What do you think?
Rate this book
Great Wars And Great Leaders: A Libertarian Rebuttal
The great historian of classical liberalism strips away the veneer of exalted leaders and beloved wars. Professor Ralph Raico shows them to be wolves in sheep's clothing and their wars as attacks on human liberty and human rights.In the backdrop of this blistering and deeply insightful and scholarly history is the whitewashing of "great leaders" like Woodrow Wilson, Winston Churchill, FDR, Truman, Stalin, Trotsky, and other collectivists. They are highly regarded because they were on the "right side" of the rise of the state. But do they deserve adulation? Raico says these great leaders were main agents in the decline of civilization in the 20th century, all of them anti-liberals who used their power to celebrate and enhance state power.Robert Higgs writes the introduction and cheers this powerful expose as a necessary corrective."For Ralph Raico," writes Robert Higgs in the foreword, "it would be not only unseemly but foolish to quiver obsequiously in the historical presence of a Churchill, a Roosevelt, or a Truman. He knows when he has encountered a politician who lusted after power and public adulation, and he describes the man accordingly. He does not sweep under the rug the crimes committed by the most publicly revered Western political leaders. If they ordered or acceded to the commission of mass murder, he tells us, without mincing words, that they did so. The idea that the United States has invariably played the role of savior or 'good guy' in its international relations Raico recognizes as state propaganda, rather than honest history."Thus, in these pages, you will find descriptions and accounts of World War I, of the lead-up to formal U.S. belligerence in World War II, and of Churchill, Roosevelt, and Truman, among others, that bear little resemblance to what you were taught in school. Here you will encounter, perhaps for the first time, compelling evidence of how the British maneuvered U.S. leaders and tricked the American people prior to the U.S. declarations of war in 1917 and 1941. You will read about how the British undertook to starve the Germans – men, women, and children alike – not only during World War I, but for the greater part of a year after the armistice. You will be presented with descriptions of how the communists were deified and the German people demonized by historians and others who ought to have known better. You will see painted in truer shades a portrait of the epic confrontation between the great majority of Americans who wished to keep their country at peace in 1939, 1940, and 1941 and the well-placed, unscrupulous minority who sought to plunge the United States into the European maelstrom."Raico’s historical essays are not for the faint of heart or for those whose loyalty to the U.S. or British state outweighs their devotion to truth and humanity. Yet Ralph did not invent the ugly facts he recounts here, as his ample documentation attests. Indeed, many historians have known these facts, but few have been willing to step forward and defy politically popular and professionally fashionable views in the forthright, pull-no-punches way that Raico does. The historians’ principal defect for the most part has not been a failure or refusal to dig out the relevant facts, but rather a tendency to go along to get along in academia and 'respectable' society, a sphere in which individual honesty and courage generally count against a writer or teacher, whereas capitulation to trendy nonsense often brings great rewards and professional acclaim."Table of ContentsForeword by Robert HiggsIntroductionI EssaysWorld War The Turning PointRethinking ChurchillHarry S. Advancing the RevolutionMarxist Dreams and Soviet RealitiesNazifying the GermansII The Ignorance and the EvilThe Two "Testaments" of American Foreign PolicyThe Other Ward that Never EndsStarving a People into SubmissionJohn T. Flynn and the Apotheosis of Franklin RooseveltOn the Brink of Wo...
246 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2010
27 people are currently reading
393 people want to read
About the author
Ralph Raico
30 books29 followersRalph Raico was an American libertarian historian of European liberalism and a professor of history.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
March 17, 2022
2020-11-26 Just finished Wednesday.
Wow - what a book. Raico BLASTS some big, pernicious and perennial myths about some of the 20th Century's "Great" leaders as well as the two World Wars. My favorite is the chapter on Churchill and how bad he was, compared to the common belief of his "greatness." Simply incredible, the mendacity and self-promotion, vs. what people "think" they know about him and how "we" benefited.
Of particular note to me was Churchill's undermining, conscious or not, of precious values of individual liberty, especially of the British Liberal party, but also classical liberal ideas in general. I had always been a bit surprised by Mises' caustic statement about Churchill's establishment of the coercive "welfare" state in England long before Churchill lost the post-war election to the Labor Party. Raico gives chapter and verse on Churchill's massive unreliability in defending individual liberty, free trade and human thriving. But who knows these things?
