Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Footprints of War: Militarized Landscapes in Vietnam by David Biggs (review)

Footprints of War: Militarized Landscapes in Vietnam by David Biggs (review) 652 JOURNAL OF WORLD HISTORY, SEPTEMBER 2020 section raises two important questions that should spur additional work on the subject. First, how did a movement whose intellectual roots both focused on agricultural production gain such popularity in the 1980sasa movement of consumption? This change seems to have less to do with Howards’ activities in the 1930s and 1940s and more to do with trends in the environmental movement in the 1960s and 1970s. Second, what are we to make of the movement’s roots in right-wing agrarianism? These values continued to loom large after the fall of the Third Reich, especially in the work of E. F. Schumacher and J. I. Rodale. Barton’s explanation that “overt fascist sympathies . . . evaporated slowly during and after the Second World War, as did overt support for the British Empire as decolonization set in during the 1950s” (p. 134) avoids the question. His claim that the movement grafted the anti- capitalist ends of left-leaning environmentalism onto right-wing intellectual roots is intriguing, but not well developed. Both these questions have major implications for understanding both the movement’s history and its ideological limits. Both remain largely unanswered here. The Global History of Organic Farming http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of World History University of Hawai'I Press

Footprints of War: Militarized Landscapes in Vietnam by David Biggs (review)

Journal of World History , Volume 31 (3) – Aug 27, 2020

Loading next page...
 
/lp/university-of-hawai-i-press/footprints-of-war-militarized-landscapes-in-vietnam-by-david-biggs-iF7jRFtTtz
Publisher
University of Hawai'I Press
Copyright
Copyright © University of Hawai'i Press.
ISSN
1527-8050

Abstract

652 JOURNAL OF WORLD HISTORY, SEPTEMBER 2020 section raises two important questions that should spur additional work on the subject. First, how did a movement whose intellectual roots both focused on agricultural production gain such popularity in the 1980sasa movement of consumption? This change seems to have less to do with Howards’ activities in the 1930s and 1940s and more to do with trends in the environmental movement in the 1960s and 1970s. Second, what are we to make of the movement’s roots in right-wing agrarianism? These values continued to loom large after the fall of the Third Reich, especially in the work of E. F. Schumacher and J. I. Rodale. Barton’s explanation that “overt fascist sympathies . . . evaporated slowly during and after the Second World War, as did overt support for the British Empire as decolonization set in during the 1950s” (p. 134) avoids the question. His claim that the movement grafted the anti- capitalist ends of left-leaning environmentalism onto right-wing intellectual roots is intriguing, but not well developed. Both these questions have major implications for understanding both the movement’s history and its ideological limits. Both remain largely unanswered here. The Global History of Organic Farming

Journal

Journal of World HistoryUniversity of Hawai'I Press

Published: Aug 27, 2020

There are no references for this article.