BLOOD AND IRON: THE RISE AND FALL OF THE GERMAN EMPIRE 1871-1918 by Katja Hoyer

(German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck)

It might surprise most of you that Germany has only been a country since 1871.  By the mid-19th century Germany was a series of states, thirty nine to be exact.  The dominant principalities were Prussia and Bavaria, one dominated the Lutheran north, the other the Catholic south.  The question must be asked, how was it unified?  Many argue it was the work of the eventual German Chancellor, Otto von Bismarck whose brilliant realpolitik fostered wars with Denmark, Austria, culminating with the unification of the north and south through war with France.  Another important question revolves around the idea that Germany was unified because of Bismarck’s brilliance and his opponents in other countries/kingdoms were not exceptional intellects, particularly King Louis Napoleon III.  Did Bismarck lure his foreign opponents into wars, creating a nationalist movement that gave the Chancellor the opportunity to use Prussia as the cudgel to bring about the new country. 

If one has read the works of Otto Pflanze, Jonathan Steinberg, or A.J.P. Taylor it is clear that Bismarck learned an important lesson during the Revolutions of 1848 – Germany could not be unified from below – it had to be unified from above, superimposing Prussia on the rest of the German states.  It is obvious that the unification of Germany was a complex endeavor that engenders many questions, and it lends itself to an important book by Katja Hoyer, a German-British historian entitled, BLOOD AND IRON: THE RISE AND FALL OF THE GERMAN EMPIRE 1871-1918.

Photograph of an elderly Wilhelm, a bald man with side whiskers

(German Emperor Wilhelm I)

Hoyer does an excellent job of synthesis as she tackles “the Second Reich” under Wilhem I through his grandson, Wilhelm II in this short volume.  Do not let its length take away from Hoyer’s incisive analysis as she explains how Germany was unified, then remarkably how Bismarck decided that after unification, Germany was satiated and turned to domestic issues and away from further foreign wars.  He resorted to diplomacy by isolating France through a series of alliances and stole the socialist domestic thunder by adopting some of their programs.  Further, he did not want to get involved in the imperialist race for colonies since Germany’s creation had upended the European balance of power; he did not want to create enemies that would lead to war.  Hoyer argues correctly that once Bismarck passed from the scene in 1888, Wilhelm II would negate the Bismarckian realpolitik for a much more aggressive foreign policy which would eventually lead to the events of August 1914 and four years later Germany’s defeat in World War I.

Despite the fact that Hoyer’s monograph is only 239 pages, it is crammed with historical assessments, personality analysis, and a deep dive into the cause and effect of important events.  Hoyer displays a firm knowledge of sources and writes in an easy style that allows a clear understanding of information that at times can be dense.  The author offers many interesting points that seem off the beaten track, but in reality impact the course of German history.  A case in point is her discussion of the Grimm brother’s fairy tales and its impact on the unity of German culture.  Others include the relationship between Kaiser Wilhelm I, his son Friedrich III, and Wilhelm II, the Kaiser’s grandson.  The Kaiser tried to stay in the background and let Bismarck lead, Friedrich who died after 99 days on the throne was much more liberal than his father, and his son Wilhelm II was an aggressive and insecure man who would lead Germany to ruin.

File:Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany - 1902.jpg

(German Emperor Wilhelm II)

Hoyer carefully explains the rise of Otto von Bismarck and his relationship with Wilhelm I.  She examines his approach to domestic and foreign policy, and it is clear from her presentation that Bismarck was far more competent than anyone he dealt with as he manipulated people and events to achieve his goals.  She vociferously argues against the idea that there is a straight line in German history between Bismarck and Adolf Hitler.  She continues stating the Bismarckian system was inherently flawed, but it did not set Germany upon the inevitable path to war and genocide.  Bismarck was aware how the unity of the German states threatened the European balance of power after 1871 and was very careful not to create situations that would foster foreign intervention into German affairs.  Obviously, Bismarck used war as a political tool, but once his goals were achieved he turned more to protect unification and deal with domestic issues like the perceived socialist and Catholic threats, resulting in social legislation and the Kulturkampf which was a response to Papal overreach.

