What do you think?
Rate this book
A ferro e fuoco. La guerra civile europea
La prima metà del Novecento fu un'epoca di guerre, di distruzioni e rivoluzioni che mise l'Europa e a ferro e fuoco. Traverso descrive i tratti principali di questa "guerra civile europea"; il misto di violenza arcaica, fredda violenza amministrativa e tecnologia moderna per annientare il nemico, la brutalizzazione delle popolazioni forzate all'esodo o all'esilio, lo scatenamento emotivo dei conflitti fra civili all'interno delle società (in Urss, 1917-23;in Spagna, 1936-39; Resistenza 1939-45), l'impero della paura e della morte nella mente degli uomini.
273 pages, Paperback
First published January 24, 2007
33 people are currently reading
1158 people want to read
About the author
Enzo Traverso
57 books199 followersEnzo Traverso is an Italian scholar of European intellectual history. He is the author of several books on critical theory, the Holocaust, Marxism, memory, totalitarianism, revolution, and contemporary historiography. His books have been translated into numerous languages. After living and working in France for over 25 years, he is currently the Susan and Barton Winokur Professor in the Humanities at Cornell University.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 48 reviews
December 9, 2021
This was a very dense book at first, but in time the point became clear that each chapter is exploring its own theme in some depth, while accumulating the basis for an overall argument. It suggests that European history from 1914 to 1945 should be viewed as a single cycle of events and described altogether as a European civil war. These observations are not original and many sources are cited to support them. Certainly the book examines them in great detail, describing just how radically the core values of humanity collapsed for the duration, how Europe abandoned the idea of the state as a lawful framework for diverse people to live together, typically within an empire, replacing this with the image and by 1945 often with the reality of a nation state with a homogenous population, from which vast numbers of people were excluded and either obliged to transfer to their own national home or rendered stateless and hence also without rights.
However, the book's task is not descriptive but analytical. The writer is dissatisfied with the pronouncement that this period represented a collapse from civilisation into depravity; on the contrary, it represented the culmination of a process that was in hand since at least the Enlightenment. He dislikes the idea that we should remember only the victims of this disaster; we should not forget those who took part on either side of the civil war and what it is that they were responsible for doing. He is not willing to accept that all those who participated were wrong to do so, nor that the values which led them to fight should be abandoned; on the contrary, he argues that it was essential to be committed, the moral imperatives could not have been greater. We should honour those who defeated Nazism in Europe, remember what they fought against and be prepared to do the same again.
” The only memory of the age of fire and blood that was the first half of the twentieth century that it seems necessary today to preserve is the memory of the victims, innocent victims of an explosion of insensate violence. In the face of this memory, that of the combatants has lost any exemplary dimension, unless that of a negative model. Fascists and antifascists are rejected equally as representatives of a bygone age, when Europe had sunk into totalitarianism (whether Communist or Nazi). The only great cause that deserved commitment, so post-totalitarian wisdom suggests, was not political but humanitarian.” p14
One of the difficult themes in the book is its opposition to the widely argued assumption that communism and fascism were equivalent, by virtue of their totalitarian nature and the numbers of their casualties. Traverso does not understate Stalin's crimes nor Russia's participation in the immense forced population transfers as well as large scale murders which marked the age. At the same time he observes that the discussion of communism and the Cold War requires a global picture, while his work is concerned specifically with European history and the concept of a European civil war. The fact is that in the European context, communists displayed a fierce commitment to the struggle against Nazism which was never displayed by liberal democrats, let alone by the elites of the liberal democracies and the war in Europe was primarily fought out on its Eastern front, between Russia and Germany. Both German and allied casualties on the Western front were a mere fraction of those in the East. Once the Germans were halted and defeated at Stalingrad, the war was strategically lost.
Beyond this, I will concede that I am not clear if Traverso actually does reject the contention that communist totatilitarianism was equivalent to fascist totalitarianism. I suspect he has a more nuanced attitude, which could only be set out after introducing work such as Losurdo's, who demonstrated the totalitarian elements in British and US practices, especially but not only during the two world wars, or the work of the Frankfurt School along similar lines. Two things are clear enough. One: He derides the notion that liberal democracy was going to defeat fascism, given its collapse across Europe in the face of fascism. Two: He also is sceptical of the way the anti-fascist alliance fell apart once the Germans were defeated, giving way to the new lines of the Cold War. He explains that the alliance was inevitably made up of very different forces, temporarily setting aside profound differences, and bound to go their separate ways in due course, but within that alliance the communists nevertheless played a vital role and generated the fierce commitment without which Nazism could never have been defeated.
Despite its density the book becomes more interesting and more challenging in proportion to the effort expended on reading it. I have already made an effort at a second reading. It is too early to say if I have understood it correctly - probably not, though writing about it has been a good start - but I have gained a lot from it already and I know I will return to it again.
However, the book's task is not descriptive but analytical. The writer is dissatisfied with the pronouncement that this period represented a collapse from civilisation into depravity; on the contrary, it represented the culmination of a process that was in hand since at least the Enlightenment. He dislikes the idea that we should remember only the victims of this disaster; we should not forget those who took part on either side of the civil war and what it is that they were responsible for doing. He is not willing to accept that all those who participated were wrong to do so, nor that the values which led them to fight should be abandoned; on the contrary, he argues that it was essential to be committed, the moral imperatives could not have been greater. We should honour those who defeated Nazism in Europe, remember what they fought against and be prepared to do the same again.
” The only memory of the age of fire and blood that was the first half of the twentieth century that it seems necessary today to preserve is the memory of the victims, innocent victims of an explosion of insensate violence. In the face of this memory, that of the combatants has lost any exemplary dimension, unless that of a negative model. Fascists and antifascists are rejected equally as representatives of a bygone age, when Europe had sunk into totalitarianism (whether Communist or Nazi). The only great cause that deserved commitment, so post-totalitarian wisdom suggests, was not political but humanitarian.” p14
One of the difficult themes in the book is its opposition to the widely argued assumption that communism and fascism were equivalent, by virtue of their totalitarian nature and the numbers of their casualties. Traverso does not understate Stalin's crimes nor Russia's participation in the immense forced population transfers as well as large scale murders which marked the age. At the same time he observes that the discussion of communism and the Cold War requires a global picture, while his work is concerned specifically with European history and the concept of a European civil war. The fact is that in the European context, communists displayed a fierce commitment to the struggle against Nazism which was never displayed by liberal democrats, let alone by the elites of the liberal democracies and the war in Europe was primarily fought out on its Eastern front, between Russia and Germany. Both German and allied casualties on the Western front were a mere fraction of those in the East. Once the Germans were halted and defeated at Stalingrad, the war was strategically lost.
Beyond this, I will concede that I am not clear if Traverso actually does reject the contention that communist totatilitarianism was equivalent to fascist totalitarianism. I suspect he has a more nuanced attitude, which could only be set out after introducing work such as Losurdo's, who demonstrated the totalitarian elements in British and US practices, especially but not only during the two world wars, or the work of the Frankfurt School along similar lines. Two things are clear enough. One: He derides the notion that liberal democracy was going to defeat fascism, given its collapse across Europe in the face of fascism. Two: He also is sceptical of the way the anti-fascist alliance fell apart once the Germans were defeated, giving way to the new lines of the Cold War. He explains that the alliance was inevitably made up of very different forces, temporarily setting aside profound differences, and bound to go their separate ways in due course, but within that alliance the communists nevertheless played a vital role and generated the fierce commitment without which Nazism could never have been defeated.
Despite its density the book becomes more interesting and more challenging in proportion to the effort expended on reading it. I have already made an effort at a second reading. It is too early to say if I have understood it correctly - probably not, though writing about it has been a good start - but I have gained a lot from it already and I know I will return to it again.
February 4, 2017
Η δουλειά του Traverso χαρακτηρίζεται από τελειότητα!
Έγκυρη & πλούσια βιβλιογραφία μαζί με έναν εξαιρετικό & πάνω απ'όλα κατανοητό λόγο.
Έγκυρη & πλούσια βιβλιογραφία μαζί με έναν εξαιρετικό & πάνω απ'όλα κατανοητό λόγο.
December 26, 2023
This is the third book by Traverso I've read now and I've become completely enamoured with his wide-ranging- sometimes meandering, but always completely engrossing- meditations. His works are always held together by quite broad themes, and consist of a variety of social, cultural, and intellectual histories that bring together thinkers like Carl Schmitt, Victor Serge, Karl Mannheim, Lenin, Rosa Luxemburg, Trotsky, Hobsbawm, Arno J. Mayer, and- perhaps most frequently- Walter Benjamin. Those looking for straightforward narrative histories would definitely be better-served by other works, but as an exploration of the dynamics, anomie, ideologies, paradoxes, and philosophies of 'civil war' and political violence (both in general and 1914-1945 specifically) this is stellar.
With this, "Revolution: An Intellectual History", and "Left-Wing Melancholia", Traverso is quickly becoming one of my favourite historians to think alongside.
With this, "Revolution: An Intellectual History", and "Left-Wing Melancholia", Traverso is quickly becoming one of my favourite historians to think alongside.
November 27, 2023
Kitap 1914’ten 1945’e uzanan, iki büyük dünya savaşına sahne olan Avrupa’nın en hareketli sürecini anlatıyor. Traverso’nun temel tezi bu sürecin tek bir olay olduğudur. Birinci ve İkinci Dünya Savaşlarının Avrupa’nın iç savaş dönemi olduğunu söylüyor. 1914’ten itibaren Avrupa’da aristokratik liberalizmin çöküşü ve halk hareketlerinin yükselişi kıtanın kaderini değiştiriyor. Kitapta bu çöküş ve yükselişlerin dinamikleri çok makul ve ikna edici argümanlarla açıklanıyor. Bu uzlaşması mümkün olmayan iki hareket Avrupa’nın çehresini tamamen değiştiriyor.
Kitabın anlatımı -özellikle ilk kısımda- çok yoğun. İlk kısımda iki savaşın nedenlerini ve toplumsal hareketleri anlatıyor. Bu kısımda belli tarihsel bilgilere sahip olmak gerekiyor. Savaşların ölçeği, Bolşevik Devrimi ve İspanya İç Savaşı gibi konular hakkında genel de olsa bilgiye gerek var. Çünkü Traverso teorik olarak yaklaşıyor genellikle. Savaşların toplumsal dinamikleri hakkındaki analizleri okunmaya değer. İmparatorlukların güç kaybettiği bir dönem. Belli zümreler imparatorluğu bir arada tutmak için akıllara zarar kararlar veriyor. Ulus devlet fikri ile çatışan bu kararlar sivilleri tüm vatandaşlık haklarından yoksun kılıyor. Halka yönelik şiddetin zirveye tırmandığı ve de normalleştiği bir süreç yaşanıyor.
İkinci kısımda savaş süreci ve iki savaş aralığındaki kültürel dönüşümlere odaklanıyor. Benjamin, Schmidt gibi pek çok tanıdık ismin felsefeleri ve sanat dünyasını anlatıyor. Okuması daha kolay bir kısım. İnsanlık mirası olarak adlandırılan değerlerin, önce aristokratların sonra burjuvazinin hırsıyla çöküşünü ve yükselme çabasını çok iyi anlatıyor. Kaynak yelpazesi çok geniş. Başka okumalar için de iyi bir rota sunuyor.
Kitabın eleştireceğim tek yönü faşizm ile komünist totalitarizmi aynı ölçüde eleştirmesi. Savaş sosyalizminden bihaber gibi sert eleştirileri var Sovyetler için. Yine de iç savaş tezi için bile okunacak bir kitap.