More on this later, when I access my notes, and offer a good sampling of some of the evidence that Raico presents.
One note though, before I forget. Some of his references are dubious and his perspective is so radically different from mainstream, that I was really taken aback sometimes, and suspect most any but the most radical libertarian readers will be too. His offering facts and perspectives from both hard left/socialist/communist sources, as well as freedom loving sources is quite a juxtaposition!!!! This book is probably the most iconoclastic one I have ever read.
Highly recommended to reconsider which 20th century leaders and wars really shared your values and what they did for/to you.
Other "Great" Leaders nailed in this book:
Woodrow Wilson
Harry Truman
Joseph Stalin
The "Great Wars" are WWI and WWII
Prepare to have some of your "basic" understandings questioned by many inconvenient facts.
Wow - what a book. Raico BLASTS some big, pernicious and perennial myths about some of the 20th Century's "Great" leaders as well as the two World Wars. My favorite is the chapter on Churchill and how bad he was, compared to the common belief of his "greatness." Simply incredible, the mendacity and self-promotion, vs. what people "think" they know about him and how "we" benefited.
Of particular note to me was Churchill's undermining, conscious or not, of precious values of individual liberty, especially of the British Liberal party, but also classical liberal ideas in general. I had always been a bit surprised by Mises' caustic statement about Churchill's establishment of the coercive "welfare" state in England long before Churchill lost the post-war election to the Labor Party. Raico gives chapter and verse on Churchill's massive unreliability in defending individual liberty, free trade and human thriving. But who knows these things?
More on this later, when I access my notes, and offer a good sampling of some of the evidence that Raico presents.
One note though, before I forget. Some of his references are dubious and his perspective is so radically different from mainstream, that I was really taken aback sometimes, and suspect most any but the most radical libertarian readers will be too. His offering facts and perspectives from both hard left/socialist/communist sources, as well as freedom loving sources is quite a juxtaposition!!!! This book is probably the most iconoclastic one I have ever read.
Highly recommended to reconsider which 20th century leaders and wars really shared your values and what they did for/to you.
Other "Great" Leaders nailed in this book:
Woodrow Wilson
Harry Truman
Joseph Stalin
The "Great Wars" are WWI and WWII
Prepare to have some of your "basic" understandings questioned by many inconvenient facts.
August 1, 2023
Robert Raico’s “Great Wars & Great Leaders: A Libertarian Rebuttal” contains 12 chapters; five chapters with essays analyzing 20th century events and the people responsible for them, and seven chapters with reviews of books dealing with these events and people. Most of the political leaders that this book deals with have been highly regarded by historians who overstate or invent their strengths and understate or ignore their weaknesses. Dr. Raico shows why these leaders – particularly Woodrow Wilson, Winston Churchill, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and Harry Truman - have been vastly overrated. He details how their efforts to avoid war were virtually non-existent and their war tactics were sometimes inhumane.
There is criticism of FDR throughout the book, but the most biting assessment is included in Chapter 10, Dr. Raico’s laudatory review of “The Roosevelt Myth” written by John T. Flynn in 1948. Among other issues, Dr. Raico praises Mr. Flynn for pointing out the impotence of successive New Deal programs, the ways that FDR deceived the American people before Pearl Harbor, and the treatment of Stalin as a friend and fellow progressive – which paved the way for the Cold War.
Defenders of the United States’ decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki have claimed that if the United States had not dropped the bombs, that a full-scale invasion of the Japanese home islands would have been required resulting in the loss of a half-million American lives. Dr. Raico refutes this defense by pointing out that American military worst-case scenario projections were that 46,000 Americans would have died if the United States had invaded Japan – a substantially smaller number than the approximately 200,00 deaths that resulted from the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Raico also points out that Eisenhower and MacArthur condemned the bombings as barbaric and unnecessary, and he concludes that Truman was a war criminal.
