Three letters on the occasion of a forthcoming exhibition at the British Museum and a six-week series of broadcasts on the BBC have been sent for publication but it remains to be seen whether they will be.

While a new perspective on German culture is long overdue, as is a departure from the cliche's of Germany being a country identified only with nazis, jack boots, lederhosen, the SS and the the perpetrators of the holocaust, there also needs to be a proper assessment of the role played by the GDR in modern German history away from the cliches of it being reduced to the 'stasi state' and a successor to the nazi dictatorship.

27 September 2014

Dear Sir/Madam

Two of the iconic cultural figures mentioned in Neil MacGregor’s article (Made in Germany in Guardian Review - 27 September), Ernst Barlach, and Käthe Kollwitz, were celebrated and promoted in the GDR (East Germany), although the former was a committed Christian and the latter a pacifist. 

I hope the new exhibition in the British Museum and the BBC series accompanying it will not simply remove the contribution made to German culture by the GDR, as is usually done. After all, two of the greatest theatre men of the twentieth century, Bertolt Brecht and the Austrian opera director Walter Felsenstein, worked and produced some of their best works there and were supported and heavily subsidised by the government. And Heiner Müller, one of Germany’s best modern dramatists was a GDR citizen.The country’s orchestras, under conductors like Kurt Masur were world famous for the excellence of their music-making, the renowned tenor Peter Schreier and baritone Olaf Bär also learned their handiwork there. This welcome exhibition should be an opportunity to reassess German culture, but without the distorting lenses of the Cold War.

28 September 2014

Dear Sir,

To open his article on German culture (Made in Germany in the Guardian’s Weekend Review - 27 September), Neil MacGregor highlights a wetsuit used by someone attempting to flee East Germany. This is the asinine equivalent of exhibiting a hood used by British troops in their maltreatment of Northern Irish and Iraqi prisoners as an icon of British culture!

He also equates the ‘two [German] dictatorships’ by writing of the ‘…situation under both the Nazis and the Stasi.’ It needs to be stated unequivocally that the Nazis were the government of 1930s Germany, imprisoning tens of thousands of political dissidents, torturing and murdering hundreds of thousands of others in concentration camps for racial and political reasons. The regime also carried out a cultural witch-hunt, burning books and demonising ‘decadent’ artists. The Stasi did not run the GDR, it was merely a very powerful security apparatus, but always under the control of the Socialist Unity Party. It did not imprison thousands or torture its perceived enemies, even if it was often heavy handed and unjust. MacGregor also re-iterates the incredible, often used, but unsubstantiated figure of  ‘…one in three of the population were informing on their friends’ to the Stasi. The GDR was a socialist state, even if centrally and bureaucratically governed, and most people lived their lives with little or no relations or connection with the state security services.

MacGregor also writes about Meissen in the same distorted vein: ‘ …so the factory set up by August the Strong received commissions to make official portraits of the leaders of the East German Communist state.’ The factory’s main role in the GDR continued to be to produce traditional first class Dresden porcelain, but it did indeed make small ceramic medallions, mostly commemorating German cultural figures like Goethe, Lessing and Schiller and extremely few of ‘communist figures’.

Dear Madam/Sir,

The author of the feature Made in Germany in the Guardian’s Weekend Review (27th September) writes that ‘Later that year the Russians removed the entire art collection [from Dresden after allied bombing in February 1945]. This may convey the impression that they stole the collection, but in fact they removed it to keep it safe and returned every single piece once the Gemaelde Gallerie was restored. Russian forces took great care to prevent looting of art treasures in Germany and in fact, immediately the war was over, promoted the rapid re-establishment of theatres and music-making, as well as encouraging and supporting artists to begin working again.

It was Britain and the USA that carpet bombed what was widely acknowledged to be one of the most beautiful and culturally-rich cities in the world. They did this with no reflection on what they were destroying - an architecturally unique city containing an immense collection of some of the world’s most valuable art works. The war was clearly coming to an end; Russian troops were poised on the Czech-German border only miles away from Dresden and the city was packed with refugees fleeing the front. By any measure that destruction was a an act of human and cultural barbarism.

Building up to a Third World War?

It is always tempting the gods to cite the past as a prediction of the future or to draw false parallels, but history can teach us lessons even if our leaders rarely choose to learn from them.

