What do you think?
Rate this book
Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time
TRAGEDY AND HOPE shows the years 1895-1950 as a period of transition from the world dominated by Europe in the nineteenth century to the world of three blocs in the twentieth century. With clarity, perspective, and cumulative impact, Professor Quigley examines the nature of that transition through two world wars and a worldwide economic depression. As an interpretative historian, he tries to show each event in the full complexity of its historical context. The result is a unique work, notable in several ways. It gives a picture of the world in terms of the influence of different cultures and outlooks upon each other; it shows, more completely than in any similar work, the influence of science and technology on human life; and it explains, with unprecedented clarity, how the intricate financial and commercial patterns of the West prior to 1914 influenced the development of today's world.
1348 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1966
About the author
Carroll Quigley
16 books167 followersAmerican historian and theorist of the evolution of civilizations.
Noted for his teaching work as a professor at Georgetown University, for his academic publications, and for his research on secret societies.
He was an instructor at Princeton and Harvard; a consultant to the U.S. Department of Defense, the House Committee on Astronautics and Space Exploration; and the U.S. Navy.
Noted for his teaching work as a professor at Georgetown University, for his academic publications, and for his research on secret societies.
He was an instructor at Princeton and Harvard; a consultant to the U.S. Department of Defense, the House Committee on Astronautics and Space Exploration; and the U.S. Navy.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 83 reviews
May 20, 2020
This gigantic book - 1350 pages! - reminds me in an odd way of Roger Penrose's almost equally massive The Road to Reality, which I read last year. In both cases, we have an unusually gifted person, who sets out to present an integrated overview of an entire field. For Penrose, it's modern physics; for Quigley, it's world history during the period from 1895 to 1960. In both cases, we soon discover that the author has a highly non-standard but strangely persuasive view of their respective subject, which involves juxtaposition of elements normally considered in isolation.
Penrose spends much of his book setting the scene for his unorthodox ideas about the connections between General Relativity, quantum theory, thermodynamics and the origins of the universe; right or wrong, there are many points in the argument where it is impossible not to wonder why other authors so resolutely refuse to put things together and ask certain questions. What is the actual relationship between the evolution of the quantum mechanical wavefunction and its apparent collapse when an observation is made? Does gravity have anything to do it? Why was the universe created in an extremely low-entropy state? Is there any real reason to think that there could be more dimensions than the four we can see? Even if Penrose is completely out to lunch (a distinct possibility), he is reminding us that these issues are far more interesting and fundamental than the theory-tweaking that most physicists spend their time on. If you don't think big, you're never going to win big.
And similarly with Quigley, who resolutely refuses to let himself be limited by a single perspective or narrow conceptions of political correctness. His account of recent history combines at least five main strands: macro-economic theory, power relationships, weapons technology, psychology and religion. It is quite startling to see how much he knows about all of them. He moves smoothly from explaining how deflationary policies caused the post-World War I German depression, to describing the way investment in arms manufacturing can redistribute wealth and kick-start an economy, to a discussion of Douhet's 1922 theory of strategic bombing and how it influenced Britain's policy of appeasement towards Nazi Germany, to an account of the development of radar and how it assured the Allied victory in the Battle of Britain. The level of detail is breathtaking; there's a reason why the book is so long, and indeed you often feel that he's reluctantly cutting a lot out to save space.
Behind it all, he has an overarching vision of how all historical events are influenced by deep philosophical, religious and cultural perspectives going back to the beginnings of recorded history. This stuff is amazingly bold. For example, he sees the basic division between the American Left and Right as ultimately emanating from counter-currents in Christian thought. The Left is following standard Christian doctrine (man is essentially good, and only needs help and guidance), while the Right follows the Manichaean doctrine imported into Christianity by Saint Augustine (evil is a positive force, and man needs strong external discipline to protect him from it). I am sure that not everyone will like this, but I thought it was perceptive. An even more controversial aspect of the book, which I can see nearly everyone hates, is his analysis of national character. For example, he claims that there is a unifying pattern of behavior connecting the Arab and Latin American countries, with Moorish Spain as the link; this is typified by a tribal government based on interpersonal relations rather than laws, endemic corruption, and contempt for women. Yes, too simplistic, as he admits himself; but is it really worse than the currently fashionable alternative, which is to pretend that people are the same everywhere and there are no truly important cultural differences?
I have to say something about conspiracy theories: thanks to a short section around p. 950, Tragedy and Hope has become a kind of bible for conspiracy theorists world-wide, who in many cases appear not to have read any other part of the book. Quigley identifies an influential English clique centered on Oxford University, the "Round Table Group", who, he says, played a major role in shaping British policy during this period, often operating behind the scenes. They were closely connected to some of the American East Coast financial establishment, in particular to J.P. Morgan and his powerful associates, and at some points were able to exert great influence on the US government as well. Quigley in no way tries to sensationalize the idea, or portray these people as unscrupulous or evil. On the contrary, his admiration for them is obvious: he feels that they did a great deal to try to make the world a better place, even if their plans did not always lead to the results they intended.
And yet... it is so easy to see why conspiracy theorists love the book. There is a constant feeling that there is more, which he cannot reveal. He talks at length about the brilliant scientists who worked on the Allied side during World War II and the Cold War, much of whose work is still not at all well-known, but who made a huge contribution to saving Western Civilization from the twin evils of Nazism and Stalinism. He is particularly indignant about the treatment Oppenheimer received at the hands of McCarthy and his stooges. And I think the conspiracy theorists are mistaken when they try to use Quigley to demonstrate the continued importance of the Round Table Group and its claimed successors. He writes of them with love and nostalgia, of the Great Ones who have now departed.
If I were a conspiracy theorist, which I am not, I would expand this idea further, and note that Tolkien was also a professor at Oxford University around this time. I have checked, and at least one member of the Inklings had a connection to the Round Table Group. I would argue that The Lord of the Rings, despite Tolkien's protestations to the contrary, tells the story of our times in a disguised form; how the Valar sent their emissaries to guide us in our fight against the great evil of Sauron, and how, when he had been defeated, they returned into the Ultimate West, leaving us bereft of their wisdom and power. But that is just a fantasy.
Penrose spends much of his book setting the scene for his unorthodox ideas about the connections between General Relativity, quantum theory, thermodynamics and the origins of the universe; right or wrong, there are many points in the argument where it is impossible not to wonder why other authors so resolutely refuse to put things together and ask certain questions. What is the actual relationship between the evolution of the quantum mechanical wavefunction and its apparent collapse when an observation is made? Does gravity have anything to do it? Why was the universe created in an extremely low-entropy state? Is there any real reason to think that there could be more dimensions than the four we can see? Even if Penrose is completely out to lunch (a distinct possibility), he is reminding us that these issues are far more interesting and fundamental than the theory-tweaking that most physicists spend their time on. If you don't think big, you're never going to win big.
And similarly with Quigley, who resolutely refuses to let himself be limited by a single perspective or narrow conceptions of political correctness. His account of recent history combines at least five main strands: macro-economic theory, power relationships, weapons technology, psychology and religion. It is quite startling to see how much he knows about all of them. He moves smoothly from explaining how deflationary policies caused the post-World War I German depression, to describing the way investment in arms manufacturing can redistribute wealth and kick-start an economy, to a discussion of Douhet's 1922 theory of strategic bombing and how it influenced Britain's policy of appeasement towards Nazi Germany, to an account of the development of radar and how it assured the Allied victory in the Battle of Britain. The level of detail is breathtaking; there's a reason why the book is so long, and indeed you often feel that he's reluctantly cutting a lot out to save space.
Behind it all, he has an overarching vision of how all historical events are influenced by deep philosophical, religious and cultural perspectives going back to the beginnings of recorded history. This stuff is amazingly bold. For example, he sees the basic division between the American Left and Right as ultimately emanating from counter-currents in Christian thought. The Left is following standard Christian doctrine (man is essentially good, and only needs help and guidance), while the Right follows the Manichaean doctrine imported into Christianity by Saint Augustine (evil is a positive force, and man needs strong external discipline to protect him from it). I am sure that not everyone will like this, but I thought it was perceptive. An even more controversial aspect of the book, which I can see nearly everyone hates, is his analysis of national character. For example, he claims that there is a unifying pattern of behavior connecting the Arab and Latin American countries, with Moorish Spain as the link; this is typified by a tribal government based on interpersonal relations rather than laws, endemic corruption, and contempt for women. Yes, too simplistic, as he admits himself; but is it really worse than the currently fashionable alternative, which is to pretend that people are the same everywhere and there are no truly important cultural differences?
