Troublesome Young Men: The Rebels Who Brought Churchill to Power and Helped Save England | 
 enlarge | Author: Lynne Olson
Publisher: Farrar, Straus and Giroux
Category: Book
List Price: $15.00
Buy New: $8.36
You Save: $6.64 (44%)
New (23) Used (7) from $8.36
Avg. Customer Rating:  36 reviews
Sales Rank: 112534
Media: Paperback
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 448
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.9
Dimensions (in): 8.1 x 5.4 x 1.3
ISBN: 0374531331
Dewey Decimal Number: 941
EAN: 9780374531331
ASIN: 0374531331
Publication Date: April 29, 2008
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Condition: Absolutely Brand New & In Stock. 100% 30-Day Money Back. Direct from our warehouse. Ships by USPS. 1+ million customers served-In business since 1986. Happy Customers is Our #1 Goal. Toll Free Support
|
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
A riveting history of the daring politicians who challenged the disastrous policies of the British government on the eve of World War II On May 7, 1940, the House of Commons began perhaps the most crucial debate in British parliamentary history. On its outcome hung the future of Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain’s government and also of Britain—indeed, perhaps, the world. Troublesome Young Men is Lynne Olson’s fascinating account of how a small group of rebellious Tory MPs defied the Chamberlain government’s defeatist policies that aimed to appease Europe’s tyrants and eventually forced the prime minister’s resignation.
Some historians dismiss the “phony war” that preceded this turning point—from September 1939, when Britain and France declared war on Germany, to May 1940, when Winston Churchill became prime minister—as a time of waiting and inaction, but Olson makes no such mistake, and describes in dramatic detail the public unrest that spread through Britain then, as people realized how poorly prepared the nation was to confront Hitler, how their basic civil liberties were being jeopardized, and also that there were intrepid politicians willing to risk political suicide to spearhead the opposition to Chamberlain—Harold Macmillan, Robert Boothby, Leo Amery, Ronald Cartland, and Lord Robert Cranborne among them. The political and personal dramas that played out in Parliament and in the nation as Britain faced the threat of fascism virtually on its own are extraordinary—and, in Olson’s hands, downright inspiring.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 31 more reviews...
 A time for war.. a time for peace August 19, 2008
2 out of 2 found this review helpful
I've always been interested in understanding how it was that Britain could have remained so passive when faced with the threat Hitler posed to its existence. This well written and thoroughly researched book goes a long way toward helping me understand the answer to that question. Lynne Olson has done a tremendous job of deconstructing the years of appeasement, the debate that led up to Britain going to war and the eventual ascension to power of Winston Churchill. By doing so, Olson allows us to gain great insight into Chamberlain, Churchill, the psychology of appeasement, the mentality of the ruling class of Britain, the game of power politics played by "The Troublesome Young Men" against the appeasers of Hitler, and the personalities and petty grievances that often times got in the way of doing what was best for the country. Throughout the book there are so many wonderful quotes from the players of the time and so many useful bits of historical information, that I ended up underlining nearly half the book. This book has much to say to the historian, political scientist, or even the average guy who thinks seriously about the issue of when a country should go to war.
 Churchill's Rebels August 9, 2008
Lynne Olson's "Troublesome Young Men" is more than, as its subtitle suggests, the story of the Fall of Neville Chamberlain and the "Churchill Conspiracy" of 1940. Olson has written a brilliant popular history of Britain in the 1930s, and what her book lacks in scholarly rigor it more than makes up for with the power of sheer storytelling.
With the rise of the Third Reich, Britain faced one of its greatest challenges. In his semi-autobiography, "Mein Kampf", Adolf Hitler had sketched the course of German ambitions in Europe. Once he rose to power, Hitler started to execute his grand design, expanding the "Reich" over the Rhineland, Austria, and Czechoslovakia.
The official response to Nazism was Appeasement - a policy of essentially capitulating to Hitler's every demand in hope of satisfying his endless appetite for conquest and expansion. Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain will be forever associated with Appeasement - especially as he came back from the sell out of Czechoslovakia in Munich, and boldly declared the arrival of "Peace for Our Times".
But from the beginning there were dissenters, the "Troublesome Young Men" of the title, a group of some thirty Tory MPs who recognized the madness of Appeasement and tried, in vain, to stop it. Such men as future Prime Minister Harold McMillan, Alfred Duff Cooper, Richard Law (son of 1920s prime minister Andrew Bonar Law) and Freshman MP Ronald Cartland, who was to die before the evacuation of Dunkirk. They attacked the government, and challenged it, risking their political futures along the way. Cartland actually called the Prime Minister a dictator in the House of Commons (p.17).
But throughout the 1930s, the rebels cried in vain. They have faced a powerful, popular and authoritarian Prime Minister in Chamberlain, who imposed an iron discipline on his party, ruled the press, and did not hesitate to use wiretap and threats to keep his party united, and following him. The rebels also had to contend with a largely hostile public opinion, and with another problem, just as acute: the lack of leadership.
In the 1930s, only two men had the potential of leading an anti-appeasement movement to power. Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden, who resigned over the government's appeasement of Mussolini, was one. But Eden was a most reluctant revolutionary. Far from leading a crusade against the government and its policies, he kept his criticism tame, having no desire to alienate Chamberlain's supporters, still the vast majority of Tory MPs, and even hoping to get a Cabinet job again.
The other potential leader was, of course, Winston Churchill. Churchill, Britain's leading orator and most brilliant politician, had the experience and spirits to lead Britain against Hitler. But he was widely percieved as unreliable. Having jumped ship from the Conservative to the Liberal party in the 1900s, and having returned to the fold only with the collapse of the Liberals in the 1920s, he was seen as an opportunist by many. And his stature was diminished by fighting for two inglorious and hopeless causes in the 1930s - his crusade against Indian independence, and his fight in favor of Kind Edward VIII as during the crisis of his marriage to Mrs. Simpson.
Leaderless, the anti-appeasers failed to stop Chamberlain's capitulation in Munich, and Britain failed to response to Hitler's final occupation of Czechoslovakia in March 1939. I had always thought that after Czechoslovakia, appeasement was dead. Indeed, Chamberlain started to take action towards military preparadness, and issued a guarantee of Poland's safety. Yet Appeasement had continued up to the out break of the war. As late as august 1939, days before the German invasion, Chamberlain tried to get the United States to pressure Poland to accept Germany's demands. In effect, he was trying to engineer another Munich, with Washington as the midwife (pp. 200-201).
When the war came, Chamberlain managed to hang onto power. Brilliantly, he co-opted the opposition by appointing Churchill as First Lord of the Admiralty, Churchill's WW1 role. Churchill, a reluctant revolutionary at the best of times, became a loyal and devoted member of Chamberlain's cabinet, and never voted or spoke against him.
The task of removing Chamberlain fell to the rest of the rebels. Chamberlain's incompetent at waging a war he had no heart for made his position weaker and weaker. With the fiasco of Britain's Norway campaign, confidence in Chamberlain was undermined. Standing against Chamberlain in debate, Rebel Leo Amory, quoting Cromwell, made a stirring attack "You have set too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, Go!"
Chamberlain's government survived the no confidence vote that followed, but only just. With pressure for a unity government rising, and with Labour refusal to serve under Chamberlain, the die was cast. After considering Lord Halifax for the role, Churchill emerged as the natural successor.
Later, Churchill described his feeling: "I felt as if I were walking with destiny, and that all my past life had been but a preparation for this hour and for this trial".
Olson gripping book offers us a front seat view of these exciting times. Along with Ian Kershaw's Making Friends with Hitler: Lord Londonderry, the Nazis, and the Road to War, "Troublesome Young Men" is the best book I know about Britain during those dark days, going through, in Churchill's phrase, The Gathering Storm.
inspiring June 27, 2008
5 out of 5 found this review helpful
This is the story of the men who brought down Chamberlain and installed Churchill as prime minister--an outcome that seemed unlikely at best when World War II began. Lynne Olson's account of these men and their times reads like a finely-crafted and eminently readable novel. Here are the coming out balls, the wire-tapping, the hostile press, the exclusive clubs, the public school mentality--the whole glittering world of upper class Britain with its extravagances, suspicions, and contempt for the masses. The men who brought Chamberlain down belonged to that world just as much as did the men who supported Chamberlain. (Indeed, Chamberlain's supporters and opponents were often close friends and relatives.) And for that reason, voting against the Government felt to these Tory Rebels as a betrayal. And perhaps in some sense they had betrayed that glittering world with their vote.
