholic historian/intellectual of a decidedly conservative bent. And by conservative I mean of the old-school type: free markets, individual responsibility, very limited government in the lives of citizens, andExcellent historical analysis of the twentieth century. Johnson's strength is to combine economics, politics, culture, science, technology and other strands of human endeavour into a cohesive narrative of events. Highly recommended as a conservative perspective on the 20s-00s.
What's the cause of all the problems of the 20th Century (including Nazi Germany and wartime Japan)? Communism.Who helped out the communists (sometimes willingly, often because they're stupid)? Democrats in the US, the Labor Party in the UK, intellectuals everywhere.Who valiantly resisted these evil communists? Republicans in the US, Conservatives in the UK, few in lily-livered Europe, even fewer in the savage lands of Africa and Asia.There, I've summarized the book for you and saved you reading
Someone else on goodreads loved this book for the following reasons:"We read this book with our home school reading group, and I was particularly struck by the bloodiness of modern history. Communism, fascism, socialism, philosophies of government aimed at manmade utopias on earth, inevitably end up killing people in unimaginable numbers. This book was also a reminder, in the face of today's troubling times, that our country has come through difficult straits in the past. While the downward
I never liked twentieth century history, but once I started this book, I gobbled it up. Johnson is a fantastic history-teller, with facts and wit and a sense of humor and of the importance of the human drama. He doesn't pretend to be "objective", if that means not making judgments or not caring about whether human actions are good or bad. He takes strong positions, frequently challenging liberal mythology, and supports them with many facts that allow the reader to begin making his own judgments.
Paul Johnsons analysis of modern history (in Modern Times: The World from the Twenties to the Eighties) is perceptive and cogent and very readable. His world view is strongly free-market and pro-individual freedom, so I personally appreciated and agreed with his conclusions, but readers who subscribe to a more collectivist world view and desire a world run by big government attempts at social engineering would find Johnsons analysis less agreeable. The book is dense and meaty, and requires its
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.