The Myth of a Guilty Nation

by Albert Jay Nock, Anders Mikkelsen (Introduction)

This was Albert Jay Nock's first great anti-war book, a cause he backed his entire life as an essential component of a libertarian outlook. The book came out in 1922 and has been in very low circulation ever since. In fact, until this printing, it has been very difficult to obtain in physical form.

The narrative has incredible staying power. The burden of the book is to prove American war propaganda to be false. The purpose of the war was not to liberate Europe and the world from German imperialism and threats. Today most everyone knows and understands this, but this was not known in 1922. If there was a conspiracy, it was by the allied powers to broadcast a public message that was completely contradicted by its own diplomatic cables.

Nock's book reminds us of what most everyone has forgotten, namely, that this was sold as a war for freedom and self-determination over imperial ambition. Along with that came some of the most rabid war propaganda ever fabricated until that point in time, all designed to make Germany into a devil nation. Nock's brave book took on that idea and demonstrated that there was fault enough to go around on all sides. All through the 1920s, a Nockian-style retelling of the facts behind the war led to a dramatic shift in public opinion against World War I.

As the introduction by Anders Mikkelsen points out, "Nock makes the reader aware of the great extent to which the allied politicians continually lied to blame Germany and justify the war, or at least told stories with no regard for the truth. No wonder Hitler found British propaganda so inspiring. In fact the story at the time made it sound like Germany was trying to overrun Europe the way Hitler temporarily did a few decades later.

"What makes this book worth reading is not whether this is the best explanation for WWI. It is worth seeing how small groups of state officials engaged in secret actions that led to a catastrophic war, and continually lied throughout the whole process to provide themselves ideological cover."

For lovers of Nock's work, this book is a fantastic addition. For those who have never encountered his writing, this book shows how he came to be such a powerful force in the world of literature and letters in the years between the wars.

Copied From:
http://mises.org/resources/6647

Genres: History, Politics, World War I, Nonfiction, War, Military History

124 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1922

About the author

American libertarian author, Georgist, social critic of the early and middle 20th century, outspoken opponent of the New Deal.

He served as a inspiration for the modern libertarian and Conservative movements.

He was one of the first Americans to self-identify as "libertarian"

http://alumnus.caltech.edu/~ckank/Ful...

Reviews

[Steven Ferre · Rating 4 out of 5]

For the first time in my life, the cause of WWI makes sense to me. Prior to this, all I'd ever been taught was that the war was caused by the assassination an Austrian Archduke,some murky treaties and a generally hostile Germany. I remember thinking at the time that this was a little naive, but my history teachers were always eager to skip over WWI to proceed onward to WWII, so I allowed myself to be distracted.

However, when one reads this book, it becomes apparent that the the imperial ambitions of England, Russia, & France were threatened by a successful Germany. Consequently, they planned, through treaties, and documented military build-ups, to neutralize Germany at some point. That point came with the assassination which was fostered by the Russians and provided the excuse they needed to address Germany.

A bulleted outline of this book should be taught in history courses. It certainly helps to explain the German hatred of the Versailles treaty and Hitler's ability to stoke the German people's desire for revenge, which has heretofore been rather mysterious to me.

[Sylvester · Rating 4 out of 5]

The myth of a Guilty Nations examines the causes of the First World War and more importantly, debunking the myth that Germany was the aggressor. Conclusion everyone was at fault here and the bloodshed could have been prevented.

[Dio Mavroyannis · Rating 4 out of 5]

Not really a book, more of a short pamphlet. I am not sure if I agree with everything being told here but for the case he is presenting Nock seems right on.

Very clear, very convincing, Russia/France/England were itchy for war as made evident by their spending on defense prior to the war. This means the narrative of "sudden war" doesn't really hold water, indeed the assassination itself is usually portrayed to not make any sense (Why would Belgrade want to instigate this?), but if you use the assumption that Russia wanted 1) Wanted the war, 2) controlled Belgrade, then it seems to make more sense.

[Miles Smith · Rating 3 out of 5]

An intense and brutally honest rebuke of Entente propaganda. Nock argues conclusively that Germany should never have been forced to bear the "sole guilt" clause in the treaties ending the Great War.

[Michael · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book might as well have been titled "Things The Public School System Avoids Teaching in History Classes."

It is a case study in the fact that history is written by the winning side. American children are taught that the Allies were the good guys and that Germany was evil, but what they are not taught is that war is never that simple.

Nock's book is well-documented and well-written, but reflects very poorly on the action of Britain and France in the years leading up to the First World War. His book explains the rationale behind the actions of the major European powers in the early 20th century, and provides a much better explanation than the official statements given at the time.

The following is perhaps the best quote of the book, and still resonates today.

... Lord Robert Cecil said in the House of Commons that the restitution of Alsace and Lorraine to France was "a well-understood war-aim from the moment we entered the war." As things have turned out, it is an odd coincidence how so many of these places that have iron or coal or oil in them seem to represent a well-understood war-aim. Less than a month before, in October, 1917, General Smuts said that to his mind the one great dominating war-aim was "the end of militarism, the end of standing armies." Well, the Allies won the war, but judging by results, this dominating war-aim seems rather to have been lost sight of.

[Jennifer Murphy · Rating 4 out of 5]

In this examination of the diplomatic and military activities of England, France, Germany and Russia in the years leading up to WWI, Nock attacked the central premise of the highly punitive Treaty of Versailles (that Germany was solely responsible for the war), and made some pretty accurate predictions of what would ensue from the treaty's enforcement. A good reminder that what the average citizen knows about any military conflict depends upon what the government allows you to know and what the media choose to report. Personally, I think this is a critical era in world history to understand, since nearly all of the political upheaval around the globe for the remainder of the 20th century was arguably rooted in WWI and the Treaty of Versailles.

[Brendan Martin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Destroys the idea that Germany was solely responsible for WWI... Which destroys the credibility of the Versailles treaty... Which lead to WWII.