But if betrayal it was, it was certainly not the first time these men betrayed one another. Boothby carried on an affair with Macmillan's wife for twenty years; none of the rebels would defend the Duchess of Atholl who, as a result, lost her seat to Chamberlain's yes-man over her anti-appeasement stance; Churchill himself (once he was in Chamberlain's Government) would hear no word said against Chamberlain--thus betraying his erstwhile companions, the Tory Rebels.
The Rebels were very fallible humans not angels. And they were disorganized, often uncertain, and lacking a credible strategy. As a result, things had to come to a nearly catastrophic point before they could act. But in the end, it was a Tory Rebel (Leo Amery) who stood up in the House of Commons and told his friend Chamberlain, "In the name of God, go!" Amery did that, knowing full well that if the Revolt did not succeed (prior to that day Chamberlain had a 250-vote majority) his career and perhaps England were doomed.
In the end, of course, the Rebels and their Labour and Liberal colleagues did succeed. Though it was a close thing. This is the story of that one success and their many, completely human failures. But more than that, it is a story of how very fallible individuals can and do make a difference even when faced with a seemingly insurmountable machine. I highly recommend it.
Illustrates the folly of denial. April 30, 2008
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
Olson describes British politics in the years leading up to World War II when Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain and most of his country were in denial about Hitler's intentions. Olson focuses on a small group of Members of Parliament (MPs) who see the Nazis as a growing threat but who struggle to persuade the government to do anything about it.
I had long known of the Munich Pact and Chamberlain's false hopes for "peace in our time" which served only to encourage further Nazi aggression. But I did not know how dictatorial Chamberlain acted with regards to his own government. As Olson describes it, Chamberlain apparently felt he had sole responsibility and authority for British foreign policy. It was almost as if he didn't trust anyone else for fear they would see Hitler differently.
Olson's story powerfully illustrates the folly of peace-at-any-price mentality which had an unbreakable grip on Chamberlain and most people in England. Having survived the bloodbath of World War I, people were afraid of an even deadlier conflict. They sensed England was woefully unprepared to fight, although the government suppressed most information about this. There were also a number of leaders who liked Germany because it was anti-Semitic and anti-Communist. I was surprised to learn that British newspapers saw their role as not to question the government but to support it. The result was that most citizens did not know the facts about Nazi brutality.
The British government so badly misjudged Hitler and Mussolini that at one point, Chamberlain sent an important, unencrypted message via regular mail to Italy. When asked why he did not use more secure means, Chamberlain responded, "Gentlemen do not read each others mail." The message was of course intercepted by Mussolini.
In the tension-filled days leading up to the Munich Pact, as Chamberlain deliberated fighting Hitler over Czechoslovakia, the Czech ambassador Masaryk told the British government, "If you have sacrificed my nation to preserve the peace of the world, I will be the first to applaud you. But if not, gentlemen, God help your souls." The appeasement policies pursued by England and France not only delayed war but made it all the more savage when it finally came.
The book is well researched and thorough. I withheld one star because Olson devotes too much space (in my opinion) to the personal lives of various actors in this drama. While I found myself skimming through those pages, other readers may find them fascinating. The story as a whole is interesting and at times fascinating
G. K. Chesterton, Churchill and the Young Men April 29, 2008
4 out of 4 found this review helpful
Those who enjoy this book should read a newly released book that brings back into print some of the writings of G. K. Chesterton. He was, by the 1930s a "troublesome old man" who (like Churchill) got little respect for warning about the menace that Germany posed to European peace. He had done so as far back World War I and continued to do so, despite the fuss he created, during Hitler's rise to power and up until his death in 1936. It's no exaggeration to say that Chesterton was `Churchill before Churchill.'
