In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

REVIEWS 219 laboursources, newspapers, government documents, andinterviews. Levenstein's account ofthepostwar years willnodoubtsuffice untilarchival materials become available. ROB•.RT B•a•COCK WellsCollege The RadicalLe[t andAmericanForeignPolicy.ROBERT W. TUCKER. Studies in InternationalAffairs,no •5. Baltimoreand London,The JohnsHopkinsPress [Toronto, CoppClark],•97•. Pp.xii, •56.$8.•5. The purpose of Professor Tucker'sbrief volumeis to summarize and evaluate whathecalls the'radical left'critique ofrecent American foreign policy. Though sucha projectraises difficulties in designating exactlywhotheradicals are,the objectof Tucker'sconcern is the professional historian. The authorrefersto suchfamiliarnamesasWilliams,LaFeber,and Kolko, but in mostinstances he discusses the radicalinterpretation in generalterms. Tucker arguesthat the widespread influenceof radical historians is due primarilytotheirsense ofmoraloutrage ratherthantheirabilityto explainthe contradictions of recentus foreignpolicy.For Tucker,theradicalcritiquehas impactnotbecause of its originality, logicalconsistency, or persuasiveness, but because of thepassion with whichit isargued.Furthermore, the authormaintainsthat Vietnamand the declineof the Cold War havecreateda receptive environment for what radicalshaveto say,sothat their prominence is more the resultof new timesthan a newhistory. Yet Professor Tuckeradmitsthe cogency of the radicalcritique.He sees it asproviding an importantcorrective to older,conventional criticisms which ascribe the alleged failureof American diplomacy to the mistaken beliefthat therestof theworldshares similarvalues andaspirations astheUnited States. The radicalhistorians havedemonstrated that Americanforeignpolicyis not tragicbecause it is the productof unconscious intellectual error,but because it issodeliberately seN-serving. Byemphasizing the calculating ratherthanaccidentalcharacterof Americanpolicy,radicalshave provideda degreeof realism lacking in oldercritiques, eventhose commonly described asbelonging to the 'liberal-realist' school. Most of Tucker'sbook,however,is not dedicated to praisingradicalhistorians . On the contrary, he subjects theirarguments anduseof evidence to a searching logicalanalysis. His principaldispute centres on the radicals' failure toprobe the.sources ofwhattheysee astheAmerican driveforeconomic hegemony .He isnotconvinced bytheirexplanation that thecapitalistic character of American domestic institutions accounts for the behaviour of the United States. Insteadof relatingAmericanexpansion to domestic economic need, Tucker would direct the attentionof the radicalsto the problemsposedby inordinate poweritself.He points to manyexamples wherethecostof maintaining anAmerican presence outweighed theprofits gained. The will to rule 220 THE CANADIAN HISTORICAL REVIEW may provea morecompelling motivethan economic gain.The authortends to minimizethe uniqueness of the us experience and explainsthe problems of American diplomacy in termsoffactors common to all greatpowers. Tucker thus disputes the radicals'tendencyto characterizeonly capitalist nations asaggressive. He feelsthat suchhistorians underestimate the possibility that diplomatic crises mayoriginate fromexternalaswell asinternalthreats, and objects to the implicationof muchradicalhistoriography that the burden of reformrests mainlyon the United States.For Tucker, suchan indictmentis parochialandrepresents a failuretoviewtheworldfrom anything otherthanan Americanperspective. The readerisleft with little doubtasto whereProfessor Tucker'ssympathies lie. Althoughhisdescription of what he callsthe radicalview is clearenough, thebookmighthavebeenimprovedbyfocussing moreconsistently onparticular historians. Furthermore, mostof Tucker'scriticisms havebeenmadebefore,so thathisevaluation isnotnotablyoriginal.Evenso,students of Americanforeign policy will findthisa useful, if general, reviewof recenthistoriography. T.E. VADNEY University o[Manitoba EUROPE Victor Emanuel,Cavour,and the Risorgimento. DENISMAGK SMITH.London, Oxford UniversityPress [Toronto,Oxford UniversityPress],I97I. Pp. xviii, 38I, maps.$•4.oo. At a newspaper kioskin Rome or Milan, next to lurid gialli and stacks of lI Lamentodi Portnoy,onecan find the historical writing of an Oxbridgedon. What DenisMack SmithhaswrittenaboutGaribaldi,Cavour,Sicily,and the Risorgimento itselfhaschanged Italianhistodography (see JohnCammett,'Two RecentPolemics on the Characterof the Risorgimento,' Science and Society, 1963).Yet hisbooks canalsoendup on Oggi'slistof bestsellers. It isnotthat Mack Smith'shistoricalwritingsare demotic,but rather that Risorgimento history stillhasavitalplace in contemporary politics. Everypartymustguardits mythsand pedigrees. Now Mack Smithhasturnedhis attentionto the centre oftheroyalist pantheon, KingVictorEmmanuel n.Debunking some ofthemyths surrounding that monarchmaybegoodhistory;it alsoserves in a smallway to compromise the Msxand their nostalgic neo-monarchist alliesat a time of resuegent fascism. An introductory essay abouttheroyalarchives vanishing to the beaches ofPortugal along withthedeposed kingsets thetone.Although scholarly andwellresearched onesenses thataccounts ofsuch episodes titillateandbecome politicalammunition for Italy'spatti prisreading public. Mack Smith apparentlyrealizedthat hiswork couldnot take conventional biographical form.The closed archives at Cascais assured that. The paradox of a monarchy at oncepoliticallyastuteand boorishly illiteratesuggests that ...


Additional Information

Print ISSN
pp. 219-220
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.