The key figure apart from Bismarck in Hoyer’s rendition of German history is Wilhelm II who saw himself as another Frederick Barbarossa who would lead Germany’s return to greatness.  According to Hoyer, Wilhelm II saw no need for Chancellors, Ministers, or political realities to mitigate his power, which was an unworkable concept at the turn of the century which only became apparent to him when it was already too late.  Wilhelm II had no comprehension of the complexity of Bismarck’s schemes in domestic and foreign affairs that held Germany together and allowed it to prosper. Despite his succumbing to flattery from certain officials resulting in cunning manipulation, feelings of insecurity, and his rejection of republicans and liberals his belief in the glory of Germany which deserved its rightful place in the world power structure was very popular with the German people.  The belief in authoritarianism and militarism is supported by a wonderful vignette dealing with an unemployed cobbler named Wilhelm Frederick Voight who acquired military costumes, dressed up as an officer and ordered soldiers and officials around as he seized Berlin City Hall with no one questioning his actions – according to Hoyer, a response to the uniform, highlighting German respect for authoritarianism and militarism.

gwimage274

(German soldiers in the trenches of World War I)

Hoyer is on point as she argues that for disparate Germans to come together they needed a sense of the common enemy, further she argues “the system fell because it was flawed from the outset, built on foundations of war, not fraternity.”  German historian Gerard DeGroot’s review sums up well what an effective job Hoyer has done; “There’s nothing particularly new in this assessment. The most impressive feature of this book is not its thesis but its brevity. Until now, I didn’t realize that it was possible to write a short book about Germany. Succinctness is an impressive and sadly undervalued quality in an author. A strict word count is a cruel tyrant; difficult decisions about what goes in have to be made and creativity inevitably curtailed. Hoyer nevertheless manages to pepper her trim narrative with some lovely frills. The mark of a really good short book is its ability to inspire curiosity. “Blood and Iron” achieves just that.  Careless historians often draw a straight line from Bismarck to Hitler. That, Hoyer argues, is “simplistic.” There’s much to admire in what Bismarck created and Wilhelm ruined. Important elements of the Second Reich survive in today’s Germany, a nation widely respected as stable, mature and responsible. What this story reveals is how easily governmental institutions can be destroyed when people are led astray by intoxicating notions of a place in the sun. That, perhaps, is a lesson for us all.”*

  • DeGroot, Gerard. “One Man, Three Wars, and the Creation of Germany,” Washington Post. January 7, 2022.
Wall Art - Photograph - Untitled 64 by © Ken Welsh

DAMASCUS STATION by David McCloskey

Syrian pro-government demonstrators gather in a central square in Damascus to support Assad

(Syrian pro-government demonstrators gather in a central square in Damascus to show their support for Bashar al-Assad’s rule)

At the time of this writing the Middle East is on the precipice of a wider war resulting from the blood stained conflict that exists in the Gaza Strip where retribution and vengeance dominates.  Last week, the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas unleashed a horror laden attack on Israel and the Netanyahu government responded in kind.  The result has been the utter destruction of the Gazan infrastructure, another example of how Hamas uses the Palestinian people as pawns in their war against Israel causing the deaths of thousands of their co-religionists and the maiming of others.  Hamas claims to be the defender of the Palestinian people, but their modus operandi does not match their rhetoric.

The current fighting mirrors the bloody civil war that occurred in Syria as opposition forces spurred on by the Arab Spring in 2011 tried to overthrow the repressive regime of Bashir Assad who used every weapon including chemical weapons and Russian barrel bombs to cling to power.  The conflict spawned a number of different radical Islamic groups that sought his overthrow including the Islamic State (ISIS).  The civil war that resulted brought in Russian and American troops and produced the deaths of thousands of Syrian casualties and millions of refugees dispersed to Turkey, Jordan, and other countries.  Events from the early years of the Syrian Civil War form the backdrop of David McCloskey, a former Middle East CIA operative’s first novel, DAMASCUS STATION.

Al-Kindi hospital in Aleppo

(al-Kindi hospital, Aleppo. Above in 2012 and below in 2013)

According to the author, the novel is a work of fiction that takes its inspiration from actual events that took place between 2011 and 2013 that evolved into a long drawn out civil war as insurgents buoyed by the Arab Spring sought to remove the Assad Dynasty that had ruled Syria for over five decades.

We immediately meet Sam Joseph, a CIA officer who is in Damascus to assist in the exfiltration of an asset from Syria.  KOMODO, a mid-level scientist at the complex responsible for Assad’s chemical weapons program, and her handler Val Owens are trying to navigate Damascus and its environs between Assad and rebel forces.  Unfortunately, Owens will be murdered by Syrian security forces changing the flow of the novel as the CIA, in particular, Sam Joseph, wants revenge.  The novel coalesces around Joseph as he has three main goals.  First, exact revenge against Ali Hassan who killed Owens.  Second, recruit an asset in the Syrian national security structure named Mariam Haddad.  Lastly, locate the sarin gas that the Assad government has moved in order to go beyond President Obama’s red line.

McCloskey has authored a remarkable novel as he navigates the intelligence community.  His approach is one of realism as he integrates aspects of the spy culture throughout.  The reader will become fascinated as McCloskey’s characters model actual CIA training, techniques, op preparation, and mission implementation.  We are instructed about dead drops, surveillance, technology, and plain human intelligence.  We are also introduced to a series of important characters such as Rustum Hassan, the leader of the Syrian Revolutionary Guard who has no compunction about killing, including thousands of victims in the Syrian Civil War.  Ali Hassan, Rustum’s younger brother who he hates is in conflict over their place in Bashar al-Assad governmental hierarchy.  Bouthaina Najjar, an advisor to Assad, and Rustum’s lover.  Basil Mahkluf, in charge of the Revolutionary Guard’s missile and rocket program.  Jamil Atiyah, an Assad henchman, a pedophile with profound influence.  Sam Joseph, the CIA operative who makes the cardinal error by falling in love with an asset.  The BANDITOS, Rami, Yusuf and Elias, the Kassab triplets who run surveillance for Joseph.  Artemis Aphrodite Proctor, the saucy Damascus station chief.  Ed Bradley, who oversaw Syrian operations from the Directorate of Operations.  Mariam Haddad, a midlevel analyst who is recruited by Joseph and flips.  Abu Qasim, rebel leader and bomb maker and his wife Sarya, a sniper with 142 kills.  Lastly, General Volkov sent by Moscow to assist the Syrians in rooting out CIA spies in Damascus.

A street in Homs, Syria in 2011 and 2014

(A street in Homs, in 2011 (above) and 2014)

McCloskey develops his characters very carefully.  He describes what led Abu Qasim to turn against the Assad regime and the issues and players involved in the bloody carnage of the Syrian Civil War.  The author takes a deep dive into the Syrian regime, how it operated and how an individual went about surviving the internal paranoia of serving in Assad’s government.  McCloskey takes the reader inside the Syrian Mukhabarat, the secret police whose who employ torture, beatings, coercing family members etc. to achieve their aims. 

Sarin gas plays a key role in the story.  Once its location is discovered and moved Joseph must locate the new site at the same time the Mukhabarat is after him.  McCloskey describes how the gas is developed, produced, and weaponized for a trial attack against a Syrian rebel village and getting it ready for a larger statement against rebel forces.  McCloskey also explores the American process in fighting the Syrian forces highlighting President Obama’s approach to the Civil War.

Omari Mosque in Deraa

(Omari mosque in Deraa. Above in 2011 and below in 2013)

The author’s expertise is on full display as he describes Joseph’s thought process while being surveilled.  Joseph analyzes his own undertaking relative to the Russian/Syrian team that watched his every movement as he prolonged the chase for hours as he was trained.  For Joseph, “he could sense the hunters out there,” during this cat and mouse game – except it was no game.

Joseph’s relationship with Mariam is complex as she felt guilty about what happened to her anti-Assad cousin Razan, her betrayal of Joseph, and killing three Mukhabarat.   McCloskey tries to make his characters feel like any one of us, but in reality they are tasked to serve and protect the United States and help US policymakers understand the region and the implications of certain events.

Overall, it is an authentic spy thriller set in the tumultuous Middle East that should keep the reader on the edge of their seats.  Former CIA Directors Leon Panetta and David Petraeus praise the “realistic portrayal of CIA operations overseas” and that is good enough for me.

Supporters of President Bashar al-Assad carried his portrait during a demonstration in Damascus on Monday, the day after the Arab League imposed sanctions.

