Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Peter Mott's avatar

I read tis a fair while ago because I had enjoyed greatly his "The Wages of Destruction" about how Nazi Germany funded it's war. America, says Tooze, was still a local conservative state when asked to take on the role of global hegemon, and lacked the institutions to do so. Well maybe, but it is not enough to unify the book and the result is just a morass of detail, a sort of Downton Abbey of a book meandering on forever.

Expand full comment
Anton Cebalo's avatar

This democratic framing seems to me bit of a projection because these were times of clear imperium, despite any gestures toward democracy. It's like saying the spirit of Wilsonianism was the main thrust of the war, despite being coherently constructed in its final days. The British empire reached its territorial height after WWI despite being weakened, and the war was essentially a conflict over who would lead the world-system more so than an ideological one. Germany feared a two-front war, not because it was surrounded by democracies, but because it felt was being entrapped within this imperial system and wanted to dominate. But I haven't read the book, so would love to read it sometime.

Expand full comment
5 more comments...

No posts