Explaining History

Эпизоды

• Quebec's secret biological warfare history 25.06.2026 33мин

  In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we are joined by award-winning French Canadian author Mireille Gagné to discuss her acclaimed novel, *Horsefly* – a powerful, genre-defying work inspired by a top‑secret biological warfare laboratory that operated on Québec's Grosse Île during the Second World War.The novel draws on a forgotten chapter of shared Allied history. In 1942, British, American, and Canadian forces established a clandestine facility on Grosse Île – an island in the St. Lawrence River that had previously served as a quarantine station for European immigrants. Their mission: to develop anthrax as a weapon of mass destruction, producing enough to kill the world's population thirty times over. The operation, known as Project M, was part of a broader effort that included the infamous Gruinard Island tests in Scotland – where anthrax spores rendered the island uninhabitable for decades.But Mireille's story is not primarily about scientists and generals. It is about the ordinary people – the residents of neighbouring islands, many of them French Canadian, who were recruited as labourers, caretakers, and assistants. They slaughtered cattle, handled organs, washed themselves with harsh red soap, and transported dangerous materials – often without understanding the full extent of the risks. They worked in silence, bound by military secrecy, and carried a heavy burden that they never fully spoke about.Mireille grew up on Île‑aux‑Grues, part of the same archipelago as Grosse Île. She heard fragments of these stories as a child – whispered, half‑remembered, dismissed by some as dementia. Her mother, who arrived on the island in the 1970s, tried to ask questions but was met with silence. It was only when Mireille began interviewing grandchildren that the stories began to emerge – piecemeal, tentative, shameful. The men who had worked there rarely spoke before they died; the families who survived did not want to revisit the past.*Horsefly* moves between the 1940s and the present day. In the contemporary timeline, a suffocating heatwave grips Québec, violence is on the rise, and a man caring for his grandfather with dementia must journey back to Grosse Île to understand the cryptic wartime past that is consuming him. The novel explores themes of memory, transhumanism, and the long shadow of war – a reminder that the "good guys" in the Second World War also pursued weapons of unimaginable destructiveness.**Topics covered:**- The top‑secret Grosse Île biological warfare laboratory (Project M)- Operation Vegetarian and the Gruinard Island anthrax tests- Britain's Porton Down and the Allied biological weapons programme- The role of Canadian scientists, including Frederick Banting- The recruitment of local French Canadian labourers- The silence and shame of those who worked there- Mireille's personal connection to the story- The novel's exploration of memory, trauma, and transhumanism- The contemporary relevance of biological weapons research---*Mireille Gagné's Horsefly is published by New Cross Press and is available now. 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.
• Belfast and the international networked far right 18.06.2026 39мин

  Northern Ireland, the Far-Right, and the Battle for Democracy with Heidi BirickIn this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we are joined again by Heidi Birick of the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism to discuss the recent far-right violence in Northern Ireland – and the global networks that fuelled it.In recent weeks, Northern Ireland was rocked by a series of violent attacks against migrant communities following an incident in which a Sudanese national attacked an NHS worker. The attack was not terrorist-related and had no connection to the wider migrant community. But the global far-right seized on the event, spreading misinformation across social media and calling for violence. The footage of the resulting attacks – houses burned, people terrified to leave their homes – had all the hallmarks of a pogrom.Heidi explains how far-right groups are tightly networked in the online space, sharing messaging across continents, coordinating through unmoderated chat channels like Telegram, and meeting in person at conferences to plan their strategy. Figures like Tommy Robinson and Elon Musk amplified the calls for violence – Musk, in particular, has been openly promoting white supremacist ideas, calling for "remigration", and threatening civil war in the UK.We discuss the alarming power of a trillionaire like Musk to ride roughshod over public order and civil society from anywhere in the world, and the inability of states – even powerful ones like the United Kingdom – to respond effectively. The erosion of content moderation on X (formerly Twitter) has created a safe haven for hate speech, and the US government's hostility to online regulation has made the problem worse.But there is hope. The far-right riots in Belfast were met with an enormous counter-protest the following day – the largest show of solidarity in Northern Ireland since the Good Friday Agreement. Heidi argues that the majority of people reject these ideas, and that movements for democracy and human rights remain powerful. She also reflects on the need for structural solutions – taxing billionaires, regulating media, and rebuilding state capacity to deliver for ordinary people.Topics covered:The far-right violence in Northern IrelandTommy Robinson and Elon Musk's role in spreading disinformationThe global network of far-right groupsElon Musk's influence on content moderation and hate speechThe power of trillionaires to undermine democracyThe ineffectiveness of state responsesCounter-protests in Belfast and the rejection of fascismComparisons with historical fascismThe Henry VII principle and the need to tax oligarchsThe generational battle against hateHeidi Birick is co-founder of the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism. Visit globalextremism.org for resources and to support their vital work.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.
• Italy from the fascism to post war republic 17.06.2026 43мин