(Supporters of President Bashar al-Assad carried his portrait during a demonstration in Damascus on Monday, the day after the Arab League imposed sanctions)

COLLISION OF POWER: TRUMP, BEZOS, AND THE WASHINGTON POST by Martin Baron

US-INTERNET-MEDIA-TAKEOVER-AMAZON-WASHINGTONPOST

What do you do when your new boss is the richest man in the world, and he has just purchased your place of employment?  This is the situation that Martin Baron, then the executive editor of the Washington Post found himself seven months into his new position in 2013.  His new boss was Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon which created an arrangement conducive to a great deal of pressure, and to exacerbate the situation further, Donald Trump announces for president in 2015 and by 2017 resides in the White House.  Trump heightens Baron’s angst as he wages a war of unprecedented vitriol and vengeance against Bezos personally and the media, especially the Washington Post.  The period 2013 to 2021 forms the time frame of Baron’s new memoir/history of the period, COLLISION OF POWER: TRUMP, BEZOS, AND THE WASHINGTON POST.

Baron’s book is much more than a rehashing of Trump’s war against Bezos and Amazon/Washington Post.  It is a well thought out and incisive examination of a career in newspaper publishing, particularly Baron’s role as executive editor at the newspaper.  Baron who had spent nearly twelve years leading the Boston Globe, recounts how he managed the Post’s newsroom and dealt with issues ranging from domestic surveillance, the #metoo movement, vetting Supreme Court candidates, to the myriad of scandals and crisis’ that surrounded Trump, the individual in addition to his administration, two impeachment trials, an insurrection, navigating internal issues at the newspaper, in addition to the comparisons between the Post and New York Times.

When Martin Baron took the took job at The Washington Post in 2013, the company was struggling to survive. Then The Post was sold and it began to expand.

(Martin Baron, author)

It is clear from the outset that the Washington Post was a target of Trump’s.  The newspaper coverage of him personally and his campaign angered him, and he leaned on Jeff Bezos to get Baron’s newsroom to back off with their criticism which would continue after he was elected president.

Baron begins his memoir by explaining the background as to how Bezos came to buy the Washington Post.  As the narrative continues it is clear that Baron likes and respects Bezos as he believes in the essential role of journalism in a democracy as the reason he purchased the paper.  Further, Baron argues that Bezos never interfered with the paper’s coverage of Amazon, his affair and divorce, and never used his position to spread his influence.  Bezos relished the challenge of turning the paper around and moving it into the digital age.  Bezos’ greatest concern was whether his strategy of “shifting from relatively few subscribers paying a lot for a subscriptions to lots of subscribers paying fairly little for digital subscriptions – would actually work.”  Baron reviews Bezos’ approach to management and the numerous changes he implemented, i.e.; to create a nation/worldwide network of journalists who would be a free-lance force.  For Bezos it would expand the journalistic reach of the paper at “bargain basement prices.”

Martin Baron, left, and Jeff Bezos in 2016. After Mr. Bezos bought The Post in 2013, Mr. Baron had more resources and sought a bigger digital audience.

(Martin Baron, left, and Jeff Bezos in 2016. After Mr. Bezos bought The Post in 2013, Mr. Baron had more resources and sought a bigger digital audience).

As one reads on, Baron rehashes the nightmare of the Trump presidency, his refusal to accept the fact he lost the 2020 election, and the events surrounding January 6th.  There is little that is new here though the emphasis is on Trump’s obsession with Amazon which he believed manipulated newspaper coverage of him personally.  Since he blamed the Washington Post for unfair criticism he went after the retail behemoth arguing it paid no taxes, it was ripping off the US Postal system, and it engaged in unfair trade practices.  To Baron’s credit when coverage of Trump did not meet the Post’s standards he refused to publish.  A good example is his handling of the Steele Dossier that accused Trump of election cooperation with Russian interference in 2016, sexual proclivities, the attempt to build a Trump Tower in Moscow, and his relationship with Vladimir Putin.  In the end the document developed by a former British spy did not meet the standard the paper relied on for publication.  No matter what the coverage of Trump, Baron points out in his war against the media “any questions that put him on the spot was an offense.”

Baron’s chapter dealing with the death of Jamal Khashoggi is important as it highlights Trump and his allies’ war on journalists.  It is clear that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman was culpable in his death, and it is interesting how Baron creates links between the Saudi leadership’s approach to critical journalism and that of Trump.  Both men sought to intimidate journalists and make them live in fear.  If one follows Trump’s reaction to the murder it is clear he did not care, and interestingly after his presidency his son-in-law received a $2 billion Saudi investment in his business fund.  Salman would even go after Amazon because of the Post’s coverage of his government and referred to Bezos as “that Jew.”

Washington Post Publisher Fred Ryan.

(Washington Post Publisher Fred Ryan)

Baron should be praised for his honesty as he navigated his relationship with Bezos and allowed a focus on Amazon’s anti-union labor practices, its marketing strategies that hurt secondary vendors, and most importantly its surveillance policies – Alexa is in your home gathering intelligence against you and your family!  To Bezos’ credit he did not interfere with any of any story that involved his personal life or businesses.  Further, Baron delves into issues dealing with social media, racial practices at the paper, and objectivity that brought him into conflict with younger and black journalists.

In the end Baron grew skeptical with the reporter’s combative tweets and their airing of their social views.  A newspaper traditionalist Baron almost resigned amidst the covid crisis, and Black Lives Matter Movement as he felt reporters were putting their own opinions above those of the newspaper. In summation I agree with Sewell Chan’s conclusion presented in his New York Times review in which he states, “As Baron describes it, the job of an editor today revolves as much around spreadsheets, team building, labor negotiations and social media guidelines as it does around relationships with reporters and supervision of coverage. That Baron managed that high-wire act so successfully — The Post won 10 Pulitzers on his watch — in an era of wrenching changes in politics and journalism shows that newsroom leadership, however devoid of ease or glamour, remains essential.”*

*Sewell Chan, “At His Post,” New York Times, October 15, 2023.

THE WOUNDED WORLD: W.E.B. DU BOIS AND THE FIRST WORLD WAR by Chad Williams

(W.E.B. Du Bois)

W.E.B Du Bois devoted his life’s work to achieving equal citizenship for all African Americans.  He worked tirelessly to achieve his goals after becoming the first African American to earn a doctorate from Harvard University and would go on to teach social sciences at Atlanta University, become one of the founders of the NAACP, edited “The Crisis” magazine which was his megaphone to the black community, lectured worldwide, promoted African and West Indian rights against colonial powers, and published a series of thought provoking books.  Du Bois was a firm believer that for African Americans to achieve full civil rights and political representation they would have to be led by a black intellectual elite – the key being advanced education that would lead to leadership.  He targeted racism, lynchings, Jim Crow laws, and all types of discrimination in his writing and public appearances.

 One of the most controversial aspects of his belief system was supporting America’s entrance into World War I, a decision he would come to regret.  He argued that if African Americans joined the American Expeditionary Force (AEF) in Europe to fight Germany and showed their talent and bravery it would raise their level of acceptance by the American people upon their return resulting in greater rights of freedom and safety.  This dream was negated by the reality of American racism , covert and overt violence, and persecution – all conditions consistent with the African American experience throughout American history.  Even US Army officials exhibited extreme racism and blatant lies as they erroneously depicted the combat experience of African American troops in Europe.

Black and white photo of African American Army officer walking downstairs passing a white Officer. Both men are wearing World War One style uniforms and hats.
(Charles Young at Camp Grant in 1919).

To atone for this grievous error in judgement, Du Bois wanted to set the historical record straight as World War I did not prove to be the catalyst for equal rights.  His strategy centered on a book he would spend nearly two decades entitled, THE BLACK MAN AND THE WOUNDED WORLD.  His effort was never completed nor published but it has become the core of an important new monograph by Chad L. Williams, THE WOUNDED WORLD: W.E.B. DUBOIS AND THE FIRST WORLD WAR.

Williams’ book is a comprehensive study of how Du Bois went about achieving his goals.  He recounts his battles with the NAACP to obtain funding and support, his battles with fellow historians who he competed with him in trying to produce the definitive study of the war, the role of his ego which did not allow him to accept enough assistance and share the limelight, his writings, particularly in the NAACP magazine, “The Crisis” which he edited, his travels worldwide promoting the Pan African world, and most importantly disseminating his ideas and research a function of his relationship with black veterans of the war, and a firm belief that American racism was destroying black progress, and the colonial European powers imprisoned people of color in a system where they could not achieve progress.

Williams’ approach is a carefully developed thesis supported by numerous excerpts from Du Bois’ writings and commentary buttressed by accounts provided by friends and foes alike, in addition to communications with black veterans and competing historians.  Williams fully explores Du Bois’ ideology which rested on his fear that if Germany were victorious in the war its racist government would negatively impact “Black folk” and brown people throughout the world.  He knew Germany well having studied at the University of Berlin providing him with firsthand knowledge of the Kaiser’s march toward autocracy, militarism, and empire.  He argued that black loyalty to England, France, and Belgium was of the utmost importance despite their colonial records. He believed an allied victory representing democracy was the only acceptable outcome in the war.  However, the result of this call to duty was dominated by racism in the military as whites refused to serve with blacks, military leaders refused to allow black officers to command black troops resulting in southern white racist officers treating black soldiers with contempt and at times violence.  Williams mentions examples of black officers like Major Charles Young, a graduate of West Point, but being an exceptional soldier did not allow him to fulfill the role Du Bois sought for him and others as the leaders of a new generation of blacks who would gain acceptance from American society.

(Over 350,000 African American soldiers served in WWI)

Williams portrays the lies put forth by military authorities when it came to black officers and their service, the performance of the 369th and 92nd divisions of the army, particularly the 368th Infantry Regiment, known as the Harlem Hell fighters, who were assigned to the French Army in April 1918. The Hell fighters saw much action, fighting in the Second Battle of the Marne, as well as the Meuse-Argonne Offensive, where black officers were blamed for the slow progress of the offensive with white officers falsely reporting on the performance of thousands of black troops.  The treatment of black soldiers carried over into their medical care during and after the war  where at first, black doctors and nurses were not allowed to treat black veterans at the new Tuskegee Institute Hospital.

When black  veterans returned home they were met with violence and race riots resulting in the deaths of over a thousand people in Tulsa, OK, Chicago, IL, Knoxville, TN, Phillips County, AK, Charleston, SC, and Washington, DC all described in detail by the author.  Further with the 1919 Red Scare many blamed black soldiers for bringing communism to America when they returned from Europe. When confronted with the reality of the African American soldier’s experience during their training, the war itself, and the reception they received upon returning from the battlefield, Du Bois committed himself to telling their story.

Williams pulls no punches in presenting Du Bois’ failed odyssey in completing his work.  First, he was overwhelmed with materials from his own travels to France  to conduct research and influence the Paris Peace Conference.  Second, he could never get a handle on the voluminous amounts of material sent to him by black veterans.  Third, his intense schedule that saw him work for Pan-African conferences and other causes.  Lastly, his other writings, lectures, and as mentioned before his ego which did not allow him to work successfully with others.  Further, he distorted his own experiences praising France for using Senegalese troops in the war and their treatment of blacks.  All one has to do is examine the French colonial experience to see how wrong he was.  Another example is his visit to the Soviet Union in 1926 and for a time believing in the “Marxist wonderland.” 

African-American soldiers (and one of their white officers) of the 369th Infantry, known as the Harlem Hellfighters, practice what they will soon experience, fighting in the trenches of the Western Front. They are wearing French helmets and using French-issued rifles and equipment, the logic being that since they were fighting under French command, it was easier to resupply them from the French system than trying to get American-issued items. (National Archives and Records Administration)

(African-American soldiers (and one of their white officers) of the 369th Infantry, known as the Harlem Hellfighters, practice what they will soon experience, fighting in the trenches of the Western Front)

In the latter part of the narrative Williams explores Du Bois’ life work particularly his realization that his World War I opus would never be completed.  The 1920s to 1945 period produced a great deal of success academically with the publication of BLACK RECONSTRUCTION, a widely accepted history of African Americans from 1850 to 1876.  In explaining Du Bois’ ideas in his books and other writings Williams traces Du Bois evolution ideologically as he argued that racism and colonization were responsible for two world wars and the failings of democracy pushing him further to the left.  As he grew older Du Bois concluded that even after World War II, African Americans were confronted with the same hostility and violence as they did in the post 1918 period.  Much to Du Bois’ dismay it was apparent that the arguments he developed for decades pertaining to racism and colonization still applied and he would work assiduously to ameliorate this situation until his death.

Throughout the two decades of preparing the book Du Bois had to overcome his “Close Ranks” editorial from the war supporting the use of African American troops in the war as a vehicle to obtain equality.  His decision was wrong, and he would pay a price professionally and personally.  Williams describes Du Bois’ effort as his most significant work to never reach the public as he struggled to finish his manuscript and the legacy of the war, however, “By rendering this story in such rich archival detail, Williams’s book is a fitting coda to Du Bois’s unfinished history of Black Americans and the First World War.”*

  • Matthew Delmont. “W.E.B. Du Bois and the Legacy – and Betrayal – of Black Soldiers,” New York Times, April 4, 2023.
W.E.B. DuBois, 1904