Empire and System: Paul W. Schroeder’s Warnings
Paul W. Schroeder was no Marxist, but in an age of collapsing empires and revived realpolitik, his cold-eyed history of diplomacy offers the left a theory of ruin we can use
The rest of the blog
Paul W. Schroeder was no Marxist, but in an age of collapsing empires and revived realpolitik, his cold-eyed history of diplomacy offers the left a theory of ruin we can use
Marine Le Pen is out of the race, but her party is preparing for power.
Dan Edelstein’s The Revolution to Come: A History of an Idea from Thucydides to Lenin and Enzo Traverso’s Revolution: An Intellectual History
This book is about the fens. I live on the edge of the fens, a flat place. When the wind blows it stops for no one. But the fens are not about wind. They are about earth and water. Black earth.
Whipple’s Uncharted is less a chronicle of Trump’s comeback than an unflinching autopsy of a decaying liberal order that mistook gerontocracy for stability and denial for strategy
On the Supreme Court ruling in For Women Scotland v. Scottish Ministers
Twenty-two years ago, millions marched against the invasion of Iraq. I was one of them. We were right; the war was wrong. And yet it happened anyway. That was the moment I realised: marching doesn’t cut through when empire’s at stake.
The UK government’s attack on dissent and protest rights echoes a long history of state suppression, revealing a deep fear of the power of a mobilised working class.
The realm of the spectacle is a treacherous landscape, where commodities distort truth and opinions manipulate desires. The United Kingdom’s decision to wage war in Iraq stands as a chilling testament to this phenomenon. In this post, we will explore how words and images were craftily deployed to create a mirage of deception and illusion, justifying the invasion. We will delve into the roles played by key figures like Tony Blair and Alastair Campbell, as well as the influence of the neoconservative agenda, in shaping this narrative. In the end, the consequences of this sinister dance between truth and spectacle emerge from the shadows, providing a harrowing reminder of the dangers of succumbing to the allure of falsehoods and manipulation.
As we approach the anniversary of the start of the Iraq War, there has been a surge in retrospective articles examining the conflict and its aftermath. These introspective pieces provide an opportunity for us to reevaluate the decisions that led to the war, its far-reaching consequences, and the lessons we can glean from this turbulent period in history. By engaging in such reflection, we can better understand the complexities of war and work towards preventing similar catastrophes in the future.
The Iraq War was not just a regrettable event but a calamitous blunder that continues to reverberate to this day. In scrutinising the reasons behind the conflict and its lingering effects, I’ve delved into three recent articles covering the legacy of the Iraq war, two in Foreign Affairs and one from The Atlantic. These articles detail the ideological and strategic forces that drove the US and UK towards invasion, leading to catastrophic outcomes that were both unforeseen and brutal. The war’s impact gave rise to widespread displacement, which in turn became a breeding ground for violent extremist groups. The dire consequences of misguided military interventions serve as a harsh reminder that war always comes at a great cost, and that those in power must take heed of the lessons of history.