Explaining History

Osad

• 
  India, America and Nehru 1940-41 22.09.2026 26min

  **In this solo episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we explore Srinath Raghavan's brilliant *India's War: The Making of Modern South Asia, 1939–1945* – a book that places India at the centre of the Second World War, rather than at its margins.**India is frequently overlooked in histories of the Second World War. When it appears at all, it is as a source of manpower for the British Empire – a vast reservoir of soldiers and labourers to be deployed in the Middle East, Asia and Europe. But as Raghavan demonstrates, India was not simply a British asset. It was the engine of the Allied war effort in the East – and the war transformed it in ways that would lead, inexorably, to independence.By December 1941, when Nehru emerged from prison, India stood at the intersection of two major theatres of war: the Mediterranean and North Africa on one side, and South Asia, China and the Pacific on the other. The defence of India was no longer a British prerogative; it had become a focal point of Allied grand strategy. Indian politics could not be insulated from the pressures emanating from Britain's key wartime allies.Drawing on Raghavan's narrative, we trace the debates within the Congress Party as it wrestled with the question of whether to cooperate with the British war effort. Gandhi insisted on non-violence and non-participation; Nehru advocated non-participation for political reasons; a third group, led by Rajagopalachari, believed that cooperation was available – if the British did the right thing. The compromise resolution that emerged was, as Gandhi observed, "like the Indian dish *khichri*" – a mixture of pulses, rice, salt, chilli and spices.We also examine the American perspective on India, which was shaped by a mixture of exotic fantasy, missionary prejudice and strategic calculation. By 1941, the State Department had concluded that the situation in India was "very serious indeed" and that the Viceroy, Lord Linlithgow, was "a man of small vision." American officials took a sympathetic stance towards Congress demands, reporting that the British were following a policy of "divide and rule." Even the conservative *Reader's Digest* carried a favourable profile of Nehru. The British cabinet, alert to American opinion, took hardly any major decision on India without reference to its impact on public opinion in the United States.**Topics covered:**- India's central role in the Second World War- The Congress Party debates on cooperation and non-participation- Gandhi, Nehru and Rajagopalachari- The "Quit India" campaign and the refusal of Indian soldiers to serve- American perceptions of India and the British Raj- The strategic importance of India to the Allied war effort- The beginning of the end of the British Empire in India---*If you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes.*Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• 
  Stalin's Statues – Monuments, Memory, and the Theme Parking of History 17.09.2026 31min

  In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we explore Keith Lowe's *Prisoners of History* and the contested world of memorialisation – focusing on one of the strangest and most controversial memorial sites in Europe.Monuments occupy public space, and they impose meaning on it. Walk through any city and you'll find statues placed with particular agendas – to memorialise the past in certain ways, to place a particular interpretation on history. As a result, they are almost always contested. The recent removal of statues associated with the transatlantic slave trade, from Edward Colston in Bristol to Confederate monuments across the American South, provoked a furious reaction from the right, who framed it as a free speech issue. What they were really defending was the right of white supremacy to own and occupy public space.Keith Lowe argues that there is no escaping the monsters of our past. We can try to ignore them, rehabilitate them, or annihilate them – but their absence becomes its own kind of presence. There is only one final course open to us: ridicule.This brings us to Grūtas Park in Lithuania – a sculpture park displaying the statues of Stalin, Lenin, and other Soviet figures that were torn down after independence in 1990. Lithuania's 20th century was one of repeated invasion, occupation, and mass deportation. Around 300,000 Lithuanians were sent to Soviet gulags in the 1940s and 50s. So when independence came, the statues were decapitated, blowtorched, and dynamited. The government then stored the best-known examples in warehouses – until a former wrestling champion and mushroom farmer named Viliumas Malinauskas offered to take them off their hands and build a park.His proposals were extraordinary: tourists arriving on cattle trucks, actors dressed as guards herding them onto trains, barbed wire, guard towers, the whole gulag experience. Critics called it a "Stalin theme park." Over a million people signed a petition against it. Former partisans and political prisoners accused Malinauskas of profiting from their misery.But the park opened anyway – and became a hit. What makes Grūtas Park so interesting, and so troubling, is that it creates a space that is completely ahistorical. It was built in the era of the "end of history," when we thought we could turn the past into a meaningless theme park.History didn't end. Spoiler alert.**Topics covered:**- Keith Lowe's *Prisoners of History*- The contest over public memorials and public space- Francis Galton, eugenics, and the limits of ridicule- Lithuania's experience of Soviet and Nazi occupation- The fate of Stalin and Lenin statues after 1990- Viliumas Malinauskas and the creation of Grūtas Park- The petition, the protests, and the constitutional court ruling- The postmodern, ahistorical aesthetics of the park- The "end of history" and its illusions---*If you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes.*Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• 
  Macmillan's Britain – Suez, Decline, and the Winds of Change 1957-60 16.09.2026 34min