Kitabın anlatımı -özellikle ilk kısımda- çok yoğun. İlk kısımda iki savaşın nedenlerini ve toplumsal hareketleri anlatıyor. Bu kısımda belli tarihsel bilgilere sahip olmak gerekiyor. Savaşların ölçeği, Bolşevik Devrimi ve İspanya İç Savaşı gibi konular hakkında genel de olsa bilgiye gerek var. Çünkü Traverso teorik olarak yaklaşıyor genellikle. Savaşların toplumsal dinamikleri hakkındaki analizleri okunmaya değer. İmparatorlukların güç kaybettiği bir dönem. Belli zümreler imparatorluğu bir arada tutmak için akıllara zarar kararlar veriyor. Ulus devlet fikri ile çatışan bu kararlar sivilleri tüm vatandaşlık haklarından yoksun kılıyor. Halka yönelik şiddetin zirveye tırmandığı ve de normalleştiği bir süreç yaşanıyor.
İkinci kısımda savaş süreci ve iki savaş aralığındaki kültürel dönüşümlere odaklanıyor. Benjamin, Schmidt gibi pek çok tanıdık ismin felsefeleri ve sanat dünyasını anlatıyor. Okuması daha kolay bir kısım. İnsanlık mirası olarak adlandırılan değerlerin, önce aristokratların sonra burjuvazinin hırsıyla çöküşünü ve yükselme çabasını çok iyi anlatıyor. Kaynak yelpazesi çok geniş. Başka okumalar için de iyi bir rota sunuyor.
Kitabın eleştireceğim tek yönü faşizm ile komünist totalitarizmi aynı ölçüde eleştirmesi. Savaş sosyalizminden bihaber gibi sert eleştirileri var Sovyetler için. Yine de iç savaş tezi için bile okunacak bir kitap.
November 27, 2018
A piercing, insightful and important analysis of the European crisis that exploded in the eponymous fire and blood of the middle 20th century, including two world wars, two major civil wars and numerous other conflicts across the continent.
Fire and Blood is really two books covering this time period. The first explores the nature of civil war and how it differs from conventional interstate warfare, especially as of the early 20th century, and how the European conflagration more closely mirrored the no-holds-barred, take-no-prisoners nature of the former rather than the rule-bound contests of the latter.
Traverso is convincing in showing how combatants increasingly viewed each other in the absolutist, extralegal terms more typically seen in civil wars, where each side must necessarily view the other as illegitimate; view neutrality with suspicion; and view all people as combatants, potential combatants or supporters of combatants and therefore unworthy of the protection and niceties afforded to prisoners and civilians in traditional warfare.
He also points out that the events from 1914 to 1945 did not include just the two total wars, one laying the conditions for the other, but also included the Bolshevik Revolution and Russian Civil War of 1917-22 and the Spanish Civil War of 1936-39, both of which attracted international interference on each side, plus fighting between different armed forces – occupiers, resistance fighters, fascist thugs, republican defenders – in Germany in the 1920s and 1930s, Italy and the Balkans in the 1930s and 1940s, and France in the 1940s. The continent, in other words, devolved into a paroxysm of conflict, turning against itself as old empires collapsed and wiping out millions of its own residents in a frenzy of war crimes ranging from poison gas to carpet bombing to extermination camps to mass executions of political and military prisoners.
In the second half of the book, Traverso turns a critical eye to the historiographical treatment of the antifascist resistance that battled the forces of Mussolini, Hitler and Franco during the latter half of the civil war. He argues that Cold War alliances led Western interpreters of history to discount the contributions of leftist antifascism by watering it down into an anti-totalitarianism that could also oppose Soviet communism, notwithstanding the key role European communists played in opposing fascism.
He shows that antifascism was a broad coalition ranging from Christians to communists that eventually fractured after the end of World War II and the rise of the Cold War, and that the primary cleavage of the civil war was a battle between fascism and its opponents – not, as some would have it, a struggle against a generic totalitarianism.
In this section, Traverso – perhaps intentionally, although he doesn't make it clear – describes fascism in a way that highlights especially strongly how much the wave of "alt-right" nationalism rising in Europe and America today is in fact a form of neofascism, with its reactionary character, its focus on racial purity, its nationalist emphasis and its focus on counter-revolution (notwithstanding whether there was much of a revolution to counter in the first place).
Overall, Fire and Blood is a penetrating exploration of a traumatic three decades that continue to haunt the West, if not the world. It assumes the reader knows the basics of this time period; it's far too short a book to recapitulate all of the names, dates and battles you'd get in a traditional history book. But if you're looking for a next-level study of this era from a perspective you're unlikely to find in most American texts, I highly recommend Traverso's.
Fire and Blood is really two books covering this time period. The first explores the nature of civil war and how it differs from conventional interstate warfare, especially as of the early 20th century, and how the European conflagration more closely mirrored the no-holds-barred, take-no-prisoners nature of the former rather than the rule-bound contests of the latter.
Traverso is convincing in showing how combatants increasingly viewed each other in the absolutist, extralegal terms more typically seen in civil wars, where each side must necessarily view the other as illegitimate; view neutrality with suspicion; and view all people as combatants, potential combatants or supporters of combatants and therefore unworthy of the protection and niceties afforded to prisoners and civilians in traditional warfare.
He also points out that the events from 1914 to 1945 did not include just the two total wars, one laying the conditions for the other, but also included the Bolshevik Revolution and Russian Civil War of 1917-22 and the Spanish Civil War of 1936-39, both of which attracted international interference on each side, plus fighting between different armed forces – occupiers, resistance fighters, fascist thugs, republican defenders – in Germany in the 1920s and 1930s, Italy and the Balkans in the 1930s and 1940s, and France in the 1940s. The continent, in other words, devolved into a paroxysm of conflict, turning against itself as old empires collapsed and wiping out millions of its own residents in a frenzy of war crimes ranging from poison gas to carpet bombing to extermination camps to mass executions of political and military prisoners.
In the second half of the book, Traverso turns a critical eye to the historiographical treatment of the antifascist resistance that battled the forces of Mussolini, Hitler and Franco during the latter half of the civil war. He argues that Cold War alliances led Western interpreters of history to discount the contributions of leftist antifascism by watering it down into an anti-totalitarianism that could also oppose Soviet communism, notwithstanding the key role European communists played in opposing fascism.
He shows that antifascism was a broad coalition ranging from Christians to communists that eventually fractured after the end of World War II and the rise of the Cold War, and that the primary cleavage of the civil war was a battle between fascism and its opponents – not, as some would have it, a struggle against a generic totalitarianism.
In this section, Traverso – perhaps intentionally, although he doesn't make it clear – describes fascism in a way that highlights especially strongly how much the wave of "alt-right" nationalism rising in Europe and America today is in fact a form of neofascism, with its reactionary character, its focus on racial purity, its nationalist emphasis and its focus on counter-revolution (notwithstanding whether there was much of a revolution to counter in the first place).
Overall, Fire and Blood is a penetrating exploration of a traumatic three decades that continue to haunt the West, if not the world. It assumes the reader knows the basics of this time period; it's far too short a book to recapitulate all of the names, dates and battles you'd get in a traditional history book. But if you're looking for a next-level study of this era from a perspective you're unlikely to find in most American texts, I highly recommend Traverso's.
September 3, 2022
02/09/2022 (**)
Non l'ho ben capito. Oppure non era il momento. Più probabilmente, il libro è al di fuori della mia personale sfera d'interesse.
La prima parte l'ho letta con interesse, anche se non dice niente di nuovo: quelle che usualmente si distinguono in prima e seconda guerra mondiale, separate da un denso ventennio, sono l'inizio e la fine di una lunga, devastante, sanguinosissima guerra civile europea, che sancisce il declino del continente a favore delle due nuove superpotenze extraeuropee. Declino che è anche una evoluzione, sotto molti aspetti: culturale, sociale, economica, che vede scontrarsi essenzialmente due ideologie contrapposte, ossia la rivoluzione illuministica al suo zenit (il socialismo reale) e la contro-rivoluzione conservatrice, anch'essa al suo zenit e incarnatasi nei movimenti fascisti e nazionalisti. Comunismo e fascismo visti quindi come punti d'arrivo finali e estremi di una onda lunghissima partita con l'Illuminismo, con i suoi deflagranti effetti sull'ordine costituito europeo e sulla sua destabilizzazione, cominciata con Napoleone e finita con Hitler.
Come noto, entrambe le ideologie perderanno, vinte e prostrate di fronte al capitalismo trionfante (che è, in un certo modo, un curioso mix fra i due estremi, avendo inglobato elementi di entrambi).
La prima parte, come detto, l'ho letta con piacere. Ben circoscritta storicamente, capace di mostrare con ottimo piglio narrativo come l'Europa pre-1914 fosse un continente fortemente interconnesso da rapporti commerciali e culturali estremamente stretti, in particolare fra le varie elite e le alte borghesie. L'implosione successiva al fatidico sparo di Sarajevo fu effettivamente una sorpresa per (quasi) tutti, e portò a galla tutte le contraddizioni - filosofiche e politiche, soprattutto - rimaste marginali negli anni precedenti.
La seconda parte si concentra proprio su questi aspetti: le concezioni politiche, culturali e filosofiche europee nel fatidico trentennio 1914-1945, le loro evoluzioni, le loro contrapposizioni e compenetrazioni, viste a livello continentale nei vari paesi. E via via il tono dell'autore, a cui va riconosciuta una formidabile preparazione culturale, è diventato più pedante, più nozionistico, più astratto e teoretico mentre il mio interesse è sempre più scemato, fino a raggiungere il nadir. Come già capitato con altri saggi a tematica similare (cito il, per me, tremendo Il mito della Grande Guerra), stante una certa sofferenza all'astrattismo e alla filosofia che mi è caratteristica, trovo questi argomenti noiosi e indigesti a livelli clamorosi.
Lontani dalle mie corde e avulsi dai miei interessi, ho letto gli ultimi tre capitoli con grande fatica e disinteresse. Forse si sarebbe potuto intitolare il libro con un più appropriato "Storia intellettuale e delle idee politiche e filosofiche negli anni della guerra civile europea 1914-1945", e me ne sarei rimasto alla larga (anche perché sarebbe stato un pessimo titolo).
Al netto delle interessanti riflessioni sopra richiamate e di una buona prima parte, non ne consiglio la lettura.
Non l'ho ben capito. Oppure non era il momento. Più probabilmente, il libro è al di fuori della mia personale sfera d'interesse.
La prima parte l'ho letta con interesse, anche se non dice niente di nuovo: quelle che usualmente si distinguono in prima e seconda guerra mondiale, separate da un denso ventennio, sono l'inizio e la fine di una lunga, devastante, sanguinosissima guerra civile europea, che sancisce il declino del continente a favore delle due nuove superpotenze extraeuropee. Declino che è anche una evoluzione, sotto molti aspetti: culturale, sociale, economica, che vede scontrarsi essenzialmente due ideologie contrapposte, ossia la rivoluzione illuministica al suo zenit (il socialismo reale) e la contro-rivoluzione conservatrice, anch'essa al suo zenit e incarnatasi nei movimenti fascisti e nazionalisti. Comunismo e fascismo visti quindi come punti d'arrivo finali e estremi di una onda lunghissima partita con l'Illuminismo, con i suoi deflagranti effetti sull'ordine costituito europeo e sulla sua destabilizzazione, cominciata con Napoleone e finita con Hitler.