I have to say something about conspiracy theories: thanks to a short section around p. 950, Tragedy and Hope has become a kind of bible for conspiracy theorists world-wide, who in many cases appear not to have read any other part of the book. Quigley identifies an influential English clique centered on Oxford University, the "Round Table Group", who, he says, played a major role in shaping British policy during this period, often operating behind the scenes. They were closely connected to some of the American East Coast financial establishment, in particular to J.P. Morgan and his powerful associates, and at some points were able to exert great influence on the US government as well. Quigley in no way tries to sensationalize the idea, or portray these people as unscrupulous or evil. On the contrary, his admiration for them is obvious: he feels that they did a great deal to try to make the world a better place, even if their plans did not always lead to the results they intended.
And yet... it is so easy to see why conspiracy theorists love the book. There is a constant feeling that there is more, which he cannot reveal. He talks at length about the brilliant scientists who worked on the Allied side during World War II and the Cold War, much of whose work is still not at all well-known, but who made a huge contribution to saving Western Civilization from the twin evils of Nazism and Stalinism. He is particularly indignant about the treatment Oppenheimer received at the hands of McCarthy and his stooges. And I think the conspiracy theorists are mistaken when they try to use Quigley to demonstrate the continued importance of the Round Table Group and its claimed successors. He writes of them with love and nostalgia, of the Great Ones who have now departed.
If I were a conspiracy theorist, which I am not, I would expand this idea further, and note that Tolkien was also a professor at Oxford University around this time. I have checked, and at least one member of the Inklings had a connection to the Round Table Group. I would argue that The Lord of the Rings, despite Tolkien's protestations to the contrary, tells the story of our times in a disguised form; how the Valar sent their emissaries to guide us in our fight against the great evil of Sauron, and how, when he had been defeated, they returned into the Ultimate West, leaving us bereft of their wisdom and power. But that is just a fantasy.
January 15, 2019
I think I first found out about this book from a footnote in a John Taylor Gatto book. Somehow, I got the impression that this was "THE" go-to history book to explain conspiracy theories. ("I got the book, I got the book to tell what they been DOIN' to us all!" - angry mob guy from the movie Rigoletto). A bit of searching on the internet seems to confirm that many people view it this way as well, though I also quickly got the impression that most people don't read T&H, but another book that quotes some portions of T&H: None Dare Call It Conspiracy. I remember seeing NDCIC laying around our house when I was a teenager, though I never got around to reading it myself and for all I know neither did my parents. As it turns out, the author of NDCIC was a prominent member of the John Birch Society (And the founder of Koch Industries was also a founder of JBS). Interestingly enough, T&H mentions the John Birch Society... it was... laughably ironic! Well, of course the people who read a short paperback promoting conspiracy theories aren't the kind of people who want to read a 1300 page textbook written by an Ivy League College Professor. Well... the joke's on them ;-) Apparently I am the latter. Even if it takes me eight years. [insert: mic drop?]
Anyway, yeah, it took me eight years to finish this book. I kept putting it down and reading other books, then coming back to it... over and over. I can't say it wasn't mostly long and dry. Lots and lots of facts and figures about WWI & WWII and then the Cold War. But out of it all, I did come away with a sense of history that I didn't have before. There were many portions of social commentary that were actually quite fascinating. Of course, many of the ways he presents things, especially other cultures, now seem prejudiced and dated, but it was written 50 years ago, ya know??
I still want to read his book: The Evolution of Civilizations: An Introduction to Historical Analysis. I'm very suspicious that it somehow influenced Sid Meier (For those who don't recognize the name, see: Sid Meier's Civilization).
Anyway, yeah, it took me eight years to finish this book. I kept putting it down and reading other books, then coming back to it... over and over. I can't say it wasn't mostly long and dry. Lots and lots of facts and figures about WWI & WWII and then the Cold War. But out of it all, I did come away with a sense of history that I didn't have before. There were many portions of social commentary that were actually quite fascinating. Of course, many of the ways he presents things, especially other cultures, now seem prejudiced and dated, but it was written 50 years ago, ya know??
I still want to read his book: The Evolution of Civilizations: An Introduction to Historical Analysis. I'm very suspicious that it somehow influenced Sid Meier (For those who don't recognize the name, see: Sid Meier's Civilization).
March 6, 2009
This book covers 15o years (up to the 1960s) of social development that Quigley associates with the rise of positions of power in the western world. As daunting a book as it may seem, it is one that must be read. Power, economic influence, globalism and the transnational forms of government. If you can get your hands on it, read it.
August 16, 2020
William Carroll Quigley (1910-1977) was professor of history at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service, where he taught an influential course, "The Development of Civilization" (summarized in his book The Evolution of Civilizations).
Quigley proposed an original and well-defined model of civilizations and the distinct stages through which they evolve.
In this model, a civilization is "a producing society that has writing, city life, and an economic instrument of expansion".
It evolves through seven stages, called
1) mixture
2) gestation
3) expansion
4) age of conflict
5) universal empire
6) decay
7) destruction (usually by outside invaders)
Quigley enumerates and names sixteen civilizations in history that fit this model, more or less.
Samuel P. Huntington drew upon Quigley's concepts in his book The Clash of Civilizations and Remaking of World Order.
---
In 1966, Quigley published a one-volume history of the twentieth century, titled Tragedy and Hope. At several points in this book, the history of the Milner group is discussed. Moreover, Quigley states that he has recently been in direct contact with this organization, whose nature he contrasts to right-wing claims of a communist conspiracy:
This radical Right fairy tale, which is now an accepted folk myth in many groups in America, pictured the recent history of the United States, in regard to domestic reform and in foreign affairs, as a well-organized plot by extreme Left-wing elements... This myth, like all fables, does in fact have a modicum of truth. There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the Radical right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other group, and frequently does so. I know of the operation of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies... but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known
---
Quigley was dismissive of the authors who used his writings to support theories of a world domination conspiracy.
On Gary Allen's None Dare Call It Conspiracy he said:
They thought Dr. Carroll Quigley proved everything. For example, they constantly misquote me to this effect: that Lord Milner (the dominant trustee of the Cecil Rhodes Trust and a heavy in the Round Table Group) helped finance the Bolsheviks. I have been through the greater part of Milner's private papers and have found no evidence to support that. Further, None Dare Call It Conspiracy insists that international bankers were a single bloc, were all powerful and remain so today. I, on the contrary, stated in my book that they were much divided, often fought among themselves, had great influence but not control of political life and were sharply reduced in power about 1931-1940, when they became less influential than monopolized industry
---
Quigley argued that the Round Table groups were not World Government advocates but super-imperialists. He stated that they emphatically did not want the League of Nations to become a World Government. Yet Lionel Curtis, who, according to Quigley, was one of the leaders of the Round Table movement, wished for it to be a World government with teeth, writing articles with H. G. Wells urging this.
---
one fascinating oddity is a quote by Huntington
“These transnationalists have little need for national loyalty, view national boundaries as obstacles that thankfully are vanishing, and see national governments as residues from the past whose only useful function is to facilitate the elite's global operations”
― Samuel P. Huntington
Quigley proposed an original and well-defined model of civilizations and the distinct stages through which they evolve.
In this model, a civilization is "a producing society that has writing, city life, and an economic instrument of expansion".
It evolves through seven stages, called
1) mixture
2) gestation
3) expansion
4) age of conflict
5) universal empire
6) decay
7) destruction (usually by outside invaders)
Quigley enumerates and names sixteen civilizations in history that fit this model, more or less.
Samuel P. Huntington drew upon Quigley's concepts in his book The Clash of Civilizations and Remaking of World Order.
---
In 1966, Quigley published a one-volume history of the twentieth century, titled Tragedy and Hope. At several points in this book, the history of the Milner group is discussed. Moreover, Quigley states that he has recently been in direct contact with this organization, whose nature he contrasts to right-wing claims of a communist conspiracy:
This radical Right fairy tale, which is now an accepted folk myth in many groups in America, pictured the recent history of the United States, in regard to domestic reform and in foreign affairs, as a well-organized plot by extreme Left-wing elements... This myth, like all fables, does in fact have a modicum of truth. There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the Radical right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other group, and frequently does so. I know of the operation of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies... but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known
---
Quigley was dismissive of the authors who used his writings to support theories of a world domination conspiracy.
On Gary Allen's None Dare Call It Conspiracy he said:
They thought Dr. Carroll Quigley proved everything. For example, they constantly misquote me to this effect: that Lord Milner (the dominant trustee of the Cecil Rhodes Trust and a heavy in the Round Table Group) helped finance the Bolsheviks. I have been through the greater part of Milner's private papers and have found no evidence to support that. Further, None Dare Call It Conspiracy insists that international bankers were a single bloc, were all powerful and remain so today. I, on the contrary, stated in my book that they were much divided, often fought among themselves, had great influence but not control of political life and were sharply reduced in power about 1931-1940, when they became less influential than monopolized industry
---
Quigley argued that the Round Table groups were not World Government advocates but super-imperialists. He stated that they emphatically did not want the League of Nations to become a World Government. Yet Lionel Curtis, who, according to Quigley, was one of the leaders of the Round Table movement, wished for it to be a World government with teeth, writing articles with H. G. Wells urging this.
---
one fascinating oddity is a quote by Huntington
“These transnationalists have little need for national loyalty, view national boundaries as obstacles that thankfully are vanishing, and see national governments as residues from the past whose only useful function is to facilitate the elite's global operations”
― Samuel P. Huntington
September 25, 2016
This book still gets a lot of interest, even though Quigley has been dead for over 40 years. Perhaps, his mention by Bill Clinton in his inaugural address has maintained interest. There have been other drivers of interest for Quigley (and this volume) as well, not all of them laudable or fair.
I rated the book highly because of the impact it (and the class for which it was read) has had on me. To this this day, I vividly remember Quigley's classes (five semesters) as if they were yesterday. The agendas he raised have remained with me ever since. He was the first professor I had who was a real showman in class, from the giving of exams to the telling of funny stories. What was so important, however, was that he worked very hard to give meaning to the complex of facts, events, and people that comprise world history. He tried to capture the flow of history, the deep longstanding streams flowing through it, and the relative few significant forces propelling it. The idea that history can be looked at this way is a powerful one, especially to an impressionable undergraduate. It made you feel like you were working with "big time" ideas and real scholarship. ...at least those were the impressions I had of the experience.
With this said, I have to also admit that without the personal experience, I doubt I would have rated the book as highly as I do.
The book is under-referenced and reads as if it is a collection of detailed lecture notes. To some extent that is OK, but I increasingly find it important to double check the sources and examine detail below the level of the main story.
Quigley is also prone to considerable generalization and I came to view my subsequent education as a process of finding out which of my undergraduate revelations held up under more focused scrutiny. Many of Quigley's did not hold up, although the process of coming to realize that was itself a valuable education.
I have also become increasingly skeptical of evolutionary views of civilizations, such as Quigley's. The devil is almost always in the details and overly broad stories can encourage hero worship rather than critical thinking.
Looking back, Quigley's huge contribution to my life was in capturing Western values, especially ideas of balance, moderation, and inclusion as keys to Western success. This is a broad story of Western History and I am thankful to Quigley for introducing me to his variant of it.
There is a lot of good history being published these days. I am still reading it with avid interest due to Carroll Quigley and Tragedy and Hope, which I read for his two semester class in the World since 1914.
I rated the book highly because of the impact it (and the class for which it was read) has had on me. To this this day, I vividly remember Quigley's classes (five semesters) as if they were yesterday. The agendas he raised have remained with me ever since. He was the first professor I had who was a real showman in class, from the giving of exams to the telling of funny stories. What was so important, however, was that he worked very hard to give meaning to the complex of facts, events, and people that comprise world history. He tried to capture the flow of history, the deep longstanding streams flowing through it, and the relative few significant forces propelling it. The idea that history can be looked at this way is a powerful one, especially to an impressionable undergraduate. It made you feel like you were working with "big time" ideas and real scholarship. ...at least those were the impressions I had of the experience.
With this said, I have to also admit that without the personal experience, I doubt I would have rated the book as highly as I do.
The book is under-referenced and reads as if it is a collection of detailed lecture notes. To some extent that is OK, but I increasingly find it important to double check the sources and examine detail below the level of the main story.
Quigley is also prone to considerable generalization and I came to view my subsequent education as a process of finding out which of my undergraduate revelations held up under more focused scrutiny. Many of Quigley's did not hold up, although the process of coming to realize that was itself a valuable education.
I have also become increasingly skeptical of evolutionary views of civilizations, such as Quigley's. The devil is almost always in the details and overly broad stories can encourage hero worship rather than critical thinking.
Looking back, Quigley's huge contribution to my life was in capturing Western values, especially ideas of balance, moderation, and inclusion as keys to Western success. This is a broad story of Western History and I am thankful to Quigley for introducing me to his variant of it.
There is a lot of good history being published these days. I am still reading it with avid interest due to Carroll Quigley and Tragedy and Hope, which I read for his two semester class in the World since 1914.
August 3, 2011
I read this back in the early 90's. I was lucky to get it on interlibrary loan, as it was out of print then. I'm so glad it is back in print now. It is essential reading if you want to know more about what happened and who caused it to happen. I'm looking forward to reading it again.
March 20, 2012
Why do they call it Conspiracy THEORY when there are books like this on the market? Carroll Quigley (mentor to Bill Clinton and others) is unapologetic in his socialistic/neoMarxist/fascistic leanings. He details how socialists and others have and are taking away our freedoms and why. WOW! This book is an eye-opener. I wish I had a personal copy of it (I had checked it out through inter-library loan).
September 3, 2014
Frankly, a disappointing book. For all its bulk and the hype surrounding it, this is definitely not an insider's look at how the "Eastern Establishment" operates. Rather, it is one professor's rather slanted interpretation of world history from about 1890 through 1963. Professor Quigley ran out of invectives to hurl at Joe McCarthy, but utters barely a whisper about Harry Hopkins (close adviser to FDR) and other players who likely had more long term influence (and did more damage) than McCarthy. For a sound, objective look at history and economics, go to books by Murray Rothbard.
March 3, 2017
This is a massive beast of a book covering world history from roughly early 19th century through the early 1960's. Though I had to force myself to focus by setting a minimum page requirement to read per day, it was very interesting and I learned a lot, broadening my knowledge base on certain subjects and revealing my near complete lack of knowledge on others, one of which is economics. Hard work to get through, but worth it.
Want to read
February 14, 2011Totally looking forward to reading this.
September 1, 2016
Often the favorite of conspiracy quacks in the US.
Read just the other day that there is a difference thinking that history has conspiracies & thinking that history is a conspiracy.
I think the latter is an important consideration to think about.
I don't think that the "&" on the cover page of the present edition was always in "purgatory pink" for instance.
Written in 1966 Quigley was supposedly a political insider with the Rhodes scholar people. Clinton is said to have cited him for influence.
I tried to locate where the fuss is concerning the presence of conspiracy Quigley supposedly explains in open-publick! (John Birch Society or no John Birch Society).
Some interesting facts did stand out. For example, the use of deadly weaponry seemed to present a wartime call for absolute dictatorial government control in secrecy long before this book was written during the cold war.
Quigley explains that nothing short of top-down dictatorship can effect the control necessary to stop the threat from, say, invisible poisons lethal to the skin or airborne in urban places.
Nuclear war actually helped slow down this process that Quigley saw coming.
This is nothing new since national security is always the rationalization for forgoing freedom or law or tradition or custom or popular desires for secret government policies of paternal inclinations.
I think the difference here is that Quigley is telling the reader (buried in 1000 pages of contemporary history) that unbeknownst this is already the case.
Quigley thought that it was for the best. He wrote thinking that the secret mechanizations of the ruling class of the Northeastern-British establishment can be out in the open without grave social consequence. Elections are engineered or irrelevant either way when all is said and done.
Now everyone admits this to some extent. In the America of Quigley's day this was still taboo however.
Quigley is actually wrongfully remembered for whistleblowing secretive history for an academic audience. His other book "The Anglo-American Establishment" is a complete bore to read with no information of usefulness despite the claim.
Tragedy and Hope is a study (in part) of great insight for the time. The final chapters on the plight of the middle class in America or the Catholic Kennedy call for the use of Medieval Scholasticism in future debates was typical in the left leaning academia of the 60's.
Dwight Eisenhower may have been a communist rather than simply a golfer in retrospect, but that is a dead duck political argument now.
A quote on the Harvard commencement speech by Lawrence Bender is just one valuable anecdote of material for the antiquarian historian who has the time to examine this book.
An anthropological narrative of middle-class white American girls in 50's America is worth the read since the vast majority of this kind of stuff came from the far-left Critical Theorist Frankfurters out of Columbia at the time. One can think of Coming of Age in Somoa.
Quigley was a gentleman of a different stripe who writes from an altogether different vantage point. Worth reading the now bland ideas to see the history of academic discourse in another perspective. Otherwise more comprehensively written elsewhere.
Read just the other day that there is a difference thinking that history has conspiracies & thinking that history is a conspiracy.
I think the latter is an important consideration to think about.
I don't think that the "&" on the cover page of the present edition was always in "purgatory pink" for instance.
Written in 1966 Quigley was supposedly a political insider with the Rhodes scholar people. Clinton is said to have cited him for influence.
I tried to locate where the fuss is concerning the presence of conspiracy Quigley supposedly explains in open-publick! (John Birch Society or no John Birch Society).
Some interesting facts did stand out. For example, the use of deadly weaponry seemed to present a wartime call for absolute dictatorial government control in secrecy long before this book was written during the cold war.
Quigley explains that nothing short of top-down dictatorship can effect the control necessary to stop the threat from, say, invisible poisons lethal to the skin or airborne in urban places.
Nuclear war actually helped slow down this process that Quigley saw coming.
This is nothing new since national security is always the rationalization for forgoing freedom or law or tradition or custom or popular desires for secret government policies of paternal inclinations.
I think the difference here is that Quigley is telling the reader (buried in 1000 pages of contemporary history) that unbeknownst this is already the case.
Quigley thought that it was for the best. He wrote thinking that the secret mechanizations of the ruling class of the Northeastern-British establishment can be out in the open without grave social consequence. Elections are engineered or irrelevant either way when all is said and done.
Now everyone admits this to some extent. In the America of Quigley's day this was still taboo however.
Quigley is actually wrongfully remembered for whistleblowing secretive history for an academic audience. His other book "The Anglo-American Establishment" is a complete bore to read with no information of usefulness despite the claim.
Tragedy and Hope is a study (in part) of great insight for the time. The final chapters on the plight of the middle class in America or the Catholic Kennedy call for the use of Medieval Scholasticism in future debates was typical in the left leaning academia of the 60's.
Dwight Eisenhower may have been a communist rather than simply a golfer in retrospect, but that is a dead duck political argument now.
A quote on the Harvard commencement speech by Lawrence Bender is just one valuable anecdote of material for the antiquarian historian who has the time to examine this book.
An anthropological narrative of middle-class white American girls in 50's America is worth the read since the vast majority of this kind of stuff came from the far-left Critical Theorist Frankfurters out of Columbia at the time. One can think of Coming of Age in Somoa.
Quigley was a gentleman of a different stripe who writes from an altogether different vantage point. Worth reading the now bland ideas to see the history of academic discourse in another perspective. Otherwise more comprehensively written elsewhere.
October 2, 2017
A great book, not without its weaknesses, especially in the second half with the endless anticommunist ravings. It's quite annoying when the only types of atrocities the writer condemns are the ones done by communists, while others, such as the purges in Indonesia, are barely mentioned.
Another thing I didn't like were the last few chapters where the author switches from warfare and economics to psychology of the masses. The chapters about the American middle class and the battle of the sexes are downright ridiculous. There is a small part where the corruption of American youth is attributed to corrupt literature featuring necrophilia and coprophilia. This kind of moralizing does nothing but damage the writer's credibility.
The best parts are those that concern the first half of the twentieth century. This fellow sure knows the American Banking System, and his narration of World War 2 is more insightful than William Shirer's overrated Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.
There is also a very amusing chapter that takes the piss on the Krauts, but on the other hand, the author refuses to write similar chapters for the Americans and British. This pro Anglo-American stance eventually becomes annoying.
Another thing I didn't like were the last few chapters where the author switches from warfare and economics to psychology of the masses. The chapters about the American middle class and the battle of the sexes are downright ridiculous. There is a small part where the corruption of American youth is attributed to corrupt literature featuring necrophilia and coprophilia. This kind of moralizing does nothing but damage the writer's credibility.
The best parts are those that concern the first half of the twentieth century. This fellow sure knows the American Banking System, and his narration of World War 2 is more insightful than William Shirer's overrated Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.
There is also a very amusing chapter that takes the piss on the Krauts, but on the other hand, the author refuses to write similar chapters for the Americans and British. This pro Anglo-American stance eventually becomes annoying.
December 21, 2011
This is THE book that explains the grand conspiracy. I don't normally go for the intellectual over analysis of social phenomena, but this book is actually a fascinating, comprehensive overview of a history in our time as the subtitle promises. But what made this book famous - or infamous - is how this establishment insider, Georgetown professor Carroll Quigley, tells all about the conspiracy to establish the second coming of the British Empire, albeit under the radar. Quigley names names, dates, events, plots, puppet institutions & anything you'd want to know about who is directing the course of the world and has been for a hundred years. The author had full access to archives of the most sensitive nature and was excoriated for this expose, but he thought a One World Government would be a good thing and wanted to bring its heroes out into the sun. I plan to read it twice.
August 27, 2017
I have 8 lectures on the totality of this work at my site and on YouTube.
August 31, 2020
I'm tapping out on this one. I thought maybe if I took a break from it I might regain some enthusiasm but nope. This is like reading a really thorough encyclopedia. It's not fun. It's so dense you don't retain any of the info.
April 29, 2009
You're not gonna find a better history book. Leave's "The People's History of the United States" in the dust.
March 15, 2015
So far I am a little short of halfway through this tome. I find it very interesting at some points, yet very boring because the economics of it is a bit overwhelming. At the same time it is very interesting where the politics and history of it are giving me a perspective I never really saw before. Of course I do realize that economics and economic policy is what drives a lot of history and motivates politicians to do what they do but that still does not change the fact that as much as I try to understand it, economics remains a fairly boring topic to me. I do understand some of the basic principals of it but to indulge myself into a book which is purely economic theory and practice would cause me to put the book down and leave it on the shelf.
Fortunately this book does have some rewarding sections which save it from a sleeper, but if I were to rate it at this point (up to beginning of Chapter XIII) I would only give it a 3 star rating and if it were not for the author's superb grasp of economics and it's interplay on the events of world history I would give it an even lower rating of two stars.
I really do not fault the author for my low rating of this very important work. My ignorance is part of the problem. I am basing my rating on enjoyability and what I learn from it. I find myself struggling to stay awake on some pages that seem to go on and on regarding economic policy in pre-war Europe, and yet on some sections I can't put the book down when the author ties these policies into the politics and current events of the times.
February 4, 2015 - Still reading this tome...I am on the next to last chapter and can see some evidence of Quigley's pompous attitude towards third world countries and societies that do not adhere to the Western style of economics. He suggests that they undergo some pattern changes. Considering how this was written before the Environmental movement of the 1960's I would say he has failed to realize the inadequacies of such Westernization and he has also failed to recognize many of the positive attributes of pastoral and traditional cultures. Despite this oversights, I continue to find this book fascinating in that it has made me aware of many events and personalities in 20th century World History which I had know little or next to nothing about.
Finally finished reading this book. The section on the Middle Class was a real mind blower. Quigley is biased towards aristocracy and privilege and he certainly is prejudiced. I can't get over the section where he mentions girls have become so sexually loose that they even revert to dating "negro boys." His racial prejudice is really apparent towards the end. This book is 98% Tragedy and 2% Hope.
It was very good in some parts and yet very bland and even boring in others. Some sections I had to really struggle to get through, but I preserved and I am glad I did. Overall it was somewhat a disappointment. I was hoping to give it a four star rating but due to the sheer boredom of some parts and topped off with the racial and generational prejudices I have to give it a mediocre rating of three stars. If it weren't for the very informative sections where I really did learn something new (i.e. planning strategies of pre-WWI and role of Colonel House in the Wilson Administration as well as a few other areas of interest I would have given it a two star rating, which are books I manage to finish but have learned nothing and found nothing rewarding or useful to say about them. Fortunately this book did have some redeeming qualities.
Fortunately this book does have some rewarding sections which save it from a sleeper, but if I were to rate it at this point (up to beginning of Chapter XIII) I would only give it a 3 star rating and if it were not for the author's superb grasp of economics and it's interplay on the events of world history I would give it an even lower rating of two stars.
I really do not fault the author for my low rating of this very important work. My ignorance is part of the problem. I am basing my rating on enjoyability and what I learn from it. I find myself struggling to stay awake on some pages that seem to go on and on regarding economic policy in pre-war Europe, and yet on some sections I can't put the book down when the author ties these policies into the politics and current events of the times.
February 4, 2015 - Still reading this tome...I am on the next to last chapter and can see some evidence of Quigley's pompous attitude towards third world countries and societies that do not adhere to the Western style of economics. He suggests that they undergo some pattern changes. Considering how this was written before the Environmental movement of the 1960's I would say he has failed to realize the inadequacies of such Westernization and he has also failed to recognize many of the positive attributes of pastoral and traditional cultures. Despite this oversights, I continue to find this book fascinating in that it has made me aware of many events and personalities in 20th century World History which I had know little or next to nothing about.
Finally finished reading this book. The section on the Middle Class was a real mind blower. Quigley is biased towards aristocracy and privilege and he certainly is prejudiced. I can't get over the section where he mentions girls have become so sexually loose that they even revert to dating "negro boys." His racial prejudice is really apparent towards the end. This book is 98% Tragedy and 2% Hope.
It was very good in some parts and yet very bland and even boring in others. Some sections I had to really struggle to get through, but I preserved and I am glad I did. Overall it was somewhat a disappointment. I was hoping to give it a four star rating but due to the sheer boredom of some parts and topped off with the racial and generational prejudices I have to give it a mediocre rating of three stars. If it weren't for the very informative sections where I really did learn something new (i.e. planning strategies of pre-WWI and role of Colonel House in the Wilson Administration as well as a few other areas of interest I would have given it a two star rating, which are books I manage to finish but have learned nothing and found nothing rewarding or useful to say about them. Fortunately this book did have some redeeming qualities.
December 23, 2019
Quigley is an Anglophile so don't expect anything really critical of the British or American empire. The English race are just neurologically good liberals whereas the Germans are simply neurologically totalitarians; you've got to read other accounts alongside this to counteract the one-sided claims.
He obviously never really studied Marx beyond some summaries of Leninism but he's still obviously influenced by the monopoly capitalism thesis which in retrospect was wrong since finance was really always waiting to reassert itself. The technocratic pluralist statist dystopia he predicted didn't exactly pan out and instead we got neoliberalism.
Also the portrayal of the USSR as the prime instigator of the cold war is just ridiculous, for another perspective see Fleming's The Cold War and Its Origins.
Overall a descent, but biased and very pro-interventionist, overview of early 20th century history. Obviously a lot of the information in this is outdated in light of documents released in more recent years, e.g. the full extent of failures and deaths by the Soviets in the space race.
He obviously never really studied Marx beyond some summaries of Leninism but he's still obviously influenced by the monopoly capitalism thesis which in retrospect was wrong since finance was really always waiting to reassert itself. The technocratic pluralist statist dystopia he predicted didn't exactly pan out and instead we got neoliberalism.
Also the portrayal of the USSR as the prime instigator of the cold war is just ridiculous, for another perspective see Fleming's The Cold War and Its Origins.
Overall a descent, but biased and very pro-interventionist, overview of early 20th century history. Obviously a lot of the information in this is outdated in light of documents released in more recent years, e.g. the full extent of failures and deaths by the Soviets in the space race.
June 5, 2020
This took me well over a year to finish reading. It was alternately boring and fascinating. In the end it was quite worthwhile, because it helped me see that there is a lot of good in the tradition of Western Civilization. I have to admit I was ignorant of this view for a large portion of my life. In spite of all the coercion and deception, the West is founded on solid human principles. For example, there is the rule of law (as opposed to the law of the jungle).
Quigley's historical message is as relevant as ever. The sustained attack on the traditions of the West that has been going on for generations has now reached it's denouement.
The thrust of the message is much more toward honest and authoritative analysis than incendiary rhetoric, which makes me wonder why it was so threatening to the powers-that-be (deep state, cabal, empire, illuminadonkey) that they had to ban it by destroying the printing plates shortly after the first publication?
Quigley's historical message is as relevant as ever. The sustained attack on the traditions of the West that has been going on for generations has now reached it's denouement.
The thrust of the message is much more toward honest and authoritative analysis than incendiary rhetoric, which makes me wonder why it was so threatening to the powers-that-be (deep state, cabal, empire, illuminadonkey) that they had to ban it by destroying the printing plates shortly after the first publication?
November 26, 2022
These were the obvious events of this critical year 1943, open to public view and hopeful in their implications for the future. But the role of this year as a turning point in the conflict with Germany was much greater than this, for, behind the scenes, the military successes of the year forced decisions on strategic plans and postwar projects whose implications are still being worked out today.
OH . . . thur's . . .
Nazis in the woodwork,
Fascists in the walls,
Little Japs with bucktooth grins
A-gonna grab yew bah th' balls.
Whin this war is over,
How happy Ah will be,
Gearin' up fer thim Rooskies
And Go-round Number Three . . . .
—from Gravity's RAINBOW
I first heard of this book because Glenn BECK was bitchin' about it — he really had a bee in his bonnet about it, I didn't even know WHY, I just heard people report about it, since I didn't watch his SHOW!!! (Ha!!!)
Turns out, he goes on the cover of Forbes like he's Colbert but without the "Comedy Central" logo and cover and no satirical point, neither — "'I could give a flying crap about the political process.' Making money, on the other hand, is to be taken very seriously, and controversy is its own coinage. 'We're an entertainment company,' Beck says." I was so annoyed I wrote a book about it. Kirkus wondered why. I wasn't so sure, myself — but I had to do something.
Then, I got a ways in to this book, myself, and I wondered if Thomas PYNCHON had used it for a sort-of source, sort-of COVER ("Well, if he's going to say THESE things, then maybe I could ... " etc. etc.) since it was published in 1966 ... but THEN, I stopped WONDERING!!!
This new privately managed capitalism was organized in an intricate hierarchy whose details could be unraveled only be a lifetime of study. The size of enterprises had grown so big that in most fields a relatively small number were able to dominate the field. In addition, there was a very considerable amount of interlocking directorates and ownership by one corporation of the capital stock of another.
On the beam, Jackson. Lyle Bland is a name he knows, all right. And a name that also shows up often in the private records Jamf kept of his own business deals. Seems that Bland, during the early twenties, was heavily involved with the Hugo Stinnes operation in Germany. Stinnes, while he lasted, was the Wunderkind of European finance. Based out of the Ruhr, where his family had been coal barons for generations, young Stinnes built up a good-sized empire of steel, gas, electric and water power, streetcars and barge lines before he was 30. During the World War he worked closely with Walter Rathenau, who was ramrodding the whole economy then. After the war Stinnes managed to put the horizontal electrical trust of Siemens-Schuchert together with the coal and iron supplies of the Rheinelbe Union into a supercartel that was both horizontal and vertical, and to buy into just about everything else—shipyards, steamship lines, hotels, restaurants, forests, pulp mills, the newspapers—meantime also speculating in currency, buying foreign money with marks borrowed from the Reichsbank, driving the mark down and then paying off the loans at a fraction of the original figure. More than any one financier he was blamed for the Inflation. Those were the days when you carried marks around in wheelbarrows to your daily shopping and used them for toilet paper, assuming you had anything to shit. Stinnes's foreign connections went all over the world—Brazil, the East Indies, the United States—businessmen like Lyle Bland found his growth rate irresistible. The theory going around at the time was that Stinnes was conspiring with Krupp, Thyseen, and others to ruin the mark and so get Germany out of paying her war debts.
READ it!!!
