Böcker av Norman Angell

Norman Angell's influential book on the relationship between arms and industry is as relevant today as it was when it was first published in 1913. Arguing that war is economically unproductive and ultimately harmful to nations' wealth, Angell persuasively makes the case for disarmament.This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it.This work is in the "public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.

""The Great Illusion"" by Norman Angell is a thought-provoking study that challenges conventional beliefs about the benefits of military power and the pursuit of war. Angell argues that armed conflict and the quest for military dominance do not lead to lasting national advantage or economic prosperity.In this groundbreaking work, Angell asserts that the interdependence of nations and the interconnectedness of their economies make war an outdated and futile strategy. He presents compelling evidence and logical reasoning to demonstrate that armed aggression ultimately harms all parties involved, including the presumed victors.""The Great Illusion"" explores the economic and social consequences of war, debunking the notion that military strength guarantees national security or superiority. Angell's ideas have had a profound impact on the field of international relations and have influenced policymakers and peace activists alike.

Peace Theories and the Balkan War is a fascinating account of the Balkan conflicts that lead to the First World War. Whether we blame the belligerents or criticise the powers, or sit in sackcloth and ashes ourselves is absolutely of no consequence at the present moment. We have sometimes been assured by persons who profess to know that the danger of war has become an illusion. Well, here is a war which has broken out in spite of all that rulers and diplomatists could do to prevent it, a war in which the Press has had no part, a war which the whole force of the money power has been subtly and steadfastly directed to prevent, which has come upon us, not through the ignorance or credulity of the people, but, on the contrary, through their knowledge of their history and their destiny, and through their intense realisation of their wrongs and of their duties, as they conceived them, a war which from all these causes has burst upon us with all the force of a spontaneous explosion, and which in strife and destruction has carried all before it. Face to face with this manifestation, who is the man bold enough to say that force is never a remedy? Who is the man who is foolish enough to say that martial virtues do not play a vital part in the health and honour of every people? (Cheers.) Who is the man who is vain enough to suppose that the long antagonisms of history and of time can in all circumstances be adjusted by the smooth and superficial conventions of politicians and ambassadors?--MR. WINSTON CHURCHILL at Sheffield.

What are the fundamental motives that explain the present rivalry of armaments in Europe, notably the Anglo-German? Each nation pleads the need for defence; but this implies that someone is likely to attack, and has therefore a presumed interest in so doing. What are the motives which each State thus fears its neighbors may obey?They are based on the universal assumption that a nation, in order to find outlets for expanding population and increasing industry, or simply to ensure the best conditions possible for its people, is necessarily pushed to territorial expansion and the exercise of political force against others (German naval competition is assumed to be the expression of the growing need of an expanding population for a larger place in the world, a need which will find a realization in the conquest of English Colonies or trade, unless these are defended); it is assumed, therefore, that a nation's relative prosperity is broadly determined by its political power; that nations being competing units, advantage, in the last resort, goes to the possessor of preponderant military force, the weaker going to the wall, as in the other forms of the struggle for life.