  In this solo episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we explore the Macmillan years – that remarkable, contradictory period of post-war British history when the country was forced to confront its diminished place in the world, even as it sought to cling to the vestiges of imperial power.When Anthony Eden led Britain into the Suez Crisis in 1956, he did so believing that Britain could still act unilaterally on the world stage. The rebuke from Eisenhower told a different story. The crisis exposed the weakness of Britain's post-war economy, triggered a run on the reserves, and revealed that the country could no longer act without American permission.Harold Macmillan – who became Chancellor in the aftermath and then Prime Minister in January 1957 – understood the lesson. Suez had been a tactical defeat, he told his cabinet, but it could yet prove "the prelude to a strategic victory." What followed was a decade of managed decline: the military budget was cut, national service was abolished, and the white paper on defence argued that spending 10% of gross national income on defence was excessive.Drawing on Kenneth Morgan's *The People's Peace*, we examine the "one nation Toryism" that characterised Macmillan's government – a form of liberal conservatism that would be denounced by today's Tory party as "creeping Bolshevism." We trace the withdrawal from empire: the end of the Mau Mau emergency in Kenya, the winding up of the Cyprus troubles, the independence of Ghana and Nigeria, and Macmillan's famous "wind of change" speech before the South African parliament in 1960.But we also confront the darker side of British decolonisation – the concentration camps and torture in Kenya, the police state in Nyasaland, and the selective memory that allows Britain to present its retreat from empire as "relatively tranquil and civilised."**Topics covered:**- The aftermath of Suez and the reality of decline- Macmillan's "strategic victory" and one nation Toryism- The 1957 Defence White Paper and massive retaliation- The abolition of national service- The end of the Mau Mau emergency and the Hola Camp scandal- The Cyprus settlement and the release of Archbishop Makarios- Macmillan's "wind of change" speech- The dissolution of the Central African Federation- Britain's diminishing role in the Middle East- The intervention in Jordan, 1958- Parallels with American decline today---*If you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes.*Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• 
  MI6 in 1914 11.09.2026 26min

  MI6 and the First World War – The Birth of the Secret StateIn this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we explore the origins of MI6 – the Secret Intelligence Service – during the First World War, drawing on Keith Jeffery's official history of the organisation.Intelligence history matters, not because of the romantic glamour of espionage, but because of the place secret organisations occupy in the social and political history of the twentieth century. Britain's secret state did not emerge fully formed. It was improvised, contested, and shaped by the crises of global war – and by the personal tragedy of the man who built it.In this episode, we examine the earliest years of the Secret Intelligence Service under Commander Mansfield Cumming – the original "C" of spy fiction fame. When the First World War broke out, the Secret Service was a fledgling organisation, born in a period of anti-German hysteria and fears about spies and infiltration. It had no clear place in the hierarchy of Whitehall. Cumming spent the first months of the war navigating between the War Office, the Admiralty and the Foreign Office – briefing each in turn, seeking approval for spending, and defending his institutional autonomy against successive military attempts to absorb his service.We trace the chaotic, fluid movements of personnel in the opening months of the war, as the pressures of total war moved men around "like counters." We also examine Cumming's own tragedy – a motor accident in France that killed his only son and cost him part of a leg. The story grew, as stories do, into legend: Compton Mackenzie's embellished account of Cumming hacking off his own foot with a penknife to free himself. The reality was more prosaic – but the consequences were not. Cumming's incapacity brought the Secret Service more closely under War Office control and prompted GHQ in France to establish its own independent intelligence service.**Topics covered:**- The origins of MI6 and the Secret Intelligence Service- Mansfield Cumming, the first "C"- The interdepartmental battle for control of intelligence- The War Office, Admiralty and Foreign Office- The chaos and flux of wartime Whitehall- Cumming's motor accident and the death of his son- The growth of the secret state in wartime- The mythology of intelligence work---*Keith Jeffery's official history of MI6 is available from all good bookshops. Please consider buying from an independent retailer.**If you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes.*Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• 
  The AFD's advances– Neoliberalism, the Extreme Centre, and the Rise of the Far Right 09.09.2026 28min

  In this solo episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we examine the recent electoral victory of the Alternative for Germany (AFD) in the state of Saxony-Anhalt – and what it tells us about the global resurgence of the far right.The AFD's crushing victory has alarmed commentators around the world. An openly fascist party emerging in Germany has a special and terrifying significance. But as veteran left intellectual Tariq Ali argues in a powerful Substack essay, this is not an isolated phenomenon. It is part of a global trend – and it is a direct consequence of the failures of neoliberalism and the "extreme centre."Ali writes that the election results "are not a huge surprise." The so-called firewall created by the extreme centre parties of the German elite has only aided the AFD's growth. The Christian Democratic Union, which won 37% in 2021, is now down to 18.5%. Meanwhile, Die Linke has won more votes than the Social Democratic Party, and the Sahra Wagenknecht Party has crossed the 5% threshold.The problem, Ali argues, is that the political and economic elites insist "that no reforms are possible and the current form of capitalism is fixed indefinitely." Telling people that an economic system that erodes their living standards year after year is the only option has created a vacuum that the far right is only too happy to fill.We also explore the historical context: the incomplete reckoning with Europe's fascist past, the failure of post-war denazification, and the erosion of the social democratic contract that once made Germany and other European countries resistant to extremism.Topics covered:The AFD's victory in Saxony-AnhaltTariq Ali's analysis of the rise of the far rightThe failure of the "extreme centre"Neoliberalism and the erosion of living standardsThe collapse of the post-war social democratic contractEurope's incomplete reckoning with fascismThe global nature of far-right resurgenceIf you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes.Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• 
  Civil Rights After 1980 – The Unfinished Revolution 08.09.2026 35min