The Middle East and indeed the whole Islamic world is in catastrophic turmoil with no clear protagonists or outcomes. This has led to an unprecedented destruction of cities and infrastructure across the whole region, millions of refugees and traumatised families. We know this is largely as a result of western meddling and military incursion, but the meddlers are now at a loss to find the magic to put the genie back in the bottle and are seemingly indifferent to the enormity of the human cost. 

Concurrently, we have a dangerous escalation of civil conflict in Ukraine at the heart of Europe. Since the end of the Second World War, Europe and the world have not faced such an incendiary situation. The parallels with the situation before both the First and Second World Wars are striking, as are the blindness to the dangers and the refusal to learn the necessary lessons by the political elite. In fact they themselves are deliberately distorting history and fanning the flames of conflict for ulterior motives.

Using particularly inflammatory rhetoric, Cameron tells European leaders that ‘to appease Putin over Ukraine as Britain and France did with Adolf Hitler in the run-up to the Second World War’ would be encouraging Russian expansionism. He told them ‘Putin had to be stopped from seizing all of Ukraine’. Such comments are not only offensive to Putin and the Russian people but a grave insult to the men and women who sacrificed their lives in their millions to save us from German fascism.

Without proper evidence, the Pentagon and the US administration have accused Russia of firing rockets from Russian territory into Ukraine. As ‘proof’ James Clapper, Director of US National Intelligence, presented some grainy, indistinct satellite images. But EU leaders are once again willing to accept this ‘evidence’ at face value and follow the US lead in escalating the Ukrainian conflict. Clapper is well-known as a notorious liar: he has misinformed the US public on a number of occasions, under oath in the senate. Interestingly the satellite photos he showed were not from the National Security Agency or other US spy sources, but from a private satellite company, Global Scope.

A memorandum to German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, by the the steering group of the US organisation,Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), in response to the war in Ukraine is salutary. It addresses allegations from the US and NATO of a Russian invasion in support of rebel forces. In the memorandum they urged the Chancellor to be suspicious of US intelligence. They stated that satellite photos released to the press are not a sufficient basis for the claim of an invasion, likening it to the case for war in Iraq (a reference to the dodgy ones used by Colin Powell in the UN to justify the invasion of Iraq), and suggested the claims of a Russian invasion are a cover for a series of successes by the rebels.

Western media have completely  ignored the mounting refugee crisis in eastern Ukraine, but according to United Nations estimates almost 730,000 people have now left Ukraine and moved to Russia this year because of the war in the east of the country. Some 87 per cent of the forced migrants are from the Lugansk and Donetsk regions. The Ukraine government is bombing and shooting at its own people who feel they will only be safe in Russia.

At the beginning of June, the number of refugees coming to Russia from eastern Ukraine was 2,600. By August 1, that total had increased to 102,600 people. Russia’s Federal Migration Service says that there are currently about two million Ukrainians in Russia, of whom 600,000 are from south-eastern Ukraine and 36,000 are living in temporary accommodation.

The mounting attacks on Putin make no reference to the centuries old historical links between Ukraine and Russia and the fact that Kiev is one of the cradles of the Russian nation. Nor do these attackers recognise the fact of a Russian-speaking minority living in the eastern Ukraine who have been subject to discrimination and attacks by the non-elected Kiev regime, comprising extreme nationalist and fascist elements.

A Western consensus depicting Putin as an imperialist, land-grabbing dictator is a concerted attempt to demonise Russia once more and return to the cold war cliches. 

The governments of the former Soviet republics are, with the exception of Belarus, extremely hostile to Russia, an attitude born out of historical circumstances. However, this hostility is being cynically played upon and fanned by the West. The choice of the Polish ex-prime minister Donald Tusk as the new EU president of the European Council is also significant. He is an avid Russophobe and aggressively pro-EU . 

Western consensus depicting Putin as an imperialist, land-grabbing dictator is fallacious and dangerous. He nor the Russian government or its people have any designs on the former republics. This is a completely concocted justification for supporting the illegitimate Ukrainian regime and to frighten the other former Soviet republics into joining the ongoing war. There is no evidence whatsoever for such allegations. Apart from anything else the Russian government would hardly be so stupid as to wish to once more conquer the countries which so recently won their independence and whose populations are largely hostile to Russia.

