What do you think?
Rate this book
The Myth of the Eastern Front: The Nazi-Soviet War in American Popular Culture
From the 1950s onward, Americans were quite receptive to a view of World War II similar to the view held by many Germans and military personnel on how the war was fought on the Eastern Front in Russia. Through a network of formerly high-ranking Wehrmacht and Bundeswehr officers who had served on the Eastern Front, Germans were able to shape American opinions into an interpretation of World War II that left the Wehrmacht with a “clean” reputation in World War II history. A broad subculture of German military enthusiasts continues to romanticize the German army to this day.
342 pages, Paperback
First published October 29, 2007
6 people are currently reading
345 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
May 11, 2018
The book has some good things to say about the American military's Nazi fetish, but ultimately the authors forget that Americans view the Nazis less as embattled soldiers fighting the evil Soviets, and more as stock villains from history books, movies, and video games.
Update after reading through it again in 2018
It was an interesting read, and I agreed with the broad thesis. Yet, I think they overplayed their hand in the chapter on wargaming and their argument about the American military's supposed "embrace" of the Nazis. The same is true in books looking at veterans after the Civil War. The current line is the Union veterans embraced the South and forgot what the war was about. This interpretation is flawed because it fails to account for Southern economic underdevelopment and political limitations after 1865, while at the same time assuming the North fought the war to free the slaves more than to save the union. While they mostly did embrace, it was not complete and their was much tension over the war than runs through America to this day in race and economics, the later of which is ignored in these times.
I know the above is an aside, but it is relevant to this book. The left is apt to see racism and fascism everywhere, the result being that evidence to the contrary gets ignored. Many Civil War veterans still harbored bitter feelings in the 1890s. Many World War II veterans had no interest in embracing their old foes, whether it was to fight the commies or because of the need for reconciliation.
Last point. Their anecdote about the American who really remembered his Soviet brethren fondly and protesting the Cold War was very maudlin and silly. They are seemingly forgetting that communism's main achievement has been the death of 100,000,000 people. Then again, most academics are pretty soft on communism since Marxist ideas are part of their politics and analysis.
The war on the east was history's gravest example of evil vs. evil. Most of history is far more gray even on the grand level.
Update after reading through it again in 2018
It was an interesting read, and I agreed with the broad thesis. Yet, I think they overplayed their hand in the chapter on wargaming and their argument about the American military's supposed "embrace" of the Nazis. The same is true in books looking at veterans after the Civil War. The current line is the Union veterans embraced the South and forgot what the war was about. This interpretation is flawed because it fails to account for Southern economic underdevelopment and political limitations after 1865, while at the same time assuming the North fought the war to free the slaves more than to save the union. While they mostly did embrace, it was not complete and their was much tension over the war than runs through America to this day in race and economics, the later of which is ignored in these times.
I know the above is an aside, but it is relevant to this book. The left is apt to see racism and fascism everywhere, the result being that evidence to the contrary gets ignored. Many Civil War veterans still harbored bitter feelings in the 1890s. Many World War II veterans had no interest in embracing their old foes, whether it was to fight the commies or because of the need for reconciliation.
Last point. Their anecdote about the American who really remembered his Soviet brethren fondly and protesting the Cold War was very maudlin and silly. They are seemingly forgetting that communism's main achievement has been the death of 100,000,000 people. Then again, most academics are pretty soft on communism since Marxist ideas are part of their politics and analysis.
The war on the east was history's gravest example of evil vs. evil. Most of history is far more gray even on the grand level.
January 23, 2009
This book attempts to explain how and why, there came to be in the United States, a culture or rather a sub-culture that romanticizes to bizarre extremes the armed forces of the most notorious regime of the 20th century, the Nazi Wehrmacht and the Waffen-SS. A regime and army against which the United States struggled.
To do this, the authors put forth that it is a combination of three phenomena, not all of which are related to the Second World War. Those being:
The appeal of the "lost cause" sentiment, which emerged following the end of the American Civil War, the Cold War, and the self-serving and apolagetic literature penned by various German generals and other ex-German soldiers in the years soon after the end of World War Two. To which extent the Cold War enabled them to so, or they in turn enabled the romanticizing phenomena is not that significant, but it is certain that both played an important role.
Overall, this is a book as much about the Cold War in America as it is about World War II. The main drawback of the book is that it is easily misunderstood, and suffers a little from a "preaching to the choir" style of writing, in this case the choir being the progressive reader.
But it is a book that needed to be written, and is the first that I know of that tackles this phenomenon directly. I would recommend it to anyone interested in Sociology, World War II, the Cold War and sub-cultures.
To do this, the authors put forth that it is a combination of three phenomena, not all of which are related to the Second World War. Those being:
The appeal of the "lost cause" sentiment, which emerged following the end of the American Civil War, the Cold War, and the self-serving and apolagetic literature penned by various German generals and other ex-German soldiers in the years soon after the end of World War Two. To which extent the Cold War enabled them to so, or they in turn enabled the romanticizing phenomena is not that significant, but it is certain that both played an important role.
Overall, this is a book as much about the Cold War in America as it is about World War II. The main drawback of the book is that it is easily misunderstood, and suffers a little from a "preaching to the choir" style of writing, in this case the choir being the progressive reader.
But it is a book that needed to be written, and is the first that I know of that tackles this phenomenon directly. I would recommend it to anyone interested in Sociology, World War II, the Cold War and sub-cultures.
December 15, 2008
The authors rightfully point out the mythologizing of the Nazi campaign on the Eastern Front in WWII with many wronglfully saying that only the SS committed atrocities on the civilian populations that the Germans over ran and that the remaining German forces fought an honorable war. The authors point out that many of the atrocities were committed by regular frontline troops who fed into and believed the Nazi propoganda that the Russians were a subhuman race that needed to be exterminiated. However, I think that they loose the meesage with a rather broad painting of everything they consider mythologizing. Wargamers who like to play the German side are particularly singled out as mythologizers. (Full disclosure - I do play wargames). A good book to get an idea of what occurred in WWII and to be aware of the support that the Nazi side still has today, but it does not stand on its own as a definiteive history.
February 6, 2008
A disconcerting retelling of the conscious mytologizing of the most brutal and destructive campaign of any war in human history that actually ended up favoring the Nazi point of view(!) for a generation.
Even though it was useful for America that we captured better Nazis at the end of the war than the Russians (and didn't kill almost all of them), it is disturbing how much influence many of them had on us, especially the military.
It's also important to be reminded that Americans, despite what you might have heard, are pretty susceptible to propaganda. No, really.
Even though it was useful for America that we captured better Nazis at the end of the war than the Russians (and didn't kill almost all of them), it is disturbing how much influence many of them had on us, especially the military.
It's also important to be reminded that Americans, despite what you might have heard, are pretty susceptible to propaganda. No, really.
May 17, 2020
I feel this started well, thoroughly delving into how the modern Western narrative on the Eastern Front was formed. In that respect is a chilling reminder of the power that a few determined influencers, albeit in circumstances (the Cold War) that suited their needs, can significantly alter our understanding of events.
I was less convinced by later chapters, particularly those dealing with 'romancers' (the author belabors that term) which seem to strongly imply that people with, say, an interest in tactics or technology, are incapable of also acknowledging the terrible crimes committed by users of said tactics or technology.
Overall I feel it would have been useful to be more specific about what the inaccuracies or omissions were in some of the critiqued material rather than simply describing something as false against the (more recently understood) historical record. It is, I believe, more convincing to be able to point to specific cases of how these authors were wrong.
One area I felt was absent was a more detailed discussion of what has been learned since the end of the Cold War and how that has (or not) impacted the overall perception of this period of history - although I grant I'm reviewing this some 13 years after it was written, which is closing on doubling the length of time between the end of the Cold War and the writing of the book.
I was less convinced by later chapters, particularly those dealing with 'romancers' (the author belabors that term) which seem to strongly imply that people with, say, an interest in tactics or technology, are incapable of also acknowledging the terrible crimes committed by users of said tactics or technology.
Overall I feel it would have been useful to be more specific about what the inaccuracies or omissions were in some of the critiqued material rather than simply describing something as false against the (more recently understood) historical record. It is, I believe, more convincing to be able to point to specific cases of how these authors were wrong.
One area I felt was absent was a more detailed discussion of what has been learned since the end of the Cold War and how that has (or not) impacted the overall perception of this period of history - although I grant I'm reviewing this some 13 years after it was written, which is closing on doubling the length of time between the end of the Cold War and the writing of the book.
December 3, 2025
Sometimes you simply wait too long to read a book, and for me, this is one of those times. Had I read it seven or eight years ago I would have been more impressed with how the authors examined the processes by which the criminality of the German military on the Eastern Front was masked by the expediency of the Cold War, but I think that we've reached the point where peak "all hail the Wehrmacht" thinking (as a buddy of mine put it) has passed. A bit of my reaction may simply come from having lived this reality, but I also wonder what this cultural trend now looks like in a world where the sort of reactionary personality that was willing to embrace this myth is now willing to embrace Putin's Russia for its ostensible anti-globalism and social conservatism. Still, for a younger person who might not be aware that this was a social trend, this is probably a useful monograph. I also get amusement from image on the book cover depicting a heroic German tank commander (taken from the box art of a board game) which I'm quite sure was produced by Tim of Finland, who was essentially the Vargas of gay pornography. The authors do not attempt to deal with the psycho-sexuality of the cult!
Originally written: March 2, 2019.
Actual rating: 3.5. (December 3, 2025).
Originally written: March 2, 2019.
Actual rating: 3.5. (December 3, 2025).
October 13, 2022
The first four or so chapters are extremely good, shocking even, in their exposure of how willing America was to accept the Nazis back into the fold of life in the interests of using them as anti-communist propagandists. The fifth and sixth chapter are still filled with interesting information but a lot more repetitive, basically just providing exhaustive evidence for the aforementioned thesis of the book, and I skimmed through most of it.
The wargaming chapter is interesting, and has someone who plays Hoi4, there is absolutely a worship of the Nazis that persists to this day.
The wargaming chapter is interesting, and has someone who plays Hoi4, there is absolutely a worship of the Nazis that persists to this day.
May 8, 2022
This was a rather disturbing read on so many fields.
Way how Wermacht and Waffen-SS got exculpated through attempts to only observe the military aspect (as if military is group of people acting on their own) on the Eastern front is heart sinking. And to see how this was helped by the West's active political and military help post 1946 is truly embarrassing.
While I understand need to learn the lessons from the WW2 and need to learn more about Russians (new enemies in Cold War) from their enemies (Nazi Germany), succumbing to the propaganda from the soldiers that [maybe, but I doubt it] felt shame and just wanted WW1 like honor of the Prussian military, and exonerating them and then pushing image of them as protectors of Europe culture against Eastern threat is nothing more than warping the history. USSR had enough of its faults, from 1917 to eve of WW2 it was one crisis after another, Civil War and then internal social changes with terrible effect in the majority of people (and their vengeful actions against German civilians immediately after WW2 did not help them at all). But they suffered terribly in WW2, victims of evil genocidal campaign led by the very Wermacht and Waffen-SS. To succumb to Nazi Germany's racial prejudices and presentation of Russians (and generally everyone other than their template of super humans) is terrible shame. To see that alive even today with lady on TV talking how Russians are different kind of human .... it is all result of this deeply planted seed of hate that was left to mature through decades where East is marked for majority of enlightened and progressive people in West as "There be Dragons" land. Terrible stain that will remain for a long long time.
I have to admit I have read many a book written by German WW2 soldiers and commanders but never consider it to be true in every aspect (especially when it comes to political elements and the always professional behavior - something that, history shows it time and time again, just does not survive in mayhem of combat, especially in a form of combat that took place in the USSR). Consider it a cautious approach to subject from a person living in a country that also saw its share of savage Wermacht/Waffen-SS reprisals and warfare.
I guess situation where we are is actually a warning of effect of controlled propaganda and mass publications with a very specific goal in mind. People pick up whatever they find interesting and then they - since they have no reasons why not - believe the works they read because same works are advertised by people exposed in the media as experts. So there is no further investigation, further reads and - very very rarely - attempt to learn about the whole of the events. Author tells the same story - while professional literature on actual Wermach/Waffen-SS war crimes exists for at least the last half a century these books do not sell as good and are read by public that already knows about all of this.
Authors do go off a bit when it comes to wargaming and especially re-enactors but I do understand why. When it comes to telling stories, most successful are those that provide people with imagery and one thing that marked both Wermacht and Waffen-SS is style, very eye catching (as was in general entire Nazi iconography - Allied forces, all of them, pale in comparison wen it comes to visual presentation). And people rarely try to read and connect the dots so visually rich iconography has a strong effect and people start to believe the fairy tales. And this is where danger lies in reenactment and very specifically illustrated and documented wargames that provide plethora of details on Nazi war machine and generic data for anybody else (that again makes an effect on the player, whether we like it or not). Problem with ideologies is that as long their root beliefs live, ideologies keep on living. And for this particular ideology [Nazism] that is very dangerous thing.
Interesting book, highly recommended.
Way how Wermacht and Waffen-SS got exculpated through attempts to only observe the military aspect (as if military is group of people acting on their own) on the Eastern front is heart sinking. And to see how this was helped by the West's active political and military help post 1946 is truly embarrassing.
While I understand need to learn the lessons from the WW2 and need to learn more about Russians (new enemies in Cold War) from their enemies (Nazi Germany), succumbing to the propaganda from the soldiers that [maybe, but I doubt it] felt shame and just wanted WW1 like honor of the Prussian military, and exonerating them and then pushing image of them as protectors of Europe culture against Eastern threat is nothing more than warping the history. USSR had enough of its faults, from 1917 to eve of WW2 it was one crisis after another, Civil War and then internal social changes with terrible effect in the majority of people (and their vengeful actions against German civilians immediately after WW2 did not help them at all). But they suffered terribly in WW2, victims of evil genocidal campaign led by the very Wermacht and Waffen-SS. To succumb to Nazi Germany's racial prejudices and presentation of Russians (and generally everyone other than their template of super humans) is terrible shame. To see that alive even today with lady on TV talking how Russians are different kind of human .... it is all result of this deeply planted seed of hate that was left to mature through decades where East is marked for majority of enlightened and progressive people in West as "There be Dragons" land. Terrible stain that will remain for a long long time.
I have to admit I have read many a book written by German WW2 soldiers and commanders but never consider it to be true in every aspect (especially when it comes to political elements and the always professional behavior - something that, history shows it time and time again, just does not survive in mayhem of combat, especially in a form of combat that took place in the USSR). Consider it a cautious approach to subject from a person living in a country that also saw its share of savage Wermacht/Waffen-SS reprisals and warfare.
I guess situation where we are is actually a warning of effect of controlled propaganda and mass publications with a very specific goal in mind. People pick up whatever they find interesting and then they - since they have no reasons why not - believe the works they read because same works are advertised by people exposed in the media as experts. So there is no further investigation, further reads and - very very rarely - attempt to learn about the whole of the events. Author tells the same story - while professional literature on actual Wermach/Waffen-SS war crimes exists for at least the last half a century these books do not sell as good and are read by public that already knows about all of this.
Authors do go off a bit when it comes to wargaming and especially re-enactors but I do understand why. When it comes to telling stories, most successful are those that provide people with imagery and one thing that marked both Wermacht and Waffen-SS is style, very eye catching (as was in general entire Nazi iconography - Allied forces, all of them, pale in comparison wen it comes to visual presentation). And people rarely try to read and connect the dots so visually rich iconography has a strong effect and people start to believe the fairy tales. And this is where danger lies in reenactment and very specifically illustrated and documented wargames that provide plethora of details on Nazi war machine and generic data for anybody else (that again makes an effect on the player, whether we like it or not). Problem with ideologies is that as long their root beliefs live, ideologies keep on living. And for this particular ideology [Nazism] that is very dangerous thing.
Interesting book, highly recommended.
July 6, 2022
I would seriously say that this is the greatest academic work on the Eastern Front I have ever read. This book is seriously amazing, tearing into prevailing historical norms, showing the rewriting of world history, and the culpability of the United States in creating an alternate view of our own world. Ronald Smelser and Edward Davies did great work!
May 21, 2025
Not sure where all the negative reviews are coming from. Very interesting book, and a fresh take on how myths permeate, sort of like the "lost cause" of the confederacy, which still has a strong grip on the U.S. I think for anyone who is interested in the period, and for those who want to learn about how history and how we teach and interact with it affects our society, it's a great read.
unfinished
October 9, 2023I got it because it showed up in a search on historians who agree with Suvorov, but this was closer to the opposite: they say that the negative treatment of the cartoon baddies isn't cartoonish enough.
That a few german generals had post-war influence is negligible compared to the massive imposition of a historic narrative by the winners.
That a few german generals had post-war influence is negligible compared to the massive imposition of a historic narrative by the winners.
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews