History does NOT repeat itself. But that does not mean that there are no parallels between the past, the present and future or that we cannot learn from the lessons of the past.
At the moment Remain pundits are busy drawing comparisons between the dark days of 1930s with the current state of British and world politics. The populists and Brexiteers dismiss such suggestions as fear mongering and claim that the dark clouds on the horizon are actually the sunny uplands.
History is not an exact science. Political axioms cannot be tested in a sterile laboratory environment that allows historians to confidently pronounce that if “x” occurs “y” will result. There is a mathematical element to the study of the past, but it is based more on probabilities than scientific certainties. For instance, if you punch your neighbour in the nose, it is probable—but not certain—that they will punch you back.
The study of history – and its application to current events– involves an understanding not only of past events but a comprehensive knowledge of human nature and how it is likely to respond to similar events in the future.
In the 1930s there was no internet or social media. Air travel was still in its infancy. Oceans were crossed by ship .Television was in the prototype stage. Space was a totally unknown frontier and although the weapons of war were frightening, they were slings and arrows compared to today’s nuclear arsenals.
But there are still parallels likely to result in similar—but not exact—results.
The 1930s was the tail end of a long period of European imperial history and a strong belief in the nation state. It came just 20 years after a disastrous Great War involving 40 million casualties. The peace that followed was judged by the loser as manifestly unjust. The world’s great economic power decided to withdraw from the world stage and crawl back into its outdated and traditional isolationism. At the same time its irresponsible economic policies created a Great Depression that spread across the globe.
Life became very complicated. Political and economic problems multiplied and had an impact on the daily lives of the butcher, baker and candlestick maker. Faced with a confusingly complex world, populations turned towards populist leaders. Solutions are simple they were told. Kill the Jews. Hang the capitalists. Then they tied their solutions to nationalism. Other groups should be killed, invaded and/or subjugated because the Aryans were a superior nation race.
Today’s world is not recovering from a Great War. It is, however, recovering from a long Cold War and a large number of Russians believe that their country was cheated by the West out of its rightful position. Chinese leaders argue that the United States is attempting to prevent it assuming the position that the world’s largest country and oldest civilisation deserves.
There has been no Great Depression. But all things are relative. Between 1945 and 2008 the world saw the biggest sustained economic growth in history. World Trade grew by a factor of 30. Three successive generations were each significantly better off than their parents and grandparents. That stopped in 2008 with the global sub-prime mortgage scandal. A depression was avoided by a coordinated international response, but growth has stalled and the current generation of young people is struggling and angry.
The world is again turning to populist politicians offering simple sound bite solutions to complex problems. Slap tariffs on your competitors. Take back control. Make America Great Again. Independence for Scotland. Independence for England.
With the slogans come the scapegoats: the EU, Black immigrants, Asian immigrants, Arab immigrants, Latin immigrants, Poles, Romanians, Turks, the deep state, Parliament, the urban elite, liberals, remainers, remoaners, and whingers….
To justify the scapegoats the populists implicitly glorify their supporters’ own group. They don’t have to be a majority. They just have to be made to feel as if they are superior to other groups and convinced that pursuit of their cause is greater than the rule of law or the protection of democratic principles.
Then there is the United States—the world’s great economic, military and political power. In the 1930s it retreated into isolationism with terrible consequences for the world. In 2019 it is racing down the previously untrod road of unilateralism which could have an even more disastrous result.
There are similarities between the 1930s and 2019. They are not exact. That they exist does not mean that we are on the verge of war or that millions are about to be marched off to the gas chambers. But the basic ingredients are there for something bad to happen. A cursory study of an inexact science and the law of probabilities tells us that.
* Tom Arms is foreign editor of Liberal Democrat Voice. He also contributes to “The New World” magazine and lectures on world affairs. He is the author of “America Made in Britain,” two editions of “The Encyclopaedia of the Cold War” and “The Falklands Crisis.”
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Michael Meadowcroft: A Liberal of Intellectual Rigour and Uncommon Integrity
Debt-ridden graduates claim they are seen as cash cows
Why non-fiction books need their indexes
Changes in status: Local Elections wrap up
Daniel Walker
Tom Bailey
Matt (Bristol)
Hywel
Chloe
9 Comments
Belgium was invaded in 1914 and there were streams of Belgian refugees in England. Belgium was invaded in 1940, Being a neutral was no defence. Belgium now has NATO HQ in Europe .(Mons)
Holland was not invaded in WW1 and hosted the defeated Kaiser after WW1. Holland was invaded in 1940 and had the experience of Burgemeester in Oorlog (Dutch mayors during occupation)
Tsarist Russia lost a naval war to Japan. Soviet Russia’s espionage learned that Japan would not invade them and transferred resources to Moscow, Leningrad and Stalingrad. In 1945 the USSR invaded Japan and annexed some islands which the Japanese want returned.
In WW1 Italy sided with Allies. In WW2 Italy started as an Axis power.
Tom
Thankyou for another thought provoking article on the dangerous world we live in.
I do not have anything to add except that leaving the EU is surely a colossal mistake
In which ways did the World’s greatest economic power withdraw from the World stage?
“When Americans landed in Normandy and captured their first German trucks, they discovered that these vehicles were powered by firms such as Ford and General Motors. Corporate America, it turned out, had been the arsenal of Nazism.”
https://www.globalresearch.ca/profits-ber-alles-american-corporations-and-hitler/4607
Might we help ourselves now by being better informed about the “Myth of the Good War” and its origins?
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/685102.Myth_of_the_Good_War
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1202599.1940
I am not so sure. The twenties were a period of relief after a terrible war and people enjoyed a standard of living beyond their means.
The bubble burst and angry, hungry people became violent and much death followed.
Well, like austerity or not, the western world and especially us, are repeating that in extremis. This tottering tower of debt and de-industrialisation is sure to fall with appalling and horrifying consequences.
But don’t worry! We now trust in crackpot economists peddling the the most absurd nonsense who tell us that all will be well, and even more clueless politicians who have a magics potion”Invest in skills and infrastructure “.
So find a nice place in Asia you can escape to when looting and mob rule arrives here.
I think we should look at what is really happening. Everything appears to be changing. We have lots of new toys. What is not changing is people and the way that they relate to each other and to the planet. There seems to be agreement that it took thousands of years for humans to dominate the planet. But for all of these years the indications are that the rate of change has been increasing. The rate of change is still increasing, so that we have reached the stage where we are changing the eco-systems in our planet.
But we are not changing.
We need a radical look at our education political system, and ask how the people of the planet can organise themselves to actually manage the planet to have a sustainable future for our species. We need to radically change our education system, so that we can develop the skills to manage our planet.
Steve,
Two of the most prominent examples of American interwar isolationism were refusal to join the League of Nations and the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, Again, we can use those two examples to draw parallels with 2019. President Trump hates the UN, has withdrawn from UN organisations and generally opposes American involvement in international organisations. As for tariffs… just look at China and the threats against the EU.
Tom Harney,
I agree with you, but it is another tale. Just as– if not more important– than the one I wrote about this week. Unfortunately space plus the boredom threshold restricts me to a topic a week. But you make a good point which needs developing. I suggest you write a considered blog with suggested remedies.
Does formal political isolationism harm World peace?
If all nations refrained from interfering with other nations, might there be more peace?
[Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya etc?]
Does actual commercial involvement in the international arms trade have more effects on peace and the lack of it?
Would the Nazi “blitzkrieg”, which enabled them to conquer so much of Europe so quickly, have been possible without the support of U.S. corporations?
https://dogandlemon.com/sites/default/files/cars_nazis.pdf
Steve,
I think there is plenty of evidence to show that political isolationism harms world peace. To put it simply, the more interconnected the world is the more interdependent its constituent parts are and the less likely they are to fight each other. The best example of this is the EU which has played a vital role in maintaining the longest period of peace and prosperity in European history.
But if you are referring to the current policies of the Trump Administration, it is guilty not so much of isolationism but unilateralism. Trump wants to engage with the rest of the world but only on his terms and without any consensus, consent or approval of his allies. He is a man who wants to do things his way and only his way. This creates a completely different set of problems to American isolationism of the past.