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
TG 1905: U.S. Readies To Attack Iran; Question Remains: Why?

George Szamuely and Peter Lavelle discuss the apparent preparations the United States is making to launch attacks on Iran, and try to answer the baffling question: Why?

01:53:50
Live Chat
Monday Night At The Movies: "Tout Va Bien" (1972)

Join Gagglers for the screening of the runner-up in The Gaggle's "France and the spirit of 1968" poll: Jean-Luc Godard's "Tout Va Bien"!
The screening starts at 3 p.m. ET sharp.
Share all of your thoughts, comments and criticisms on the Live Chat.

01:35:39
The Gaggle Music Club: Darius Milhaud's "La Création Du Monde"

This week's selection for The Gaggle Music Club is Darius Milhaud’s "La création du monde." Composed in 1923, the ballet in one act, is based on African creation myths, and is a pivotal work of early 20th-century music. It synthesizes African myth, jazz idioms and classical form.

Darius Milhaud (1892–1974) was born in Aix-en-Provence, France, into a Provençal Jewish family. He studied at the Paris Conservatoire, where he came under the influence of Charles-Marie Widor, Vincent d’Indy and Paul Dukas, but soon forged his own style, emphasizing polytonality (simultaneous use of multiple keys) and rhythmic energy.

Milhaud was a central figure in the composer collective Les Six, along with Francis Poulenc, Arthur Honegger, Georges Auric, Louis Durey, and Germaine Tailleferre. Les Six were not bound by a formal manifesto. They did not compose in the same style or even collaborate extensively. They objected to what they deemed to be Wagner’s heaviness and Debussy and Ravel’s dreamy impressionism....

00:17:03
Monday Night At The Movies

Please choose which one of the following 8 movies you would like to have screened next Monday, June 23.

The theme is "Peacetime Army Life."

Please continue to vote after June 9, so that we can determine the runner-up. The runner-up will be screened on June 30.

Boris Ivanov
·
Following
Studied History & Literature at Russian State University for the HumanitiesJun 8
How accurate is the claim that Vladimir Putin offered to negotiate a peace deal between President Trump and Elon Musk?

That’s not true. Former president Medvedev offered to do that, in exchange for shares of Starlink. That was, of course, trolling. These days, Medvedev is primarily known as an online troll, although he is also Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of Russia. We don’t take most of his musings seriously.

World War Now:
🇺🇸 US President Donald Trump could fire Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard over a ( allegedly ) false report on Iran's nuclear program.

According to CBS, CIA Director John Ratcliffe met with Trump at the White House and presented him with evidence that Iran is supposedly weeks away from having a nuclear bomb.

@CIG_telegram

🇺🇸🇮🇷Today, reports began circulating on social media claiming that the United States is considering the use of tactical nuclear weapons against heavily fortified Iranian targets. These claims were allegedly attributed to coverage by Fox News.

However, Fox has clarified that the nuclear speculation did not originate with them but instead stemmed primarily from the British press.

These reports come amid growing concerns that U.S. conventional bunker-buster bombs may be insufficient to destroy Iran’s heavily protected Fordow nuclear facility—adding to the gravity of the situation.

⚡️🇮🇱🇮🇷 Iranian air defenses ...

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