It is noteworthy that three American politicians – William Jennings Bryan, Herbert Hoover, and Robert Taft - somewhat surprisingly emerge from this book with their reputations enhanced. In Chapter 9, “Starving a People into Submission,” Raico praises C. Paul Vincent’s “The Politics of Hunger: The Allied Blockade of Germany, 1915-1919, which exposed the World War I blockade – primarily imposed by Winston Churchill and the British Navy – as a “state atrocity.” The British blockade should have only blocked shipments of weapons and food to German soldiers but was extended to block shipments of food to civilians. The food blockade was not terminated at the Armistice (11/11/1918) but continued to the signing of the Treaty of Versailles (6/28/19) and resulted in the starvation deaths of at least 763,000 persons. The blockade was ignored by Woodrow Wilson, who claimed to be neutral when it was started. William Jennings Bryan was the Secretary of State for Wilson who criticized Wilson for overlooking the United Kingdom’s irregularities which were provoking Germany’s submarine retaliation. Bryan resigned in 1915. Herbert Hoover made similar criticisms of Churchill’s misguided policies of trying to starve non-Allied civilians in both world wars. In 1939, he set up a Commission for Polish Relief after following the German and Soviet occupation of Poland. The Commission provided relief to Nazi occupied territories of Poland, until May 1940, when Winston Churchill replaced Chamberlain as the UK Prime Minister, and his policy made it much more difficult to ship food to continental Europe.
Robert Taft is praised for opposing the Truman Doctrine (the principle that the US should give support to countries or peoples threatened by Soviet forces or Communist insurrection), which was largely supported by the internationalist wing of the Republican Party. He is also praised for condemning the Nuremburg War Crime Trials (described by Raico as a travesty of justice).
The book’s analyses are strengthened by 522 footnotes, mostly in the essay chapters, because Dr. Raico annotates the footnotes with insights that clarify and expand upon points made in his essays.
There is criticism of FDR throughout the book, but the most biting assessment is included in Chapter 10, Dr. Raico’s laudatory review of “The Roosevelt Myth” written by John T. Flynn in 1948. Among other issues, Dr. Raico praises Mr. Flynn for pointing out the impotence of successive New Deal programs, the ways that FDR deceived the American people before Pearl Harbor, and the treatment of Stalin as a friend and fellow progressive – which paved the way for the Cold War.
Defenders of the United States’ decision to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki have claimed that if the United States had not dropped the bombs, that a full-scale invasion of the Japanese home islands would have been required resulting in the loss of a half-million American lives. Dr. Raico refutes this defense by pointing out that American military worst-case scenario projections were that 46,000 Americans would have died if the United States had invaded Japan – a substantially smaller number than the approximately 200,00 deaths that resulted from the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Raico also points out that Eisenhower and MacArthur condemned the bombings as barbaric and unnecessary, and he concludes that Truman was a war criminal.
It is noteworthy that three American politicians – William Jennings Bryan, Herbert Hoover, and Robert Taft - somewhat surprisingly emerge from this book with their reputations enhanced. In Chapter 9, “Starving a People into Submission,” Raico praises C. Paul Vincent’s “The Politics of Hunger: The Allied Blockade of Germany, 1915-1919, which exposed the World War I blockade – primarily imposed by Winston Churchill and the British Navy – as a “state atrocity.” The British blockade should have only blocked shipments of weapons and food to German soldiers but was extended to block shipments of food to civilians. The food blockade was not terminated at the Armistice (11/11/1918) but continued to the signing of the Treaty of Versailles (6/28/19) and resulted in the starvation deaths of at least 763,000 persons. The blockade was ignored by Woodrow Wilson, who claimed to be neutral when it was started. William Jennings Bryan was the Secretary of State for Wilson who criticized Wilson for overlooking the United Kingdom’s irregularities which were provoking Germany’s submarine retaliation. Bryan resigned in 1915. Herbert Hoover made similar criticisms of Churchill’s misguided policies of trying to starve non-Allied civilians in both world wars. In 1939, he set up a Commission for Polish Relief after following the German and Soviet occupation of Poland. The Commission provided relief to Nazi occupied territories of Poland, until May 1940, when Winston Churchill replaced Chamberlain as the UK Prime Minister, and his policy made it much more difficult to ship food to continental Europe.
Robert Taft is praised for opposing the Truman Doctrine (the principle that the US should give support to countries or peoples threatened by Soviet forces or Communist insurrection), which was largely supported by the internationalist wing of the Republican Party. He is also praised for condemning the Nuremburg War Crime Trials (described by Raico as a travesty of justice).
