Few Americans have ever understood US foreign policy. William Appleman Williams was a revisionists historian.
"Perhaps the most well-known of these works is historian William Appleman Williams’s The Tragedy of American Diplomacy (1959). According to Williams, American foreign policy was motivated primarily by a relentless pursuit of foreign markets to facilitate the expansion of the domestic economy. According to Williams, American foreign policy was motivated primarily by a relentless pursuit of foreign markets to facilitate the expansion of the domestic economy. This insistence on maintaining an “open-door empire” of free trade was what ultimately crystallized the Cold War. Williams contends that Stalin wanted “minimum natural and desirable frontiers in eastern Europe” but that U.S. officials resisted such an arrangement and failed to consider “security and economic aid for the Soviet Union” that would lead to “a modus vivendi with the Russians”—not out of “fear that Russia was about to overwhelm Europe or the world in general” but out of a desire to penetrate European and Asian economies. The Soviets had legitimate concerns over Eastern European boundaries, German reparations, post-war recovery, and agreements in the Middle East and Asia, but selfish and expansion-minded American diplomats refused to listen. In trying to explain why Moscow refused Marshall Plan aid, Williams claims that Stalin rightly saw it as an attempt to interfere in his country’s internal affairs."
That was 1953! 70 additional years on the containment/conquest/control path means, as the Russians have said, that only a decisive defeat in Ukraine and Gaza can shake them off their path.
I was looking for some text about William Appleman Williams and there are a couple of good paragraphs in the article but on balance it is not worth reading. The title tells the story.
"Blaming America for Russian Aggression, Then and Now
During the Cold War, just as today, some commentators held the U.S. accountable for Russian belligerence in Eastern Europe.
William Appleman Williams was one of the last Progressive Historians that came from the University of Wisconsin. He taught and his papers are at Oregon State University, a collection I've always wanted to examine. I have most of his books. Like too many historians, he was unable to comprehend the depth of depravity within the Outlaw US Empire's Ruling Strata. If he did, then he censored himself massively. The same is true of all too much historical writing. As I've said and written, I continue to look for clues to the crimes, past and present and inform based upon them.
Excellent article, and associated commentary. Lots there I didn't know, and a great deal of it in the USSR's and Russia's favor, and zero to our balance.
"we insisted that France be among the great powers that would be represented on a permanent basis..."
That was a fucking mistake... LOL
As I've said before here, the UN Security Council should either be abolished or it should have members which represent 1) the largest population concentrations sufficient to cover most of the human race, and 2) secondarily the largest economies, also selected to cover most of the human race. In other words, have a UNSC that actually represents the world instead of just nuclear powers.
Certainly India and Brazil should be represented, as well as Malaysia. Basically pick the standard geographical regions of the world, pick the countries in those regions with the highest population and highest economy and give them permanent seats. Take the next couple of countries in each region and give them rotating seats.
The UNSC permanent seats would expand to maybe 20 countries, with another 10-20 rotating.
Or as an anarchist, drop a nuke on the UN and forget the whole waste of time trying to organize 8 billion chimpanzees.
Few Americans have ever understood US foreign policy. William Appleman Williams was a revisionists historian.
"Perhaps the most well-known of these works is historian William Appleman Williams’s The Tragedy of American Diplomacy (1959). According to Williams, American foreign policy was motivated primarily by a relentless pursuit of foreign markets to facilitate the expansion of the domestic economy. According to Williams, American foreign policy was motivated primarily by a relentless pursuit of foreign markets to facilitate the expansion of the domestic economy. This insistence on maintaining an “open-door empire” of free trade was what ultimately crystallized the Cold War. Williams contends that Stalin wanted “minimum natural and desirable frontiers in eastern Europe” but that U.S. officials resisted such an arrangement and failed to consider “security and economic aid for the Soviet Union” that would lead to “a modus vivendi with the Russians”—not out of “fear that Russia was about to overwhelm Europe or the world in general” but out of a desire to penetrate European and Asian economies. The Soviets had legitimate concerns over Eastern European boundaries, German reparations, post-war recovery, and agreements in the Middle East and Asia, but selfish and expansion-minded American diplomats refused to listen. In trying to explain why Moscow refused Marshall Plan aid, Williams claims that Stalin rightly saw it as an attempt to interfere in his country’s internal affairs."
That was 1953! 70 additional years on the containment/conquest/control path means, as the Russians have said, that only a decisive defeat in Ukraine and Gaza can shake them off their path.
I was looking for some text about William Appleman Williams and there are a couple of good paragraphs in the article but on balance it is not worth reading. The title tells the story.
"Blaming America for Russian Aggression, Then and Now
During the Cold War, just as today, some commentators held the U.S. accountable for Russian belligerence in Eastern Europe.
Niranjan Shankar
Mar 16, 2022"
https://www.thebulwark.com/p/blaming-america-for-russian-aggression-then-and-now
William Appleman Williams was one of the last Progressive Historians that came from the University of Wisconsin. He taught and his papers are at Oregon State University, a collection I've always wanted to examine. I have most of his books. Like too many historians, he was unable to comprehend the depth of depravity within the Outlaw US Empire's Ruling Strata. If he did, then he censored himself massively. The same is true of all too much historical writing. As I've said and written, I continue to look for clues to the crimes, past and present and inform based upon them.
Excellent article, and associated commentary. Lots there I didn't know, and a great deal of it in the USSR's and Russia's favor, and zero to our balance.
Surprised?
After all the years of historical research and experiences with human behavior, no, sadly.
"we insisted that France be among the great powers that would be represented on a permanent basis..."
That was a fucking mistake... LOL
As I've said before here, the UN Security Council should either be abolished or it should have members which represent 1) the largest population concentrations sufficient to cover most of the human race, and 2) secondarily the largest economies, also selected to cover most of the human race. In other words, have a UNSC that actually represents the world instead of just nuclear powers.
Certainly India and Brazil should be represented, as well as Malaysia. Basically pick the standard geographical regions of the world, pick the countries in those regions with the highest population and highest economy and give them permanent seats. Take the next couple of countries in each region and give them rotating seats.
The UNSC permanent seats would expand to maybe 20 countries, with another 10-20 rotating.
Or as an anarchist, drop a nuke on the UN and forget the whole waste of time trying to organize 8 billion chimpanzees.