"An immense synthesis of modern literature and modern science — it is equally adept with Rilke and organic chemistry — and it interprets beautifully both modern history and the process of historical thought. Few books of this century have achieved the range and depth of this one, and even fewer have held so large a vision of the world in a structure so skillfully and elaborately conceived." Edward Mendelson, Yale Review, contemporaneous review of Gravity's RAINBOW
OH . . . thur's . . .
Nazis in the woodwork,
Fascists in the walls,
Little Japs with bucktooth grins
A-gonna grab yew bah th' balls.
Whin this war is over,
How happy Ah will be,
Gearin' up fer thim Rooskies
And Go-round Number Three . . . .
—from Gravity's RAINBOW
I first heard of this book because Glenn BECK was bitchin' about it — he really had a bee in his bonnet about it, I didn't even know WHY, I just heard people report about it, since I didn't watch his SHOW!!! (Ha!!!)
Turns out, he goes on the cover of Forbes like he's Colbert but without the "Comedy Central" logo and cover and no satirical point, neither — "'I could give a flying crap about the political process.' Making money, on the other hand, is to be taken very seriously, and controversy is its own coinage. 'We're an entertainment company,' Beck says." I was so annoyed I wrote a book about it. Kirkus wondered why. I wasn't so sure, myself — but I had to do something.
Then, I got a ways in to this book, myself, and I wondered if Thomas PYNCHON had used it for a sort-of source, sort-of COVER ("Well, if he's going to say THESE things, then maybe I could ... " etc. etc.) since it was published in 1966 ... but THEN, I stopped WONDERING!!!
This new privately managed capitalism was organized in an intricate hierarchy whose details could be unraveled only be a lifetime of study. The size of enterprises had grown so big that in most fields a relatively small number were able to dominate the field. In addition, there was a very considerable amount of interlocking directorates and ownership by one corporation of the capital stock of another.
On the beam, Jackson. Lyle Bland is a name he knows, all right. And a name that also shows up often in the private records Jamf kept of his own business deals. Seems that Bland, during the early twenties, was heavily involved with the Hugo Stinnes operation in Germany. Stinnes, while he lasted, was the Wunderkind of European finance. Based out of the Ruhr, where his family had been coal barons for generations, young Stinnes built up a good-sized empire of steel, gas, electric and water power, streetcars and barge lines before he was 30. During the World War he worked closely with Walter Rathenau, who was ramrodding the whole economy then. After the war Stinnes managed to put the horizontal electrical trust of Siemens-Schuchert together with the coal and iron supplies of the Rheinelbe Union into a supercartel that was both horizontal and vertical, and to buy into just about everything else—shipyards, steamship lines, hotels, restaurants, forests, pulp mills, the newspapers—meantime also speculating in currency, buying foreign money with marks borrowed from the Reichsbank, driving the mark down and then paying off the loans at a fraction of the original figure. More than any one financier he was blamed for the Inflation. Those were the days when you carried marks around in wheelbarrows to your daily shopping and used them for toilet paper, assuming you had anything to shit. Stinnes's foreign connections went all over the world—Brazil, the East Indies, the United States—businessmen like Lyle Bland found his growth rate irresistible. The theory going around at the time was that Stinnes was conspiring with Krupp, Thyseen, and others to ruin the mark and so get Germany out of paying her war debts.
READ it!!!
"An immense synthesis of modern literature and modern science — it is equally adept with Rilke and organic chemistry — and it interprets beautifully both modern history and the process of historical thought. Few books of this century have achieved the range and depth of this one, and even fewer have held so large a vision of the world in a structure so skillfully and elaborately conceived." Edward Mendelson, Yale Review, contemporaneous review of Gravity's RAINBOW
December 7, 2007
Quigley taught at Georgetown, after a long career that involved him behind the scenes in international bidniss. His perspective is often financial, but his insights are crisp and amazing.
This book changed my perspective on history in some interesting ways.
Oh, one of his students was a young Bill Clinton.
This book changed my perspective on history in some interesting ways.
Oh, one of his students was a young Bill Clinton.
Want to read
March 8, 2013I just added this to my "to read" list, however stuff like the following may cause me to have some disagreement with this book:
"while the Right follows the Manichaean doctrine imported into Christianity by Saint Augustine (evil is a positive force, and man needs strong external discipline to protect him from it)"
.
"while the Right follows the Manichaean doctrine imported into Christianity by Saint Augustine (evil is a positive force, and man needs strong external discipline to protect him from it)"
.
June 14, 2023
Tragedy and Hope, authored by Carroll Quigley and first published in 1966, stands as a seminal work in the realm of historical analysis and political scholarship. This academic book review aims to provide a comprehensive assessment of Tragedy and Hope, exploring its main themes, arguments, and contributions to our understanding of power dynamics, historical events, and the influence of elite networks. Quigley's meticulous examination of historical patterns and the role of secret societies unveils a thought-provoking perspective on the forces shaping global affairs.
Tragedy and Hope delves into the intricate interplay of power, politics, and historical events. Quigley illuminates the existence and activities of secret societies, such as the Rhodes-Milner Group, and their impact on shaping world affairs from the late 19th to the mid-20th century. The book explores the concentration of power, the role of banking and finance, the influence of multinational corporations, and the intricate web of relationships between political, economic, and intellectual elites.
Quigley's Tragedy and Hope offers a sweeping analysis of historical events, unveiling hidden mechanisms of power and influence. Drawing from extensive research, Quigley highlights the pivotal role played by secret societies and their members in shaping global events and policies. He presents a compelling argument for the existence of an influential network of individuals who work behind the scenes to influence politics, economics, and social development.
One of the central contributions of the book lies in Quigley's exploration of the concentration of power. He identifies a small group of elites, including financiers, politicians, and intellectuals, who wield disproportionate influence over major global decisions. Quigley highlights the interconnectedness of these power structures, demonstrating how individuals from various fields collaborate to advance their shared interests and shape the course of history.
Moreover, Tragedy and Hope sheds light on the role of multinational corporations and the impact of economic interests on political decision-making. Quigley analyzes the growth of corporate power and its implications for democratic processes and national sovereignty. He exposes the mechanisms through which corporations extend their influence, from lobbying to media manipulation, leading to the erosion of public accountability and the subversion of democratic ideals.
Tragedy and Hope has made significant contributions to the fields of political science, history, and global studies. Quigley's research and analysis offer a unique perspective on the dynamics of power and the interplay between political, economic, and intellectual elites. The book's examination of secret societies and their activities prompts a reevaluation of conventional narratives surrounding historical events and the forces shaping global affairs.
Furthermore, Tragedy and Hope's focus on the concentration of power and the influence of multinational corporations remains highly relevant in contemporary discussions on globalization, neoliberalism, and the erosion of democratic institutions. Quigley's work invites critical examination of the complex relationships between economic elites and political leaders, shedding light on the mechanisms through which power is consolidated and wielded in the modern era.
Tragedy and Hope, authored by Carroll Quigley, offers a meticulously researched and thought-provoking analysis of power dynamics, historical events, and the influence of secret societies. Quigley's exploration of hidden networks, the concentration of power, and the impact of multinational corporations challenges conventional narratives and provides a fresh perspective on the forces shaping global affairs. Tragedy and Hope remains a significant contribution to political scholarship, history, and global studies, inviting readers to critically examine the complex dynamics of power and influence in our modern world.
GPT
Tragedy and Hope delves into the intricate interplay of power, politics, and historical events. Quigley illuminates the existence and activities of secret societies, such as the Rhodes-Milner Group, and their impact on shaping world affairs from the late 19th to the mid-20th century. The book explores the concentration of power, the role of banking and finance, the influence of multinational corporations, and the intricate web of relationships between political, economic, and intellectual elites.
Quigley's Tragedy and Hope offers a sweeping analysis of historical events, unveiling hidden mechanisms of power and influence. Drawing from extensive research, Quigley highlights the pivotal role played by secret societies and their members in shaping global events and policies. He presents a compelling argument for the existence of an influential network of individuals who work behind the scenes to influence politics, economics, and social development.
One of the central contributions of the book lies in Quigley's exploration of the concentration of power. He identifies a small group of elites, including financiers, politicians, and intellectuals, who wield disproportionate influence over major global decisions. Quigley highlights the interconnectedness of these power structures, demonstrating how individuals from various fields collaborate to advance their shared interests and shape the course of history.
Moreover, Tragedy and Hope sheds light on the role of multinational corporations and the impact of economic interests on political decision-making. Quigley analyzes the growth of corporate power and its implications for democratic processes and national sovereignty. He exposes the mechanisms through which corporations extend their influence, from lobbying to media manipulation, leading to the erosion of public accountability and the subversion of democratic ideals.
Tragedy and Hope has made significant contributions to the fields of political science, history, and global studies. Quigley's research and analysis offer a unique perspective on the dynamics of power and the interplay between political, economic, and intellectual elites. The book's examination of secret societies and their activities prompts a reevaluation of conventional narratives surrounding historical events and the forces shaping global affairs.
Furthermore, Tragedy and Hope's focus on the concentration of power and the influence of multinational corporations remains highly relevant in contemporary discussions on globalization, neoliberalism, and the erosion of democratic institutions. Quigley's work invites critical examination of the complex relationships between economic elites and political leaders, shedding light on the mechanisms through which power is consolidated and wielded in the modern era.
Tragedy and Hope, authored by Carroll Quigley, offers a meticulously researched and thought-provoking analysis of power dynamics, historical events, and the influence of secret societies. Quigley's exploration of hidden networks, the concentration of power, and the impact of multinational corporations challenges conventional narratives and provides a fresh perspective on the forces shaping global affairs. Tragedy and Hope remains a significant contribution to political scholarship, history, and global studies, inviting readers to critically examine the complex dynamics of power and influence in our modern world.
GPT
Read
February 28, 2021I read a good chunk of this book and enjoyed it. It definitely has some bad "hot" takes, specifically with respect to monetary policy, but otherwise offers a pretty robust history of the late 19th-early 20th century. Given how long this book is and how much much history I've recently read, I don't feel sufficiently motivated to slog through this. I think it's possible I someday return to finish this book.
The chapter on rationalism and science during World War 2 is fascinating and worth reading. I excerpted it here for anyone curious: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1z...
The chapter on rationalism and science during World War 2 is fascinating and worth reading. I excerpted it here for anyone curious: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1z...
February 4, 2017
Excellent as a history lesson of the world conflicts and societal environment between 1860 and 1960ish. However, I only give it three stars because of the obvious slant of the author toward international intervention in global problems. Quigley adopts the world view of secular humanists that man is basically good and a little lower than a god in the universal hierarchy of authority. Therefore, humans should be able to control and perfect our environment, international relationships, inter-ethnic relationships, etc... through the power of goodness and diversity. However, since his worldview is flawed, he neglects the fact that all people are sinful and left to themselves are self-centered, self-ingratiating, self-aggrandizing, and self-seeking.
Jeremiah 17:9King James Version (KJV)
9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?
The ability of mankind to obtain any level of diversity or goodwill toward others is completely dependent on whether the members of the diverse group have individually received the grace and power of God to do so. Otherwise, all conflicts between the peoples of Earth will continually result in failure.
Quigley has willful disdain for anyone with a different opinion concerning international matters and refers to them as "neo-isolationists." He neglects to consider the ramifications of foreign entanglements and naively sees all conflict on the world stage as lack of consideration for fellow man. People have family, local, nearby environmental, and national problems to work out in our own country and don't need to spend trillions of dollars to "volunteer" as the Global Earth Police Force for the planet.
Jeremiah 17:9King James Version (KJV)
9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?
The ability of mankind to obtain any level of diversity or goodwill toward others is completely dependent on whether the members of the diverse group have individually received the grace and power of God to do so. Otherwise, all conflicts between the peoples of Earth will continually result in failure.
Quigley has willful disdain for anyone with a different opinion concerning international matters and refers to them as "neo-isolationists." He neglects to consider the ramifications of foreign entanglements and naively sees all conflict on the world stage as lack of consideration for fellow man. People have family, local, nearby environmental, and national problems to work out in our own country and don't need to spend trillions of dollars to "volunteer" as the Global Earth Police Force for the planet.
September 22, 2018
The book was written in the 1960’s , long before The Freedom of Information Act, whistleblowers, the internet, and satellite TV. His portrayal of the Zionists cause in 1947-48 is totally 1960’s scholarship. His description of Latin, Arab and African personality types was rather brusque and forward from a 2018 PC perspective, but in the 1960’s, it was kosher. The last hundred pages; Quigley’s ideas on the future, were slow and tedious to get through.
However, all around a masterpiece. I vaguely remember my father reading this when I was a child., sparking my interest in history. Of course, my favorite parts were about the history I remember experiencing and living through , and the parts of history I don’t remember because I was too small to remember.
From another aspect, I look at the neighbors with little kids the same ages I was during the 50’s , and wonder about my folks and Aunts and Uncles, and their behavior and personalities, and how they were affected growing up in the depression and then just going into high school when Hiroshima was bombed . When I was the age they were then, MLK & RFK were assassinated a few weeks apart.
Paraphrasing Quigley, it’s remarkable that mankind made it through the 20 years between 1945 and 1965!
Quigley’s step by step account of the process of making the Atomic Bomb was riveting. So much so, I’ve checked out Daniel Ellsberg,”The Doomsday Machine” from the library.
However, all around a masterpiece. I vaguely remember my father reading this when I was a child., sparking my interest in history. Of course, my favorite parts were about the history I remember experiencing and living through , and the parts of history I don’t remember because I was too small to remember.
From another aspect, I look at the neighbors with little kids the same ages I was during the 50’s , and wonder about my folks and Aunts and Uncles, and their behavior and personalities, and how they were affected growing up in the depression and then just going into high school when Hiroshima was bombed . When I was the age they were then, MLK & RFK were assassinated a few weeks apart.
Paraphrasing Quigley, it’s remarkable that mankind made it through the 20 years between 1945 and 1965!
Quigley’s step by step account of the process of making the Atomic Bomb was riveting. So much so, I’ve checked out Daniel Ellsberg,”The Doomsday Machine” from the library.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Read
January 6, 2009I am reading this book aloud with Evan!
Quigley was BClinton's , or old-blue-eyes, as I like to call him, mentor. What an ambish book, trying to cover "world history in our time" This book is dense as War and Peace, and War What Is It Good For.
I am only reading parts of it; we are on page 532,372 and the topic is McCarthyism and the Cold War. If you are knowledgeable about this McCarthyism topic, or history in general, let's talk!
I would like to compare Quigley's finance and detail heavy text on The Cold War to Howard Zinn's text on the subject in The History of The United States. You could also compare Rambo movies to see who the US portrayed as the enemy at that time in history (one Rambo movie has the Ruskies as enemy agnst the Afghans, another Rambo portrays the Afghans as evil!)
I am learning so much by reading and analyzing this with my honey! God, and I do love the sound of my own voice..
There are jokes hidden in Tragedy and Hope's three page run-on sentences!!I promise!!
Quigley was BClinton's , or old-blue-eyes, as I like to call him, mentor. What an ambish book, trying to cover "world history in our time" This book is dense as War and Peace, and War What Is It Good For.
I am only reading parts of it; we are on page 532,372 and the topic is McCarthyism and the Cold War. If you are knowledgeable about this McCarthyism topic, or history in general, let's talk!
I would like to compare Quigley's finance and detail heavy text on The Cold War to Howard Zinn's text on the subject in The History of The United States. You could also compare Rambo movies to see who the US portrayed as the enemy at that time in history (one Rambo movie has the Ruskies as enemy agnst the Afghans, another Rambo portrays the Afghans as evil!)
I am learning so much by reading and analyzing this with my honey! God, and I do love the sound of my own voice..
There are jokes hidden in Tragedy and Hope's three page run-on sentences!!I promise!!
February 29, 2020
A book with the title 'History of the world' deserves to be treated with caution. What I am finding with this particular book is that the parts of history that it handles give me the feeling that they are momentous and very significant. It is also well written with a logical intuitive style which helps me take on the material. I have been choosing parts which interest me most rather than reading from start to finish but find myself reading all of the remaining parts as the educational value continues to hook me.
Update 29.02.2020 - the scope of this book is simply stupendous! I have just finished reading about the rise of the Third Reich and now I am reading about the British parliamentary system. In fact I may have read this once before and I am starting to highlight where I have read already.