  The Toscanini Conspiracy – Arturo Toscanini, Fascism, and the Italian Resistance with Filippo IannaroneIn this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we are joined by Italian author Filippo Iannarone to discuss his acclaimed crime novel, The Toscanini Conspiracy – a story that weaves together a real‑life cold case, the anti‑fascist resistance of conductor Arturo Toscanini, and the author's own family history of heroic opposition to Mussolini and Hitler.The novel began with a chance encounter. While travelling in Val d'Orcia, Filippo discovered a small inn called Locanda Toscanini and asked the host why it bore the name of the legendary conductor. The answer opened a door to a forgotten story: the murder of Dr. Rinaldi, a physician and friend of Toscanini, in 1935 – the same year Mussolini invaded Ethiopia. The case was never solved. But as Filippo dug through newspaper archives and court documents, he found that it exposed a hidden world of anti‑fascist activity in a small Tuscan village.That village became a gathering place for intellectuals, artists, and dissidents – including the explorer Umberto Nobile, fashion designer Salvatore Ferragamo, and Anita Garibaldi – all resisting the tightening grip of Mussolini's regime. At the centre of it all was Arturo Toscanini, the most famous conductor in the world, who had already been beaten by fascist thugs for refusing to play the regime's anthem. Later, he would reject a personal invitation from Adolf Hitler to conduct at Bayreuth – a decision that carried immense symbolic weight.But Filippo's story is also deeply personal. His uncle, Major General Michele Iannarone, was a hero of the Italian Resistance. A monarchist officer who served on the Eastern Front and developed contacts with German officers opposed to Hitler, he became one of the commanders of Rome's clandestine military resistance after the fall of Mussolini in July 1943. When Rome was occupied by the Nazis, his network of thousands of partisans coordinated with the Allies, saved Jewish families, and kept the German army occupied until the Americans arrived.We discuss the brutal civil war that raged in Italy from 1943 until well after the war's end, the forgotten role of monarchist partisans, the trauma of the "years of lead" in the 1970s, and the uncomfortable continuities between fascism and today's far‑right movements across Europe and America. Filippo also reflects on what Toscanini would make of our current moment – and why telling these stories matters more than ever.Topics covered:The real‑life cold case that inspired the novelArturo Toscanini's anti‑fascist activismThe 1935 Italian invasion of Ethiopia and its domestic consequencesThe alternative community of dissidents in Spiazza, TuscanyMajor General Michele Iannarone and the monarchist partisansThe military clandestine front in occupied RomeThe Via Rasella bombing and the Ardeatine massacreItaly's post‑war civil war and the "years of lead"The erasure of monarchist partisans from official historyParallels between 1930s Italy and today's far‑right movementsFilippo Iannarone's The Toscanini Conspiracy is available now in English. 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.
• Militarism, Masculinity, and the Making of the American Warrior 10.06.2026 43мин

  In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we are joined by investigative journalist Jasper Craven to discuss his new book, *God Forgives, Brothers Don’t: Inside the Violent, Hypermasculine World of America’s Military Schools*. The conversation ranges far beyond military academies to explore how the US military has become the defining institution of American manhood – and what that means for democracy, violence, and the soul of the nation.**Jasper’s journey into this subject began with a tip about a dysfunctional military school near Philadelphia, rife with abuse and corruption. That story opened a window onto a broad network of military education – from elite officer training at West Point to reform schools for troubled boys – all peddling the same promise: that rigid hierarchy, discipline, and violence can forge a real man. The military, Jasper argues, has filled a void left by the collapse of other pathways to meaning and middle‑class security.We trace the historical roots of America’s uneasy relationship with standing armies – the founders’ distrust of a professional military versus the lionisation of the revolutionary war veteran. That tension has been resolved decisively in favour of the soldier. Today, militarism permeates American culture, from a defence budget larger than the next ten countries combined to the reflexive adoration of anyone in uniform. This “secular faith” has produced a generation of veterans who feel their sacrifices are acknowledged only in hollow, abstract gestures – never in a genuine willingness to confront the ugliness of war.The conversation turns to Pete Hegseth, Trump’s defence secretary and a walking embodiment of hyper‑performative masculinity. Jasper traces Hegseth’s own insecurities – shame at his “soft” father, a desperate need to prove himself – and shows how the military offered him a ready‑made identity. But that identity is brittle, built on a foundation of alcohol abuse, misogyny, Islamophobia, and a deep fear of being seen as weak. Hegseth, Jasper argues, is not an aberration but the “inevitable conclusion” of decades of imperial blowback.We also discuss the role of military schools in channelling working‑class boys – disproportionately white, often struggling with learning disabilities or juvenile justice issues – into a system that promises redemption through submission. The long‑term consequences are devastating: high rates of suicide, PTSD, domestic violence, and extremist radicalisation. Jasper notes that the mob that stormed the Capitol on 6 January was composed largely of military veterans – a fact that was briefly discussed, then quietly forgotten.Topics covered:- Jasper’s investigative journey from a single dysfunctional military school to a national network- The economic and social drivers of military recruitment- How military schools weaponise masculinity as a recruiting tool- America’s historic tension between distrust of standing armies and adoration of soldiers- The failure of post‑9/11 wars to deliver meaning or victory- Pete Hegseth as a case study in fragile, performative masculinity- The 6 January insurrection and the role of radicalised veterans- The hollow abstraction of veteran worship- Graham Platner’s Senate campaign as a test of whether voters can face the real wounds of war---*Jasper Craven’s *God Forgives, Brothers Don’t* is out now. 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.
• The Ottoman March on Egypt 1915 03.06.2026 29мин

  In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we examine the opening moves of the Ottoman Empire’s war against Britain – a desperate, audacious campaign to seize the Suez Canal that has been largely forgotten but which revealed the fragility of the British Empire and the resilience of the Ottoman army.At the outbreak of the First World War, the Ottoman Empire saw itself surrounded by enemies: the British in Egypt, the Russians to the north, a hostile Habsburg Empire to the west, and a recently hostile Italy in the Mediterranean. The Young Turk government initially hoped to stay out of the war. But when they looked at Britain, France, and Russia, they saw voraciously hungry powers intent on dismembering their empire. Germany offered a security guarantee – unreliable, but the best available.The German High Command placed a high priority on cutting the Suez Canal. Between August and December 1914, 376 transport ships carried nearly 164,000 Allied troops through the canal. It was the vital artery connecting the Indian Ocean to the Mediterranean – the lifeline of Britain’s Asian empire. If the Ottomans could pinch it off, they could deal Britain a mortal blow and perhaps inspire a pan‑Islamic jihad against British rule.The man chosen to lead the attack was Cemal Pasha. In November 1914, he stood in Istanbul’s central train station and publicly proclaimed his intention to conquer Egypt. The British dismissed his pledge as empty rhetoric. They did not believe he could raise an army large enough or cross the waterless, hostile Sinai desert.But Cemal assembled a heterogeneous, multi‑ethnic force – regular soldiers from the Arab provinces, volunteers from Bedouin, Druze, Circassian, Kurdish, Albanian, and even Jewish communities. He wrote to the Sharif of Mecca, Hussein ibn Ali, asking for troops under one of his sons. Hussein’s son Ali went no further than Medina – a warning sign Cemal chose to ignore.Against all odds, Cemal’s force marched across the Sinai in 12 days, losing neither a man nor a beast. They carried light rations of dates, biscuit, and olives, water carefully rationed, marching through the freezing nights and resting by day. British aerial surveillance initially failed to detect them – early aircraft lacked the range to reach central Sinai.By late January 1915, the British realised the impossible was happening. They withdrew all troops to the western shore of the canal, chained guard dogs on the east bank, and waited. The odds were stacked against the Ottomans – 25,000 attackers against 50,000 dug‑in defenders, backed by warships, armoured trains, and the canal itself. But Cemal had achieved surprise. What happened next would shape the course of the war in the Middle East.Drawing on Eugene Rogan’s *The Fall of the Ottomans*, this episode explores the political context of the Ottoman decision to enter the war, the challenges of mobilising a multi‑ethnic army, the incredible logistics of the Sinai crossing, and the early use of aerial reconnaissance in desert warfare.**Topics covered:**- The Ottoman Empire’s strategic dilemma in 1914- The alliance with Germany and the promise of jihad- The importance of the Suez Canal to the British war effort- Cemal Pasha and his public proclamation- The composition of the Ottoman expeditionary force- Sharif Hussein’s reluctant cooperation- The 12‑day march across the Sinai- British aerial reconnaissance and its limitations- The defence of the canal: warships, armoured trains, and guard dogs- The moment of surprise before the attack---*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.
• Adoption, Colonialism, and the Korean War 28.05.2026 34мин

  *The history that this podcast episode explores involves harm and neglect to children and some listeners may find the details disclosed distressing.In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we are joined by Paige Towers to discuss her new book, What They Stole – a deeply researched exploration of intercountry adoption from Korea to the United States, rooted in a family tragedy that shook her Iowa hometown.The book begins with a shocking event: in 2008, a local bank vice president murdered his wife and children before taking his own life. For Paige, this was a window into a much larger and darker history – the story of Korean intercountry adoption, which began in the aftermath of the Korean War and continued for decades with little oversight or accountability.We trace the origins of modern intercountry adoption to the mass displacement of children during and after World War II. In Italy, Greece, and Germany, orphans filled the streets, and American GIs and missionaries began taking children home – often through informal, unregulated channels. By the time the Korean War ended, a full‑blown adoption industry had emerged, driven by a combination of military humanitarianism, Christian missionary zeal, and Cold War anti‑communism.Paige focuses on Harry and Bertha Holt, an evangelical couple who became the face of Korean adoption. The Holts started by seeking out the multiracial children of American GIs – children whose “whitened” appearance struck a chord with US audiences. But when those children proved scarce, they simply turned to Korean children, fulfilling a waiting list of 10,000 American families. The Holts pioneered “baby lifts” – chartering old military cargo planes, removing the seats, and packing up to 100 infants on unpressurised, freezing, turbulent flights. Many children died en route.The system that emerged was reckless and coercive: adoptions by proxy (parents never met their child before the adoption was finalised), falsified records, and a global pipeline that eventually supplied children to Denmark, France, Sweden, and the Netherlands. Paige also documents a shocking pattern of murder – Korean children killed by their adoptive parents, cases that were largely ignored by a media more interested in feel‑good rescue narratives.What does it mean when good intentions produce harmful systems? Paige argues that the humanitarian narrative of adoption has often silenced the voices of adoptees themselves – their experiences of cultural loss, identity erasure, and, in the worst cases, violence. The book is a powerful call to reckon with the colonial assumptions embedded in intercountry adoption.Topics covered:The 2008 Iowa City murder and its connection to adoption historyWorld War II displacement and the origins of intercountry adoptionThe Korean War and “military humanitarianism”Harry and Bertha Holt and the Christian adoption missionMultiracial children and the politics of “whiteness”The shift to adopting Korean childrenBaby lifts: unpressurised planes, sick infants, and deaths in transitAdoption by proxy and the lack of regulationEuropean adoption pipelines (Denmark, France, Sweden, the Netherlands)Adoptee activism and the fight for truth and reconciliationPaige Towers’ What They Stole is available now from the University of Iowa Press. 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.
• The Shortest History of Scotland – Nation, Union, and the Rise of Nationalism 20.05.2026 34мин

  In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we are joined by cultural historian Murray Pittock to discuss his new book, The Shortest History of Scotland – a concise but richly detailed journey through two millennia of Scottish history, from the Picts to the present day.Scotland’s geography – the “land of the mountain and the flood”, in Walter Scott’s phrase – made it virtually impenetrable until modern roads and railways. For centuries, the sea was the highway, and Scotland’s east‑coast ports looked as much to continental Europe as to England. Understanding that terrain is key to understanding how Scotland became a state in historical time – and why the union with England was never a foregone conclusion.Murray explains the origins of his book, written as part of the bestselling Shortest History series, and the opportunity it offered to refresh a field dominated by either heavy tomes or outdated accounts. He focuses not just on kings and battles, but on people’s lived lives, culture, and the built environment – while also signposting readers towards deeper dives, such as the Declaration of Arbroath.We then turn to the present. The story of modern Scottish nationalism begins with Winnie Ewing’s shock by‑election victory in Hamilton in 1967, and her slogan “Stop the world – Scotland wants to get on”. The post‑imperial era marginalised Scotland’s distinctive identity; Britishness, once a broad, inclusive identity shared by Australians, Canadians and New Zealanders, suddenly became something narrower and more insular. The memory of the two world wars – particularly the myth of 1940 as an English, south‑east England story – has played a complex role in the union’s longevity.Murray explores the drivers of Scottish nationalism: economic anxiety, a desire for democratic control, and an internationalist outlook that became visible in the 2016 Brexit vote, where Scotland’s pattern diverged dramatically from England’s. He also reflects on the 2014 independence referendum – where pensions and currency fears likely tipped the balance – and on devolution, which Labour hoped would “kill nationalism stone dead” but which failed partly because Scottish Labour never truly became a nationalist party.We also discuss the formation of the union in 1707, a vote “forced” by economic weakness, English obstruction of Scottish overseas trade, and a lack of alternatives. The mercantile class later profited handsomely from the British Empire, shifting Scotland’s economic centre of gravity from east to west – from the European ports to Glasgow and the American trade.Topics covered:The geography of Scotland and its historical impactWalter Scott’s “land of the mountain and the flood”The Declaration of ArbroathWinnie Ewing and the birth of modern Scottish nationalismPost‑imperial Britishness and the Festival of Britain (1951)The memory of the world wars and its role in the unionDrivers of Scottish nationalism: economic, democratic, internationalistThe 2014 independence referendum and the currency/pensions questionDevolution: Labour’s miscalculationThe 1707 union: economic weakness, Darien, and a forced voteMurray Pittock’s The Shortest History of Scotland is available now 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.
• Trump and Nixon in Beijing - an instructive comparison 19.05.2026 30мин

  In this episode of the Explaining History podcast, Nick sets the scene for an upcoming interview with historian Murray Pittock on The Shortest History of Scotland, reflecting on the current wave of nationalist politics across Scotland, Wales, and Ireland—and how these movements connect to wider shifts in British and English identity.From there, Nick turns to global affairs, unpacking the stark contrast between Richard Nixon’s landmark visit to China and Donald Trump’s far more troubled encounter with Beijing. What did Nixon understand about power, diplomacy, and long-term strategy that seems absent today?The episode explores the tangled relationship between the United States, China, and Iran, looking at how recent events may signal a shift in global power—and what that means for American influence, its allies, and the future of international politics.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.
• Master of Lies – Anthony Blunt, the Cambridge Spy Who Changed the Course of World War II 13.05.2026 40мин

  In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we are joined by author Piers Blofeld to discuss his new book, Master of Lies: The Untold Story of Anthony Blunt, which re‑examines the most underestimated member of the Cambridge Spy Ring.Anthony Blunt was exposed as a Soviet agent in 1979 – long after the defections of Burgess, Maclean and Philby. For decades, he has been treated as something of an afterthought, a cultured art historian who happened to pass a few secrets to the Russians during the war. But Blofeld’s research paints a very different picture – one in which Blunt was not a minor player but a master of deception whose actions had catastrophic consequences.Blunt was recruited by the NKVD in the 1930s, joined MI5 during the war, and rose to become Surveyor of the Queen’s Pictures. Officially, he stopped spying in 1945. In reality, he continued operating well into the 1950s and 60s, using his flat to debrief agents and helping to investigate the very defections of his fellow spies.But his most significant work was not stealing documents – it was disinformation. Blofeld argues that the “postgraduate level” of espionage is misleading your enemy, and Blunt was a virtuoso. He ran a deception operation that mirrored the famous “Garbo” double‑agent network, feeding the Germans false information that helped ensure the success of D‑Day. Crucially, Blunt’s information arrived at German High Command via Sweden four hours before Garbo’s did – making the deception far more convincing.Yet just three months later, Blunt sabotaged Operation Market Garden, releasing detailed Allied order of battle to the Germans. The result was 16,000 Allied casualties, a failed advance into Germany, and a prolonged war that allowed Stalin to seize Eastern Europe. Blunt’s betrayal, Blofeld argues, directly contributed to the partition of Berlin and the shape of the Cold War.We also explore how Blunt was protected by the British establishment for decades, how he edited incriminating evidence after Burgess and Maclean fled, and why Margaret Thatcher – herself misled by her own security services – finally named him in 1979.**Topics covered:**- The Cambridge Spy Ring and Anthony Blunt’s role- Blunt’s continued espionage after 1945- Disinformation as the highest form of espionage- The Garbo deception and Blunt’s mirror operation- Operation Market Garden and Blunt’s sabotage- The cover‑up and protection of Blunt by MI5- Thatcher’s outing of Blunt and its aftermath---*Piers Blofeld’s *Master of Lies* 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 Neocons Admit Defeat in Iran 11.05.2026 26мин

  In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we examine a remarkable moment: the leading architect of the Project for a New American Century, Robert Kagan, admitting that the Iran crisis is a catastrophe of unprecedented proportions – and that America has effectively lost the war.**The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) was the neoconservative think tank that shaped the foreign policy of the George W. Bush administration. Its vision was a unilateral American empire, able to fight and win two major wars simultaneously, with Iran at the top of its enemies list. But now, writing in *The Atlantic* – the house magazine of liberal interventionism – Kagan has declared that the Gulf War is unwinnable, that Iran has seized control of the Straits of Hormuz, and that the post-war American order is finished.What does it mean when the neocons themselves admit defeat? Kagan acknowledges that Iran has turned the straits from a passageway of free navigation into the world's most significant global pinch point. Iran will now decide which regimes can access Gulf shipping and which will be economically starved. America cannot project power into the Gulf; it has presented itself as an unreliable ally. The consequences for Taiwan, Japan, and other US partners are dire: they will not hesitate to break ties if a powerful regional predator comes calling.Kagan’s only proposed alternative is a “massive generational land and air war” occupying Iran forever – an impossibility so absurd that it reveals the neocons’ delusion. The Saudis, meanwhile, have concluded that the US and Israel are the aggressors, and that the entire attack was designed to drag them into a war with Iran. The eight-decade alliance forged by Franklin Roosevelt is now fraying. America is being expelled from the Gulf.This is the end of Pax Americana. Regional powers will now call the shots. Smaller nations will have to accommodate larger neighbours. And the neocons – after decades of advocating violent empire – have finally admitted that the project for a new American century is dead.**Topics covered:**- The Project for a New American Century (PNAC)- Robert Kagan’s *Atlantic* article- Iran’s control of the Straits of Hormuz- The end of American naval supremacy- Saudi Arabia’s break with Washington- The collapse of Pax Americana- Neocon delusion and the impossibility of occupying Iran---*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.
• Hobsbawm's Age of Extremes – The Golden Age, the Fall of Communism, and the Crisis of Social Democracy 09.05.2026 29мин

  **In this solo episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we return to Eric Hobsbawm's magisterial overview of the 20th century, *Age of Extremes*, to explore the paradoxes that shaped our world – and the crisis that defines our present.**Hobsbawm argued that the "short twentieth century" – from 1914 to 1991 – was defined by the confrontation between capitalism and communism. But the relationship between these two systems was stranger than simple opposition. The victory over Hitler's Germany was essentially won, and could only have been won, by the Red Army. Without the Soviet Union, the Western world would likely consist of a set of variations on authoritarian and fascist themes, not liberal parliamentary ones.Yet the most lasting result of the October Revolution was to save its capitalist antagonists – by providing the incentive of fear to reform itself after the Second World War, and by furnishing it with the popularity of economic planning. The post-war Golden Age (1947–73) – that unprecedented era of rising living standards, mass consumption, generous welfare states, and growing life expectancy – was, in Hobsbawm's word, "anomalous". It emerged from specific historical conditions: the need to stave off communist challenge, the availability of cheap energy, and the destruction of old ruling classes.That Golden Age is now long gone. Neoliberalism has de‑industrialised the West, privatised public assets, and replaced productive capitalism with rentier capitalism – where we rent the infrastructure of our own lives back from global capital. Social democratic parties across the Western world have abandoned any commitment to redistribution, embraced managerialism, and collapsed into irrelevance. Right‑wing populists – Trumps, Orbáns, Farages – have rushed into the vacuum, offering not solutions but the spectacle of permanent crisis.Hobsbawm died in 2012, but his framework helps us see our moment: an era of decay, of institutional collapse, of centre‑left parties dying. As Gramsci put it, the old is dying and the new cannot be born. And that new may not be born in Europe or America. The centre of gravity is shifting eastwards – to India and China – returning to where most of human history has been centred.We are living through the death of the post‑war social democratic order. What comes next is uncertain – but it will not look like the past.**Topics covered:**- Hobsbawm's "short twentieth century"- The Red Army and the defeat of Nazism- The paradox of Soviet communism saving capitalism- The post‑war Golden Age (1947–73) as an anomaly- De‑industrialisation and the rise of rentier capitalism- The collapse of social democratic parties- Neoliberalism, the 2008 crisis, and the absence of alternatives- Right‑wing populism and kleptocracy- The shifting global centre of gravity to Asia---*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 Tsar's Generals and the Press – Russian Military Journalism in the Reform Era 05.05.2026 31мин

  In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we explore a little‑known but revealing corner of Russian history: the military press during the reign of Alexander II.After the humiliating defeat in the Crimean War, it was clear that Russia's army – and the autocracy that sustained it – needed fundamental change. Alexander II, who came to power as the war dragged on, embarked on a series of "Great Reforms", most famously the emancipation of the serfs in 1861. But reform was always a balancing act between modernisation and the preservation of autocratic power.Nowhere were these tensions sharper than in the military press. Historian E. Willis Brooks, in an essay from the collection *Reforming the Tsar's Army*, examines how War Minister D. A. Milyutin used newspapers and journals to communicate new ideas to officers and conscripts – while struggling to control the very voices he had unleashed.Publications like *Ruski Invalid* (The Russian Veteran) and *Voyeny Sbornik* (Military Review) were meant to be loyal instruments of state policy. But as they sought readers and relevance, their editors – some of them former utopian socialists – began to clash with government censors and even the Tsar's ministers. The result was a chaotic, semi‑autonomous press that both advanced reform and exposed its contradictions.We look at the founding of new military journals, the explosion in readership, and the uneasy partnership between Milyutin and his old radical acquaintance Colonel Pisarevskii, who was given the extraordinary task of running a government newspaper as a capitalist enterprise. Their struggle over "official" and "unofficial" opinions reveals the limits of censorship – even in an autocracy.Topics covered:- The Crimean War and Russia's military humiliation- Alexander II's Great Reforms- War Minister D. A. Milyutin- The military press: *Ruski Invalid*, *Voyeny Sbornik*- Censorship and the "epoch of sensorial terror"- The experiment of semi‑commercial government journalism- Pisarevskii, utopian socialism, and the dangers of editorial independence- How state‑led reform struggles with public communicationIf 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.
• Austerity Never Ended – The Cultural Politics of Thrift in Modern Britain 04.05.2026 25мин

  In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we examine the enduring legacy of austerity – a policy that officially ran from 2010 to 2024, but whose cultural and political effects are still very much with us.The Labour government has made token gestures toward rolling back austerity – ending the two‑child benefit cap, for example – but the structural damage done to British society is likely unfixable without something approaching wartime levels of economic mobilisation. The real story, however, is not just about cuts. It is about how austerity was sold to the public.Drawing on Liam Stanley's *Britain Alone*, I explore how thrift became a nationalist virtue. The "keep calm and carry on" aesthetic, wartime nostalgia, and television shows like *Super Scrimper* turned prudent consumption into a marker of belonging. Those who made the "right" choices – growing vegetables, knitting, reusing leftovers – were celebrated as proper Britons. Those who didn't – often the working poor – were stigmatised as feckless, their poverty framed as a moral failing rather than a structural one.The two‑child benefit cap was never about economics. It was a weapon of class prejudice, designed to punish poor families for having "too many" children. And it worked – not because it saved money, but because it appealed to middle‑class anxieties about who deserves support.Austerity may be officially over, but its ideology of moralised consumption lives on.Topics covered:- The persistence of austerity after 2024- The two‑child benefit cap and class prejudice- Liam Stanley's *Britain Alone*- Wartime nostalgia and "austerity chic"- The "keep calm" phenomenon- TV thrift programmes and the moralisation of consumption- How consumer choices became markers of national identityExplaining 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 Lost Empire of Emmanuel Nobel – Oil, Revolution, and the Birth of the Soviet State 29.04.2026 38мин