Come noto, entrambe le ideologie perderanno, vinte e prostrate di fronte al capitalismo trionfante (che è, in un certo modo, un curioso mix fra i due estremi, avendo inglobato elementi di entrambi).
La prima parte, come detto, l'ho letta con piacere. Ben circoscritta storicamente, capace di mostrare con ottimo piglio narrativo come l'Europa pre-1914 fosse un continente fortemente interconnesso da rapporti commerciali e culturali estremamente stretti, in particolare fra le varie elite e le alte borghesie. L'implosione successiva al fatidico sparo di Sarajevo fu effettivamente una sorpresa per (quasi) tutti, e portò a galla tutte le contraddizioni - filosofiche e politiche, soprattutto - rimaste marginali negli anni precedenti.
La seconda parte si concentra proprio su questi aspetti: le concezioni politiche, culturali e filosofiche europee nel fatidico trentennio 1914-1945, le loro evoluzioni, le loro contrapposizioni e compenetrazioni, viste a livello continentale nei vari paesi. E via via il tono dell'autore, a cui va riconosciuta una formidabile preparazione culturale, è diventato più pedante, più nozionistico, più astratto e teoretico mentre il mio interesse è sempre più scemato, fino a raggiungere il nadir. Come già capitato con altri saggi a tematica similare (cito il, per me, tremendo Il mito della Grande Guerra), stante una certa sofferenza all'astrattismo e alla filosofia che mi è caratteristica, trovo questi argomenti noiosi e indigesti a livelli clamorosi.
Lontani dalle mie corde e avulsi dai miei interessi, ho letto gli ultimi tre capitoli con grande fatica e disinteresse. Forse si sarebbe potuto intitolare il libro con un più appropriato "Storia intellettuale e delle idee politiche e filosofiche negli anni della guerra civile europea 1914-1945", e me ne sarei rimasto alla larga (anche perché sarebbe stato un pessimo titolo).
Al netto delle interessanti riflessioni sopra richiamate e di una buona prima parte, non ne consiglio la lettura.
November 2, 2025
alleen een man kan oorlog vergelijken aan een orgasme.
January 21, 2017
A little too theoretical and quite obviously a product of contemporary intellectualism with all its faults, this is a decent enough history with an interesting and well-argued theory that 1914-1945 in Europe should be taken as a single, coherent civil war. The book at times feels a little like a box-ticking exercise for modern historians, veering into cultural and gender history with no real need, but there is a lot to be drawn from here. It is very well researched and, despite its obvious political stance, is worth a read for anyone well-versed in the time period.
October 17, 2017
Εξαιρετικός στοχαστής ο TRAVERSO, σίγουρα θα διαβάσω και άλλα έργα του σύντομα.
May 28, 2023
Un libro que te hace descender a los infiernos de lo que fue la guerra civil europea. Muy completo y muy inquietante. Lo recomiendo mucho, Traverso tiene una manera de narrar la historia del siglo XX muy por encima del resto de historiadores.
February 26, 2025
Commencement, anatomy, war against civilians, judgment of the enemy, eruption, imaginaries of violence, antifascism and its antimonies. The chapter titles, or my paraphrasing of them, reveal the spine of the book. The body of the text delves into the analysis of the European Civil War from 1914-1945.
One can't understand the Spanish Civil War but as a prelude to the European Civil War. Nazi functionaries saw the war in Civil War terms. One can't separate nor disentangle the First from the Second — there existed a continuity, which the book richly explains the origin of.
It gives serious consideration to the dynamics of the Russian Civil War and the lessons that it has for all Civil Wars, and takes seriously the figure of Leon Trotsky, while also respecting the analysis of those who lived and breathed the Russian Revolution and drew different (and often valid) political conclusions, like Victor Serge.
It's worth quoting some excerpts, so to give an insight;
"The European Civil War created a series of conditions without which the Holocaust could have neither conceived nor perpetrated" p. 63
"In other words, the violence born from the regression of the civilising process combined, in an astonishing dialectic of non-contemporaneity, with a much more murderous violence based on the technology of industrial society" p. 92
"In short, if the dialectic of amnesty and forgetting is established before justice is delivered, this memory will resurge later, often charged with resentment." p.150
One can't understand the Spanish Civil War but as a prelude to the European Civil War. Nazi functionaries saw the war in Civil War terms. One can't separate nor disentangle the First from the Second — there existed a continuity, which the book richly explains the origin of.
It gives serious consideration to the dynamics of the Russian Civil War and the lessons that it has for all Civil Wars, and takes seriously the figure of Leon Trotsky, while also respecting the analysis of those who lived and breathed the Russian Revolution and drew different (and often valid) political conclusions, like Victor Serge.
It's worth quoting some excerpts, so to give an insight;
"The European Civil War created a series of conditions without which the Holocaust could have neither conceived nor perpetrated" p. 63
"In other words, the violence born from the regression of the civilising process combined, in an astonishing dialectic of non-contemporaneity, with a much more murderous violence based on the technology of industrial society" p. 92
"In short, if the dialectic of amnesty and forgetting is established before justice is delivered, this memory will resurge later, often charged with resentment." p.150
December 10, 2021
Enzo Traverso has to be one of my favorite living writers, he is everything that i want out of a book: crisp analysis, wide-ranging and insightful comparisons from not only historical events but truly the structure of feeling as seen throughout artistic and intellectual life, judicious communist politics while never failing to critique the failings of the past, and above all an encounter with history that never shies away from theory (or synchrony), from distilling universal(?) moral lessons from the catastrophe of the past. read this book.
November 26, 2020
The book was fascinating and fabulous (though not a particularly easy read). But what set it below five stars was it’s lack of a conclusion, it stops rather abruptly. The point he had made throughout about the civil war dynamic during the world wars in Europe deserves to be wrapped together into some higher level view and talk about the effect it has on the rest of the century. Overall though, it is an essential book on the subject.