Update 29.02.2020 - the scope of this book is simply stupendous! I have just finished reading about the rise of the Third Reich and now I am reading about the British parliamentary system. In fact I may have read this once before and I am starting to highlight where I have read already.
February 10, 2017
You must read this book. But in order to understand the full magnitude of the information contained within you need to forget most of your previously help views and beliefs of history, economics, social studies, technology, phycology, and geopolitics, as they are most likely colored or flat out false. This tome exposes the mechanisms of the true power structure that has driven the world and has for the last 200+ years.
April 6, 2022
You can watch my full review on YouTube here: https://youtu.be/5GhGr3OqZGw
This book that I’d heard lots of people talk about was absolutely huge. It gives a picture of where we are in the world. It was written in the 1960’s and it goes into quite a lot of detail from around 1900 up until the 60’s, covering the first world war, the second world war. It goes into detail about the politics and economics shaping the decisions that were made. There’s also a brief history of many of the components in those areas, such as Britain, USA, Russia and other European countries, and other areas of the world. It was very, very interesting! I definitely feel like I have learnt a lot, I don’t know how much of it I’m going to remember, but it was really interesting.
I think what it got across a lot for me was how different people are from different areas in the world and how differently they view the world, and how they make their decisions in different ways, we do know this but it’s always good to be reminded.
Quigley also talks about the different ways that civilisations/countries have got to where they are, so you have some countries that may have a slow progression with democracy evolving and political structures, and then development of manufacturing and arms and things like that; whereas other countries are coming straight in at a higher level of manufacturing and arms, maybe without the build-up of democracy, and how that changes outlook and things like that.
It is also just one man’s opinion so you’ve got to take that into account, but I do really feel like he has gone to a lot of effort to try to explain the situation, to explain what’s going on, and not to oversimplify things too much, and say do you know what, it is really complicated; there’s that going on, there’s that group of people who want influence, there’s those people behaving like that, and there’s that group.
Another thing that was really interesting about it is how all the countries have a very similar system of a very small ruling minority and a large group of people who don’t really have a lot of say in what’s going on. It’s always interesting that most people are very reasonable and just want to get on with life and are not really interested in wars or going into other countries and getting involved and interfering with other countries, or having ridiculously large economies or anything like that. Most people just want normal everyday life. However, if you have a psychopathic mentality you’re probably going to get to the top of society, and those people tend to want world domination and incredible financial wealth to a ridiculous level, and they cause all the problems don’t they.
So, it gets to where we are in the mid 60’s and at that point the book finishes, you’ve just got the beginning of the European Economic Community, you’ve got the Cold War, and he gives a few predictions about what’s going to happen.
This book covers different countries’ histories and developments, politics and finance and social organisation. One thing I thought was really interesting was he goes into quite a lot of detail about World War One, the inter-war period, World War Two and the post-war period. I have to be honest, a lot of this I didn’t really know about, the details that is, so that was really, really interesting. I read ‘The Phoney Victory’ by Peter Hitchens last year which I did a review for, and I remember saying then that I was surprised how much I don’t actually know about what really went on in the second world war, or the things leading up to it. I know what I learnt at school; I know about the rise of the Nazi’s, the Home Front, the concentration camps, things like that; but the actual war I didn’t really know that much about, so that was really interesting and I really feel like I learnt a lot about the manoeuvring of different countries and how things developed.
Quigley also talks about civilisations and how civilisations develop and also how they dissolve, and that the Western civilisation in one way or another, through Europe and the USA, has kept reinventing itself to last for a really long time. He asks, are we at a point now where it is going to end, where it is going to dissolve, or is it going to change and reinvent itself and continue as this big dominant thing that it is, that was interesting.
Another thing I found interesting was hearing more history about other countries like Russia and the USA, because I don’t actually know that much about the history of the USA, about things like the American Civil War, and I think that would be really good to look into further, or the history of Germany and how it became unified. It’s all interesting and gives you an idea of people’s mindsets and how they go out into the world.
He talks about the appeasement program, which was really interesting, and in hindsight we can say it was very misguided, it was also quite manipulative. It’s a bit of a weakness of the West there, thinking that they can manipulate events in other countries to weaken areas which will in turn strengthen the West, I’m talking governments now not everyday people. It seems to be a recurring thing that they do and it doesn’t often end well, maybe it does end well if you have all the money and the businesses, but it doesn’t end well for every other fucker!
You can watch my full review on YouTube here: https://youtu.be/5GhGr3OqZGw
This book that I’d heard lots of people talk about was absolutely huge. It gives a picture of where we are in the world. It was written in the 1960’s and it goes into quite a lot of detail from around 1900 up until the 60’s, covering the first world war, the second world war. It goes into detail about the politics and economics shaping the decisions that were made. There’s also a brief history of many of the components in those areas, such as Britain, USA, Russia and other European countries, and other areas of the world. It was very, very interesting! I definitely feel like I have learnt a lot, I don’t know how much of it I’m going to remember, but it was really interesting.
I think what it got across a lot for me was how different people are from different areas in the world and how differently they view the world, and how they make their decisions in different ways, we do know this but it’s always good to be reminded.
Quigley also talks about the different ways that civilisations/countries have got to where they are, so you have some countries that may have a slow progression with democracy evolving and political structures, and then development of manufacturing and arms and things like that; whereas other countries are coming straight in at a higher level of manufacturing and arms, maybe without the build-up of democracy, and how that changes outlook and things like that.
It is also just one man’s opinion so you’ve got to take that into account, but I do really feel like he has gone to a lot of effort to try to explain the situation, to explain what’s going on, and not to oversimplify things too much, and say do you know what, it is really complicated; there’s that going on, there’s that group of people who want influence, there’s those people behaving like that, and there’s that group.
Another thing that was really interesting about it is how all the countries have a very similar system of a very small ruling minority and a large group of people who don’t really have a lot of say in what’s going on. It’s always interesting that most people are very reasonable and just want to get on with life and are not really interested in wars or going into other countries and getting involved and interfering with other countries, or having ridiculously large economies or anything like that. Most people just want normal everyday life. However, if you have a psychopathic mentality you’re probably going to get to the top of society, and those people tend to want world domination and incredible financial wealth to a ridiculous level, and they cause all the problems don’t they.
So, it gets to where we are in the mid 60’s and at that point the book finishes, you’ve just got the beginning of the European Economic Community, you’ve got the Cold War, and he gives a few predictions about what’s going to happen.
This book covers different countries’ histories and developments, politics and finance and social organisation. One thing I thought was really interesting was he goes into quite a lot of detail about World War One, the inter-war period, World War Two and the post-war period. I have to be honest, a lot of this I didn’t really know about, the details that is, so that was really, really interesting. I read ‘The Phoney Victory’ by Peter Hitchens last year which I did a review for, and I remember saying then that I was surprised how much I don’t actually know about what really went on in the second world war, or the things leading up to it. I know what I learnt at school; I know about the rise of the Nazi’s, the Home Front, the concentration camps, things like that; but the actual war I didn’t really know that much about, so that was really interesting and I really feel like I learnt a lot about the manoeuvring of different countries and how things developed.
Quigley also talks about civilisations and how civilisations develop and also how they dissolve, and that the Western civilisation in one way or another, through Europe and the USA, has kept reinventing itself to last for a really long time. He asks, are we at a point now where it is going to end, where it is going to dissolve, or is it going to change and reinvent itself and continue as this big dominant thing that it is, that was interesting.
Another thing I found interesting was hearing more history about other countries like Russia and the USA, because I don’t actually know that much about the history of the USA, about things like the American Civil War, and I think that would be really good to look into further, or the history of Germany and how it became unified. It’s all interesting and gives you an idea of people’s mindsets and how they go out into the world.
He talks about the appeasement program, which was really interesting, and in hindsight we can say it was very misguided, it was also quite manipulative. It’s a bit of a weakness of the West there, thinking that they can manipulate events in other countries to weaken areas which will in turn strengthen the West, I’m talking governments now not everyday people. It seems to be a recurring thing that they do and it doesn’t often end well, maybe it does end well if you have all the money and the businesses, but it doesn’t end well for every other fucker!
You can watch my full review on YouTube here: https://youtu.be/5GhGr3OqZGw
Displaying 1 - 30 of 83 reviews