Ironweed
01-12-2003, 07:42 AM
I deleted what appears below in my response on the thread listed below. Although I read the book referenced by Taylor, I don't remember it well enough to include it in the response to MorphicOutFielder. I'm pretty sure Taylor's position is distorted, but I'm not sure I remember it exactly, so I may be guilty of the same thing. A trip to the library is warranted before any "official" response made. Whether I have the time or energy is another matter entirely.
====
http://www.discussanything.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=254525#post254525
I don't think this is central to wherever your thesis is going, so I'll mark it "off-topic," and you can respond as you like.
In The Origins of the Second World War, A.J.P. Taylor, a leading British historian, shows that "Hitler did not wish a war, either local, European, or world. His only fundamental aim in foreign policy was to revise the unjust and unfair Treaty of Versailles, and to do this by peaceful means." (Quotation from a review by Harry Elmer Barnes.)
I read Taylor's book last year. As best I recall, this is a deliberate distortion of what Taylor thought. Essentially, Taylor's thesis is a rejection of the view that Mein Kampf was any kind of blueprint for anything. Taylor considered Hitler a master of the bluff, who lurched from conference to conference with no plan or ultimate goal. Per Taylor, Hitler essentially started believing his own hype when Poland was invaded, and that he could pull off some sort of dimplomatic coup to prevent war yet again. It was an interesting read, and at odds with the commonly held view that Hitler knew precisely what he was doing and where he was going, as detailed in Mein Kampf. However, I remember nothing that led me to believe Taylor thought Hitler was simply trying to "revise the unjust and unfair Treaty of Versailles."
Of course, this also ignores the logical problem of precisely which "unfair provision" of Versailles was revised when Germany annexed Austria and occupied all of Czechoslovakia.
Or, even better, where did Hitler seek to overturn Article 156?
http://www.lib.byu.edu/~rdh/wwi/versa/versa3.html
ARTICLE 156.
Germany renounces, in favour of Japan, all her rights, title and privileges¯particularly those concerning the territory of Kiaochow, railways, mines and submarine cables_which she acquired in virtue of the Treaty concluded by her with China on March 6 1898, and of all other arrangements relative to the Province of Shantung.
All German rights in the Tsingtao-Tsinanfu Railway, including its branch lines together with its subsidiary property of all kinds, stations, shops, fixed and rolling stock, mines, plant and material for the exploitation of the mines, are and remain acquired by Japan, together with all rights and privileges attaching thereto.
The German State submarine cables from Tsingtao to Shanghai and from Tsingtao to Chefoo, with all the rights, privileges and properties attaching thereto, are similarly acquired by Japan, free and clear of all charges and encumbrances.
====
http://www.discussanything.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=254525#post254525
I don't think this is central to wherever your thesis is going, so I'll mark it "off-topic," and you can respond as you like.
In The Origins of the Second World War, A.J.P. Taylor, a leading British historian, shows that "Hitler did not wish a war, either local, European, or world. His only fundamental aim in foreign policy was to revise the unjust and unfair Treaty of Versailles, and to do this by peaceful means." (Quotation from a review by Harry Elmer Barnes.)
I read Taylor's book last year. As best I recall, this is a deliberate distortion of what Taylor thought. Essentially, Taylor's thesis is a rejection of the view that Mein Kampf was any kind of blueprint for anything. Taylor considered Hitler a master of the bluff, who lurched from conference to conference with no plan or ultimate goal. Per Taylor, Hitler essentially started believing his own hype when Poland was invaded, and that he could pull off some sort of dimplomatic coup to prevent war yet again. It was an interesting read, and at odds with the commonly held view that Hitler knew precisely what he was doing and where he was going, as detailed in Mein Kampf. However, I remember nothing that led me to believe Taylor thought Hitler was simply trying to "revise the unjust and unfair Treaty of Versailles."
Of course, this also ignores the logical problem of precisely which "unfair provision" of Versailles was revised when Germany annexed Austria and occupied all of Czechoslovakia.
Or, even better, where did Hitler seek to overturn Article 156?
http://www.lib.byu.edu/~rdh/wwi/versa/versa3.html
ARTICLE 156.
Germany renounces, in favour of Japan, all her rights, title and privileges¯particularly those concerning the territory of Kiaochow, railways, mines and submarine cables_which she acquired in virtue of the Treaty concluded by her with China on March 6 1898, and of all other arrangements relative to the Province of Shantung.
All German rights in the Tsingtao-Tsinanfu Railway, including its branch lines together with its subsidiary property of all kinds, stations, shops, fixed and rolling stock, mines, plant and material for the exploitation of the mines, are and remain acquired by Japan, together with all rights and privileges attaching thereto.
The German State submarine cables from Tsingtao to Shanghai and from Tsingtao to Chefoo, with all the rights, privileges and properties attaching thereto, are similarly acquired by Japan, free and clear of all charges and encumbrances.