October 21, 2025
After reading Traverso's masterful The Origins of Nazi Violence, I knew I had to read his work about the period in Europe from the beginning of World War I to the end of World War 2. It ended up not quite being what I expected- I thought it'd be a standard historical narrative, but instead it's more like a analysis of what different aspects of the time period meant. Still, it was a good, insightful read. A little dense, but manageable. I definitely learned a lot!
January 26, 2021
Éste es un breve, pero fascinante libro en el que el historiador italiano Enzo Traverso hace un análisis de la catástrofe que barrió a Europa en la primera mitad del siglo XX, un ciclo de violencia que incluyó conflictos bélicos de alcance global, guerras civiles, revoluciones, dictaduras, genocidios y crisis económicas.
Más que hacer una narración de las dos guerras mundiales y el periodo de entreguerras, Traverso trata de encontrar qué significó esa época y cómo transformó para siempre la historia, no sólo de Europa, sino del mundo.
La Primera Guerra Mundial inició en 1914 como un tradicional enfrentamiento bélico entre potencias. Pero no tardó mucho en degenerar en una guerra total, que incluyó a su vez insurrecciones, conflictos civiles y una gran revolución, la rusa. Para 1918, cuando terminó la guerra, todo se había quebrado. No sólo habían desaparecido imperios, sino que la misma civilización parecía haberse reducido a cenizas. Los años que siguieron fueron de extrema violencia, con persecuciones políticas, deportaciones masivas y genocidios que culminarían en el Holocausto.
La Segunda Guerra Mundial no era solamente un conflicto entre imperios. Fue también una serie de guerras intestinas en el seno de las naciones ocupadas por el Eje o gobernadas por regímenes fascistas. Los partisanos en Italia y los Balcanes, así como la Résistance en Francia, en su lucha contra los fascistas locales y extranjeros, son la figura representativa de este conflicto. En general, no se trataba solamente de un duelo entre potencias, sino una lucha a muerte entre ideologías.
También se demuestra la falta de visión histórica en los líderes de las naciones Aliadas. Una vez terminado el conflicto, se juzgó al enemigo en Nuremberg y Tokyo. Pero tras algunas condenas y ejecuciones, ante la amenaza de la Guerra Fría, los mandos Aliados comenzaron a dar amnistías o simplemente a hacerse de la vista gorda. Funcionarios de los regímenes de Hitler y Mussolini no sólo salieron indemnes, sino que pudieron volver a trabajar en los gobiernos de sus países.
De forma paralela, surgió el mito de la guerrilla antifascista como un brazo armado del comunismo soviético. En realidad, las diferentes guerrillas conjuntaban a múltiples actores, y ni de lejos fueron todos comunistas. La narrativa miope del liberalismo de la posguerra borró a los guerrilleros de las narrativas heroicas, por considerar su tipo de lucha (fuera de la legalidad y de las jerarquías de gobiernos y ejércitos), como una inspiración peligrosa.
De especial interés para los lectores contemporáneos será el análisis de la ideología nazi, y de cómo se configuró una intelectualidad antifascista que defendía la herencia de la Ilustración; una alianza tácita o explícita, que incluía a liberales, marxistas, cristianos, etc. Muchos dejaron de lado sus diferencias para luchar contra el enemigo común. El caso de esa breve, pero trascendental alianza, debería servirnos de inspiración en los tiempos presentes
Más que hacer una narración de las dos guerras mundiales y el periodo de entreguerras, Traverso trata de encontrar qué significó esa época y cómo transformó para siempre la historia, no sólo de Europa, sino del mundo.
La Primera Guerra Mundial inició en 1914 como un tradicional enfrentamiento bélico entre potencias. Pero no tardó mucho en degenerar en una guerra total, que incluyó a su vez insurrecciones, conflictos civiles y una gran revolución, la rusa. Para 1918, cuando terminó la guerra, todo se había quebrado. No sólo habían desaparecido imperios, sino que la misma civilización parecía haberse reducido a cenizas. Los años que siguieron fueron de extrema violencia, con persecuciones políticas, deportaciones masivas y genocidios que culminarían en el Holocausto.
La Segunda Guerra Mundial no era solamente un conflicto entre imperios. Fue también una serie de guerras intestinas en el seno de las naciones ocupadas por el Eje o gobernadas por regímenes fascistas. Los partisanos en Italia y los Balcanes, así como la Résistance en Francia, en su lucha contra los fascistas locales y extranjeros, son la figura representativa de este conflicto. En general, no se trataba solamente de un duelo entre potencias, sino una lucha a muerte entre ideologías.
También se demuestra la falta de visión histórica en los líderes de las naciones Aliadas. Una vez terminado el conflicto, se juzgó al enemigo en Nuremberg y Tokyo. Pero tras algunas condenas y ejecuciones, ante la amenaza de la Guerra Fría, los mandos Aliados comenzaron a dar amnistías o simplemente a hacerse de la vista gorda. Funcionarios de los regímenes de Hitler y Mussolini no sólo salieron indemnes, sino que pudieron volver a trabajar en los gobiernos de sus países.
De forma paralela, surgió el mito de la guerrilla antifascista como un brazo armado del comunismo soviético. En realidad, las diferentes guerrillas conjuntaban a múltiples actores, y ni de lejos fueron todos comunistas. La narrativa miope del liberalismo de la posguerra borró a los guerrilleros de las narrativas heroicas, por considerar su tipo de lucha (fuera de la legalidad y de las jerarquías de gobiernos y ejércitos), como una inspiración peligrosa.
