Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
21 of 21 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
World War II Revisionism, November 13, 2001
This book is a collection of essays from Dr. Martin, the bulk of which were published in the 1960s in a small libertarian paper, Rampart Journal. The writing style may be a bit dense for some people, and Martin's cutting sarcasm regarding conventional history will certainly offend others, but this book is still worth a read. Several of the essays, such as his summary of the "Peace Now" movement of 1943 deal with little known topics that simply have not been explored by mainstream historians. His two best essays: one on the Cold War, and the other a summary of the work of Harry E. Barnes, however, are worth the price of the book. Martin's discussion of sociologist, historian and journalist Barnes provides a good summary of the latter's career, and his interest in using history to promote international peace. The essay on the Cold War, however, has strongly influenced my interpretation of history and foreign policy. Martin argues that the Cold War was, in the final analysis, an Orwellian conflict, used primarily for controlling domestic populations, and was never an actual conflict between nations, the rulers of which, Martin argues, had more in common with each other than their differing ideologies suggest. The war he suggests, was primarily fought as an element of domestic policy. In this he anticipated some of the later new left critics of the Cold War. Now that the Cold War is over, I can't help but wonder if the "War on drugs" and our new "War on Terrorism" might not fit under the same rubric. In any event, reading Martin is a challenge and delight, and is highly recommended for those with open minds. People easily offended should avoid his books.
|
|
|
5 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
A Thoughtful Study , September 24, 2004
The dean of living revisionist historians is at his brilliant, provocative best in these essays on "war crimes," Allied terror bombing, Fascism, the draft, the American mass media's wartime love affair with Stalin, America's postwar "defense" imperialism, and more! Indispensable for the revisionist scholar, excellent for the thoughtful young student.
|
|
|
7 of 8 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
An Honest Historian vs Court Historians, February 25, 2006
James J. Martin's REVISIONIST VIEWPOINTS is "must reading" for those who have been deluged with canned historical accounts and conventional studies by those who should know better. The "Court Historians" have been either too timid or too politically connencted to write an honest assessments of events since World War I and especially World War II. This book should make an honest reader think.
The essay titled "On the 'Defense' Origins of the New Imperialism" gives a clear account of the U.S. policy since the end of World War II. Political adventures in extending U.S. control have been defined as "National Defense." If there are no actual enemies, U.S. policy makers invent them to justify huge defense budgets government contracts to the politically connected plutocratic rich.
The essay on conscription or the military draft has been connected to this defense spending. In spite of the Thirteenth Amendment, which forbade slavery and involuntary servitude, conscription has been used as part of this scam. Martin also uses the public record including military reports to verify that military conscription has not produced type of military hero that is presented in media entertainment.
James J. Martin's assessment of Fascism is the best this writer has ever read. All the fake attributes to Fascism as a politically disapproval word is undermined in this. Martin deals with the economic policies of the "wicked fascists" and concludes that these policiies were similiar to those of the New Deal. In fact, there is an essay dealing with John Maynard Keynes' GENERAL THEORY which was translated into German. Keynes is clear that his economic theories were more easily applied to a totalitarian system rather than to a system of laissez-faire capitalism. Martin also cites historians and political writers who have tried to come to grips with Fascism without the "Fascims is bad" analysis. For example, Martin cites John T. Flynn's AS WE GO MARCHING and Ernst Nolte's THE THREE FACES OF FASCISM.
The interested reader should read the essays titled THE BOMBING AND NEGOTIATED PEACE-1944 and "THE RETURN TO THE 'WAR CRIMES'-'WAR CRIMINALS' ISSUE in tandom. Martin memorializes the members of the Peace Now who tried in vain to get a negotiated peace in 1944. Their efforts obviously failed, but had their suggestions been followed by U.S. policy makers, the emergence of Big Communism and the Cold War would have been mitigated or eliminated. Martin mentions that war criminals are those on the losing side in a war. The charges levelled against the Germans and Japanses military and civilian leaders could have been levelled against the "Allies." By the way Hannah Arendt makes the same case in her book EICHMANN IN JERUSALEM. What may surprise readers is that Martin cites the very liberal Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas who was clear that the trials were unlawful and arose under ex post facto law which the U.S. Constitution clearly forbids.
Martin's essay titled "American Mass Media and Stalinism" should be read with "The Defense Origins of the New Imperialism mentioned above. Martin demonstrates that many of the Cold Warriors were sychophants who lauded "Good Ole Uncle Joe" (Joseph Stalin)during the 1940s only to look likes fools when their "gallant ally" actually kept the spoils of war which has been the nature of the winners of wars for 6,000 years. Martin uses the public record to demonstrate that the patriotic loud mouthed Cold Warriors actually supported Stalin's Big Communism. These revelations should make anyone question the rationality and supposed staunch anti-Communism that emerged since World War II.
Two of the later essays in this book are instructive. Martin's essay titled "REVISIONISM AND THE COLD WAR,1946-1966" shows that a correction of previous historical errors and propaganda have been difficult to overcome. This is a good essay in that any thinking individual could easily see how phony the Cold War was. Yet, those who incited Cold War hysteria refused to acknowledge anything about World War II which created the Cold War and planetary enemies.
The last essay in this book is titled "HISTORY AND SOCIAL INTELLIGENCE" which is instructive on how popular "history" has undermined honest history and in turn honest political and historical response. Martin scoffs at the notion that history and education has become part of the entertainment business.
REVISIONIST VIEWPOINTS is well written. Martin is in elite company in the readabiltiy of his work. He does not cite arcane and obscure sources in his work, and his citations are from the public record if one wants to confirm the veracity of his conclusions. This book should be followed by Martin's book titled THE SAGA OF HOG ISLAND AND OTHER ESSAYS IN INCONVIENT HISTORY. Martin was never challenged with the work in these books. The answer to this fact is that his work is unanswerable.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
by Patrick J. Buchanan
by Carroll Quigley