  # Episode DescriptionIn this solo episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we tackle one of the most persistent problems in how we teach and understand the civil rights movement: the "happy ever after" narrative.For many years, students have been taught that the struggles of the 1950s and 60s culminated in victory – that the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act somehow "solved" racism in America. This is, of course, nonsense. History doesn't work like that. The civil rights movement achieved significant gains, but the idea that racism was somehow "sorted" in 1968 is deeply misleading.Drawing on Kevin Verney's excellent book *The Debate on Black Civil Rights in America*, we explore the historiographical challenges of writing about the post-1968 period. Historians are naturally cautious about passing judgment on recent decades, which means the story of African American life since 1980 is often reduced to a few paragraphs about the emergence of a black middle class – and, bizarrely, a section on performers like Michael Jackson and Will Smith.We examine the debate around Jesse Jackson's presidential campaigns, the argument over whether race or class is the primary division in American society, and the continuing crisis of inner-city poverty and police violence that the "happy ever after" narrative conveniently ignores.Topics covered:- The "happy ever after" problem in civil rights historiography- The challenge of writing about recent history- Jesse Jackson and the debate over black political leadership- Race vs. class in post-civil rights America- William Julius Wilson and the "declining significance of race"- Inner-city poverty and institutionalised racism- The limitations of liberal reform---*If you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes.*Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• 
  The Fall of Baghdad 1917 - Part Two 05.09.2026 23min

  In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we continue our exploration of Eugene Rogan's masterful The Fall of the Ottomans, examining the fall of Baghdad to British forces in March 1917 – a victory that transformed Britain's position in the Middle East and revealed the imperial ambitions that would shape the post-war world.The British capture of Baghdad was far from inevitable. The catastrophic surrender at Kut in April 1916 had left the War Cabinet deeply risk-averse. General Robertson, the Chief of the Imperial General Staff, feared that occupying Baghdad would leave British forces isolated and vulnerable to a resurgent Ottoman army. He warned against being "compelled later to fall back for any reason because of the objectionable political effect that such a retirement might produce."But pressure came from multiple directions. The Commander-in-Chief in India argued that seizing Baghdad would "greatly increase prestige in the Islamic East" – a crucial consideration given British fears of Muslim insurrection in India. And the Russians were proposing a spring offensive that might see them reach Baghdad first, which would "nullify the Sykes-Picot agreement." Oil, too, was already a factor – Mosul was understood to be the most reliable source of oil in the region.General Maud, whose superstition led him to launch his offensive on the 13th of December with the 13th Division in the vanguard, pushed forward despite London's caution. The Ottomans, recognising that Baghdad could not be defended, evacuated the city. As they withdrew, they destroyed military installations – wireless masts, cranes, water tanks, and the pontoon bridge across the Tigris. Looting erupted, and the American consul, Oscar Heiser, rode out to find the British advance guard.Maud's proclamation – drafted by Sir Mark Sykes, co-author of the Sykes-Picot Agreement – declared that the British came "not as conquerors or enemies, but as liberators." But the people of Baghdad were not convinced. As one Iraqi schoolboy recalled, "the people of Baghdad and of Iraq as a whole saw with their own eyes how the English treated the Iraqis as slaves or captives."Topics covered:The British War Cabinet's caution after KutThe Russian threat and the Sykes-Picot AgreementThe strategic importance of oilGeneral Maud's superstitious commandThe Ottoman evacuation of BaghdadThe destruction of Ottoman infrastructureLooting and the restoration of orderMaud's proclamation and Iraqi scepticismBritain's imperial ambitions in the Middle EastEugene Rogan's The Fall of the Ottomans is available from all good bookshops. Please consider buying from an independent retailer.If you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes.Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• 
  The Fall of Baghdad 1917 03.09.2026 24min