In September of 1932, four months before Hitler took power, Chesterton wrote a scathing article for the Illustrated London News. Referring what was once called the Great War, he notes that it had become a commonplace to discuss how "the young were embittered when they realised how their elders had brought the world into a horrible catastrophe and a hideous mess." He goes on to issue a stern challenge to those young men: "Since then, the first batch of Young Men have themselves almost become Old Men; but they are still saying it. They are still saying it without seriously thinking about it."
After devoting most of his article to defending the decisions those Old Men made, he turns again to the Young Men of that war now growing old.
"I think this worth mentioning now, for a simple reason. We are already drifting horribly near to a New War, which will probably start on the Polish Border. The Young Men have had eighteen years in which to learn how to avoid it. I wonder whether they do know much more about how to avoid it than the despised and drivelling Old Men of 1914. How many of the Young Men, for instance, have made the smallest attempt to understand Poland? How many would have anything to say to Hitler, to dissuade him from setting all Christendom aflame by a raid on Poland? Or have the Young Men been thinking of nothing since 1914 except the senile depravity of the Old Men of that date?"
All this was but a continuation of a criticism Chesterton directed at all those in positions of leadership, young or old, who lack the courage and will to stand up to evil. Chesterton had been warning about such people for some two decades. In 1918, he would say this about a new breed of pacifist that had appeared just before World War I.
"There still lingers--or rather, lounges--about the world a special type of Conscientious Objector who is luckily in a minority, even in the small minority of Conscientious Objectors. He might more properly be described as an Unconscientious Objector--for he does not so much believe in his own conscience as disbelieve in the common conscience which is the soul of any possible society. His hatred of patriotism is very much plainer than his love for peace. But, just as the instantaneous touch of ice has been mistaken for hot iron, so the unnatural chilliness of his personality is sometimes mistaken for fanaticism. The most horribly unholy and unhappy thing about him is his youth. Most of the more representative Pacifists are old men and indeed, saving their presence, old noodles. But they are kindly old noodles, and their pacifism is mostly a prejudice left by the last sectarian eccentricities of people who could not wholly cease to be Christians even by being Puritans. These people had always disapproved of what they rather vaguely called militarism, regarding it in some mysterious manner as a form of dissipation. As they had been taught not to look on the wine when it was red, so they were taught not to look on the uniform when it was red. They disapproved of bullets rather as they did of billiards, from a hazy association of ideas that connected it with having a high old time. Whether the experience of war is really a giddy round of gaieties, there are probably many to-day who could testify. The point here is that this sort of conscientiousness was a most comical perversion of the Christian tradition; but was still Christian, in the sense that it was a perversion of that and of nothing else. Some sincerity, some simplicity, some sorrow for others, dignified the dying sect."
"But no such lingering grace clings to the remarkable young man I have in my mind. He is cold, he is caddish, he is an intellectual bully, and his intellect is itself vapid and thin. He is marked by an imaginative insufficiency which can be compared to nothing except to finding a Commander, in the thick of battle, looking into a pocket-mirror instead of a field-glass. I remember a debate nearly four years ago in which some followers of Mr. Norman Angell tried to persuade me that, by our moral progress, we had outgrown the very notion of war. When I pointed out that even to abandon war, merely to make money, indicated no moral progress at all, a young Cambridge man put his head on one side and said, "My ethics are not at all ascetic." I can see him still, with his eye cocked up at a corner of the ceiling, and the white light from a high window falling on his funny little head. It happened to be the very day when the Austrian ultimatum went to Serbia." [Chesterton on War and Peace, 294-295, from the Illustrated London News, May 11, 1918. With Austria's harsh ultimatum to Serbia, the long slide toward a Europe-wide war became almost unstoppable. In 1933 Norman Angell would win the Noble Peace prize and tell his many followers that a now Nazified Germany posed no special threat to the peace of Europe.]
As Lynne Olson describes in her book, a few of those Young Men of World War I did take up Chesterton's call to stand up to Hitler. Unfortunately, there were too few of them and they acquired power too late to dissuade Hitler "from setting all Christendom aflame by a raid on Poland" in September 1939, unleashing the war precisely as Chesterton had predicted in 1932.
--Michael W. Perry, editor of Chesterton on War and Peace: Battling the Ideas and Movements that Led to Nazism and World War II
|
|
|