The book’s analyses are strengthened by 522 footnotes, mostly in the essay chapters, because Dr. Raico annotates the footnotes with insights that clarify and expand upon points made in his essays.
November 21, 2011
Very interesting. I expected a lot of this already, but the essay on Truman was particularly eye-opening for me. Clearly written, easy reading for serious historical essays.
May 14, 2022
2022-05-14: The volume starts well. Very well.
September 16, 2012
Great little read on Wilson, Churchill, Truman, and Trotsky. It's sad to see how the U.S. has drifted so far in the 20th and 21st Century from it's distinctly libertarian and capitalistic beginning. What's even more appalling is the complicit agreement the Christian religious leaders have lent to the cause of Socialism, Fascism, Communism and militarism in the service of some Utopia which, of course, is not possible.
March 3, 2019
Really liked his critique of Wilson and Truman, the topic on Churchill was very eye-opening but I need to read up more about this to state my opinion on the ol' bulldog. Did not like the book reviews at the end, wish the entire book was just a collection of essays
April 24, 2023
Absolutely eye opening. So much crucial history that’s never talked about. Very well researched and sourced.
July 27, 2017
The author is a professional historian that actually enters onto what the mainstream current labels conspiracy and revisionist (not just borderline) view of history. And this makes him very valuable because many conspiracy theorists even if they reveal true facts are not historians and do not have the historian's skill in interpreting facts and telling of the story.
For me much of the thesis here is not new, but the style is refreshing and well documented. I will be in debt to Raico for setting me straight on the atomic bombing of Japan. My initial position was that it was a war crime; but after reading A world at arms (the definitive mainstream view on WW2) my conviction was poisoned with statistical justification and the moral condemnation of the crime committed got lost. But this book reminded me of the real nature of the bombing. Regarding ww2, I am surprised to find out that Churchil's history of WW2 is regarded by mainstream historians as being at most self-justification... and is used extensively as WW2 source material... I find this to be very unprofessional of historians and Raico helped me understand the source of the current view on WW2.
For me much of the thesis here is not new, but the style is refreshing and well documented. I will be in debt to Raico for setting me straight on the atomic bombing of Japan. My initial position was that it was a war crime; but after reading A world at arms (the definitive mainstream view on WW2) my conviction was poisoned with statistical justification and the moral condemnation of the crime committed got lost. But this book reminded me of the real nature of the bombing. Regarding ww2, I am surprised to find out that Churchil's history of WW2 is regarded by mainstream historians as being at most self-justification... and is used extensively as WW2 source material... I find this to be very unprofessional of historians and Raico helped me understand the source of the current view on WW2.
July 19, 2021
The first half of this book is an exceptional tear down of the way most schools teach students about the heroism of people like Churchill, Truman, and Wilson. I did not expect the book review sections towards the end of the book. I firmly believe all people with an interest in history should reconsider any hero worship given to men like Truman and Churchill. The violence brought about by those men is disgusting. All in all a great book and a good read for libertarians and non-interventionists alike.
October 22, 2016
This books is a series of 12 (often expanded) essays by historian and professor Dr. Ralph Raico concerning, as the title suggests, the "Great Wars" (World War 1 and World War 2) and their "Great Leaders" (the imperialist gang of FDR, Woodrow Wilson, Winston Churchill, and Harry S. Truman).
Throughout the book, Raico illustrates the (avoidable) problems that got us in to these wars (that seem to have been forgotten by history and overlooked by modern historians with their love of these blood thirsty leaders and the policy they set forth).
It is striking how history seems to repeat itself continually. Reading through this book, it is very easy to see parallels drawn between the affects of foreign policy (and interventionist leaders) then and what we deal with now as an affect of the War on Terror (and certainly what is coming from that).
Raico is not one to make things up, and lists countless citations and footnotes at the end of every chapter (some of these going on for 30 pages). His attention to detail is much appreciated. The content is fantastic in addressing these topics thoroughly and illustrating how these wars were completely avoidable, these men are no heroes of history, and much of what we've been told or lead to believe about all of this is simply false.
Throughout the book, Raico talks of "isolationism", much like others from the previously named "Old Right", in place of the more fitting (which he admits to at times in the book) term "non-intervention". I understand that throughout the early 20th century (and still today), the term "isolationism" or "isolationist" is used to criticize and mislabel one who supports non-interventionism. Still, it is puzzling to me why Raico and similar authors use this term despite knowing better today.