  In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we are joined by author Douglas Brunt to discuss his fascinating new book, The Lost Empire of Emmanuel Nobel – the story of the greatest oil magnate you've never heard of, and the turbulent Russian decades that swept him away.Emmanuel Nobel, nephew of the more famous Alfred (inventor of dynamite and founder of the Nobel Prizes), built an oil empire that by 1900 had surpassed Standard Oil. His Nobel Brothers Petroleum Company dominated the oil fields of Baku (modern-day Azerbaijan), introduced the world's first oil tanker, and supplied the Tsar's military with fuel as the Russian army mechanised. He was, for a brief window, the most important oil man on the planet.But Emmanuel was more than an industrialist. He was an unusually enlightened employer in a brutal industry – building schools and housing for his workers, who proudly called themselves "Nobelites". His benevolent practices protected him during the 1905 revolution, when Rothschild's operations were targeted. Yet even his fortune and influence could not survive the seismic forces of the First World War and the Russian Revolution.Douglas traces the Nobel family's journey from Sweden into the Russian Empire, the grandfather's bankruptcy and reinvention, the technical genius of Ludwig Nobel, and Emmanuel's transformation of Baku from a backward oil field into a global powerhouse. We explore the modernising reforms of Tsar Alexander II and Finance Minister Sergei Witte, the shift from kerosene to gasoline as the internal combustion engine took root, and the geopolitical scramble for oil that made Churchill declare petroleum "more important than food".The conversation then turns to revolution. Douglas reveals Nobel's desperate final years – writing to British leaders, warning of the Red Army's advance on Baku, and offering a plan that might have crushed Bolshevism in its cradle. Had Churchill's advice been taken in 1919, the 20th century might have looked very different. Instead, Nobel fled in disguise, aided by former employees, and watched as Stalin systematically erased his legacy – tearing down statues, renaming streets and factories, and rewriting history. Orwell's *1984* was directly inspired by the erasure of Emmanuel Nobel.**Topics covered:**- The Nobel family's journey from bankruptcy to Russian industrial might- Alfred Nobel, dynamite, and the Nobel Prizes- Baku oil fields and the rivalry with Standard Oil- The invention of the world's first oil tanker- Tsarist modernisation and foreign investment- The 1905 revolution and Nobel's "enlightened employer" reputation- Lenin, Stalin, and the Bolshevik seizure of power- Why the British failed to intervene in 1919 – a sliding-door moment- Nobel's harrowing escape from Russia- Stalin's memory‑hole: how *1984* was inspired by Nobel's erasure*Douglas Brunt's previous book explored Rudolf Diesel; his new book, The Lost Empire of Emmanuel Nobel, is published on 19th May. Please consider ordering from an independent bookstore or directly from the publisher.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 Death of Britain's Two-Party System – A Century in the Making 27.04.2026 34мин

  In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, I examine the slow-motion collapse of the political order that has defined British politics for a century – and what is likely to replace it.The term "political earthquake" gets overused. What is happening in Great Britain is more like a once‑in‑a‑century end of a political order. It began in 2024 with the death of the Conservative Party – a party that is unlikely to restore itself. And it will continue over the next few years with the death of the Labour Party.The May local elections, just a week away, will mark a major step. Labour is almost certain to lose two of the places it has dominated for generations: Wales (for a century) and London (for half a century). But this isn't just about one bad election night. It is the culmination of decades of neoliberal economics, deindustrialisation, austerity, and the systematic destruction of any alternative vision within the mainstream parties.I draw a historical parallel with the last time Britain's party system realigned: the years after the First World War, when the Liberal Party – the party of 19th‑century capital, free trade, and limited government – collapsed, replaced by a two‑party system of Labour and Conservatives. That system, cemented in 1945, survived for nearly eighty years. Now it is dying.The culprits are not just individual leaders. Thatcherism broke union power, atomised communities, and left Britain poorer and more unequal. The 2008 financial crisis blew up the economic assumptions of that model. Brexit smashed Britain's role as a transatlantic bridge between Washington and Brussels. Austerity killed hundreds of thousands, collapsed public services, and turned the country into a nation in de‑development. The Labour right's merciless destruction of the Corbyn movement left the party in the hands of a centrist technocrat, Keir Starmer – a man who, despite his blandness, has gleefully embraced racist rhetoric on immigration, supported Israel's genocide in Gaza, and handed state functions over to private equity vultures.Starmer's Labour has tried to tack to the right, hoping that voters will hold their noses and vote for "not far‑right". But that strategy is failing. In recent by‑elections, voters ignored Labour's warnings and voted Green or Plaid Cymru – proving that the old "vote for us or you'll get the fascists" threat no longer works.So what comes next? The beneficiaries are two very different parties. Reform UK – funded by a reclusive Bitcoin billionaire, backed by the propaganda channel GB News – offers a populist, proto‑fascist nationalism. The Green Party – untainted by private donations, hostile to the tabloid press, and offering a genuine left‑wing economic alternative – has already won a stunning by‑election on an anti‑racist, cost‑of‑living platform.The next decade could see Britain's political landscape transformed. A two‑party system of Reform and Greens is possible – though each would feel like an enemy occupation to the other side's voters. What is certain is that the old order is being taken out to a field and put out of its misery. And what caused it? Five decades of neoliberalism – an economic project that both main parties embraced, whose contradictions they are now incapable of addressing.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 Transnational Far Right – Hate, Vigilantism, and the Mainstreaming of Extremism 16.04.2026 40мин

  **In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we are joined by Wendy Via of the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism – a former Southern Poverty Law Center staffer – to discuss a new report on the transnational activities of far-right and anti-migrant groups around the world.**We often think of hate and xenophobia as local phenomena, but just like organised violence, the far‑right has become increasingly internationalised. The internet, political crises, and economic uncertainty have allowed extremist groups to learn from one another, share strategies, and normalise ideas that were once relegated to the fringes.Wendy explains how the movement has become more sophisticated in its branding. Neo‑Nazis still exist, but they no longer openly quote *Mein Kampf*. Instead, they speak of "protecting our culture" and "saving our families". The "great replacement" conspiracy theory – once confined to obscure writers – is now pushed by politicians and mainstream commentators, giving cover to unspoken reactionary ideas.We explore the alarming mainstreaming of far‑right politics. In Britain, the Conservative Party has moved from ostracising Enoch Powell to rehabilitating his ideas. In the United States, Trump’s open demonisation of Mexican immigrants – "they’re rapists" – did not end his campaign; it became a template for others. Across Europe, Latin America, and beyond, leaders have taken cues from Trump, turning immigration into an existential threat.The report also examines the rise of vigilante groups – self‑appointed militias patrolling borders and neighbourhoods. While there is no single centralised command, these groups communicate constantly, learning from each other’s tactics. Political leaders who call immigrants "the enemy" provide implicit encouragement, and wealthy figures like Elon Musk amplify hateful rhetoric, attracting young men – the demographic most vulnerable to far‑right extremism.Yet there is hope. Hungary’s recent election showed that people can push back against autocracy, even if the new leader remains conservative. A UK by‑election expected to be won by the far‑right Reform Party was instead won by the Green Party on an explicitly anti‑racist, economic populist platform. Across the world, countries are standing up to Trump and his allies, defending their sovereignty. By and large, people are decent – and the far‑right’s gains are not inevitable.**Topics covered:**- The transnational nature of far‑right extremism- The mainstreaming of the "great replacement" conspiracy theory- From Enoch Powell to the modern Conservative Party- Trump’s role in normalising hate- Vigilante groups and their cross‑border communication- Elon Musk’s influence on young men- Hungary’s rejection of Orbán’s corruption- The UK Green Party’s anti‑racist by‑election victory- Where to find hope in a dark political landscape---*Wendy Via is co‑founder of the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism. Visit globalextremism.org for resources and to support their vital work.**If you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. More details soon.*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 Gulf Crisis – Two Theories of American Decline 13.04.2026 31мин

  There are roughly two camps. One argues that there is an overarching grand plan behind America's actions in Venezuela, Iran, Greenland, and against Russia's shadow fleet – a coherent strategy to choke off China's industries and make Europe energy-dependent on the United States. The other, more plausible camp sees imperial decline and the chaos that decline inevitably brings.I explore both.John Mearsheimer argues that America has suffered a catastrophic defeat. The evidence is stark: Iran has published a ten-point plan that includes the removal of American bases from the Gulf, continued uranium enrichment, and reparations – and Trump accepted it as the basis for negotiations. America is running out of Tomahawk missiles, having burned through eight to ten years of stockpiles in weeks. Its capital ships have been withdrawn out of Iranian missile range. The world's key strategic waterway is no longer under US control.But journalist Richard Medhurst makes a compelling case that this is all about China – a brutal attempt to cut off Chinese industry from Persian Gulf oil and force Beijing to negotiate from weakness.The problem is Trump. According to the New York Times, he went into this war on a whim – a "yeah, sounds good" after Netanyahu's sales pitch – overruling his own generals. The White House has been systematically de‑professionalised. Institutional memory is gone. Decision‑making is chaos.I draw a careful parallel with Hitler's regime: the removal of experts, the promotion of sycophants like Ribbentrop, the deliberate creation of administrative chaos to concentrate power. Trump surrounds himself with the same kind of people – Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff – who tell him what he wants to hear.From Tehran, this looks like a once‑in‑a‑generation opportunity: remove the Americans from the Gulf forever, gain permanent leverage over the world, and finally deal with the threat of Israel. And Israel's standing in America has plummeted – not just among Democrats, but among the MAGA base as well.What we are witnessing is the end of a world order that began in 1991. Trump is not the cause of American decline – he is an accelerant. But the collapse is coming, and the consequences will be catastrophic.Topics covered:- Mearsheimer's thesis of strategic defeat- America's munitions crisis- Medhurst's blockade‑of‑China argument- Trump's chaotic, whim‑driven decision‑making- The de‑professionalisation of the White House- Hitler, Ribbentrop, and the parallel of sycophantic advice- Iran's once‑in‑a‑lifetime opportunity- Israel's collapsing popularity in the US- The end of the post‑Cold War order---*If you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us. We're migrating from Patreon to Substack – more details soon.*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 New World Order and Its Unravelling – From Bush Snr to Trump 10.04.2026 27мин

