TheGaggle
Politics • Culture • News
Our community is made up of those who value the freedom of speech, the right to debate and the promise of open, honest conversations.

We don't agree on everything but we never silence our followers and value every opinion on our channel.
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
December 07, 2024
The Gaggle Book Club

After having given the matter some thought, we are finally launching The Gaggle Book Club. Every week, we will recommend a book for Gagglers to read and—most important—we will upload a pdf version of it.

One need hardly add that we do not vouch for the reliability or accuracy of any book we recommend. Still less, do we necessarily agree with a recommended book's central arguments. However, any book we recommend will be one of undoubted interest and intellectual importance.

To kick off The Gaggle Book Club, we recommend E.H. Carr’s "The Twenty Years’ Crisis, 1919–1939: An Introduction to the Study of International Relations." Published in 1939, Carr’s work is a pithy, often sarcastic, critique of the interwar period’s idealistic approach to international diplomacy.

Carr was the founder of the modern “realist” school within the theory of international relations. He anticipated by several decades many of John Mearsheimer’s insights. Carr detested what he labeled “utopian” or “idealist” approaches to international relations. These approaches, fervently promoted by the liberals of that era, found expression in post-World War I projects such as the League of Nations or the 1928 Kellogg-Briand Pact to outlaw war.

Carr argued that idealism, with its emphasis on morality, international law and mutual cooperation among states, ignored the realities of power politics.
He took particular issue with the notion that collective security agreements or disarmament treaties could prevent war. International politics, according to him, was a competitive and anarchic blood-sport. He would have ridiculed any suggestion that there existed something called a “rules-based international order,” and would have taken delight in pointing out the dishonesty and hypocrisy of policymakers who would make such a suggestion.

Carr contrasted idealism with “realism,” an approach to international relations that emphasizes power and self-interest as the forces that drive the behavior of states. As he saw it, morality plays only a very minor role in how states comport themselves toward one another.

Written on the eve of World War II, Carr’s book takes many well-deserved potshots at the League of Nations. However, the League of Nations was low-hanging fruit. Most interesting was Carr’s defense of the policy of appeasement that successive British governments, particularly that of Neville Chamberlain, had pursued toward Nazi Germany in the years leading up to World War II.

Carr argued that an effective foreign policy must acknowledge the interests of all major powers, including those of revisionist states such as Nazi Germany. He believed that the Versailles Treaty had imposed unjust and unsustainable conditions on Germany, and had thus contributed to the rise of the Nazi movement. The book was published before the outbreak of World War II, and was thus written in the shadow of the 1938 Munich agreement, which had apparently successfully staved off war among the Great Powers.

During the Cold War, Carr came under frequent attack for his supposed lifelong habit of taking the side of powerful actors while dismissing the grievances of the weak and victimized. In other words, he supposedly loved winners and despised losers. For example, his mammoth history of the early years of the Soviet Union was very sympathetic to the Bolsheviks—who had prevailed over their enemies—and at the same time unconcerned about the plight of the victims of the Bolsheviks who had fallen by the wayside.

As the West became more and more obsessed with “Munich” and “appeasement,” seeing in every nationalist, anti-Western leader the traits of Hitler, and in every cautious Western politician the traits of Neville Chamberlain, Carr’s reputation went into decline.

However, "The Twenty Years’ Crisis" is today considered one of the seminal texts of realism, a dominant school in International Relations theory that focuses on power, national interest, and the inevitability of conflict.

E._H._Carr_-_The_Twenty_Years__Crisis,_1919-1939__An_Introduction_to_the_Study_of_International_Relations__-MacMillan_and_Co._Ltd._(1946).pdf
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
What else you may like…
Videos
Posts
Articles
Live Chat
Monday Night At The Movies: "The Sorrow And The Pity" (1969)

Join Gagglers for "The Sorrow and the Pity"!
The screening starts at 3 p.m. ET sharp.
Share all of your thoughts, comments and criticisms on the Live Chat.

02:06:51
December 21, 2025
TG 2032: Fierce Fight Over Israel Breaks Out At Turning Point AmFest

George Szamuely and Peter Lavelle discuss the ferocious fight on the subject of U.S. support for Israel that took place this weekend at the Turning Point USA’s annual AmericaFest conference.

01:23:26
December 21, 2025
TG 2031: E.U. Taxpayers On The Hook For Unending Ukraine Disaster

George Szamuely and Peter Lavelle discuss the aftermath and consequences of the E.U. Council meeting in Brussels that culminated in the extension of a never-to-be-paid-back €90 billion "loan" to Ukraine.

00:54:17

SANCTIONED: Col Jacques Baud Explains Being the EU's TARGET

Daniel Davis / Deep Dive

274K subscribers

Dec 22, 2025

11 hours ago

"From a geostrategic perspective, it would make sense for the EU to allow Montenegro and Albania—both of which have access to the Adriatic Sea—to join the bloc, as that would complete its Three Seas Initiative. With the two nations in, the Adriatic Sea – excluding the small portion of Neum belonging to Bosnia and Herzegovina – would effectively become 'an internal lake' for the EU and NATO. In the Baltics, Russia’s exclave of Kaliningrad is already surrounded by NATO and EU members, while the Black Sea is no longer seen as 'Russia’s lake.'

Moreover, from a purely military perspective, the EU could potentially fast-track Moldova’s accession. The landlocked nation of 2.4 million people – sandwiched between Romania and Ukraine – is of crucial importance, as its railways are a natural pathway for military logistics, especially for moving supplies from the EU into Ukraine or projecting force.

Thus, if the European Union is seriously preparing for an increasingly likely ...

19 hours ago
January 21, 2023
More Leftie Than Thou
"Jacobin" Magazine Celebrates A Strike Against Ol' Blue Eyes

Here at "The Gaggle" we have very little time for the "more Leftie than thou" school of thought--that's the approach to life according to which the only thing that matters is whether you take the right position on every issue under the sun from Abortion to Zelensky. No one in the world meets the exacting standards of this school of thought; any Leftie leader anywhere is always selling out to the bankers and the capitalists. The perfect exemplar of this is the unreadable Jacobin magazine. 

The other day I came across this article from 2021. It's a celebration of trade union power. And not simply trade union power, but the use of trade union power to secure political goals. Of course (and this is always the case with the "more Leftie than thou" crowd), this glorious, never-to-be-forgotten moment on the history of organized labor took place many years ago--in the summer of 1974 to be exact. Yes, almost half a century has gone by since that thrilling moment when the working-class movement of Australia mobilized and prepared to seize the means of production, distribution and exchange. 

Well, not quite. Organized labor went into action against...Ol' Blue Eyes, the Chairman of the Board, the Voice; yes, Frank Sinatra. Why? What had Sinatra done? Sinatra was certainly very rich, and he owned a variety of properties and businesses. But if the Australian trade union movement were, understandably, searching for the bright, incandescent spark that would finally awaken the working class from its slumber there were surely richer, greedier, more dishonest, more decadent, above all more Australian individuals it could have discovered. Australia was never short of them. Rupert Murdoch immediately springs to mind. Why Sinatra?

 

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals