These books and authors criticize the decision of the United States in 1917 to enter WWI, the bad results of the treaties that ended the war, and the propaganda designed to induce the public to accept the war against the Central Powers.
The Bolsheviks were shocked to discover the destruction of money failed to bring about the rational economic order that the Communists believed to be inevitable.
Not all the public is deluded or sunk into habitual submission. In contrast to "the brutish mass," there is always an elite who will understand the reality of the situation.
John Locke was ridiculed for suggesting that people "consent" to their government by not emigrating. Hume suggested this theory could be used to claim consent for even the most outrageous tyrants.
Brazilian authorities here are discontented with our rising skepticism of the state — and they are willing to silence the dissidents.
Tory MPs vying for the Prime Ministership mostly all vote alike on taxes and foreign policy. So only the issue of Brexit separates the bad from the very bad candidates.
Progressives like John Kenneth Galbraith no longer heap praise on China, given that it long ago abandoned Mao’s austere communism. Instead, modern progressive economists like Joe Stiglitz save their acclaim for the economies of places like Cuba and Venezuela.
Both the battle and the war were unnecessary, but were the products of Great Power hubris and incompetence during and after World War I.
Far from being a bucolic utopia, economic conditions were highly unsatisfactory on the eve of the Industrial Revolution. The traditional social system was not elastic enough to provide for the needs of a rapidly increasing population.
The great boon of human freedom experienced in earlier decades has, in the long record of thousands of years, been enjoyed by a mere fraction of the people and for only a brief moment in history