Putin is the elected leader of a democratic country, even if that democracy is flawed and elections are not completely free and transparent. NATO has been expanding inexorably eastwards, despite clear assurances given by Bush to Gorbachev not to do so, and hostility to Russia is being actively encouraged and even fomented by the US. The West encouraged the overthrow of a legitimate Ukrainian government, however corrupt, and has welcomed the new one, installed on the back of an armed coup. Putin and the Russian government have been remarkably restrained vis a vis the escalation in Ukraine and western threats and draconian trade boycott. NATO’s very recent decision to set up ‘rapid response units’ to deal with the so-called Russian aggression will only make a war between Russia, the US and Europe more likely and less difficult to prevent. 

The Rat Race is for Rats!

Ask anyone in work today whether they enjoy it and you won’t find many who reply: ‘yes, it’s great fun and rewarding’. Enormous numbers of people find their work stressful, pressurised, certainly not much fun and often poorly paid. Of course, for generations, work, particularly hard manual labour or monotonous office drudgery was never much fun either. For past generations, though, a sense of comradeship often bound workforces together; while work was hard and hours long, there was still time and opportunity for banter with colleagues and work mates, there was even room for creativity, innovation and individual input. That feeling alone of being part of a substantial workforce, of building or making things together or providing a vital public service gave many workers a sense of dignity and worth. 

The work process today has been rationalised, intensified and the opportunities for individual input largely eradicated. Robots don’t deviate from the commands given them nor do they fall ill, take holidays and maternity leave. For employers, if they can turn their workforce into quasi robots, so much the better, and that’s what most employers today are trying to do. Look at Amazon’s warehouses for a prime example. Every minute of the working day workers’ movements are tracked, time taken for each task measured and behaviour monitored, so that every single minute is accounted for. No time for a chat with a workmate, a short tea break or a quick scan of the newspaper on the toilet. These employment practices dehumanise the workforce and demonstrate how employers see their workers as units, as robots. There is no dignity here, no job satisfaction and certainly no joy. 

Workplace stress has become the defining factor for many workers with serious implications for mental and physical health and family life. A major study whose results were published this month by the Institute of Epidemiology in Munich, followed 5,337 men and women aged between 29 and 66 who were in full-time work.

It found that those under the most strain at work are 45 per cent more likely to fall ill, with increased risk of heart disease, strokes, blindness and amputations.

Stress at work 'raises diabetes risk by 45%. One in five are affected by high levels of stress at work, and raised levels of stress hormones upset the body’s glucose levels, which can damage the body's circulation and major organs

The study also found that those under the most strain at work are 45 per cent more likely to fall ill with the condition, which increases the risk of heart disease, strokes, blindness  and amputations, and strain is a factor even among the slim.

Some three million people in the UK are currently affected by diabetic symptoms, but if trends continue this could rise to four million by 2025 and five million by 2030, with type 2 accounting for 90 per cent of cases.

Marx memorably described the alienation that capitalism imposes on workers, by robbing them of a meaningful relationship with the products they make, but even he could hardly have envisaged  the cruel and ruthless perfection of the present system. Over thirty years ago, Jimmy Reid, one of the leaders of the Upper Clyde Shipbuilders work-in, memorably remarked that ‘the rate race is for rats, not human beings’. But that rat race is not even a race anymore, but a cage fight with a pre-determined outcome. 

Capitalism has always involved the alienation of working people because they are robbed of control over their working day and the work process itself. But the same transformation has since been imposed on the public sector too. While this sector was often characterised by lower pay than in the private one, that was compensated somewhat by higher job satisfaction. Public service workers were rewarded by seeing how their work helped and supported thier fellow citizens and there was also a highly motivating public service ethos and sense of social purpose. All this has been eroded, dismissed and ridiculed by successive Blairite and Tory governments which have portrayed such services as bloated, inefficient and second-rate. So that today we have a totally demoralised workforce in most areas of public service.

Work is at the centre of our lives, it largely determines who we are and what we are. Work denotes our place in society, we obtain satisfaction from contributing to society. Those without work suffer even deeper depression, a sense of being worthless and a loss of self esteem; we need work, just as we need food and drink. The workplace should be where we can express ourselves creatively, where we find companionship among like-minded people and where we readily devote our energies. It should also be a place of happiness. Under capitalism all that is impossible, where workers are seen merely as a means of profitable exploitation. Working people are, for the capitalist, merely a means to an end - to make more money.