Overall, the content in this book is fantastic, and the citations numerous (some chapters contain 30 pages of citations and footnotes on the citations, as Raico gives page numbers and even quotations). My only complaint is that this is a series of essays and book reviews, and not a true book in itself. I personally loathe this style of book writing (though it is a double-edged sword, as much like with Tom DiLorenzo's fantastic book Organized Crime: The Unvarnished Truth About Government , it gets the information out there quickly and saves the author a good deal of time, but, in my opinion at least, it makes the book far less enjoyable).
I scratch my head and wonder why it is that there are book reviews mixed in with expanded articles that Raico has written. The content is always great, but such formatting makes it harder on the reader to follow through with the author at times, I think.
The content of the book is easily 5 stars, but I had to sadly knock a star off because of the way the book was formatted, by including book reviews in with expansive essays. This book is a very insightful and worthwhile read for anyone interested in history or US foreign policy, but it could have really been golden if Raico were to have sit down and write it cover to cover as a traditional book.
Raico has given numerous lectures on the history of US foreign policy, and these can be found easily on YouTube if one is interested. Additionally, Raico at times discusses the "Old Right", and one may be inclined to believe that he is talking about Republicans or the collective pre-1950's Right-Wing (which is far from the case), so I would suggest reading Murray Rothbard's Betrayal of the American Right if you're not familiar with this small circle of Libertarians and Classical Liberals.
If you're a fan of this book, I'd suggest listening to the Dangerous History Podcast, found here: http://profcj.org/
Throughout the book, Raico illustrates the (avoidable) problems that got us in to these wars (that seem to have been forgotten by history and overlooked by modern historians with their love of these blood thirsty leaders and the policy they set forth).
It is striking how history seems to repeat itself continually. Reading through this book, it is very easy to see parallels drawn between the affects of foreign policy (and interventionist leaders) then and what we deal with now as an affect of the War on Terror (and certainly what is coming from that).
Raico is not one to make things up, and lists countless citations and footnotes at the end of every chapter (some of these going on for 30 pages). His attention to detail is much appreciated. The content is fantastic in addressing these topics thoroughly and illustrating how these wars were completely avoidable, these men are no heroes of history, and much of what we've been told or lead to believe about all of this is simply false.
Throughout the book, Raico talks of "isolationism", much like others from the previously named "Old Right", in place of the more fitting (which he admits to at times in the book) term "non-intervention". I understand that throughout the early 20th century (and still today), the term "isolationism" or "isolationist" is used to criticize and mislabel one who supports non-interventionism. Still, it is puzzling to me why Raico and similar authors use this term despite knowing better today.
Overall, the content in this book is fantastic, and the citations numerous (some chapters contain 30 pages of citations and footnotes on the citations, as Raico gives page numbers and even quotations). My only complaint is that this is a series of essays and book reviews, and not a true book in itself. I personally loathe this style of book writing (though it is a double-edged sword, as much like with Tom DiLorenzo's fantastic book Organized Crime: The Unvarnished Truth About Government , it gets the information out there quickly and saves the author a good deal of time, but, in my opinion at least, it makes the book far less enjoyable).
I scratch my head and wonder why it is that there are book reviews mixed in with expanded articles that Raico has written. The content is always great, but such formatting makes it harder on the reader to follow through with the author at times, I think.
The content of the book is easily 5 stars, but I had to sadly knock a star off because of the way the book was formatted, by including book reviews in with expansive essays. This book is a very insightful and worthwhile read for anyone interested in history or US foreign policy, but it could have really been golden if Raico were to have sit down and write it cover to cover as a traditional book.
Raico has given numerous lectures on the history of US foreign policy, and these can be found easily on YouTube if one is interested. Additionally, Raico at times discusses the "Old Right", and one may be inclined to believe that he is talking about Republicans or the collective pre-1950's Right-Wing (which is far from the case), so I would suggest reading Murray Rothbard's Betrayal of the American Right if you're not familiar with this small circle of Libertarians and Classical Liberals.
If you're a fan of this book, I'd suggest listening to the Dangerous History Podcast, found here: http://profcj.org/
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews