What do you think?
Rate this book
Neville Chamberlain: The Passionate Radical
Neville Chamberlain is remembered today as Hitler’s credulous dupe, the man who proclaimed in September 1938 that the Munich agreement guaranteed ‘peace in our time’.
This is a magisterial reappraisal of Chamberlain and his legacy. It reveals the nuances of a complex and sensitive man who was a true radical and a man of passion, especially in all that concerned the welfare of his fellow citizens. As Minister of Health, Chancellor and Prime Minister, he presided over a fundamental modernisation of Britain, shuttingthe door on the Victorian age, ending free trade, improving living conditions and abolishing the Poor Law and the workhouse.
Munich was much more than the traditional narrative suggests. Scarred by the death of his cousin in the First World War, Chamberlain was determined to ensure that a new generation was spared the tragic waste that had consumed their elders. Even so, he prepared for war while he worked for peace. The aircraft that won the Battle of Britain were built on his watch. He didn’t win the Second World War, but it was he who ensured it wasn’t lost in 1940.
This is a magisterial reappraisal of Chamberlain and his legacy. It reveals the nuances of a complex and sensitive man who was a true radical and a man of passion, especially in all that concerned the welfare of his fellow citizens. As Minister of Health, Chancellor and Prime Minister, he presided over a fundamental modernisation of Britain, shuttingthe door on the Victorian age, ending free trade, improving living conditions and abolishing the Poor Law and the workhouse.
Munich was much more than the traditional narrative suggests. Scarred by the death of his cousin in the First World War, Chamberlain was determined to ensure that a new generation was spared the tragic waste that had consumed their elders. Even so, he prepared for war while he worked for peace. The aircraft that won the Battle of Britain were built on his watch. He didn’t win the Second World War, but it was he who ensured it wasn’t lost in 1940.
- GenresBiography
336 pages, Hardcover
Published November 2, 2021
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
March 5, 2025
An odd book that nonetheless does its job of asking the reader to think again about how we remember Neville Chamberlain.
Reid spends most of the book on Chamberlain's pre-premiership life, and makes the argument that his social reforms in local politics and then as Health Secretary and Chancellor must form part of a rounded perspective on him. For the most part, he makes the argument well and brings to light a number of themes that I haven't seen covered elsewhere - his five years attempting to farm in the Bahamas, his wide reading, his caring approach as a businessman, and his desire to improve the lot of the working classes.
But there are two key flaws that risk undermining the points he wants to make.
Firstly, the book is lacking in hard evidence. It's a short book covering a long career, which doesn't help, but there's a real lack of primary sources. At times, it feels like a polemic rather than a biography.
That leads onto the second flaw, which is Reid's tendency to overegg the pudding. He writes, for example:
Does Reid seriously think that Chamberlain's work on matters such as sewage pipes, housebuilding and pensions is as important as his attempts to stop the bloodiest war in human history? Reid also tries to frame Chamberlain's efforts as the most important work in laying the foundations for the post-WW2 welfare state; ignoring, in his haste to heap praise on Chamberlain, the work done by the pre-WW1 Liberal governments that Chamberlain was merely building on.
Reid also claims in his concluding remarks that, had it not been for the Second World War, Chamberlain would be viewed as the twentieth century's second most successful peacetime PM (after Attlee). He makes this claim despite, to the best of my recollection, not making any mention whatsoever of Chamberlain's work on domestic policy after becoming PM. It is a ludicrous claim because foreign affairs was so dominant in Chamberlain's time as PM - and seems to be entirely based on Chamberlain's pre-PM Cabinet roles.
The sections on appeasement and Chamberlain's premiership are fairly standard, with Reid for the most part reiterating the argument made by others before him that Chamberlain's efforts at rearmament were vital and that there was little real alternative to appeasement. But, combined with the pre-PM analysis, it does make for an interesting argument and an interesting perspective that does add something fresh.