END

From Hope to despair- why the Soviet Union collapsed

Many books and articles have been written about perestroika and the collapse of the Soviet Union together with actually existing socialism in Eastern Europe, but we have heard little from those who were actually involved in the process and are critical of how the process was handled. Hans Modrow was the last prime minister of the German Democratic Republic before free elections were held in 1990, leading to German unification. He was intimately involved in discussions with Gorbachev and other leading Soviet politicians, as well as with West German leaders in the run up to Germany unification.

His reminiscences offer a unique insight into the processes that brought about perestroika and the demise of Eastern Europe’s experiment with socialism. As soon as I had read only a few pages, I was fascinated and hooked. His book is an essential read for all those wishing to better understand those processes from the viewpoint of an intelligent insider and perceptive observer. It was written in 1998 but now, at last, translated into English.

Hans Modrow, the author of this book, was drafted as a 17-year-old into Hitler’s army and became a Soviet prisoner of war. After his release he, like many others traumatised by the Nazi experience, decided to help build a better, democratic post-war Germany. He became active in the FDJ socialist youth movement, and soon thereafter rose through the party ranks of the Socialist Unity Party in the German Democratic Republic (East Germany) to become its regional secretary in Dresden. By the eighties, he had already become disillusioned with the undemocratic practices of the SED and its leadership and began advocating the need for transformation to a proper democratic form of socialism. 

Unlike many others who once called themselves ‘communist’ or ‘socialist’, Modrow refused to cross to the other side and join the victors, nor has he succumbed to cynicism as many also did. He became an MP for the PDS (the party that emerged out of the SED, later to become Die Linke - the Left Party of Germany) in the Bundestag, and then an MEP. Today, he is honorary Chair of Die Linke and is still an active participant in the political life of Germany and maintains his international contacts.

Like Modrow and many others, I was initially full of admiration for Gorbachev when he took over the helm of the Soviet Communist Party. I knew that socialism in Eastern Europe and particularly in the Soviet Union had become ossified and that its progress was being held back by an inflexible bureaucracy. His original demands of perestroika (restructuring) and glasnost (transparency) appeared to offer a way out of the quicksands. He was also unlike his stone-faced and apparatchik-like predecessors; he went out and mixed with the people, he was spontaneous, a great communicator and he was passionate about world peace. From that initial period, when he was seen as a man promising to usher in genuine socialist renewal,he became transformed into a darling of the west and, once he’d served his political purpose, ends up as an advertising ikon for a pizza chain.

Modrow reveals how Gorbachev and the Soviet leadership had no real concept about what they wanted or hoped for from perestroika and glasnost; they broke over the Soviet Union and the Eastern bloc like a thunderstorm, but the crops they were supposed to nurture were left flattened in the fields.

Michail Gorbachev brought about not only the transformation of the Soviet Union and the Eastern bloc, but the constellation of world relationships. At the centre of those profound changes that shook Europe was a divided Germany. Western leaders like Reagan, then Bush, Thatcher and Kohl couldn’t believe their luck when fairy godmother Gorbachev appeared to grant all their wishes without asking for a single quid pro quo.

The Pentagon generals must have polished their missiles with renewed vigour when they heard that Gorbachev wasn’t even demanding a written agreement that no NATO expansion eastwards would take place. He also ignored East German pleas to ensure that the post-war settlement, including the transfer of land from the big landowners to the people was sacrosanct, nor did he demand immunity of prosecution for GDR party leaders who had committed no crimes according to GDR law.

During his period as Dresden regional party secretary, Modrow had numerous contacts with the Soviet Union and other East European countries, and during his short time as prime minister he met frequently with Soviet leaders. He has an intimate knowledge of the processes that led to perestroika and the detailed discussion that took place between world leaders at that time. He was particularly involved in the discussions concerning the process that concluded with German unification. He explains how he fought for a unification on the basis of two internationally recognised German states coming together as equals. But what happened was the virtual annexation of the GDR by the Federal Republic. All the achievements of the GDR, such as- an exemplary social welfare system, the promotion of women in the workplace, universal childcare and a simplified, easily accessible justice system were all swept aside and a West German system imposed. But he is not someone who holds on to illusions: as he makes clear in his book, he believes that the centralised ‘command economies’ of Eastern Europe were doomed virtually from the outset because democratic principles were ignored. That’s why, today, he is an adamant supporter and campaigner for a genuinely democratic socialism.

The book is sometimes heavy with detail on the protracted negotiations, and many of the names of Soviet and East European leaders will be unfamiliar to British readers, but this shouldn’t put you off, as the unique analysis he provides is profoundly informative, fascinating and fact-based.

What is particularly interesting in Modrow’s account is that it is written by a man who still believes in socialism and refuses to call it a day. Unlike many others who once called themselves ‘communist’ or ‘socialist’, Modrow refused to cross to the other side and join the victors, nor has he succumbed to cynicism. 

Perestroika and Germany - the Truth behind the Myths by Hans Modrow, assisted by Bruno Mahlow.

Pbck. £10

Available from Marx memorial Library

World of Birds exhibition

The Wonder of Birds

Because of their high visibility, colourfulness, varied songs and ability to fly, birds have always provided a fascinating subject for study and contemplation. This unique and pioneering exhibition mounted by Norwich Castle Museum & Art Gallery is an imaginative attempt to document our complex and special relationship with birds through art, taxidermy and photography.

The curators have brought together an amazing range of beautiful objects and illustrations that provide an insight into the multi-faceted ways birds have impacted on our lives throughout history. It is also accompanied by a lusciously illustrated catalogue with introductory text by BBC naturalist Chris Packham. Don’t be misled that this is only of interest to bird fanatics; there is something for everyone, young and old. 

The Wonder of Birds explores the cultural impact of birds upon humankind.  Eliciting a wide range of emotions from awe to fear, pleasure to cruelty, birds have intrigued humanity since the earliest of times. With loans from local and national collections, this exhibition spans the centuries and include some 220 works by major artists and illustrators, natural history, archaeology, fashion and social history.

A 19th century feather pellerine coat and a hat made entirely of feathers, reminds us of how the Victorians shot many birds almost to extinction in order to harvest their feathers. A delicate Indian painting of Tibetan cranes, to a robust bronze British-Romano duck cup, examples of the taxidermist’s skills to some of the best works by contemporary bird artists and photographers provide an overview of how differently birds have been visualised and portrayed throughout history.  

The exhibition comprises six sections, each highlighting a different aspect of birds, their meanings and our relationships with them: what is a bird, introducing the exotic, migrants and ocean travellers, birds and landscape, predators and prey, the realms of the spirit, but it is impossible to enumerate all aspects of this monumental exhibition.

The show begins by introducing the visitor to the breadth of this fascinating subject: what is a bird; what do they mean to us; how have we studied, portrayed, preserved, endangered and used them?  This section features Hans Holbein’s stunning Lady with a Squirrel and a Starling, back in Norfolk for the first time since its acquisition by the National Gallery in 1992.  This work is complemented by another beautiful Renaissance work of art, an exquisite 15^th century drawing by Andrea Mantegna, portraying a bird from the artist’s imagination, illustrating how birds have been used decoratively and heraldically through the ages.  

Predators and Prey examines the traditional symbolism of the eagle, from kingship to fascism, exemplified by a darkly humorous Russian propaganda poster from the Scond World War, in which the fascist eagle is demoted to crow by the act of being strangled by a Russian soldier. 

Birds are also closely associated with our ideas of place and as such may be strongly connected with local identities.  This is especially true in East Anglia, which boasts a wealth of wetland and other habitats of worldwide importance housing unique groups of species.  In addition, birds are also closely linked with the sea, travel, distance and migration.  Some birds travel phenomenal distances annually and the section on Migrants and Ocean Travellers examines the seasonal behaviour which may take migrating birds from Norfolk to the Arctic, Africa or South America.  

The Realms of the Spirit, the final section, illustrates how songbirds and their relatives have symbolised the idea of an immortal soul, been seen as heralds of the seasons, messengers from heaven, or as magical beings.  Major loans include a gold Colombian shaman’s necklace portraying half-human, half-bird figures.  This work was a star exhibit in the recent British Museum show Beyond El Dorado.

If you are anywhere near Norwich over the coming months, don’t fail to visit this exhibition - you won’t be disappointed. 

Norwich Castle Museum & Art Gallery

The Wonder of Birds 24 May to 14 September 2014

Farley Mowatt - a great writer and socialist dies

The Canadian author Farley Mowat was a socialist and passionate environmentalist. He wrote with humour, keen perception and passionate social commitment, completing over 40 books and numerous articles. He is sadly not so well known in Britain but deserves to be. His family came from Scottish immigrant stock and he retained a special fondness for Scotland.

His works were translated into 52 languages, and he sold more than 17 million copies. He achieved fame with his books on the Canadian North, such as People of the Deer (1952) and Never Cry Wolf. Mowat's advocacy for environmental causes and his own claim to ‘never let the facts get in the way of the truth,’ earned him both praise and criticism. Nevertheless, his influence is undeniable: Never Cry Wolf, a fictional narrative of a man living among wolves in the sub-arctic which was made into a successful film. It is credited with shifting the mythology and fear of wolves. After the Russian version was published, the government even banned the killing of the animal.

His stories are fast-paced, gripping, personal, and conversational. Descriptions of Mowat refer to his ‘commitment to ideals,’ ‘poetic descriptions and vivid images.’

His first non-fiction work People of the Deer became a classic. In it he documented the disappearing communist way of life of Canada’s native Inuit people, among whom he lived while writing the book. He showed how a colonial arrogance and an exploitive system had driven the Inuit and their culture to the edge. The Siberians, written almost two decades later in 1970, showed how the Soviet Union, in contrast, was attempting to help the Inuit maintain their way of life but at the same time inter-relate with an industrialised society. He became a lifelong advocate of indigenous people’s rights, labelling Canada's treatment of them as ‘abominable’. Never one to shy away from controversy, Mowat was outspoken about many environmental and social issues.

During the Second World War, Mowat was commissioned as a second lieutenant, rising to the rank of captain. After the war he returned to Canada, desperate to escape from ‘what had been and seemed likely to remain, a world run by maniacs’, and fled north to live among the Inuit people.

Many of his works are autobiographical, such as Owls in the Family (about his childhood), and And No Birds Sang (about his experience fighting in the Second World War).

Mowat published a denunciation of the destruction of animal life in the north Atlantic entitled Sea of Slaughter in 1984. In 1985, as a part of the promotional tour for the book, Mowat was invited to speak at the university in Chico, California, but US officials denied him entry. His security file indicated he should be denied entry ‘for violating any one of 33 statutes.’ Reportedly, these statutes included being a member of a group considered radical by the US government. The result was a media circus, which brought worldwide attention to Mowat. The negative publicity eventually forced the Reagan administration to allow Mowat to enter the US, but he declined because to accept would be undignified as the permission was valid for only one visit—his book tour. Mowat documented the reasons why he was refused entry to the United States in his 1985 book, My Discovery of America. 

He won a number of prestigious awards for his books and environmental work. The Sea Shepherd Conservation Society ship RV Farley Mowatt was named in honour of him.

Mowat was a strong supporter of the Green Party of Canada. 

His friend, the author, Margaret Atwood said: ‘So sorry to hear that [Mr Mowat] has died. Wonderful colleague and friend of many years.’ 

Farley Mowat died on May 6, 2014, less than one week before his 93rd birthday.

Homo Sapiens - a Liberal’s Perspective

by Ron Newby

ISBN 0615970095

156 pp.

In this book, Newby straightaway takes us on a quick canter through the basics of evolution, how present day homo sapiens has evolved and how we are similar to, and differ from the rest of the animal world. He discusses the role of nature and nurture in human development and proceeds to discuss the positive and negative traits of mankind and how these are impacting on our society and on our future prospects for survival. He questions whether we will be able to solve the pressing problems we are now facing: population growth, climate crisis, wealth disparity and our own intrinsic nature.

I find myself agreeing with 99% of what he has to say, but reluctantly also find myself very critical of his approach. Newby’s subject matter is, of course, huge and many of the issues he addresses have been dealt with more eloquently and in much more depth by others. 

He does though splatter his text with signposts to other, useful publications, but these do break up the flow unnecessarily (why not footnotes at the end?).

Already from its title, one can discern that this book is primarily addressed to a US-based readership and most of the author’s examples are also taken from a US context. ‘A Liberal’s perspective’ is something many of us, here in Europe, would not find an interesting or attractive proposition. Liberalism in the UK is usually associated either with the 19th century heyday of the Liberal Party or with the present day minor coalition partners of the Conservative Party, representatives of a largely right-wing ideology. Even in Germany, the tiny Liberal party is to the right of Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats. What north Americans refer to as ‘Liberal’ we would normally describe as ‘progressive’. Newby, for instance, describes a whole list of progressive and democratic accomplishments in the USA as being due to ‘liberal’ action and agitation, but doesn’t mention the role played by social democrats, socialists and even communists who all had a significant impact on progressive legislation in the USA, certainly in the first half of the twentieth century, up to the end of the Second World War, but this contribuition has been written out of mainstream US history.

For someone largely unaware of the issues Newby deals with, his book could be a valuable introduction. But, to me, it reads more like a secondary school primer than a polemical and provocative thesis for adults. He does argue forcefully for evolution and rightly describes those who oppose it, as irrational, but he is addressing his words to a society steeped in obscurantism, creationism and right-wing ideology. 

In Britain we don’t (yet) have such a problem with evangelical Christianity or belief in creationism. We also have our own home-grown and eloquent promotors of evolutionary theory and atheism in the form of Richard Dawkins and Steve Jones to name the most prominent. Surprisingly, neither warrants a mentioned in Newby’s book.

He describes how human co-operation has evolved to help us as a species survive and flourish and why we should be sceptical or even opposed to rampant capitalism, but doesn’t develop this idea in the context of modern day US society. I felt this with almost all of his ideas - why doesn’t he developed them more and dig beneath the epidermis.

Again in his chapter on aggression, he writes that, it has been observed that just as it is in many animals, birds, dogs, fish and mice, aggressive behavior can be selected and bred.’ What would be interesting is to examine how such behavioural traits are promoted in our societies, through the glorification of violence in films, video games and other media. How our perceptions of the opposite sex, of kindness, compassion or rational thought are moulded and stunted and how all this impacts on how our society (mal)functions.

Newby is also a keen artist and, in CP Snow tradition, encourages a combination of an artistic imagination with scientific thinking and practice. But, once again, the issue is only touched upon and is tantalisingly short. As we know, the first art arose in prehistoric societies, 20-15,000 BC. The caves of Altamira in Spain and Lascaux in France are magnificent examples of this early art. He speculates that art arose as a response to ownership - markings made on a person’s stick or stone, to denote that it belongs to them. But no evidence is presented for this theory. He makes no reference, for instance, to the classic work of the Austrian Marxist art historian, Ernst Fischer in his book The Necessity of Art, in which he forcefully argues that art arose out of human ritual and is not some optional form of entertainment, a pleasant luxury of civilised life, but an essential or constitutive part of human consciousness and social being. Art in its widest sense is rooted in the same complex that gives us language; the ability to make and understand symbols.

Art in capitalist society may appear as a discrete area of leisure or luxury, but this is exceptional for human society. Art, Fischer argued, is humanity’s attempt to control the world: art and magic were the same thing. There have been various interpretations of upper palaeolithic cave paintings, which are key to Fischer’s argument, and that these images were attempts to influence or control the outside world seems undeniable. 

In his warning to us all about the probable consquences of our unthinking behaviour, he uses, as an example, the collapse and extermination of the population on Easter Island (Rapa Nui) as a result of total deforestation and lack of sustainable food production. This has been quoted many times by those warning of environmental implosion in our own times, but this scenario has been and is disputed, but he ignores this. It is not the whole story, according to Dr. Chris Stevenson, an archaeologist who has studied the island—famous for its massive stone statues—with a Rapa Nui scientist, Sonia Haoa, and Earthwatch volunteers over many years. They argue that the introduction of virulent diseases by European visitors probably played a significant role. 

Newby clearly feels very strongly about the issues he tackles and is passionate about ensuring that our species and the planet have a future. He is absolutely right to emphasise that if we don’t adequately develop the rational and co-operative side of our human character, we will fail.

His final chapter, enumerates the urgent crises humanity is facing, but he fails to offer any new or innovative thinking in terms of how we can tackle these issues effectively. He only proposes a general appeal for us all to continue learning, go back to school, improve our knowledge and expand our imagination. What, though, needs addressing is the type of education we need and why our present educational system is failing us. How can education help us to think logically and critically, how should it help us question everything we are told and to examine reality carefully and analytically. That is one of the keys to ensuring that coming generations are capable of tackling these global issues.

Finally, it is rather a pity that Newby didn’t have his manuscript properly proofed - there are many irritating typos which could have been easily picked up and eliminated.