In 1950; just five years after the end of World War II; Britain and America again went to war―this time to try and combat the spread of communism in East Asia following the invasion of South Korea by communist forces from the North. This book charts the course of the UK-US ‘special relationship’ from the journey to war beginning in 1947 to the fall of the Labour government in 1951. Ian McLaine casts fresh light on relations between Truman and Attlee and their officials; diplomats and advisors; including Acheson and MacArthur. He shows how Britain was persuaded to join a war it could ill afford and was forced to rearm at great cost to the economy. The decision to participate in the war caused great strain to the Labour party―provoking the Bevan-Gaitskell split which was to keep the party out of office for the next decade. McLaine’s revisionist study shows how disastrous the war was for the British―and for the Labour party in particular. It sheds important new light on UK-US relations during a key era in diplomatic and Cold War history.
#584292 in Books 2013-03-12 2013-03-12Original language:EnglishPDF # 1 8.20 x .55 x 5.50l; .85 #File Name: 1781680086304 pages
Review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. Coherent with his historical materialistic views; the author constructs ...By Ivan Mario BraunCoherent with his historical materialistic views; the author constructs a solid theory about the transition of the mode of production in the Greco-Roman (and especially the Roman) world to feudalism; whose most typical form appeared (according to Anderson) in Western Europe. Parallelling this description; the author tries to explain why feudal structures evolved in Northern and Eastern Europe; as well as the Balcans differed from their Western European model.Although concise; the book is rich in bibliography and many of the referenced studies are briefly commented by the author.0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. Full of historical information and very easy to readBy Taimur RahmanSuperb book. Full of historical information and very easy to read.31 of 37 people found the following review helpful. Rethinking ethnocentric historical materialismBy Suckwoo LeePerry Anderson is a leading editor of 'New Left Review' and well-known Marxist historian. This book is the first volume of a two part work. The second volume is 'Lineage of the Absolutist State' Those two volumes cover the whole history of pre-capitalist Western world from Greco-Roman antiquity to Absolutist monarchies. It's incredible how one research could cover that range of time. Moreover; he maintains his distinctive perspective throughout two volumes. His problem is the same one as Marx and Weber posed: the formation of capitalism. But Anderson's problem is somewhat narrower: why did the capitalism emerge in Europe rather than in more advanced China; India or Islamic world at that time? To answer the question; he traces back to Greco-Roman antiquity. His answer in the first volume is this: it's because the West was formulated through combining antiquity and feudalism. It doesn't seem distinctive at all. But he questioned in the line of Marxist tradition and his answer could have meaning only in that line. his terminology is different from traditional Marxist one. He recasts the conventional definition of antiquity and feudalism: he contends that the antiquity and the Western feudalism had idiosyncratic modes of production. For example; the slavery itself; which was the dominant mode of production in antiquity; could be common in that time. But outside Greco-Roman world; the slavery was not dominant mode of production. Moreover; the Western feudalism was formed through fusing totally different modes of production: a synthesis of Greco-Roman society and German society. So features of Western feudalism are restricted to its own context; not catholic ones. If we treat it as universal; Anderson argues; we can't explain why the capitalism merged only in the West. To prove his proposition; Anderson compares the different paths Western Europe and Eastern Europe followed. Furthermore; he redefines the relationship between superstructure and infrastructure. As Braudel maintained with his jargon; longue duree; Anderson asserts that components of superstructure; such as the state; religion; value; law; convention; also affect the mode of production.
