A seasoned American observer of the European scene provides an informed, outspoken view of World War II and its origins that contrasts sharply with the familiar, official accounts.
For 22 years Donald Day (1895-1966) was the only American journalist stationed in Europe north of Berlin. From Poland, Finland, Latvia, Sweden and elsewhere in northern and central Europe, he covered events as correspondent for the Chicago Tribune. His dispatches were read by millions of readers of dozens of American newspapers. He was also an authority on the Soviet Union. But unlike many of those who reported on Soviet affairs, he was undeceived about the true character of the Stalin regime.
Convinced that Third Reich Germany was Europe's only bulwark against Soviet tyranny, Day resolved actively to enlist in what he regarded as the West's crucial struggle for survival. In the summer of 1944, at a time when the tide of war had already shifted decisively to the Allies, he moved to Berlin to work for German radio. From September 1944 until April 1945, he broadcast from the beleagured capital city, speaking out against President Roosevelt and America's military-political alliance with Stalinist Russia, and the ruthless Allied war against Germany and Christian Europe.
In this valuable memoir, Day reveals the character and thinking of an American who decided to enlist with Axis Europe. With a preface by Walter Trohan, and a foreword by Mark Weber.
Controversial, but muddied. It presents itself as a contrarian look at the eastern front in WW2, but instead it gets hung up on a lot of gossip and seemingly omits necessary details. This book could have been great in detailing and describing the fall of Baltic states, but it ends up repeating canards and even repeating itself at several points. It wasn't the excellent tome I was expecting, it ended up being quite lacking in many respects. I enjoy dissident and divergent viewpoints from my own, but this book just lacked the details to really challenge any underlying assumptions and prejudices.
I don't know the first thing about the criteria critics use to determine if a book meets their standards. Could it have been written better? Possibly. However, Day's character and tenacity as a reporter came across to me. Considering present conditions here in the US, his assessment of the future of the country was spot-on. Perhaps even Clairvoyant.