Defence of the Realm: The Official History of MI5 - Christopher Andrew

Defence of the Realm: The Official History of MI5
-Christopher Andrew

MI5’s history has been shrouded in mystery for a long time, despite various embarrassing disclosures and the whole Peter Wright legal struggle. For the first time, however, MI5 has consented to allow a historian access to its achieves to produce the first official history of MI5 – which joins a series of various unofficial disclosures from people who worked for MI5 in the past. It is a weighty tome, but very interesting, even though it is surprisingly – or perhaps unsurprisingly – disingenuous in places.

The story starts back before the First World War, when Britain was caught up in the invasion scare and there was a popular belief that the ‘Security Service’ would take care of the German spies. That belief, as this book makes clear, was not rooted in fact – the Security Service had barely been born, although it already had fame, both inside and outside Britain. It became very involved with tracking German spies and agents and, although always short of manpower, was able to round up most of the German agents on the outbreak of war. As is well known to most interested people, MI5 effectively ran the German intelligence networks in the UK during both World Wars and was able to collect a surprising number of German accolades for ‘its’ agents. This sometimes bordered upon farce – the book lists a series of incidents when the entire network came far too close to disaster – yet it all held together remarkably well.

MI5’s role during the inter-war period was sometimes murkier. It became involved with communist subversion and counter-fascist activity – Mosley and co do not seem to have been much of a threat, despite close links with Germany – although it missed out on a set of leads that would have led it right to the Cambridge Five, the most accomplished group of Russian spies in Britain. (Ironically, the Russians never quite believed their own success and feared that it was all a plot.) It also had few illusions about Hitler and attempted to warn the government that Hitler could never be trusted, although its warnings were not always heeded. Possible links with German anti-nazis were ignored and Hitler was allowed to gain supreme power unopposed.

The book goes into considerable details of the post-war period, when the Labour Government was more than a little suspicious of MI6. Some Labour PMs suspected that MI5 was a bastion of the establishment, although many changed their tune when they realised how many of their backbenchers had been contaminated by the communists – mainly represented through the CPGB, a mouthpiece for Moscow. Ironically, the Communists lost much of their influence after Moscow embarked upon a series of moves that were very difficult to ‘spin’ in their favour, although their subversion remained a clear and present threat. They attempted to gain control over Trade Unions and other potential leavers, as well as peace groups and suchlike. The CND, among other groups, was backed by Moscow. It is sometimes hard to tell how much of a threat the communists actually represented. The book seems to veer between a monolithic hive mind and a handful of men plotting in basements.

It also covers the Cambridge Five and the disaster they represented. It is alarmingly clear that MI5 got much closer to the truth than is commonly realised, although it was far too late to prevent most of the damage. Peter Wright – of Spycatcher fame – comes across as a paranoid fool, suspecting the then-DG of MI5 (Roger Hollis) of being the ‘sixth man’. It is hard not to wonder if Wright had a point – Hollis was never very effectual as a DG.

The book is at its most disingenuous when dealing with the War on Terror. It admits to failures in procedure that allowed terrorists to strike in London on 7/7, yet it misses out on various vital facts. It is very well known that warnings had been coming in for years about the activities of Abu Hamza and his band of terrorist-traitors, including several who would later appear in Afghanistan. London was warned by people as disparate as the American CIA, the French, various reporters and even members of the Muslim community…and nothing was done. Given a priceless opportunity to demonstrate strength and resolve, London and MI5 fumbled the ball and wrecked ghastly damage on the war effort. The book doesn’t even give a nod to these problems, preferring to concentrate on the issue of bureaucratic nonsense and other such stupidities that were beginning to creep into MI5. MI5 was left playing catch-up after 7/7, a catch-up that should never have been necessary. An open admission that the system was flawed would have gone much further.

Overall, this book is a fascinating glimpse into a very different world. It’s well worth a read, but it is also worth studying carefully – and never quite taking anything for granted.

Exchange - Dale R. Cozort

Exchange
-Dale R. Cozort

There tends, in my opinion, to be something of a disconnect between writers of professional alternate history books (SM Stirling, Harry Turtledove) and those who write timelines as part of the online alternate history community and post them online. The former tend to concentrate on building up characters rather than just world-building, while the latter focus entirely on building their world. Both have much to recommend them, but not everyone moves smoothly from one to the other.

I have followed Dale’s work for a long time – he has been a great inspiration to me over the years – and he is probably the foremost writer of timelines in the AH community. (And, another point to his credit, he doesn’t get up on his high horse or bogged down by petty politics, unlike many others I could mention.) He commands a vast grasp of his subject matter, which ranges from World War Two – a stable among the community – to such subjects as the American Indians (upon which he has published another book), biology and places where most people would struggle to find a Point of Divergence.

