In his fussy, The War of the World, Niall Ferguson presents a moral view of the twentieth century reviewing mostly secondary sources to declaim the savagery of the 20th century. Ferguson shows primarily how not only financial difficulties as well as economic progress, in short, economic volatility of any sort, along with decaying empires, psychopathic dictators, and social violence resulted in the wars, and the genocides of what he calls "History's Age of Hatred."
The book was widely acclaimed, Ferguson was interviewed and on podcasts, The New York Times Book Review named War of the World one the 100 Notable Books of the Year and acclaimed by many in 2006.
I am uncomfortable with his moralizing historical analysis which evaluates as much as it relates historical events. He seems to write a fuddy-duddy analysis of repellent dictators and economic troubles. One part of the subtitle, the Descent of the West, seems cloying or perhaps he means the phrase in an ironic nod to Darwin. I'm not sure.
Posts