De especial interés para los lectores contemporáneos será el análisis de la ideología nazi, y de cómo se configuró una intelectualidad antifascista que defendía la herencia de la Ilustración; una alianza tácita o explícita, que incluía a liberales, marxistas, cristianos, etc. Muchos dejaron de lado sus diferencias para luchar contra el enemigo común. El caso de esa breve, pero trascendental alianza, debería servirnos de inspiración en los tiempos presentes
May 16, 2018
I had the opposite experience reading this book as I had when reading Traverso’s Left Wing Melancholia. In that book the first two thirds soared; then the book kind of collapsed. In this book, the first two thirds were fine, but in an academic and somewhat pedantic manner. The last two chapters, which are intellectual histories of the inter-war period, are really good, particularly his excavation of anti-fascism. Throughout, as always with Traverso, it is a treat to read someone who has clearly read everything on his topic, can assimilate so much raw material, in so many languages, and has a point of view. He mines reactionary sources, liberals, and writers of the left in all their varieties. He delves into interesting exchanges, not merely the well-worn Trotksy-Dewey debate, but, for example, that between Walter Benjamin and Carl Schmitt. In that analysis, Benjamin comes in for some heavy criticism, but Traverso’s admiration for Benjamin, so evident in Melancholia, is also implicit here, in how seriously he takes Benjamin’s arguments, how much significance they hold, even retrospectively. There are certainly echoes in the contemporary period of the challenges of the interwar period, and particularly of the 1930s, in forging a progressive response to the crisis of liberal capitalism in all dimensions – analytical, political, organizational. We can only hope that we don’t descend into out and out fascist dictatorship in heretofore bourgeois democracies. Actually, we have to do more than hope – we have to struggle, and we have to figure how to prevent the worst outcomes and how to nurture the better world we know is possible.
November 25, 2018
Really blown away by this book. Had my school librarian purchase it almost on a whim. It had popped up in a promotional email and I noticed the subtitle. A colleague of mine (who seems to be as old as the school I work at) has used the term "European Civil War" to describe the first half of the 20th century before and it always hit me the wrong way, sounded very imperialist. But as is often the case, that was largely my American perspective on the Second World War.
The way Americans have come to view World War II has really done a disservice to that conflicts scope and tragedy. The Saving Private Ryan, Greatest Generation, pop historiography really isolates it as a triumphal moment of American exceptionalism. Traverso is a much needed rejoinder to this view.
It is a thrill and challenge to read a book whose footnotes are equally spread between English, French, German, Spanish, and Italian language sources. My notes quickly devolved into a litany of books to read, re-read, or people to look up. So much of this book brings together strands of things I've been thinking about lately.
It is a heady ride, and a theory heavy view of a historical era that feels so well-trod as to be cliche, but the use of social and cultural history coupled with political theory provided me, at least, with a challenging, nuanced, and extremely fresh perspective on the era of 1914-1945. This book felt like the beginning of a long term project. Definitely a book I will return to.
The way Americans have come to view World War II has really done a disservice to that conflicts scope and tragedy. The Saving Private Ryan, Greatest Generation, pop historiography really isolates it as a triumphal moment of American exceptionalism. Traverso is a much needed rejoinder to this view.
It is a thrill and challenge to read a book whose footnotes are equally spread between English, French, German, Spanish, and Italian language sources. My notes quickly devolved into a litany of books to read, re-read, or people to look up. So much of this book brings together strands of things I've been thinking about lately.
It is a heady ride, and a theory heavy view of a historical era that feels so well-trod as to be cliche, but the use of social and cultural history coupled with political theory provided me, at least, with a challenging, nuanced, and extremely fresh perspective on the era of 1914-1945. This book felt like the beginning of a long term project. Definitely a book I will return to.
October 7, 2016
Required reading for a class. Traverso's argument that the European theater of the second World War should be seen as a European Civil War is an interesting one, and he certainly convinces me, pointing to the very international ideological character of the war for almost all European participants and witnesses to the war. This monograph is not in my field, so I don't have too much critical to say about it. He certainly brings a passion to the subject.
December 30, 2018
Revelatory for me, discussing this 30 year period in ways I hadn't considered before. This is a cultural analysis, nothing about military campaigns and war fighting. I'll have to let this percolate for a bit and then come back for a second read after giving some attention to some of the texts and films (available and in English of course) that he references.
August 16, 2018
Enzo Traverso provides a fascinating perspective of the two worlds wars that I had never considered before that of the world wars constituting one continuous (mostly) European civil war. I picked up this book because I was looking for a more social, political, and cultural account of WWI, rather than a typical historical/political/military account that hops from event to event or from battle to battle. Traverso does a wonderful job at this by providing the social and political context of the 'civil war' period, but also a brief account of how Europe got there. One of the most crucial aspects of Traverso's book is his explanation of the 100 year period of relative peace in Europe that ends with the out break of WWI. Of course, it was during this time period that Europe was waging war against other people via colonization.
I found Part I to be more interesting and informative than Part II. I think people interested in the more military side of war will find Part I interesting and Part II lacking. That said, I think for those who stick to military accounts of war will benefit greatly from Traveso's 'civil war' framework because it helps to politicize the two wars at every level and complicate standard narratives.
I found Part I to be more interesting and informative than Part II. I think people interested in the more military side of war will find Part I interesting and Part II lacking. That said, I think for those who stick to military accounts of war will benefit greatly from Traveso's 'civil war' framework because it helps to politicize the two wars at every level and complicate standard narratives.
October 3, 2020
An excellent analysis of the 1914-1945 period of warfare and crisis in Europe, and the dynamics of civil war, violence, and antifascism. The main argument underpinning the book is that WW1 and WW2, and the interregnum between, constituted a period of civil war in Europe, where irreconcilable differences and goals between different political factions (namely, fascism and everybody else) emerged within countries across Europe, with WW1 serving as a sort of detonator for the collapse of aristocratic liberalism and the emergence of violent mass politics.