I first read Exchange in snippet form through Point of Divergence, a semi-workshop for writers and I have to admit that I wasn't too impressed, mainly because I was reading it out of order and missing sections. When Dale published it, I decided that it was worth giving the completed and revised manuscript a look and I’m glad to say that I didn’t regret it. Completed, Exchange is definitely a worthwhile story.

Exchange is set in the very near future, where ‘exchanges’ – a dimensional warp that exchange locations in our world with the same locations in an alternate world – are fairly common and alarming. Direct contact between our world and one where humanity never evolved poses considerable dangers, including wild animals that have no fear of humanity and diseases for which we have no cure. Although direct settlement of ‘Bear Country’ is illegal, there are plenty of groups that want to set up settlements on the alternate world, escaping the modern world. This isn’t easy. Exchanges, as far as anyone can tell, are random; you’re either caught up in one or you’re not. An exchange will generally reverse itself within a few days, but if someone leaves the exchanged territory, they remain stranded within Bear Country.

The main character of the book is a divorced woman, Sharon. Sharon is the mother of Bethany, a young girl with OCD – readers of Questionable Content will note similarities to one of the characters within that web comic – who finds herself roped into a work party at gunpoint, just before the exchange takes place. When she returns home, just after the Exchange and a brief battle between Marines and swarming monkeys – she discovers that her drunken loser of an ex-husband has returned home, kidnapped their daughter and vanished into Bear Country. Sharon has to find her daughter – weaving her way through a maddening mix of convicts, unconcerned authority, religious fanatics and racists – before the Exchange reverses itself. In some ways, the book is a travelogue of Bear Country, exploring the new world and just what it means for the humans unlucky enough to be trapped on the far side. I would not be too surprised to discover that SM Stirling’s Conquistador was one of the inspirations.

But that isn’t all. Sharon is, more by accident than design, entrapped in a web of lies and deceptions, told by everyone. Everyone has their own plans for Bear Country, from the insane Sister West to the survivalists to the US Government itself. One of the book’s minor problems is that I found the issue a little confusing, although it was wrapped up nicely at the end. Dale actually handles this quite well; we, the reader, only see through Sharon’s eyes and her obsession (quite understandable) with recovering her daughter blinds her to the many different plots and counter-plots being laid by the other characters.

Sharon is quite a believable character, although she is incredibly lucky and she does have her flaws. She’s a martial artist – she fights her way clear of danger several times – yet she is less used to guns. I would have expected her to have taken shooting lessons after leaving her useless husband. Most of the other characters are believable as well, although I found myself hating the women dragged along by the survivalists. If women were smarter about who they dated and married, the world would be a happier place. One issue was that Bethany is something of a cipher. I never had the sense that she was real.

Dale deserves credit – full credit – for making it clear that Bear Country is not a safe place to live and that most people who are intent on returning to a ‘simpler’ time are utter fools. Without law, society and socialisation breaks down rapidly; Sharon comes close to being raped several times in the story, while others are not so lucky. The cultists and the convicts are reverting to type rapidly, while the shortage of modern medicine means that women will die in childbirth – what few women there are in Bear Country. One of the ideas mentioned within the story are of a number of women who have been kidnapped by the convicts and held outside Bear Country until the exchange reverses itself, trapping them permanently.

The story also looks at the implications of the exchanges for our world. After the first couple of disasters, standard procedure became to sterilise any exchanged territory in order to prevent new animals and diseases spreading into our world. The hints that there might be someone out there with advanced technology are tantalising, as are some of the hints and clever stunts the US Government did to try to learn more about the unknown threat. I wish that Dale had spent more time exploring that angle; perhaps it will be something for the sequel.

One thing I didn’t buy is the international agreements banning exploration or settlement of Bear Country. Dale is quite right to point out that Bear Country is of limited use – and a massive liability – to national governments, but there are plenty of groups that would want to get loose in Bear Country, if only to establish a homeland of their own. Governments, too, would want to set up research bases, even if they would only be of limited value. Perhaps someone would discover a way to generate exchanges at will, or predict them perfectly weeks in advance, making the bases of infinite value. I’d expect far more groups plotting to get into Bear Country – most of those plans would come to grief very quickly, though.

Please don’t let those minor quibbles distract you. Exchange is an extremely good story that cries out for a sequel (or two).

A sample of Exchange can be found at: http://efanzines.com/SFAM/SFAM-05-01.pdf

Dale’s Website is at: http://www.dalecozort.com/

The best (or at least most civil) online AH discussion forum is at: http://counter-factual.net/

Destiny Disrupted: A History of the World Through Islamic Eyes

Destiny Disrupted: A History of the World Through Islamic Eyes
-Tamim Ansary

A writer I am very fond of once remarked that the level of toxicity in anything is directly proportional to the dose. One particular political disease that can be extremely dangerous is the willingness to either ignore the enemy’s statements or to take them at face value; in effect, accepting the enemy’s view of the world. This may be because the human mind is programmed to dislike contradictions and, when two different people have dynamically opposed visions of the world, tends to swing behind one or the other. If there is anything history teaches us, it is that it is important to pay attention to what someone else believes to be true, even if we regard it as arrant nonsense. They take it seriously.

Tamim Ansary (an Afghan-American) has attempted to write a short and fairly comprehensive history of the world, seen though Islamic eyes. Instead of concentrating on Rome, Napoleon and the struggles between Britain and France, Ansary looks at the development of the Islamic world from its birth to the present day. It is a fascinating and generally well-written piece of work (the author writes with a wry sense of humour), although it does have some flaws. It also starts with an interesting warning; not everything in the book might be objectively true (he says, so I give him points for honesty), but it is what Muslims believe to be true.

The early section of the book covers the development of the First Community, from the Prophet Muhammad to the four Rightly Guided Caliphs. The early Muslims found themselves the victims of persecution in Mecca (apparently, notes the author, this was because Muhammad’s opposition to the shines threatened the tourist trade) and had to flee to Medina, where they rapidly became powerful within the multicultural city. This alienated Mecca and a number of wars followed, which eventually resulted in the capture of Mecca and Islam’s triumph in Arabia. Although the author doesn’t make the point explicit, Islam had a fair chance at drawing the lesson ‘God helps those who help themselves’ from some of the battles, including disastrous defeats that occurred because some of the Muslims fled the battlefield, or stopped to loot.

History teetered on a knife-edge when Muhammad died, leaving behind an empire that had grown rapidly in the years since his conquest at Mecca, for there was no protocol for choosing a successor. Indeed, no one knew what being Muhammad’s successor actually meant! Was the successor simply the elected successor of Muhammad, or was he someone related to Muhammad, which suggested that Muhammad himself was somehow more than a man. The former view won out at first, but the latter view remained alive, eventually resulting in the split between Sunni and Shia Muslims. The latter believed that Ali (who was related to Muhammad and would be the fourth Caliph, eventually) was the divinely appointed successor to the Prophet and had been badly snubbed by the elections that eventually put Abu Bakr in power as the First Caliph. Unfortunately for Islam, this early glimmering of democracy faded and flickered out of existence.

The Caliphs found themselves ruling over an empire that was in the process of disintegration. Without Muhammad, the very question of what it meant to be a Muslim was up in the air, leaving some groups splitting away from the mainstream. Although Abu Bakr ruled well, he planted a very nasty seed in fertile soil and equated dissent or disagreement with treachery. The promise of loot from expansion spurred the vast expansion of the empire (the author has no truck with the suggestion that ‘jihad’ means internal struggle, noting that the cause of spreading Islam served as an excuse to loot) and the empire rapidly became too large to control effectively. By the time Ali finally got his chance at ruling Muhammad’s legacy, it was too late to save it from disaster as over-mighty subordinates made their own bid for power.

The next few centuries highlighted both religious wars and attempts to unite and codify Muhammad’s legacy, although those had begun during the First Community. Clerics collected, codified and fixed Islamic Law, believing that it could be finalised and used as a guide to living. They found themselves in competition with philosophers who believed that a more fluid and flexible approach to Islam – in effect, every Muslim would be his or her own final authority on what Allah wanted and didn’t want – and tried to convince the rulers to effectively separate mosque and state. (Although Islam has no Pope, it does have very respected and insular scholars who wielded great power.) Islamic Civilisation was still showing signs of an intellectual fire, but that fire was slowly being dampened by a dead mass of fixed rulings and a growing beaucatic caste. By then, there was no longer any pretence at ruling with the consent of the people; the various emperors (however named) and their courts were firmly in control. This in turn led to the ossification that slowly strangled the lifeblood out of the Islamic World.

Not unlike Imperial China, which suffered from similar problems, the Islamic World found itself under assault from outsiders. (Although the book doesn’t make this clear, Islam itself expanded into a power vacuum.) These assaults included the dreaded Mongols and the Crusaders. (The author suggests that the Crusades were an employment program for the younger noble youths of Christendom, which IIRC is untrue.) Islam regrouped under the Ottomans and eventually formed the Ottoman Empire, which endured until it chose the wrong side in the First World War. The Ottoman Empire saw one of the most determined attempts to break the straightjacket of history – the Young Turk movement – Islam has yet seen, which helped to reform Turkey. It also led to the Armenian Genocide, which the author insists did actually happen and was a cold-blooded attempt at mass murder.

By this point, Europe (and to a lesser extent America) had thoroughly impinged upon the Islamic world. The collapse of the Ottoman Empire opened the door for sweeping changes, including the mass migration of Jews to Palestine (later Israel) and the conquest of Arabia by the Saudis, who renamed it Saudi Arabia. The author is unusually sympathetic to the Jews and places blame far more evenly than most Islamic writers, blaming a rogue’s galley of Islamic leaders, the British, the Americans, the Russians, the French and last, but not least, the Palestinians themselves. One point the author neglects to make is that the Rule of Law did not exist in the Ottoman Empire or in its successor states, leaving it hard to tell who was actually in the right. The Jews bought land from those who owned it, not from those who lived and worked on it. Depending on how one looks at it, the land was either bought legally or stolen. There were no laws designed to cover the interests of those who worked on the land.

Odd as it may seem, this led to further mental ossification in the Middle East. Many Muslims spent the twentieth century trying to grapple with the problems facing the Islamic world, but many of the solutions were badly flawed. Attempts to go back to ‘pure’ Islam failed because no one had any idea of what ‘pure’ Islam was supposed to be. (The author is at pains to make clear that while Wahhabism represents itself as a return to ‘pure’ Islam; it is in fact just as much an innovation as those it rails against.) In a similarity to the USSR, the elites tasted the rewards of power and refused to give them up. Those who dared to suggest that democracy was the answer could be harassed and killed. This eventually led to a region that seemed largely incapable of taking responsibility for itself, choosing instead to blame the US and Israel for its woes. This attitude led to both 9/11 and an endless series of childlike displays of temper tantrums when the West failed to abase itself in front of Islamic superiority and give it what it wanted. The author does hold out some hope for change in the wake of the US invasion of Iraq and the shifts in power across the Middle East. This reviewer is less hopeful.

The book does have some flaws. Chief among them is the very limited discussion of Islam’s relationships with other religions. The treatment of Jews and Christians – an insistence that they convert or pay a tax – led to considerable trouble for the Islamic world. Intended as an incentive to convert, it gave the Muslims thousands of hypocrites who pretended to convert in order to escape harassment. Worse, it made the Muslims arrogant and confident in their superiority, a sin that is inevitably punished by the universe. The treatment of religions who were not ‘people of the book’ was often a great deal worse; the author concentrates on relatively enlightened or sensible Muslim rulers (like Ackbar of India) and ignores far darker souls.

Ansary also glosses over Islam’s experiences with slavery and racism. After a hopeful period during the rule of the Second Caliph where slavery nearly died (according to the author, at least), Islamic involvement with slavery rapidly mushroomed into an enterprise that dwarfed anything the West did. Islamic slave raids on Europe go unmentioned, apart from the creation of the Janissaries, who were both the guardians of empire and its slaves. The involvement of Arab slave traders in selling black Africans to the West also goes unmentioned, as does the racism epidemic through Middle Eastern society. In fact, the book almost completely ignores Islam’s expansion into Africa.

The book says very little about how the role of women in Islam mutated from near equality (one of the most dangerous challenges to Ali’s rule came from Muhammad’s youngest wife) to a pattern of near-complete submission. It is actually sickening to realise that early Islam gave women far more rights than the preceding religions and then threw it all away. I suspect that it happened, in general terms, because the society became heavily authoritative and men were pushed into having authority over their women, if not over anyone else.

***
The problem in reviewing this book is that it is hard to know when to take it seriously. The author’s specific warning that he isn’t writing objective history so much as subjective history means that I cannot tell if he is telling the ‘subjective truth,’ or if he is either ignorant or trying to mislead us. For example, his story of the PLO and Arab Nationalist/Fascist leaders could hardly be considered objective. There are other points in this book where I am left wondering if this is merely a rosy view of history. A set of footnotes outlining objective truths, or at least subjective truths, would have been very helpful.

In conclusion, this book is interesting and very well written, but it is also a timely reminder of a fact that is rarely made clear. Someone may have a different opinion to you, a different sense of history, a different culture…but that doesn’t make it a valid point of view.

Hitler’s War (Harry Turtledove)

Hitler’s War

-Harry Turtledove

In the first few pages, Hitler’s War shows remarkable promise. In a new record for Turtledove, that promise is cast away within the first two chapters. I was a third of the way through it when I recognised an ugly truth. I was bored. I didn’t care what happened to the characters. I didn’t want them to live, or to die, or to make babies with their girls. I didn’t care about them in the slightest.

Hitler’s War is based around two promising PODs, rather than one. A famous Spanish Nationalist survives a plane crash that would have killed him. A famous German from Czechoslovakia is assassinated during the Munich Conference. I don’t see how the two of them interrelate, but perhaps it doesn’t matter. Hitler takes the assassination as a chance to start a war with the Czechs. Apart from the moments of “I’m a naughty boy” from Hitler (more akin to Herr meets Hare than real life), it works fairly well. Hitler did want a war with the Czechs and was disappointed when Chamberlain surrendered and let him rape the country. At that point, one chapter in, the story disintegrates.

The Turtledove books that are well remembered focused on a tiny number of characters. The Guns of the South, Toxic Spell Dump and Ruled Britannia only had a small number of main characters. The only book with a vast cast of characters that worked out near-perfectly was How Few Remain. The longer sets of books, particularly the Great War books, dragged on and on and on, with so much repetition that one wonders if Turtledove was writing for someone with poor short-term memory problems. I still have a fond space in my heart for the WorldWar books, but even they were stretched too far. Turtledove is not so much interested in the story as what happens to the people caught up in events. Sometimes this works. It just doesn’t work very often and it really doesn’t work for Hitler’s War.

Turtledove offers us what should have been an interesting cast of characters. There’s a German Jewish girl in Germany. There are soldiers from all sides and nationalities (yes, ALL!) There’s an American woman stranded in Germany. There are Japanese and American soldiers in China. This would be more impressive if they didn’t all blur together after a while into one vast mass of…boring people. None of them rise up to be interesting, or good or bad or whatever. There are few glimpses of what is happening with the overall war. The characters just are.

He does show us intriguing glimpses of his research. Historically, the Poles did sell out the Czechs. At the same time, of course, they were caught between Hitler and Stalin. (This point does get made in the book.) Even so, they passed up their best chance to stop Hitler right there and then. There are moments when he shows the tactics of the alternate war. There are moments when he repeats himself, a problem so excessively bad in his early works that it has spawned derision among the AH community. The book needed an editor. I know someone I could recommend, if Turtledove were interested.

The alternate European War is decidedly odd, to say the least. Germany attacks Czechoslovakia after the peace talks break down. The Spanish Civil War is sidelined, with the nationalists attacking and capturing Gibraltar. The Poles stay neutral. The USSR sends ‘volunteer’ units to fight the Germans. The French launch a tiny offensive that gets nowhere fast. The UK declares war, but otherwise does little. The Czechs lose to Germany. The Germans attack France and bomb England. The Russians take the chance to press demands on Poland, bringing in the Germans on the Polish side (!). The Japanese stab the Russians in the back. The German offensive against France stalls against Paris and is driven back, where it will probably be resumed in the next book.

There’s only one problem with this scenario.

It’s utter nonsense.

The Germans in 1938 were FAR weaker than Turtledove suggests. They had shortages in pretty much every area, and weak in trained cadre. A war of almost any duration would have run the risk of burning through all their stock. They would be attacking a tough opponent dug into the second-strongest defence line in Europe, with tanks and a tough little air force of their own. (The Czechs produced plenty of excellent war machines for Germany after the West abandoned them.) Their tanks were inferior to Western designs. I won’t even go into what happened to the Japanese when they faced the Soviets in OTL. They got their butts soundly kicked.

Turtledove, despite being branded the Master of Alternate History, has a nasty habit of using OTL as a guide to ATL. It never works out very well. He seems to combine World War Two with World War One and failed at both. It would not have worked out that way.

If Hitler really did launch Case Green, there would be a good chance that the Czechs could hold him off themselves, without help. If the French Army came over the border with just a division or two, they’d brush through the tiny force Hitler left to the west, even if they had a McClellan in command. They’d realise pretty quickly that Hitler had been bluffing and keep moving onwards into Germany. The Germans would find themselves caught in a two-front war (three-front if the Poles jump in as well) and running out of supplies. Perhaps some kindly soul would shoot Hitler and put an end to the war, or perhaps Berlin would fall and the allies impose peace.

The really annoying part of this book is that a lot of intriguing ideas are tossed in and then out again. Hitler faces a coup launched by the German military and survives – what happened then? We never get told. How was he so much stronger than in OTL 1938? Chamberlain faces a no-confidence vote and survives, somehow. What happened? Why? There are few overall images of how the war is progressing. Turtledove glosses over vast sweeps of detail that could have transformed the book from an absurdity to an interesting read. In one sense, the book is too long. In another, it is too short. It doesn’t do justice to the vast sweep of ideas, nor does it justify them.

There comes a time, in the life of every best-selling author, when he becomes editor-proof. A Tom Clancy. Stephen King or JK Rowling (and yes, a Harry Turtledove) does not HAVE to listen to an editor when he or she is told that the book needs a rewrite. They can merely threaten to take their name to another publisher to get their way. Their books degenerate into masses of poorly researched and badly-written text, barely showing hints of the great genius they once allowed to flourish. And then they lose popularity and wonder why.

Sic Transit Gloria…

(People interested in a proper look at a WW2 in 1938 would be advised to check out - http://www.changingthetimes.net/samples/darkvalley/on_to_berlin.htm)

Heritage/Legacy/Inheritance ‘Trilogy’ (Ian Douglas)

Heritage/Legacy/Inheritance ‘Trilogy’

Ian Douglas

Heritage Trilogy:

Semper Mars

Luna Marine

Europa Strike

Legacy Trilogy:

Star Corps

Battlespace

Star Marines

Inheritance Trilogy

Star Strike

Galactic Corps

Semper Human

Military SF has always exercised a fascination over me and I was pleased to come across all nine of these books relatively cheap. The story, which at least party counts as space opera as well as military SF, follows the development of the USMC through the early space age to an age where humans are effectively god-like creatures. The background is simple enough, yet very elaborate. As the human race probes into space, they encounter signs of alien life and alien threats, including one near-omnipotent race that is attempting to destroy every other race in the universe. All of this takes place against a background of human politics and social development.

The first trilogy focuses around the discovery of alien ruins on Mars, the Moon and Europa, with a war triggered on Earth by the discovery of workable alien technology. The second trilogy focuses on interstellar exhibitions and war against alien races, finally ending with the first confrontation with the ultimate threat. The third focuses on a terrifying war with said ultimate threat and the final destiny of the human race.

Internally, the story follows a set of families with a long history of being involved with the Marines. This actually strikes me as odd; one of the main heroes of the Marines (and his two descendents from the later series) is portrayed as signing up against the will of his family. His descendents have the same problem. They may be soldiers, but they also seem to have an uncanny knack for marrying people who don’t approve of the military. The characters in the story may not have precisely identical histories, but they rhyme.

The author shows considerable imagination and an eye for technological development, fully the equal – in that regard – of David Weber or Peter F. Hamilton. Parts of the series can be read as speculation as to how training methods will improve as technology advances, other parts can be read as warnings about the dangers of technology without social development. For this alone, the series is well worth reading.

What is considerably less impressive are the politics. It may made sense, in the first book, to have the French portrayed as sanctimonious idiots, the UN as a deeply corrupt organisation and the Muslims as fanatical foes of liberty. It makes little sense for the same attitudes to be present in a post-scarcity society. The warriors go in and take land; the diplomats give it away freely, unheeding of the human cost. One would figure, after Earth had been bombarded, that no one would be talking of peace with a race that didn’t even bother to paint itself as a victim, but idiots on Earth try right up until the end. Grr.

It’s well worth a read, but there are times when you will want to throw the book right across the room.

The Turner Diaries (Andrew MacDonald)

The Turner Diaries

(Andrew MacDonald)

In hopes of forestalling the inevitable chorus of condemnation from the Left, I shall say one thing right from the start. The Turner Diaries is one of the most disturbing and unpleasant books I have ever read. I only read it the first time around because people were telling me that I shouldn't read it. (I followed this logic with The Satanic Verses as well, which is even less readable and vastly overrated.) I recently reread the book and I cannot say that it improved.

The Turner Diaries is set in the very near future (from when the book was published) and covers a race war within an unrecognisable version of the United States. The ‘hero’ of the book, a member of an organisation known only as the Organisation (imaginative, I'm sure), finds himself arrested for possessing illegal guns, weeks after the private possession of all handguns has been prohibited. This search nets so many people that the Government – referred throughout as The System – is forced to let most of them go, including Turner. Turner and his cell – the Organisation functions on a similar pattern to the IRA – launch a terrorist campaign against the System. The System finds itself unable to fight back effectively, although Turner notes that time is in fact on its side.

The System is very much the nightmare of the Far Right. It is controlled by the Jews (portrayed in very unflattering terms), and enforced by the Blacks, who are portrayed in even more unflattering terms. (Basically, every Black man in the story is a rapist dope-fiend one step removed from the jungle.) The System is backed up by a massive propaganda outlet, which sees to it that hardly anyone dares offer resistance, for fear of being branded a racist. Most of white America has been emasculated by the System and cannot fight back effectively. Turner’s voice drips contempt for them, an attitude that flows through the entire book.

Turner himself comes across as a strange combination of traits. On one hand, he is a racist and probably a sexist. On the other, he is capable of extreme bravery, love (he falls in love with one of his cell mates) and devotion to his cause. This is noted by his superiors and he finds himself inducted into The Order (an SS-like group existing within the Organisation, but unknown to the majority of its members) and charged with defending the white race at all costs. This also gets him into considerable trouble; during the course of the war, Turner accidentally exposes himself to the System and gets arrested for his pains. The Order takes a very dim view of such failure.

Luckily for Turner, they are remarkably forgiving for such an organisation. The Order ‘merely’ promises him a chance to redeem himself and sends him back to work. The action moves to California, where the Organisation is finally ready to make a move towards the endgame, the overthrow of the System itself. Turner becomes a very important personage within the Organisation as the group comes out into the open, taking over California and eventually expanding up against the System (and ethnically cleansing the occupied zone of every last Black, Jew and Race Traitor.) In the nuclear stand-off that follows, Turner is finally offered his chance to redeem himself by flying a nuclear-armed plane into the Pentagon, decapitating the System (and killing himself in the process.) The Organisation, as the epilogue makes clear, uses this opportunity to take over America, Europe and then the world. After slaughtering every last non-white in existence, they all lived happily ever after.

(Except for Turner, who’s dead.)

What can one say about such a book?

The writer, and I say this without regard for his politics or his worldview, was an evil genius who could have gone far, had he chosen to write more mainstream books. Turner comes across as a surprisingly well drawn and likeable character (indeed, almost sympathetic); it takes thought and reflection to realise just how warped his worldview truly is, or just what kind of monster he was. Turner is a man who could be kind and loving at one point, and utterly sadistic the next. His particular brand of evil is justified quite extensively; Turner, one feels, believes that the ends always justify the means. He thinks nothing of fighting fire with fire. It is clear that the ends of the Organisation (and the Order) are actually very similar to the System, with the only real difference being the people in charge.

I have believed for quite some time that if you read a book, you have to accept the underlying premise. (There’s no point in reading a book about dragons if you cannot accept that dragons exist, at least in the book.) The underlying premise of The Turner Diaries is a dark and sinister one, the more so for being presented in a manner that almost requires one to accept it. Turner defines himself against a background of social decay, degeneration and hopelessness – the more so because of the rising tide of violence and anarchy. The stereotypes within the book only enhance that effect, the more so because all stereotypes tend to contain a hint of truth. There is nothing particularly subtle about the message, but it is chillingly easy to get sucked under into the miasma. The book was a hit with its intended readership and it is easy to understand why.

The book also reveals the underlying hypocritical nature of those who share Turner’s belief system. Turner believes, firmly, in the right to keep and bear arms, yet he is unwilling to extend that right to anyone who doesn’t agree with him on all points. Turner believes in protecting women – there are several incidents in the book where he intervenes to protect white women on the verge of being raped by black men – but it is protection on his terms. The concept of female equality is dismissed; women in Turner’s world, even his lover, are required to be seen and not heard. The Madonna/Whore syndrome is a large part of Turner’s mindset and it shows. Don’t even mention gays, liberals or mixed-race couples. The latter, in particular, come in for special bashing. Towards the end of the book, they are all gleefully wiped out, exposing the true nature of Turner’s belief system. Like all fascist and communist groups, The Organisation cannot tolerate any other group’s mere existence. Compromise, even with Conservatives, is impossible. It is a world where George W. Bush and Barrack Obama would end up hanging together from a lamppost, while Hilary would be firmly bitch-slapped and sent back to the kitchen.

I believe (from old and probably unreliable memory) that some groups saw The Turner Diaries as a guidebook to the inevitable race war. (Which, for some strange reason, has not materialised.) Unfortunately for them, much about the war described in The Turner Diaries doesn't make sense. The System is brutally incompetent and weighed down by its own insane social policies (one assumes that the National Guards have been disbanded, as there is no mention of them within the book) and the Organisation is far too good at keeping it off balance. In reality, I suspect that the cities would be fairly easy to control, but the countryside would become a seething mass of discontent.

The author (purely by accident, I suspect) does make one good point, although he plays it up so much that it is hard to recognise that there is an important point underneath. The word ‘racist’ has been grossly overused, to the point where people are afraid to bring charges against ethnic minorities (or pay attention to the less savoury aspects of such groups) because they find themselves accused of being racist. In reality, this means that forced marriages and poor treatment of women is ignored; in the book, a white girl can be forced to allow a black guy to have sex with her...or be branded a racist. The word is so badly devalued that it is now effectively meaningless, used only as a magic talisman to keep away the evil. (I shall hear no evil, cries the liberal, blocking his ears to the screams of the victims.)

It does not require an application of logic and reason to realise that, seen in the cold light of day, that Turner’s world is not only warped, but unrealistic. If the Jews are as all-powerful as Turner suggests, why exactly have they been getting the short end of the stick for so long? The book claims that the ‘great one’ (Hitler) led the charge that crippled Jewish power for years, but Jews have been persecuted since time out of mind. That’s a little odd for the secret rulers of the world. Hitler was hardly the first anti-Semite to gain power and he wasn't the last. And then there’s the version of black men...there isn’t a single redeeming character (good or bad) in the book, with one exception. A conservative member of the Organisation refuses to carry out an attack that would have resulted in civilian deaths...and, for this, is put to death by Turner and his men.

Turner’s world is not ours. Let’s be grateful.

It's hard to give the book any rating. On one hand, I am impressed with the author’s skill at creating a book that conveyed his message so well. (People who say that this is easy have never tried it.) On the other hand, his message is profoundly disturbing and dishonest, not least because it bears little relationship to reality. If you want to read a book about noble patriots taking on the might of a corrupt American government, read Unintended Consequences or A State of Disobedience instead. At least they have characters you can root for.

The Lost Regiment Series (William R. Forstchen)

The Lost Regiment
-William R. Forstchen

The first thing you need to understand about the Lost Regiment series is that it’s a series to extreme. None of the books make sense unless read in strict chronological order. While some of the books are better than others, they must be read in order.

The basic plot of the books is simple. A Union Regiment from the US civil war is swept through a portal built by an alien race to a planet a long way from Earth. Luckily for the regiment, there are other humans here, unluckily, there are also three tribes – or hordes – of alien human-eaters. The whole plot of eight books is concentrated round wars between the humans and the aliens.

The setting is very neat. The Lost Regiment arrives near Rus, which was founded by descendents of Russians who arrived though the ‘gate of light’. This is a feudal system with boyars and a Tsar, but the Americans start to introduce their ideas and their technology – centuries ahead of the Rus tech – to the system. Then the Regiment meets a member of the Tugar Horde and learns the sick truth – the humans of Rus are preyed upon by the horde, who eat them alive. Once you get over the problems with genetic compatibility, it’s a good setting.
Naturally, the regiment prepares to fight. The Rus revolt against their lords in their main city and join the Americans. There is a massive battle with the Turgars, including viewpoints from both sides, and finally the horde is defeated and nearly wiped out. And that’s all in the first book.

The next three books introduce both limited political elements and a new horde. The new republic (pun not intended) has absorbed the rest of Rus. In a parallel to the US reconstruction era, the Americans have been forced to accept the involvement in local politics of the remaining boyars, most of whom are a dead hand. Meanwhile, a human renegade has been arming the Cathas (descendent of a Carthaginian fleet) and using them, under the Merki horde, to attack the Roum. The first part of that war is a masterpiece of strategic planning. Books three and four are far more limited tactically, although we see much more horde politics and the introduction of Tamuka, a character we all love to hate. His crusade against the humans leads to the murder of the horde leader, who he’s sworn to guard, and ends with a surprising side-switch by the remains of the Tugars from book one.

The final four books expose the fledgling republic to its greatest challenge. The Bantag horde, already larger than the others, receives a new leader and messiah from a world as advanced as our present day. For the first time, the humans are outmatched technologically by the horde, facing tanks, aircraft and other tricks – as well as a whole new art of using them. After much daring-do, the republic lures the horde into a mutual destruction trap, and convinces them to agree to a permanent peace.

So, what are my thoughts about these novels? Unlike the WorldWar books, the aliens here are fairly imaginative and well-defined. The hordes do have a surprise (on the lines of Rouke’s drift) when they bump into the human forces for the first real battle, but then they learn and adept. The first horde was primitive, but if they used their weapons right, it did not matter. The tactical action is superb. The viewpoints are wide enough so that we get a good idea of what’s happening everywhere. One thing that’s not well defined is the ESP that some of the aliens have. What is it and what can it do?

On the other hand, I don’t buy the massive technological advances made in ten years of fighting. It’s just too quick, how could one person, who is even less equipped than the Regiment, convince an entire Horde to change their ways? Even with the myth of a messiah, it’s a stretch.
Speaking of that guy, he’s probably the only character in a novel to regress in character development. In his first two books, he’s the foe you love to hate (such as Doctor Who’s Master), but in his last, he’s just a tactical moron like Hitler.

The series is well-worth a read, but be sure to read them in order, or you’ll get hopelessly confused.

#1 Rally Cry
#2 Union Forever
#3 Terrible Swift Sword
#4 Fateful Lightning
#5 Battle Hymn
#6 Never Sound Retreat
#7 A Band of Brothers
#8 Men of War (The final book in the series, or so I thought)
#9 Down to the Sea