Militarism, Masculinity, and the Making of the American Warrior

Militarism, Masculinity, and the Making of the American Warrior

In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we are joined by investigative journalist Jasper Craven to discuss his new book, *God Forgives, Brothers Don’t: Inside the Violent, Hypermasculine World of America’s Military Schools*. The conversation ranges far beyond military academies to explore how the US military has become the defining institution of American manhood – and what that means for democracy, violence, and the soul of the nation.** Jasper’s journey into this subject began with a tip about a dysfunctional military school near Philadelphia, rife with abuse and corruption. That story opened a window onto a broad network of military education – from elite officer training at West Point to reform schools for troubled boys – all peddling the same promise: that rigid hierarchy, discipline, and violence can forge a real man. The military, Jasper argues, has filled a void left by the collapse of other pathways to meaning and middle‑class security. We trace the historical roots of America’s uneasy relationship with standing armies – the founders’ distrust of a professional military versus the lionisation of the revolutionary war veteran. That tension has been resolved decisively in favour of the soldier. Today, militarism permeates American culture, from a defence budget larger than the next ten countries combined to the reflexive adoration of anyone in uniform. This “secular faith” has produced a generation of veterans who feel their sacrifices are acknowledged only in hollow, abstract gestures – never in a genuine willingness to confront the ugliness of war. The conversation turns to Pete Hegseth, Trump’s defence secretary and a walking embodiment of hyper‑performative masculinity. Jasper traces Hegseth’s own insecurities – shame at his “soft” father, a desperate need to prove himself – and shows how the military offered him a ready‑made identity. But that identity is brittle, built on a foundation of alcohol abuse, misogyny, Islamophobia, and a deep fear of being seen as weak. Hegseth, Jasper argues, is not an aberration but the “inevitable conclusion” of decades of imperial blowback. We also discuss the role of military schools in channelling working‑class boys – disproportionately white, often struggling with learning disabilities or juvenile justice issues – into a system that promises redemption through submission. The long‑term consequences are devastating: high rates of suicide, PTSD, domestic violence, and extremist radicalisation. Jasper notes that the mob that stormed the Capitol on 6 January was composed largely of military veterans – a fact that was briefly discussed, then quietly forgotten. Topics covered: - Jasper’s investigative journey from a single dysfunctional military school to a national network - The economic and social drivers of military recruitment - How military schools weaponise masculinity as a recruiting tool - America’s historic tension between distrust of standing armies and adoration of soldiers - The failure of post‑9/11 wars to deliver meaning or victory - Pete Hegseth as a case study in fragile, performative masculinity - The 6 January insurrection and the role of radicalised veterans - The hollow abstraction of veteran worship - Graham Platner’s Senate campaign as a test of whether voters can face the real wounds of war --- *Jasper Craven’s *God Forgives, Brothers Don’t* is out now. Please consider buying from an independent bookshop or directly from the publisher.* *If you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes.* Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share. ▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive Content Become a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory [https://www.patreon.com/explaininghistory] ▸ Join the Community & Continue the Conversation Facebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcast [https://www.facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcast/] Substack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com [https://theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com/] ▸ Read Articles & Go Deeper Website: explaininghistory.org [https://explaininghistory.org/] ---------------------------------------- Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy [https://acast.com/privacy] for more information.

The Ottoman March on Egypt 1915

In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we examine the opening moves of the Ottoman Empire’s war against Britain – a desperate, audacious campaign to seize the Suez Canal that has been largely forgotten but which revealed the fragility of the British Empire and the resilience of the Ottoman army. At the outbreak of the First World War, the Ottoman Empire saw itself surrounded by enemies: the British in Egypt, the Russians to the north, a hostile Habsburg Empire to the west, and a recently hostile Italy in the Mediterranean. The Young Turk government initially hoped to stay out of the war. But when they looked at Britain, France, and Russia, they saw voraciously hungry powers intent on dismembering their empire. Germany offered a security guarantee – unreliable, but the best available. The German High Command placed a high priority on cutting the Suez Canal. Between August and December 1914, 376 transport ships carried nearly 164,000 Allied troops through the canal. It was the vital artery connecting the Indian Ocean to the Mediterranean – the lifeline of Britain’s Asian empire. If the Ottomans could pinch it off, they could deal Britain a mortal blow and perhaps inspire a pan‑Islamic jihad against British rule. The man chosen to lead the attack was Cemal Pasha. In November 1914, he stood in Istanbul’s central train station and publicly proclaimed his intention to conquer Egypt. The British dismissed his pledge as empty rhetoric. They did not believe he could raise an army large enough or cross the waterless, hostile Sinai desert. But Cemal assembled a heterogeneous, multi‑ethnic force – regular soldiers from the Arab provinces, volunteers from Bedouin, Druze, Circassian, Kurdish, Albanian, and even Jewish communities. He wrote to the Sharif of Mecca, Hussein ibn Ali, asking for troops under one of his sons. Hussein’s son Ali went no further than Medina – a warning sign Cemal chose to ignore. Against all odds, Cemal’s force marched across the Sinai in 12 days, losing neither a man nor a beast. They carried light rations of dates, biscuit, and olives, water carefully rationed, marching through the freezing nights and resting by day. British aerial surveillance initially failed to detect them – early aircraft lacked the range to reach central Sinai. By late January 1915, the British realised the impossible was happening. They withdrew all troops to the western shore of the canal, chained guard dogs on the east bank, and waited. The odds were stacked against the Ottomans – 25,000 attackers against 50,000 dug‑in defenders, backed by warships, armoured trains, and the canal itself. But Cemal had achieved surprise. What happened next would shape the course of the war in the Middle East. Drawing on Eugene Rogan’s *The Fall of the Ottomans*, this episode explores the political context of the Ottoman decision to enter the war, the challenges of mobilising a multi‑ethnic army, the incredible logistics of the Sinai crossing, and the early use of aerial reconnaissance in desert warfare. **Topics covered:** - The Ottoman Empire’s strategic dilemma in 1914 - The alliance with Germany and the promise of jihad - The importance of the Suez Canal to the British war effort - Cemal Pasha and his public proclamation - The composition of the Ottoman expeditionary force - Sharif Hussein’s reluctant cooperation - The 12‑day march across the Sinai - British aerial reconnaissance and its limitations - The defence of the canal: warships, armoured trains, and guard dogs - The moment of surprise before the attack --- *If you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes.* Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share. ▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive Content Become a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory [https://www.patreon.com/explaininghistory] ▸ Join the Community & Continue the Conversation Facebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcast [https://www.facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcast/] Substack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com [https://theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com/] ▸ Read Articles & Go Deeper Website: explaininghistory.org [https://explaininghistory.org/] ---------------------------------------- Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy [https://acast.com/privacy] for more information.

Adoption, Colonialism, and the Korean War

*THE HISTORY THAT THIS PODCAST EPISODE EXPLORES INVOLVES HARM AND NEGLECT TO CHILDREN AND SOME LISTENERS MAY FIND THE DETAILS DISCLOSED DISTRESSING. In this episode of the Explaining History Podcast, we are joined by Paige Towers to discuss her new book, What They Stole – a deeply researched exploration of intercountry adoption from Korea to the United States, rooted in a family tragedy that shook her Iowa hometown. The book begins with a shocking event: in 2008, a local bank vice president murdered his wife and children before taking his own life. For Paige, this was a window into a much larger and darker history – the story of Korean intercountry adoption, which began in the aftermath of the Korean War and continued for decades with little oversight or accountability. We trace the origins of modern intercountry adoption to the mass displacement of children during and after World War II. In Italy, Greece, and Germany, orphans filled the streets, and American GIs and missionaries began taking children home – often through informal, unregulated channels. By the time the Korean War ended, a full‑blown adoption industry had emerged, driven by a combination of military humanitarianism, Christian missionary zeal, and Cold War anti‑communism. Paige focuses on Harry and Bertha Holt, an evangelical couple who became the face of Korean adoption. The Holts started by seeking out the multiracial children of American GIs – children whose “whitened” appearance struck a chord with US audiences. But when those children proved scarce, they simply turned to Korean children, fulfilling a waiting list of 10,000 American families. The Holts pioneered “baby lifts” – chartering old military cargo planes, removing the seats, and packing up to 100 infants on unpressurised, freezing, turbulent flights. Many children died en route. The system that emerged was reckless and coercive: adoptions by proxy (parents never met their child before the adoption was finalised), falsified records, and a global pipeline that eventually supplied children to Denmark, France, Sweden, and the Netherlands. Paige also documents a shocking pattern of murder – Korean children killed by their adoptive parents, cases that were largely ignored by a media more interested in feel‑good rescue narratives. What does it mean when good intentions produce harmful systems? Paige argues that the humanitarian narrative of adoption has often silenced the voices of adoptees themselves – their experiences of cultural loss, identity erasure, and, in the worst cases, violence. The book is a powerful call to reckon with the colonial assumptions embedded in intercountry adoption. Topics covered: * The 2008 Iowa City murder and its connection to adoption history * World War II displacement and the origins of intercountry adoption * The Korean War and “military humanitarianism” * Harry and Bertha Holt and the Christian adoption mission * Multiracial children and the politics of “whiteness” * The shift to adopting Korean children * Baby lifts: unpressurised planes, sick infants, and deaths in transit * Adoption by proxy and the lack of regulation * European adoption pipelines (Denmark, France, Sweden, the Netherlands) * Adoptee activism and the fight for truth and reconciliation Paige Towers’ What They Stole is available now from the University of Iowa Press. Please consider buying from an independent bookshop or directly from the publisher. If you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes. Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share. ▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive Content Become a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory [https://www.patreon.com/explaininghistory] ▸ Join the Community & Continue the Conversation Facebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcast [https://www.facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcast/] Substack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com [https://theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com/] ▸ Read Articles & Go Deeper Website: explaininghistory.org [https://explaininghistory.org/] ---------------------------------------- Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy [https://acast.com/privacy] for more information.

The Shortest History of Scotland – Nation, Union, and the Rise of Nationalism

IN THIS EPISODE OF THE EXPLAINING HISTORY PODCAST, WE ARE JOINED BY CULTURAL HISTORIAN MURRAY PITTOCK TO DISCUSS HIS NEW BOOK, THE SHORTEST HISTORY OF SCOTLAND – A CONCISE BUT RICHLY DETAILED JOURNEY THROUGH TWO MILLENNIA OF SCOTTISH HISTORY, FROM THE PICTS TO THE PRESENT DAY. Scotland’s geography – the “land of the mountain and the flood”, in Walter Scott’s phrase – made it virtually impenetrable until modern roads and railways. For centuries, the sea was the highway, and Scotland’s east‑coast ports looked as much to continental Europe as to England. Understanding that terrain is key to understanding how Scotland became a state in historical time – and why the union with England was never a foregone conclusion. Murray explains the origins of his book, written as part of the bestselling Shortest History series, and the opportunity it offered to refresh a field dominated by either heavy tomes or outdated accounts. He focuses not just on kings and battles, but on people’s lived lives, culture, and the built environment – while also signposting readers towards deeper dives, such as the Declaration of Arbroath. We then turn to the present. The story of modern Scottish nationalism begins with Winnie Ewing’s shock by‑election victory in Hamilton in 1967, and her slogan “Stop the world – Scotland wants to get on”. The post‑imperial era marginalised Scotland’s distinctive identity; Britishness, once a broad, inclusive identity shared by Australians, Canadians and New Zealanders, suddenly became something narrower and more insular. The memory of the two world wars – particularly the myth of 1940 as an English, south‑east England story – has played a complex role in the union’s longevity. Murray explores the drivers of Scottish nationalism: economic anxiety, a desire for democratic control, and an internationalist outlook that became visible in the 2016 Brexit vote, where Scotland’s pattern diverged dramatically from England’s. He also reflects on the 2014 independence referendum – where pensions and currency fears likely tipped the balance – and on devolution, which Labour hoped would “kill nationalism stone dead” but which failed partly because Scottish Labour never truly became a nationalist party. We also discuss the formation of the union in 1707, a vote “forced” by economic weakness, English obstruction of Scottish overseas trade, and a lack of alternatives. The mercantile class later profited handsomely from the British Empire, shifting Scotland’s economic centre of gravity from east to west – from the European ports to Glasgow and the American trade. Topics covered: * The geography of Scotland and its historical impact * Walter Scott’s “land of the mountain and the flood” * The Declaration of Arbroath * Winnie Ewing and the birth of modern Scottish nationalism * Post‑imperial Britishness and the Festival of Britain (1951) * The memory of the world wars and its role in the union * Drivers of Scottish nationalism: economic, democratic, internationalist * The 2014 independence referendum and the currency/pensions question * Devolution: Labour’s miscalculation * The 1707 union: economic weakness, Darien, and a forced vote Murray Pittock’s The Shortest History of Scotland is available now from all good bookshops. Please consider buying from an independent retailer or directly from the publisher. If you enjoy the podcast, please consider supporting us – we are migrating from Patreon to Substack. Details in the show notes. Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share. ▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive Content Become a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory [https://www.patreon.com/explaininghistory] ▸ Join the Community & Continue the Conversation Facebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcast [https://www.facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcast/] Substack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com [https://theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com/] ▸ Read Articles & Go Deeper Website: explaininghistory.org [https://explaininghistory.org/] ---------------------------------------- Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy [https://acast.com/privacy] for more information.

Trump and Nixon in Beijing - an instructive comparison

In this episode of the Explaining History podcast, Nick sets the scene for an upcoming interview with historian Murray Pittock on The Shortest History of Scotland, reflecting on the current wave of nationalist politics across Scotland, Wales, and Ireland—and how these movements connect to wider shifts in British and English identity. From there, Nick turns to global affairs, unpacking the stark contrast between Richard Nixon’s landmark visit to China and Donald Trump’s far more troubled encounter with Beijing. What did Nixon understand about power, diplomacy, and long-term strategy that seems absent today? The episode explores the tangled relationship between the United States, China, and Iran, looking at how recent events may signal a shift in global power—and what that means for American influence, its allies, and the future of international politics. Explaining History helps you understand the 20th Century through critical conversations and expert interviews. We connect the past to the present. If you enjoy the show, please subscribe and share. ▸ Support the Show & Get Exclusive Content Become a Patron: patreon.com/explaininghistory [https://www.patreon.com/explaininghistory] ▸ Join the Community & Continue the Conversation Facebook Group: facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcast [https://www.facebook.com/groups/ExplainingHistoryPodcast/] Substack: theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com [https://theexplaininghistorypodcast.substack.com/] ▸ Read Articles & Go Deeper Website: explaininghistory.org [https://explaininghistory.org/] ---------------------------------------- Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy [https://acast.com/privacy] for more information.