  The Fall of Baghdad In this solo episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we continue our exploration of Eugene Rogan's masterful The Fall of the Ottomans, examining the British campaign to capture Baghdad in 1917 – a victory that helped redeem the catastrophic humiliation of Kut.The surrender at Kut in April 1916 had been one of the worst disasters in British military history. Thousands of British and Indian soldiers, starved into submission, were marched into captivity and then worked to death building Ottoman railways. The British government was deeply wary of any further advances in Mesopotamia. But the Mesopotamian Expeditionary Force, smarting from the stigma of defeat, was determined to score a victory.Drawing on Rogan's narrative, we trace the campaign from the cautious advance on the Tigris to the fall of Baghdad. General Maud, a commander who had been wounded in France and was the last man off the beach at Gallipoli, was determined to break the Ottoman defences. Despite orders from London that barred an advance on the city, Maud pushed forward – driven in part by a superstitious belief that 13 was his lucky number.The Ottoman Sixth Army, worn down by illness, desertion, and casualties, was desperately understrength. Halil Pasha had been forced to redeploy forces to confront a Russian threat on the Persian frontier, leaving Baghdad dangerously exposed. When the British finally broke through at the Shumran Bend, the Ottoman retreat became a rout – pursued by British gunboats that wreaked havoc on exhausted and demoralised Turkish soldiers.The recapture of Kut was a symbolic victory. But the fall of Baghdad, which followed shortly after, was the first major British victory in the Middle East – a triumph that had eluded them since the beginning of the war.Topics covered:The disaster at Kut and its aftermathGeneral Maud's command and his superstitious beliefsThe Russian threat on the Persian frontierThe battle for Kut (December 1916 – February 1917)The breakthrough at Shumran BendThe Ottoman retreat and the naval pursuitThe symbolic recapture of KutBritish fears of Muslim insurrection in IndiaEugene Rogan's The Fall of the Ottomans is available from all good bookshops. Please consider buying from an independent retailer.If you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes.Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• 
  Britain Alone – The Hostile Environment and the Remaking of Britishness 02.09.2026 28min

  In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we explore the transformation of British society since Brexit – a story of the weaponisation of immigration, the erosion of the NHS, and the narrowing of who counts as "British."Drawing on Liam Stanley's excellent book, Britain Alone, we examine how the anxieties that gave rise to the 2016 referendum have been magnified and entrenched in the years since. The referendum did not create the forces that produced it – it gave them permission to speak openly. Racist discourse, once hinted at, is now shouted. Social media has amplified far-right invective. And political parties – first UKIP, then the Brexit Party, then Reform – have seized upon anti-immigrant sentiment as their primary political offering.We explore the devastating human consequences of the "hostile environment" – the set of policies introduced by Theresa May as Home Secretary to make the lives of migrants "miserable, costly and precarious." The Windrush scandal, in which thousands of people who had legally lived in the UK for decades were detained, deported, or stripped of their rights, is the most extreme example. Sylvester Marshall, who moved to the UK from Jamaica in 1973, was denied cancer treatment because he could not prove his immigration status – despite having lived and worked in Britain for 44 years.The episode also examines the "nationalisation" of the NHS – not in terms of state ownership, but in terms of making the state more national in its regulation and distribution of resources. Eligibility for healthcare, housing, and other essentials of life has become based around nationality – and as defined by Britain's right, based around whiteness. The logic of these changes cannot be reduced to austerity alone; they are a political project of exclusion.Topics covered:Brexit and the mainstreaming of racist discourseThe Windrush scandal and the hostile environmentThe "nationalisation" of the NHSThe politics of austerity and punishmentPost-imperial Britishness and the racialisation of immigrationThe bipartisan embrace of anti-immigrant policiesIf you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes.Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• 
  Reforming the Tsar's Army – From Serfdom to Universal Service in Imperial Russia 01.09.2026 25min

  In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we explore one of the most significant transformations of 19th-century Russia: the introduction of universal military service in 1874.The Crimean War had exposed the profound weaknesses of the Russian Empire. Its army, composed largely of serfs serving 25-year terms, was backward, poorly equipped, and utterly demoralised. The British and French had demonstrated the power of industrialised warfare – railroads, telegraphs, modern rifles – and Russia had been humiliated.War Minister D. A. Milyutin, a reformer shaped by the shock of defeat, understood that the army could not be modernised without modernising the society that sustained it. The emancipation of the serfs in 1861 was the first step. Universal military service in 1874 was the next. It was an act simultaneously of military and social policy – designed not only to create a larger, more effective fighting force, but to elevate educational standards, foster civic cohesion, and transform the army from an object of social contempt into a symbol of national unity.Milyutin's reforms were inspired by the successes of the Prussian army against Austria in 1866 and France in 1870. But Russia was not Prussia. The challenge was to create a system that could mobilise the empire's vast population while navigating the complex ethnic and social divisions of the Tsarist state.We explore the mechanics of the reform: the reduction of active service terms, the expansion of the reserve pool, the linking of education to service length, and the creation of a more equitable system of conscription. We also examine the paradox at the heart of Alexander II's reforms – the desire to modernise and liberalise without surrendering autocratic power – and the tensions that would eventually lead to revolution.Topics covered:The Crimean War and its impact on RussiaD. A. Milyutin and the reform agendaUniversal military service (1874)The Franco-Prussian War as a catalystThe abolition of serfdom and its military implicationsEducation, literacy, and the armyMobilisation and the reserve systemAlexander II's reformist paradoxExplaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• 
  Hegseth's War Crimes 31.08.2026 26min