One final issue - the editing is sloppy. Two examples:
1. Incorrect dates being given for the premierships of Baldwin/Macdonald (confusing enough without unnecessarily adding to it)
2. We are told that in May 1940 the Churchill-led War Cabinet (with the other members being Chamberlain, Halifax, Attlee and Greenwood) was considering whether to negotiate with Hitler. When discussion on it was adjourned, we are told that Churchill, opposing the idea, would have lost a vote. But in a footnote on the same page, Reid writes that Attlee and Greenwood were on Churchill's side throughout negotiations - in which case, how could Churchill have lost a vote?
Reid spends most of the book on Chamberlain's pre-premiership life, and makes the argument that his social reforms in local politics and then as Health Secretary and Chancellor must form part of a rounded perspective on him. For the most part, he makes the argument well and brings to light a number of themes that I haven't seen covered elsewhere - his five years attempting to farm in the Bahamas, his wide reading, his caring approach as a businessman, and his desire to improve the lot of the working classes.
But there are two key flaws that risk undermining the points he wants to make.
Firstly, the book is lacking in hard evidence. It's a short book covering a long career, which doesn't help, but there's a real lack of primary sources. At times, it feels like a polemic rather than a biography.
That leads onto the second flaw, which is Reid's tendency to overegg the pudding. He writes, for example:
An assessment of Neville Chamberlain must rest on his several stints at the Ministry of Health as much as on any other part of his career.
Does Reid seriously think that Chamberlain's work on matters such as sewage pipes, housebuilding and pensions is as important as his attempts to stop the bloodiest war in human history? Reid also tries to frame Chamberlain's efforts as the most important work in laying the foundations for the post-WW2 welfare state; ignoring, in his haste to heap praise on Chamberlain, the work done by the pre-WW1 Liberal governments that Chamberlain was merely building on.
Reid also claims in his concluding remarks that, had it not been for the Second World War, Chamberlain would be viewed as the twentieth century's second most successful peacetime PM (after Attlee). He makes this claim despite, to the best of my recollection, not making any mention whatsoever of Chamberlain's work on domestic policy after becoming PM. It is a ludicrous claim because foreign affairs was so dominant in Chamberlain's time as PM - and seems to be entirely based on Chamberlain's pre-PM Cabinet roles.
The sections on appeasement and Chamberlain's premiership are fairly standard, with Reid for the most part reiterating the argument made by others before him that Chamberlain's efforts at rearmament were vital and that there was little real alternative to appeasement. But, combined with the pre-PM analysis, it does make for an interesting argument and an interesting perspective that does add something fresh.
One final issue - the editing is sloppy. Two examples:
1. Incorrect dates being given for the premierships of Baldwin/Macdonald (confusing enough without unnecessarily adding to it)
2. We are told that in May 1940 the Churchill-led War Cabinet (with the other members being Chamberlain, Halifax, Attlee and Greenwood) was considering whether to negotiate with Hitler. When discussion on it was adjourned, we are told that Churchill, opposing the idea, would have lost a vote. But in a footnote on the same page, Reid writes that Attlee and Greenwood were on Churchill's side throughout negotiations - in which case, how could Churchill have lost a vote?
August 15, 2023
There have been several recent attempts to rescue Chamberlain's reputation and this is one of them. We learn that he was extremely well-read, radical and adventurous. The author describes him in his youth, working on the father's ill-conceived sisal enterprise in the Bahamas as 'a bronzed hunk'. I cannot think of anything less relevant when assessing a politician's reputation.
It is true, I think, that he was a decent, well-intentioned man, and it is certainly true that he was not responsible for Britain's failure to re-arm in the thirties. It is also true that British foreign and military policy in the thirties had been naïve and ineffectual long before Chamberlain became Prime Minister in 1937 – witness the immense efforts put into the 1935 naval treaties, especially that with Germany, which were impossible to police and (certainly in Germany's case) promptly broken.
If one describes Chamberlain as an appeaser, this is not to describe him as one of those (often pro-Nazi) who opposed war with Germany at any cost. When Churchill became Prime Minister, Chamberlain served the Government faithfully, unlike Halifax who connived at various plans to make peace with Germany in secret.
However, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that Chamberlain's weakness in his dealings with Hitler helped to make war inevitable.
My problem with this book is that it is so keen to rehabilitate Chamberlain's reputation, that it fails to fully acknowledge that, for all his decency, his premiership was a catastrophe.
It is true, I think, that he was a decent, well-intentioned man, and it is certainly true that he was not responsible for Britain's failure to re-arm in the thirties. It is also true that British foreign and military policy in the thirties had been naïve and ineffectual long before Chamberlain became Prime Minister in 1937 – witness the immense efforts put into the 1935 naval treaties, especially that with Germany, which were impossible to police and (certainly in Germany's case) promptly broken.
If one describes Chamberlain as an appeaser, this is not to describe him as one of those (often pro-Nazi) who opposed war with Germany at any cost. When Churchill became Prime Minister, Chamberlain served the Government faithfully, unlike Halifax who connived at various plans to make peace with Germany in secret.
However, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that Chamberlain's weakness in his dealings with Hitler helped to make war inevitable.
My problem with this book is that it is so keen to rehabilitate Chamberlain's reputation, that it fails to fully acknowledge that, for all his decency, his premiership was a catastrophe.
June 9, 2022
Interesting reassessment of Chamberlain - in total rather than just his intersection with appeasement. I learned quite a bit about Chamberlain, including:
1. He was a not a likable person - ever - but became even more so as he aged. He defined the word “prig.”
2. Although unlikable, he was a passionate advocate for advancing the lives of the poor and working class. He got in to politics in order to better the lives of the poor and did great work in this regard.
3. Although a Conservative in an era of union demonizing, as a business man he encouraged unions among his employees and happy workforce throughout his career.
4. He lived in the Bahamas for 5 years where he built - from scratch and with his own (and many other) hands a farm. This was unseccessful and it scarred him.
5. Throughout his years of appeasement, he was simultaneously building up Britain’s armaments. He single-handedly pushed through increases larger than his ministers wanted - and at one point more than even Churchill wanted.
1. He was a not a likable person - ever - but became even more so as he aged. He defined the word “prig.”
2. Although unlikable, he was a passionate advocate for advancing the lives of the poor and working class. He got in to politics in order to better the lives of the poor and did great work in this regard.
3. Although a Conservative in an era of union demonizing, as a business man he encouraged unions among his employees and happy workforce throughout his career.
4. He lived in the Bahamas for 5 years where he built - from scratch and with his own (and many other) hands a farm. This was unseccessful and it scarred him.
5. Throughout his years of appeasement, he was simultaneously building up Britain’s armaments. He single-handedly pushed through increases larger than his ministers wanted - and at one point more than even Churchill wanted.
August 18, 2023
This book depicts Neville Chamberlain as a rounded and profoundly conscientious politician. Chamberlain is notorious as the appeaser who failed to face down Hitler, but this book she’s that there was clearly much more to his character than that chapter of his life. This book shows Chamberlain had distinguished career as a city politician before entering national politics, doing much to improve the lives of the working class. Even in the most notorious part of his life he was motivated by a desire to avoid the repetition of the horrors of war, an aim which would in reality have been shared by most Britons.
May 29, 2022
Chamberlain was a snob, an arrogant and egotistical narcissist his character seems like that of an asshole throughout the whole book but this book is not about judging his character it's about his legacy and after reading this I get a sense that he talked of peace while simultaneously preparing for war, the political climate in Britain was not fertile enough to go to war against Germany before or after Munich so Neville did what he could he spent loads of money on RAF and the British navy trying to arm them as fast as he could. He was a stupid idiot who believed that Hitler was a man whom he could do business with but when the war started and Halifax(British foreign secretary) wanted to go for peace with Germany chamberlain backed Churchill and served as his number 2. Overall this was a good book which is worth reading.
Ps- "Things don't just happen to because prime ministers are keen on it, Neville chamberlain was very keen on peace" i couldn't resist ;)
Ps- "Things don't just happen to because prime ministers are keen on it, Neville chamberlain was very keen on peace" i couldn't resist ;)
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews