Книжка про то, как Сталин всех переиграл в четырёхмерные шахматы. Не читал, но осуждаю.
Рецензия The Times:
"McMeekin doesn’t believe that the victory was actually worth it. Never mind liberated France or the ending of the Jewish genocide, he sees it as finishing up with Stalin in charge of half of Europe and Stalin’s ally Mao poised to win in China, also as a result of the Soviet dictator’s clever policy and western gullibility. It was all a terrible mistake. That is indeed provocative, but strangely none of it is new. The isolationist strand of the American right from America First through McCarthyites to Pat Buchanan has always believed this version of the Second World War. Since the late 1930s their publications and their partisans have argued that this war against the Nazis was the wrong war, fought in effect to help atheist communism, and prosecuted by a president who was both unscrupulous and naive. When he wasn’t being just a dupe of the communists. And at every stage they have lost this argument. McMeekin has just reopened it." https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/stalins-war-by-sean-mcmeekin-review-3vtq5ndz6
Рецензия известного историка Маргарет Макмиллан в Financial Times:
"McMeekin wants to do more than just right the record and dispel popular misconceptions. He is also a crusading prosecutor intent on building a case to convict the guilty. Churchill for one: he might have been able to stop or at least limit the war by coming to terms with Hitler in 1940. The British could have kept their empire and western Europe remain free while Germany and the Soviet Union slugged it out in the east. Given Hitler’s record of broken promises, perhaps Churchill was wise not to trust him. Roosevelt, another culprit, prolonged the war in Europe when his initial backing in 1944 for the Morgenthau Plan to dismember and deindustrialise Germany gave the Germans little choice but to fight on. Yet would the Germans, and more importantly Hitler, really have surrendered but for that? When we look at the past we must always remind ourselves of what were the real choices before decision makers. McMeekin, in his eagerness to persuade the jury, relies too much on counterfactuals." https://www.ft.com/content/e42fdee5-afa9-4c9f-a2fb-c808a4b6a354
Рецензия Нины Хрущевой:
"If you want to believe that Stalin – who neither anticipated Hitler’s abrogation of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact in June 1941, nor initially believed reports that the Nazis had crossed the Soviet frontier – was practically omniscient, this is the book for you. But it cannot change the truth – including the widely agreed conclusion that Stalin’s USSR (like Putin’s Russia) have influenced the world mostly through tactics and opportunism, not well-laid strategic plans." https://www.project-syndicate.org/onpoint/stalin-putin-russia-relations-book-review-by-nina-l-khrushcheva-2021-05
Но собранные факты сами по себе могут быть интересными.
>> through tactics and opportunism, not well-laid strategic plans."
Хорошо ею сказано. Многоходовочек не бывает. Кремль ведет себе как мастеровой, а не инженер. Сперва делает, только потом думает и исправляет по ходу дела возводимую конструкцию.
>> Но собранные факты сами по себе могут быть интересными
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2022-12-29 12:48 am (UTC)Рецензия The Times:
"McMeekin doesn’t believe that the victory was actually worth it. Never mind liberated France or the ending of the Jewish genocide, he sees it as finishing up with Stalin in charge of half of Europe and Stalin’s ally Mao poised to win in China, also as a result of the Soviet dictator’s clever policy and western gullibility. It was all a terrible mistake.
That is indeed provocative, but strangely none of it is new. The isolationist strand of the American right from America First through McCarthyites to Pat Buchanan has always believed this version of the Second World War. Since the late 1930s their publications and their partisans have argued that this war against the Nazis was the wrong war, fought in effect to help atheist communism, and prosecuted by a president who was both unscrupulous and naive. When he wasn’t being just a dupe of the communists. And at every stage they have lost this argument. McMeekin has just reopened it."
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/stalins-war-by-sean-mcmeekin-review-3vtq5ndz6
Рецензия известного историка Маргарет Макмиллан в Financial Times:
"McMeekin wants to do more than just right the record and dispel popular misconceptions. He is also a crusading prosecutor intent on building a case to convict the guilty. Churchill for one: he might have been able to stop or at least limit the war by coming to terms with Hitler in 1940. The British could have kept their empire and western Europe remain free while Germany and the Soviet Union slugged it out in the east. Given Hitler’s record of broken promises, perhaps Churchill was wise not to trust him. Roosevelt, another culprit, prolonged the war in Europe when his initial backing in 1944 for the Morgenthau Plan to dismember and deindustrialise Germany gave the Germans little choice but to fight on. Yet would the Germans, and more importantly Hitler, really have surrendered but for that?
When we look at the past we must always remind ourselves of what were the real choices before decision makers. McMeekin, in his eagerness to persuade the jury, relies too much on counterfactuals."
https://www.ft.com/content/e42fdee5-afa9-4c9f-a2fb-c808a4b6a354
Рецензия Нины Хрущевой:
"If you want to believe that Stalin – who neither anticipated Hitler’s abrogation of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact in June 1941, nor initially believed reports that the Nazis had crossed the Soviet frontier – was practically omniscient, this is the book for you. But it cannot change the truth – including the widely agreed conclusion that Stalin’s USSR (like Putin’s Russia) have influenced the world mostly through tactics and opportunism, not well-laid strategic plans."
https://www.project-syndicate.org/onpoint/stalin-putin-russia-relations-book-review-by-nina-l-khrushcheva-2021-05
Но собранные факты сами по себе могут быть интересными.
no subject
Date: 2022-12-29 03:21 am (UTC)Хорошо ею сказано. Многоходовочек не бывает. Кремль ведет себе как мастеровой, а не инженер. Сперва делает, только потом думает и исправляет по ходу дела возводимую конструкцию.
>> Но собранные факты сами по себе могут быть интересными
На это и надежда.