The end of the Cold War makes it possible, for the first time, to begin writing its history from a truly international perspective, one reflecting Soviet, East European, and Chinese as well as American and West European viewpoints. In a major departure from his earlier scholarship, John Lewis Gaddis, the pre-eminent American authority on the United States and the Cold War, has written a comprehensive comparative history of that conflict from its origins through to its most dangerous moment, the Cuban missile crisis. We Now Know is packed with new information drawn from previously unavailable sources; it also reflects the findings of a new generation of Cold War historians. It contains striking new insights into the role of ideology, democracy, economics, alliances, and nuclear weapons, as well as major reinterpretations of Stalin, Truman, Khrushchev, Mao, Eisenhower, and Kennedy. It suggests solutions to long-standing puzzles: Did the Soviet Union want world revolution? Why was Germany divided? Who started the Korean War? What did the Americans mean by "massive retaliation"? When did the Sino-Soviet split begin? Why did the U.S.S.R. send missiles to Cuba? And what made the Cold War last as long as it did? This is a fresh, thought-provoking and powerfully argued reassessment of the Cold War by one of its most distinguished historians. It will set the agenda for debates on this subject for years to come.
2 有用 酸吗 2015-01-16 23:04:16
we now know nothing through this book...我读这个书的眼光跟历史系童鞋们完全不一样。正如Leffeler的批判,与Fukuyama一同,属于苏联坍塌时的意识形态狂欢。
0 有用 希仁 2009-04-13 13:46:31
you know i don't know
1 有用 豆友1437182 2015-11-17 12:40:47
过于琐碎,没有太新的观点,对新发现的档案资料的解读尚浅
0 有用 冷焰火 2024-04-15 21:59:03 江苏
加迪斯大概从这本书开始,从后修正主义直接变成修正主义了,其后的书“The cold war”我看简直不能成为“修正主义”,应该属于美国的“正统学派”。
0 有用 寶 2022-03-14 01:47:13
冷战结束后一系列新资料的纰漏,直接把Gaddis逼成了修正学派,我曾在大学期间义愤填膺的觉着苏联是被动反应。也曾因为批评凯南过激被老师说太年轻。我琢磨自己知识也没什么长进,但对很多问题有南辕北辙的新认识。可能更多是伦理认识上的进步,以及,对“他们真的能干得出来”“别把人想得太善良”有了更深刻的认识。
0 有用 冷焰火 2024-04-15 21:59:03 江苏
加迪斯大概从这本书开始,从后修正主义直接变成修正主义了,其后的书“The cold war”我看简直不能成为“修正主义”,应该属于美国的“正统学派”。
0 有用 寶 2022-03-14 01:47:13
冷战结束后一系列新资料的纰漏,直接把Gaddis逼成了修正学派,我曾在大学期间义愤填膺的觉着苏联是被动反应。也曾因为批评凯南过激被老师说太年轻。我琢磨自己知识也没什么长进,但对很多问题有南辕北辙的新认识。可能更多是伦理认识上的进步,以及,对“他们真的能干得出来”“别把人想得太善良”有了更深刻的认识。
0 有用 Aubrey Plaza 2021-05-06 15:45:22
给冷战白痴科普还挺好的…角度很美国了
0 有用 不能不信邪 2019-04-10 23:19:52
传统美国中心论
0 有用 咕咕鸡 2016-02-01 05:16:44
作者在开头就直白的表示了自己的立场,冷战的前半部分是斯大林个人统治下的俄罗斯和美国的较量,其中互相猜疑和对对方外交、军事政策的错误解读造成了两国在冷战的路上一去不复返。这是斯大林美国中国的宫斗纪啊。