  On 29th January 1991, President George H.W. Bush addressed a joint session of Congress. America was at war with Iraq, having launched Operation Desert Storm to expel Saddam Hussein's forces from Kuwait. Bush's tone was sombre, measured—a contrast to the triumphalism of his State of the Union a year earlier, when he had spoken of communism crumbling and a new era for the world. Now he spoke of something grander: a "new world order.""What is at stake is more than one small country. It's a big idea: a new world order where diverse nations are drawn together in common cause to achieve the universal aspirations of mankind—peace and security, freedom and the rule of law."Drawing on Kristina Spohr's excellent book Postwall Post Square, we explore the context of that speech. The first Gulf War was a remarkable moment: a coalition of 28 countries from six continents, including traditional allies like Britain and Australia, prickly partners like France, and even Arab nations like Egypt, Syria, and Saudi Arabia. Most strikingly, the United States and the Soviet Union—despite Saddam being a long-time Moscow client—cooperated. Bush and Gorbachev had forged a personal accord, and the Cold War was over.But behind the grand rhetoric, the picture was more complex. Moscow's violent crackdown in Lithuania cast a shadow over the gleaming language of freedom. Bush struggled to balance his principled assertion of democratic values against his pragmatic need for Gorbachev's cooperation in the Gulf. And at home, America was sliding into recession. As Democratic Majority Leader George Mitchell pointedly reminded the president: "We have a crisis abroad, but we also have a crisis here at home."Bush invoked the lessons of history—the long struggle against Nazi totalitarianism—to justify American leadership. "We're the only nation on this earth that could assemble the forces of peace," he declared. "This is the burden of leadership and the strength that has made America the beacon of freedom in a searching world."Yet that liberal internationalist language—always a veneer for American imperialism—has now been eviscerated. Trump has abandoned any pretence of moral leadership. His decision to attack Iran, apparently taken after a chat with Netanyahu and against the advice of his own generals, has produced the greatest strategic disaster in American history, bar none. There is no exit strategy, no route to victory, no achievable objective.What Iran has done is fundamental. Unlike Vietnam or Afghanistan, where empires suffered humiliations but survived, America has been strategically and tactically defeated in the Persian Gulf. The petrodollar—propped up by American military power, bases, and security guarantees—is under threat. And once you show that American power is not all-conquering, it causes fragmentation in unprecedented ways.The distance from George H.W. Bush's "new world order" to Trump's chaotic adventurism is less than 40 years. Trump is not the cause of American decline; he is an accelerant to an ongoing process. The empire's days are numbered—and the world is about to become a much more dangerous place.Topics covered:George H.W. Bush's "new world order" speech (29th January 1991)The first Gulf War coalition and Soviet-American cooperationThe contrast between liberal internationalism and American imperialismDomestic recession and the limits of presidential powerMoscow's crackdown in Lithuania as a challenge to the new orderThe collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of historyTrump's Iran disaster and the absence of strategic thinkingThe petrodollar and the foundations of American hegemonyHow Iran has achieved a strategic defeat of the United StatesTrump as an accelerant, not the cause, of declineIf you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us. We're migrating from Patreon to Substack—more details soon.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.
• China's Transformation 1978-84 07.04.2026 29мин

  In the 21st century, China stands as a global economic powerhouse, a trajectory heavily influenced by the reforms initiated in 1978 under Deng Xiaoping. This episode delves into Deng's pivotal role, positioning him as the consequential figure bridging Mao Zedong's era and the present-day leadership of Xi Jinping.Drawing on David Harvey's "A Brief History of Neoliberalism," we explore the economic, social, and ideological transformations that began with Deng's rise to power. At the outset of his reforms, China's economy was almost entirely state-controlled, marked by the "Iron Rice Bowl" system of employment and welfare, and a lagging agrarian sector organized by communes. Deng's initial aim was to lift China out of the chaos and impoverishment left by the Cultural Revolution and the Great Leap Forward.The episode examines the gradual liberalization of the Chinese economy, starting with agricultural reforms that dissolved communes in favor of individual responsibility, and the emergence of Township and Village Enterprises (TVEs) as hubs of entrepreneurialism. We explore how these changes led to a surge in rural incomes initially, but also created stark urban-rural disparities and triggered the largest mass migration in world history.We also consider the concept of "neoliberalism with Chinese characteristics" and its applicability to Deng's era, where market forces were unleashed but carefully managed by the state and the Communist Party. The episode highlights key differences between Deng's approach and Xi Jinping's China, particularly in the management of capital and the state's directive role in strategic industries. While a vigorous Chinese capitalism thrives, the episode explains why a capitalist political class has not emerged to rival the Communist Party.Join us as we uncover the complex historical processes that shaped modern China, the figures who steered its course, and the ongoing debates about its unique economic and political model.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.
• Capitalism without Democracy 06.04.2026 30мин

  In this solo episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we step back from the daily news cycle to examine a question that has shaped the modern world: what is the relationship between capitalism and democracy?For decades, we have been told that economic freedom and political freedom are two sides of the same coin—that the ability of capital to move freely, to invest, to accrue profits, is the mirror of the rights and liberties that citizens enjoy. This is one of the secular articles of faith upon which the Western world runs. But is it true?I argue that it is not. And arguably, it has never been true.We trace the history of this entanglement from the Cold War to the present. In the early years of the Cold War, faced with the seemingly unstoppable advance of communism, Western leaders—from Churchill to the architects of the emerging national security state—crafted a powerful narrative: whatever else communism was, it was antithetical to freedom. The Second World War had been fought as a war for freedom. The Norman Rockwell "Four Freedoms" posters were potent propaganda. And the sacrifices of that war became a powerful symbol, warning Western populations never to stray into totalitarianism again.But freedom, as a concept, served mainly those who already had power to exercise it. It became a convenient stick—not just to beat communism with, but to beat the left's various more moderate iterations across the democratic world. The constant attempt on the political right to conflate even the mildest formations of social democracy with totalitarianism began as a marginal position. But by the 1970s, the Hayekian neoliberals, waiting for their moment, found their crisis in the oil shocks and seized it.The 1970s and 1980s saw the brief Cold War compact between capital and social democracy shatter permanently. The decline of the Soviet Union made social democracy less of a necessity—and social democracy, from a left perspective, was always a concession granted by advanced capitalist societies when faced with the prospect of revolution. Bismarck's social reforms, the expansion of the franchise in 19th-century Britain, the acceleration of social reform after 1917—all were designed to stave off something worse.Now, we exist on the far side of neoliberalism. Capital has freed itself from almost all democratic constraints. It has captured the state rather than being liberated from it. The wealthiest man in the world openly agitates against democracies, insisting that far-right movements be elevated into power. And what we are experiencing in the global north—the slow erosion of rights, the gradual diminishment of the ability to challenge concentrated power—is something that large parts of the global south found very familiar during the Cold War.Yet there may be a silver lining. Trump is so blatant, so gratuitous, so willing to say the quiet part out loud, that resistance has an opportunity. In countries like Britain, the easy path of quiet collaboration no longer seems possible. Civil society is waking up. The political class is beginning to understand that toadying to Trump makes no difference.The danger is the continuity opposition—parties like the Democrats in the US, who squeeze back into power, celebrate superficial optics, keep the economic settlement intact, and set up the next round of extreme populism. If that is all we can offer, we might as well leave Trump where he is.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.