This is mostly a theoretical book, but is still surprisingly easy to read, although it is probably helpful to at least have a general understanding of the time period and the course of key events like the Bolshevik Revolution and the Spanish Civil War. The book doesn't spend much time at all laying out the course of wars - it is not a military history by any means - and instead focuses on the political and cultural dynamics of the period, i.e. how violence against civilians became normalized, or the impact of the wars on the arts. But despite being largely theoretical, its grounded enough in the feeling of the time that it is still a very immersive and colorful read.
This is mostly a theoretical book, but is still surprisingly easy to read, although it is probably helpful to at least have a general understanding of the time period and the course of key events like the Bolshevik Revolution and the Spanish Civil War. The book doesn't spend much time at all laying out the course of wars - it is not a military history by any means - and instead focuses on the political and cultural dynamics of the period, i.e. how violence against civilians became normalized, or the impact of the wars on the arts. But despite being largely theoretical, its grounded enough in the feeling of the time that it is still a very immersive and colorful read.
January 25, 2018
Traverso has a target in this book; the contemporary liberal pap which seeks to condemn both the fascist and anti-fascist forces of the time as being both 'undemocratic' and 'illiberal' and as bad as each other. Traverso demolishes this for the nonsense that it is; pointing out that during the era of the European Civil War, liberalism was an all-round failure and liberal regimes fell like ninepins before the onslaught of totalitarianism. Traverso unearths the real history of the anti-fascist fronts; showing that they predated any involvement by the Stalinist CPs, that they were more widely based and not controlled by Moscow. At the end of the day the only hope of defeating fascism lay in allying with the USSR and Stalinism, and without that, we would be living in a fascist world. Traverso makes clear the need then (and by extension now, faced with the revival of fascism even in a watered down fashion) of making a choice and a commitment, of engaging with the task of defeating fascism, rather than abetting it by avoiding engagement.
May 28, 2019
This is a phenomenal look at the period from the start of World War One right through to the end of World War 2 from a leftist perceptive. The information presented here is unlike anything presented in high school history classes(or even a University Course). Enzo goes into a lot of detail about different types of conflict and their factors, "‘classic’ wars between states; civil wars; wars of national liberation; genocides; violent confrontations arising from cleavages of class, nation, religion, politics and ideology". The shift to both the far left and far right, the collapse of liberalism and radicalism of the era is perfectly displayed in this book. The violence against citizens, dehumanisation, the want to completely to destroy your enemy and the general war of ideas displayed. Enzo using examples of Visual Art, Poetry, Flim and Literature the changing cultures and psychology of the men and women lived experience of the European Civil War. More than any other book on the topic it shows the range of factors that lead to one of the most barbaric times in human history.
Read
November 30, 2021çok severek okudum, çok yoğun ve insanı düşünmeye sevkeden bir çalışmaydı. traverso temel olarak 1914-1945 arasındaki dönemi birbirine bağlı bir avrupa iç savaşı olarak görmeyi ve bu dönemin vahşetini, kıyıcılaşma mekanizmalarını, faşizmin yükselişini bir avrupa iç savaşı çerçevesinden değerlendirmeyi öneriyor. iki savaşın şiddetini, ırkçılığını, faşizmlerin yükselişlerini, anti-faşist direnişi birlikte görmek gerçekten çok kafa açıcı geldi bana. stalinist rejimle faşizmi eşitleyen liberal tarihyazımına itiraz ama stalinizmin marazlarını görmek, anti faşist direnişlerin hakkını vermek ana holokost körlüklerini teslim etmek, savaşın sadece politik sahada değil sanatta ve insanların muhayyelesinde yarattığı tahribatı anlamaya çalışmak ve avrupa iç savaşı olarak adlandırdığı döneme gerçekten avrupa çapında karşılaştırmalı olarak bakmak kitabı çok güçlü bir hale getiriyor. 20. yüzyıl tarihi, tarihyazımı ve politik hafızası ile ilgilenen herkese tavsiye ederim.
March 6, 2021
After reading this Universe Brain book, I’ll never be able to think about the 20th century in the same way again. Drawing from contemporary writing, art, films, and philosophy, this joined a lot of dots for me in sketching out its conception of the period between the October Revolution and the fall of Nazism as a “European Civil War”. Thanks to Underworld and a few other sources, a lot of my headspace at the start of this year was devoted to the Cold War and the aftermath of the events in Fire & Blood. It was good to have a long, hard look at the precursor. Highly highly recommended!
December 23, 2025
“The struggle against fascism needed a hope, a message of universal emancipation, which it seemed at this time could be offered only by the country of the October Revolution. If a totalitarian dictatorship like that of Stalin became the embodiment of these values in the eyes of millions of men and women, which is indeed the tragedy of twentieth-century Communism, this is precisely because its origins and its nature were completely different from those of fascism. That is what liberal anti-totalitarianism seems incapable of understanding.”
September 21, 2017
The author has a big agenda, the book, however, is essentially just an extended essay; the coverage is far from systematic. There are many captivating phrases here that gives the reader a clear grasp of events and processes. Having said that, I do not find all of Traverso's ideas convincing partly because he is too strongly focused on Western Europe at the expense of 'the other half.' This remains an engaging book by an engaged historian.
May 26, 2020
Traverso's reckoning with history is personal, political, and academic - he is an excellent guide and while some may find his theoretical frames provocative insofar as they focus on the rise and importance of anti-fascist thinkers, I find them unobjectionable. His interest in multiple sectors of human activity through the two world war periods illuminates shared fascinations - from artists to politicians, Traverso finds their place in what he calls the European civil war.
Read
August 21, 2022Sometimes picking up a book on a whim works out really well. While I lack the prior knowledge to fully appreciate this book in full, the various themes are presented in a way I could follow and understand even if I'm someone who didn't know Hobbes had another book titled after a biblical beast. Its density can be a challenge but again, it's really well written and I kept underlining passages more often that I thought I would,
Displaying 1 - 30 of 48 reviews