  Hegseth's War – The Catastrophic Consequences of Maximum LethalityIn this week's solo episode, I examine a ProPublica investigation into Pete Hegseth's tenure as US Defence Secretary – and the catastrophic consequences of his "maximum lethality" doctrine. Here, I want to expand on some of the key themes we discussed.The Civilian Protection ProgrammeThe story begins with a programme called Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response (CHMR). It was a relatively new initiative, adopted after years of heavy civilian tolls in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. Its mission was to station personnel within major regional commands to develop a picture of life on the ground in combat zones, aiding decision-making on military strikes and helping to avoid or minimise civilian harm.Shortly after taking office, Hegseth polled the nation's top commanders about cutting the programme. He expected them to endorse his view that civilian security was "woke" and out of step with "maximum lethality." Instead, every commander rebuffed him. Nine chose to preserve the programme; two asked to expand it.Hegseth ignored them. He gutted the programme, cutting staff from nearly 200 to around two dozen, and reducing Central Command's team from 16 to one.The ConsequencesThe results were predictable. In Yemen, an air campaign killed 153 civilians and wounded 243 others. In Iran, a US strike on a school killed more than 100 children.Democratic senators and humanitarian groups questioned whether the cuts had contributed to the school tragedy. In a letter to Hegseth, 11 senators said the strike reflected the administration's "broader disregard for the strategic, legal and moral imperatives to minimise civilian harm."But this is not a regime that cares about international law. As I argue in the episode, the extreme right believes that international law has held the US back for years – that it has been fighting with one hand behind its back. The breaking of international law is not a regrettable byproduct of their policies; it is the mission.The "War Department"In a speech last year, Hegseth announced that the "Department of Defense is over" and that the "Department of War" had been restored. He spoke of "peace through strength" and "the warrior ethos." He told his enemies they would be "crushed by violence, precision and the ferocity of the war department." In other words: FAFO.But the reality is very different. The US military is under-resourced and overstretched in the Persian Gulf. It has lost its supply bases. It is facing critical shortages of everything from ammunition to toothpaste. The "maximum lethality" doctrine has produced exactly the opposite of what it promised.Hegseth's PsychologyAs I discussed in my earlier conversation with Jasper Craven, Hegseth is a deeply damaged individual – a product of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and of the far-right culture war that has consumed the Republican Party. He is living out a violent adolescent fantasy, speaking in the language of Christian fascism and the annihilation of the enemy.But he is also a symptom of a larger problem. Trump surrounds himself with incompetent ideologues because he does not want specialists and experts. He wants people who will tell him what he wants to hear, who will create chaos and distraction while he carries on looting the state. Hegseth is the perfect product of that system.If you'd like to support this work, please consider joining us on Substack. We are migrating from Patreon – details in the show notes.Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• 
  An Exceptional Hatred – Antisemitism, Free Speech, and the American Culture War 26.08.2026 37min

  In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we are joined by James Loeffler, the Felix Posen Professor of Modern Jewish History at Johns Hopkins University, to discuss his new book, An Exceptional Hatred: Antisemitism and the Fight Over Free Speech in Modern America.The book traces a century of struggle over antisemitism and free speech in the United States, from the violent anti-Jewish riots of the 1940s to the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville in 2017, and the ferocious campus debates over Israel-Palestine today. Loeffler argues that antisemitism has always been a uniquely contested category in American life – weaponised by both the right and the left, and often used to obscure rather than clarify the fight against hate.We explore the surprising rise of antisemitic attitudes in America after World War II and the Holocaust, the complex relationship between anti-communism and antisemitism in the 1950s, and the long history of Jews being viewed as "not quite white" – a racial ambiguity that has made them a persistent target of conspiracy theories.The conversation also examines the politicisation of antisemitism. Today, conservatives often use the accusation of antisemitism as a weapon against the left, while some on the left dismiss legitimate concerns about antisemitism as a smokescreen for defending Israel. Loeffler argues that this instrumentalisation of hatred does a disservice to the victims of real antisemitism and creates a toxic environment where genuine debate is impossible.Topics covered:The 2017 Charlottesville rally and its significanceThe history of antisemitic violence in post-WWII AmericaThe "Judeo-Bolshevik" conspiracy theoryJews, whiteness, and racial ambiguityThe politicisation of antisemitismFree speech, hate speech, and the campus debatesThe Israel-Palestine conflict and its impact on American JewsJames Loeffler's An Exceptional Hatred is available from all good bookshops. Please consider buying from an independent retailer or directly from the publisher.If you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes.Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• 
  Harold Wilson, Corporatism, and the Paranoia of the British Right 25.08.2026 27min

  In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we explore the life and legacy of Harold Wilson – the most successful Labour Prime Minister of the 20th century, and the man who attracted the most fevered paranoia from the British right.Wilson is often misunderstood. To the right, he was a crypto-communist, a threat to the British way of life. To some on the left, he was a betrayer of socialist ideals. The truth is more complex: Wilson was a corporatist, a believer in a managed mixed economy where private enterprise would be guided, not bullied, by the state. He wanted to break the power of the City of London, modernise British industry, and create a "producers' alliance" between manufacturing, unions, and government.This vision – modest by any standard – was met with extraordinary hostility. In the 1960s and 70s, MI5 agents plotted against him, bugged his offices, and discussed military coups. Senior civil servants sabotaged his government's plans. Newspaper barons waged campaigns of character assassination. Wilson was never a socialist, let alone a communist – but he threatened the interests of a ruling class that would not tolerate even mild reform.I draw a parallel with the current moment. The language of the British right – from the Conservative Party to Reform to various crypto-fascist fringe groups – routinely equates the basics of post-war social democracy with communism. The idea that workers should have rights, that there should be a social safety net, that there should be a public health service – these are now described as "communist ideas." This is not a new phenomenon. It is a continuation of the same paranoid tradition that sought to destroy Wilson.We also examine Wilson's attempt to create a Department of Economic Affairs to break Treasury dominance – a battle he lost, and which has echoes in Andy Burnham's current efforts to decentralise economic decision-making. The Treasury won then, and it is winning now.Topics covered:Harold Wilson as corporatistThe post-war social democratic consensusMI5 plots against WilsonThe cult of the "gentleman amateur"Wilson's "white heat of technology" speechThe Department of Economic Affairs and Treasury sabotageThe paranoia of the British rightParallels with the current momentIf you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes.Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• 
  Trump, Canada and the defence of sovereignty 24.08.2026 27min

  In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, I examine the extraordinary diplomatic demands the United States has placed on Canada – demands that echo the Austro-Hungarian ultimatum to Serbia in July 1914 and raise profound questions about American intentions.The Trump administration's trade demands on Canada are not mere negotiations. They include provisions that would restrict Canada's ability to make trade agreements with other countries, effectively preventing it from diversifying its economy beyond the United States. They target the Canadian automotive industry, Quebec's French language and cultural rights, critical minerals, and agricultural markets. Taken together, they amount to a demand for the end of Canadian sovereignty – the ceding of economic, foreign, and domestic policy to Washington.I draw a historical parallel with the Austro-Hungarian ultimatum to Serbia in 1914. The Habsburgs presented demands designed to be unacceptable – including the right to send their own police into Serbian territory to conduct investigations. The Serbs accepted most demands but rejected the diminution of their sovereignty. War followed, and with it, the cataclysm of the First World War.Is America seeking a rejection? Or is this simply the chaotic flailing of a desperate regime? I explore the incoherence of Trump's policy – the simultaneous attempts to lay economic siege to Iran, to pressure China, and to bully Canada. This is not strategy; it is the kind of random, improvisational aggression that emerges from a dysfunctional administration where access to the president determines policy, and where policy changes with the weather.The comparison to the Nazi regime's chaotic decision-making – the "working towards the Führer" model – is not about equating Trump with Hitler, but about understanding how autocratic systems generate incoherence. When the leader is inattentive, lazy, and surrounded by competing factions, policy becomes a function of who has access and what they think they heard.The result is the rapid erosion of American credibility and power. Canada will not accept these demands. And the damage to America's standing in the world – already immense – will take generations to repair.Topics covered:The Austro-Hungarian ultimatum to Serbia (1914)Trump's trade demands on CanadaRestrictions on Canadian sovereigntyThe Canadian automotive industryQuebec's French language and cultural rightsCritical minerals and the tech industryThe incoherence of American foreign policyThe "working towards the Führer" modelThe erosion of American credibilityIf you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes.Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• 
  Voter suppression and stolen US elections 19.08.2026 37min

  In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we are joined by David F. Walbert, a veteran voting rights attorney whose new book, Stealing Elections American Style, traces the long, sordid history of contested and corrupted elections from the mid‑19th century to the present day.David's career spans decades of litigation on voting rights cases, beginning in the early 1970s when he moved to Georgia and discovered that despite the Voting Rights Act, African American representation in elected office was staggeringly low. The problem was not voter registration – Black and white registration was near parity – but structural devices that allowed white majorities to control every election outcome.We explore the origins of the "Southern strategy" – the explicit deal struck by Richard Nixon in 1968 with the white South: electoral votes in exchange for Supreme Court justices hostile to civil rights. That strategy, David argues, is the genesis of the ongoing assault on voting rights, culminating in the 1980 Supreme Court decision that nearly shut down vote dilution cases – and the subsequent effort to amend the Voting Rights Act in 1982.The conversation moves to the stolen election of 1876 – perhaps the most flagrant in American history – where Rutherford B. Hayes was awarded the presidency despite losing the popular vote, through the systematic throwing out of Democratic precincts in Louisiana. The parallels to the present are striking.David also discusses the evolution of voter suppression tactics, the spread of white racist ideology from the South to the North, and the alarming infiltration of election denialists into state and local election apparatuses. He warns that the next close election – particularly in the House and Senate – could be decided not by voters, but by partisan politicians in Congress, a prospect that threatens the very foundation of American democracy.Topics covered:David's career litigating voting rights casesThe Voting Rights Act and its amendmentsThe Southern strategy and its consequencesThe stolen election of 1876 (Tilden vs. Hayes)George W. Bush vs. Al Gore in 2000Trump's attempt to steal the 2020 electionThe infiltration of election denialists into state and local officesThe constitutional power of Congress to judge its own electionsThe threat to the 2028 presidential electionDavid F. Walbert's Stealing Elections American Style is published by Bloomsbury and is available from September 3 in the US and October in the UK. Please consider buying from an independent bookshop or directly from the publisher.If you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes.Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• 
  From Empire to Neoliberalism – The Long Arc of Capital and the Cannibalisation of the West 18.08.2026 27min

  In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we step back from the specific history of Congo to examine the broader theoretical framework of neocolonialism – and how the decline of formal empire prepared the ground for the neoliberal revolution.Drawing on thinkers from Marx and Lenin to J.A. Hobson and Rosa Luxemburg, we explore the purpose of empire from the perspective of capital: the pursuit of cheap resources, cheap labour, and captive markets. Britain's transformation from a middling European kingdom to a global superpower was built on the extraction of wealth from its colonies – from the opium trade with China to the slave‑based sugar and cotton economies to the systematic deindustrialisation of India.But what happens when empire becomes unsustainable? In India, the British lost control of the Indian Army in 1946, and with it, their ability to monopolise armed force. By the 1950s and 60s, most of Britain's African colonies were gone. Yet the flow of wealth from the Global South to the City of London did not stop. It continued through neocolonialism – debt, the Bretton Woods institutions, corporate infiltration, and support for pliant regimes.And then came neoliberalism. As the returns from empire declined, capitalist elites in the Global North turned inward, cannibalising their own societies through privatisation, the erosion of welfare states, and the breaking of organised labour. The neoliberal revolution was, in part, a response to the crisis of empire – a way to maintain elite wealth and power when the old imperial structures could no longer deliver.We also consider the explicitly colonial and eugenic thinking of some neoliberal architects, and the destructive consequences of imposing market logic on societies with no history of it. From the mass unemployment of Thatcher's Britain to the ongoing exploitation of Africa, the arc of capital bends towards extraction – and the people always pay the price.Topics covered:Marxist and liberal theories of imperialism (Hobson, Lenin, Luxemburg)Britain's transition from formal empire to neocolonialismThe loss of control over the Indian Army in 1946The Bretton Woods institutions and the weaponisation of debtNeoliberalism as a response to the decline of empireThe cannibalisation of Western welfare statesThe role of organised labour and the defeat of the minersThe eugenic and colonial thinking of neoliberal theoristsIf you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes.Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• 
  Belgium, America and Congo 1884-1960 17.08.2026 31min

  In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we begin a journey into one of the darkest and most overlooked chapters of the 20th century: the establishment of neocolonialism in Africa after the formal end of European empires.After the Second World War, the dreams of a genuinely independent Africa – of nations free from exploitation, able to chart their own futures – were mercilessly snuffed out by Western powers. Drawing on Susan Williams's brilliant White Malice: The CIA and the Neocolonialisation of Africa, we explore the relationship between Ghana and Congo, and the forces that destroyed the hopes of the independence era.We begin with the brutal history of King Leopold II's Congo Free State – a territory nearly 80 times the size of Belgium, where an estimated 10 million Congolese people died as a consequence of forced labour, mutilation, and murder. The purpose of Belgian rule, as Kwame Nkrumah observed, was not to suppress slavery but to change its nature, to make it more profitable.But the exploitation did not end with formal decolonisation. The Congo's Shinkolobwe mine produced uranium of unparalleled richness – up to 75% uranium oxide, compared to ores from America that contained just 0.2%. This uranium was essential to the Manhattan Project, powering the atomic bombs that devastated Hiroshima and Nagasaki. After the war, the resource extraction continued, but through new means: corporate infiltration, debt, coups, and the tools of the Bretton Woods system.We trace the origins of American intelligence operations in Africa, from the OSS bases in Accra, Cape Town, and Addis Ababa, to the top-secret mission to protect Congolese uranium from falling into enemy hands. And we consider the broader tragedy of neocolonialism – how the West used every tool at its disposal to ensure that Africa's resources remained under its control, long after the flags of empire had been lowered.Topics covered:The Belgian Congo and the crimes of King Leopold IIThe forced labour system and the rubber tradeThe Shinkolobwe uranium mineThe Manhattan Project and the atomic bombThe OSS and early US intelligence in AfricaKwame Nkrumah and Pan-AfricanismThe tools of neocolonialism: debt, coups, and corporate powerThe continuing relevance of resource exploitation todaySusan Williams's White Malice is available from all good bookshops. Please consider buying from an independent retailer.If you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes.Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• 
  America's Wrong Turn – How Neoliberalism Broke U.S. Healthcare with John McDonagh 12.08.2026 38min

