My nose crinkles up and my upper lip curls back when discussing Pat Buchanan’s notions of history. His crimes are the type that led to the promulgation of henkster’s law.
The contention that the British Empire would have lasted “forever” if they’d cut a deal with the Germans is ludicrous. As though an alliance with Germany would somehow have made Ghandi not be Ghandi, or would have convinced all the nascent nationalist movements in the various corners of the Empire to stay under the Crown. Historical forces other than World War I and World War II were going to end the British Empire, but those two events certainly hastened its demise.
Also, his very notion of a British alliance with Hitler is a flagrant violation of henkster’s law. For at least two centuries, British foreign policy was composed of two core elements: 1) Freedom of commerce on the high seas guaranteed by the world-wide supremacy of the Royal Navy, and 2) Balance of Power in Europe preventing any one power gaining Continental hegemony. Those twin pillars of foreign policy were mutually supportive and rationally based. Both were essential to the maintenance of the British Empire and her international position. The rise of the German Empire in the late 1800s caused Britain to switch her long standing relationships of friendship toward Prussia and enmity to France in the pursuit of the prevention of hegemony. The costly naval race with Germany merely accelerated the about face. That naval race meant Germany was clearly the threat to both pillars of British Foreign policy.
Those memories were quite fresh in 1939. Anyone care to recall what it was that Neville Chamberlain waved around at Heathrow airport after Munich? Yes, it was the deal dismembering Czechoslovkia, but that wasn’t all. It was also the Anglo-German naval treaty he claimed brought “peace in our time.” Munich was supposed to prevent hegemony by the promise of “no further demands,” and the naval treaty was intended to preserve the supremacy of the Royal Navy. Chamberlain came home convinced he had successfully pursued Britain’s twin policies. Of course, Hitler didn’t intend to honor the former, and had no intention of challenging the latter at that time. But for the British to accept Continental hegemony meant sooner or later there would be a naval challenge, and they had to prevent it from happening. Thus, they went to war over Poland in pursuit of both policies.
There was no way, ever, under any circumstances, that Britain was going to abandon both of these long held and essential policies in 1939 or 1940, and make a deal with Hitler on Hitler’s terms.
For his deliberate and premeditated violation of henkster’s law with aggravating circumstances, the Court now Orders that the defendant, Pat Buchanan, be sentenced to banishment for life beyond the fringes of accepted historian status.
Without having read ol' Pat's tome, I assume it features disparagement of Churchill's prosecution of the war, and to me that is a distinct disservice to a man who, willingly or not, heartily did God's bidding. Indeed, it is a wonder that Churchill held up under it and strongly suggests to me that he could not have done so without divine support. I wonder whether Buchanan has ever bothered to consider any of this from God's perspective.
Americans often forget the time horizon of the British. Churchill and his other senior leaders would recall the Napoleonic Wars when Britain, often alone, outlasted and eventually defeated Boney. In what we call the French and Indian War it was Britain and Prussia against most of the rest of Europe. Or, how about Churchill's direct ancestor, the Duke of Marlborough, who with the Dutch and some hired Germans defeated the greatest power in Europe, the French?
The British ruling class knew how to fight and win such wars. And who has heard of Pat Buchanan lately?