Currently on a Great War reading binge while preparing a lecture series on period navies and navalism. One of the works consulted is Wilson's War: How Woodrow Wilson's Great Blunder led to Hitler, Lenin, Stalin & World War II by Jim Powell.
America's involvement in WW1 is frequently fertile ground for controversy but given the provocative sub-title it was likely to be written as a anti-Wilson polemic and the book is certainly that.
What it is not is an objective or sound work of history.
Powell, a Fellow with the CATO Institute attaches virtually all of the ills of the 20th Century on the decision of President Wilson to bring the United States into Europe's Great War in April 1917. Unfortunately he does a remarkably poor job at connecting the dots since he consistently cherry-picks only the slimmest evidence connecting his central thesis and infers cause and effect that he does not bother to substantiate.
In a nut shell, Wilson's decision to declare war on Germany led to Versailles Diktat which led to the inevitable rise of Hitler and WW2. Big stretch this when he invokes Hitler experts like Alan Bullock who's Hitler: A Study in Tyranny is considered by many to be seminal on the subject. Yet Prof Bullock never considers the rise of Hitler to have been in any sense inevitable. So dumping all the blame on Wilson is disingenuous and intellectually dishonest.
Likewise he extensively quotes from Orlando Figes' A People's Tragedy: The Russian Revolution 1891-1924 and yet this work makes it very clear that the success of the Bolshevik's was never ordained and could have been derailed at any number of points.
In other words, a vast number of non-Wilsonian ducks had to line up before the events Powell lays solely on the shoulders of Woodrow Wilson could have occurred. That the author is intrinsically aware of this is shown by the fact that much of the book covers the periods after Wilson's final stoke and subsequent death in countries totally outside of the US' sphere. Admittedly, Powell does not link the German 1933 Enabling Act directly to Wilson but virtually every event before that is laid almost exclusively on the 28th President. Likewise he spends much space linking Lenin's propensity to the use of terror directly to the Wilson-enabled Bolshevik seizure of power despite Lenin's own pronouncements on the inherently violent Dictatorship of the Proletarian pre-date the War itself.
Wilson's War is sloppily written and a terrible work of history so anybody with any interest in America and the Great War might wish to look elsewhere. As an attempt at linking cause and effect the book deserves an 'epic fail' rating. It constitutes nothing less than an anti-Wilson tirade whose central argument is contradicted in many of the author's own source material.
However, if you link from here and buy it on Amazon, SubSim gets a little piece of the action. Probably the most positive comment I could make about it.
|