  In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we are joined by John McDonagh, professor of practice at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, former Massachusetts state legislator, and key architect of Obamacare. He is here to discuss his new book, America's Wrong Turn: U.S. Healthcare in the Neoliberal Era – a searing diagnosis of how a revolution in economic thinking turned the American healthcare system into a global outlier.The United States spends more on healthcare than any other advanced nation – by a staggering margin – yet its health outcomes rank near the bottom. Life expectancy has been declining since 1980. The infant mortality rate is embarrassingly high. And while every other wealthy country covers 99–100% of its citizens, the U.S. still leaves millions uninsured.John explains how a single chart – showing U.S. healthcare spending as a percentage of GDP – reveals the story. In 1980, the U.S. was the highest spender but still in the pack. Then something happened. Around 1982–83, the U.S. "jackrabbited" away from every other nation. The culprit? The neoliberal revolution – the ideas of Milton Friedman, Friedrich Hayek, and the Mont Pelerin Society – that captured American policy under Ronald Reagan and transformed healthcare from a public good into a site of value extraction.John traces how monopoly capitalism, private equity, and the mantra of "maximising shareholder value" have hollowed out the system. Hospitals are bought by private equity firms, stripped of their land and buildings, and turned into tenants paying exorbitant rents. Two companies now control 90% of dialysis care. Antitrust enforcement has collapsed. The result is a system that Americans hate – but feel powerless to change.Yet John is an optimist. He argues that the feedback loop of public revulsion is building, and that the neoliberal era – though its effects persist – is over. The seeds of hope lie in renewed antitrust activism, grassroots organising, and the eventual replacement of a corrupt administration.Topics covered:U.S. healthcare spending vs. outcomesThe 1980s inflection pointThe neoliberal revolution and its key thinkersMonopoly capitalism in healthcarePrivate equity and value extractionThe collapse of antitrust enforcementMilton Friedman's "shareholder value" doctrineThe NHS and the politics of healthcareHope for reformJohn McDonagh's America's Wrong Turn is published by Johns Hopkins University Press. Use code HTWN at checkout for 30% off. Please consider buying from an independent retailer or directly from the publisher.If you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes.Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• 
  California and the origins of the carceral state 11.08.2026 27min

  In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we explore a little‑known chapter of American history: the establishment of California's penal system as a form of coerced labour that replaced chattel slavery.When we think of slavery in America, we think of the southern states. But California has a far more complex and underexplored history. In 1849, the year after gold was discovered, California was a lawless frontier. There were no courts, no jails, no police. Vigilantes and self‑appointed "tribunals" dispensed "justice" with fists, guns and ropes. White paramilitary groups like the Hounds terrorised Latino and Black communities, robbing, raping and mutilating with impunity.As California moved towards statehood in 1850, it needed to establish order. But the state had no money to build prisons. The solution was to put prisoners to work – and to make them pay for their own incarceration. From the 1850s onwards, legions of shackled prisoners built roads, broke granite, laid pipes and even built San Quentin prison itself. Convict labour was leased to private businesses, creating a system of penal slavery that would endure for generations.Drawing on Jean Felser's California, a Slave State, we trace the origins of this system. The 13th Amendment abolished slavery – but with a crucial exception: "except as a punishment for crime". That exception allowed California to build an economic colossus on the backs of unpaid prisoners, disproportionately Native American, Black, immigrant and poor. And the system never went away.Topics covered:California's lawless gold rush eraThe Hounds and vigilante justiceThe 1850 Act for the Government and Protection of IndiansThe establishment of San Quentin prisonConvict leasing and penal slaveryThe 13th Amendment's "punishment for crime" exceptionThe racialisation of crime and punishmentThe prison‑industrial complex in historical perspectiveIf you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes.Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
• 
  The International Brigades and the fight for Spain 22.07.2026 37min

  The International Brigades and the Fight for Spain**In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we are joined by Tony Fox, organiser of the Northeast Volunteers for Liberty and the International Brigades Memorial Organisation, to discuss the newly published collection, *Remember Me to My Comrades: Letters from Spain to Britain*.**The book emerged from a remarkable collaboration with the families of volunteers from the North East of England – one of the industrial heartlands hit hardest by the Great Depression. Through letters, diaries, and previously unpublished documents from the Russian archives, it brings to life the voices of men who went to Spain to fight fascism.Tony explains how the International Brigades were formed in response to the Non-Intervention Treaty signed by Britain, France and other powers. While Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy poured troops and weapons into Franco's Nationalist forces, the Soviet Union organised volunteers through the Comintern. In Britain, the Communist Party – not the Labour Party, which supported non-intervention – recruited and vetted two-and-a-half thousand men.We discuss the diverse motivations of the volunteers: from committed communists who had already fought Oswald Mosley's fascists on the streets of Britain, to idealists who saw Spain as the front line of a wider war against fascism. We explore the unique political character of the International Brigades – an army of working-class activists who knew why they were fighting, and whose morale was sustained through political education, including an essay competition held in the middle of the war.Tony also shares the story of Sam Wild, the last and finest commander of the British Battalion, and the chaotic, heroic rear‑guard actions that defined the British experience – from the defence of Madrid to the bloody retreats across the Ebro.**Topics covered:**- The Non-Intervention Treaty and its consequences- The formation of the International Brigades- The role of the Communist Party in recruitment- The social and political character of the volunteers- The Battle of Jarama and the defence of Madrid- Sam Wild and the British Battalion- Letters from the Russian archives- The human cost of the Spanish Civil War---*Tony Fox's *Remember Me to My Comrades* is available from Barnfather Publishing and independent bookshops. Please consider buying from an independent retailer or directly from the publisher.**If you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes.*Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share.▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive ContentBecome a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory▸ Join the Community & Continue the ConversationFacebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcastSubstack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com▸ Read Articles & Go DeeperWebsite: explaininghistory.org Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.