Geert Mak Draws Parallels Between 1930s,today: Democracy on the Line

AMSTERDAM – in ‍his latest book,”watchwater: America Europe 1933-1945,” Dutch ⁣historian Geert Mak ⁢explores the tumultuous years leading up too and during World War II,drawing unsettling parallels⁤ with contemporary political and social dynamics.

The Enigmatic Harry Hopkins

Mak’s research led him to Harry Hopkins, a key figure in Franklin D. Roosevelt’s governance, largely unknown in Europe. “I encountered him ‍while working on ‘In Europa’ and a book⁢ about John Steinbeck,” Mak explains. “But the initial spark⁢ came⁣ from an ⁤article I wrote⁣ in the 90s about ‍Martha Gellhorn, a ⁤remarkable 20th-century journalist.”

Gellhorn, as a young reporter, traveled the U.S.documenting the impact of the New Deal.her letters,addressed to hopkins,caught⁤ Mak’s attention. Later,while researching Winston Churchill,Mak discovered Roosevelt had sent Hopkins to London in 1941 to⁣ assess Churchill’s resolve. Despite initial skepticism,the two men ‍formed a close bond. “Churchill was overjoyed by Hopkins’ arrival,” Mak recounts, leading to the inspiration for “Watchwater.”

Living in the past

Mak ⁣spent four years immersed in this ancient period. “Initially, I enjoyed it immensely,” he says, “They were smart, visionary individuals.” Though, like many biographers, mak ⁣eventually developed a critical outlook towards his subject. He notes Hopkins’ ambition frequently enough overshadowed his personal life, citing a poignant discovery of neglected letters from Hopkins’⁣ daughter in the archives.

Echoes of the Present

Mak’s book⁤ highlights parallels between the 1930s⁤ and today. He points to Roosevelt’s question regarding American willingness to defend Eastern European nations, a sentiment ⁣echoed by Henry Kissinger ⁣in 1968. Kissinger questioned the feasibility of risking nuclear war ‍for minor ⁢European incidents.

Roosevelt’s declaration of the U.S.⁢ as “the arsenal of democracy” during WWII resonated with President Joe Biden’s recent invocation of the same phrase concerning Ukraine. Mak noted that Biden’s speechwriters consciously chose those words, aware⁣ of their historical significance.

Trump ⁢vs. Roosevelt

While a photo of Roosevelt dressed as a Roman emperor might⁤ evoke images of Donald ⁣Trump’s self-aggrandizing “Long Live the King!” tweet, Mak⁤ emphasizes a crucial difference: Roosevelt’s actions were playful⁢ and self-deprecating. “The big difference ⁢with Trump is that he means it,” Mak asserts.

Mak argues the New Deal was not just an economic recovery plan but a defense of democracy against the allure of authoritarianism. Roosevelt,‍ aware of Hitler’s danger, consciously rejected dictatorial powers, using the New⁤ Deal to counter Mussolini and Hitler.

War as economic Driver

Mak acknowledges the uncomfortable truth that⁤ war frequently enough stimulates ⁣economic growth. The establishment of America’s war ⁣industry during WWII considerably reduced unemployment and boosted incomes.

Journalistic Bravery

the book also pays tribute to journalists like Martha Gellhorn, who covered the Spanish Civil War,⁤ drawing parallels with contemporary reporting from Ukraine. “This book is secretly also an ode to brave ⁣journalists who look good,” Mak said.

Defending Democracy

mak emphasizes‍ that his ⁢intention was not to write a contemporary political commentary. However, he gradually realized the importance of defending democracy itself. “roosevelt saw ⁤the dangers⁣ vrey well,” Mak states. “And if you are not alert‍ then you will slowly⁣ become a complicit from the spectator.”

lessons from the Past

Mak highlights roosevelt’s approach to addressing⁤ public dissatisfaction through tangible improvements and treating people with dignity. He contrasts this with the humiliation frequently enough associated with⁤ unemployment and welfare, which can fuel extremist movements.

He also stresses the importance of ⁣competent leadership, noting the high caliber of individuals in ⁣Roosevelt’s ⁤white House, including Hopkins, who successfully ⁤bridged the gap between government and business.

The Contingency of History

Mak acknowledges the pivotal moments in history where events could have unfolded differently. He cites the potential ⁢for an American form of fascism⁣ during the Great Depression ⁣and the near abandonment of Europe in 1943.

While historians can identify ⁣broad trends, Mak cautions against predicting the future with certainty. He⁤ reflects on the personal tragedies of historical figures, such as the death⁢ of Hopkins’ ⁣son, ⁣and the seductive nature of heroic narratives that often overshadow individual suffering.