Sacred Causes: The Clash of Religion and Politics, from the Great War to the War on Terror by Michael Burleigh

Sacred Causes: The Clash of Religion and Politics, from the Great War to the War on Terror Reviews

• 
  Gary

  In this sweeping and comprehensive work, Michael Burleigh examines the role played by religion in politics and politics in religion from the end of the First World War until the Islamic terrorist onslaught taking place today against the free world.
  It is written from a strongly Catholic perspective, and Burleigh puts forward a robust defense of the Roman Catholic church against charges that it did nothing to try to prevent the Holocaust.
  One of Burleigh's most important contributions in this book is his outline of the sterling role played by the Christian Democratic Parties in Western Europe, in both helping their countries to overcome the evil legacy of Nazism, and preventing the spread to their countries of the equally evil Communist tyranny.
  As a traditional Jew, I can say that my communitarian pro-traditionalist and pro-national self-determination outlook (and my belief in a socially responsible market economy as opposed to laissez faire libertarianism), is very similar to an equivalent of the Christian Democrat philosophy, and I believe to prevent a victory by the dark forces of Satanic Islamo-Nazism, a variant of this philosophy needs to be re-established.
  
  Beginning with the rise of Nazism and Fascism in Germany and Italy,the author explains how the knee jerk reaction of the Left to label everyone to the right of them as a "Fascist" blinded them to the genuine phenomenon, and how Leftist parties refused to co-operate with the moderate and Christian forces to stop Nazism and Fascism, thus bearing some responsibility for the the rise of these regimes.
  Already by the 1920s predictions abounded of apocalypse and the end of days. A move to the right took place as a reaction tot he horrors of Bolshevism and the 1919 orgy of violence by Bela Kun in post-war Soviet Budapest.
  Burleigh quotes the penetrating observation, by Russian religious philosopher Semyon Frank, about the Communist infatuation with the idea:
  "Sacrificing himself for the sake of this idea, he does not hesitate to sacrifice other people for it. Among his contemporaries he sees either the victim of the world's evil he dreams of eradicating or the perpetrators of that evil...This feeling of hatred for the enemies of the people from the concrete and active psychological foundation of his life. Thus the great love of mankind of the future gives birth to a great hatred for people; the passion for organizing an earthly paradise becomes the passion for destruction".
  
  Interestingly in outlining the bloody mass politicide and deliberate creation of famine as as a political weapon by the Bolshevik, the author notes that the Bolsheviks raided and destroyed churches and synagogues but not mosques.
  Was this because Islam is not part of the Judeo-Christian tradition and ethic.
  Perhaps this could go some way to explaining the hatred of the extreme left for Christianity and Judaism, but their mania to defend and side with Islamic extremists, and never to condemn, even in passing, Islamic excesses.
  The author compares the modus operandi of the Soviet Communist Party and Cheka/NKVD during the Stalinist purges with the Spanish Inquisition, the differences and similarities.
  While he does not approve of praise Franco's administration in Spain, he puts this in some context, describing the massive outrages and massacres against the Catholic clergy and believers in Spain prior to Franco by the leftist Republican forces.
  He also points out that in the case of Dolfuss in Austria, this was a brave man who courageously opposed both evil systems of Communism and Nazism.
  Dolfuss chose a benevolent form of authoritarianism in order to combat the totally ruthless and genocidal totalitarianism. before being murdered by the Nazis.
  Interestingly in the 1938 plebiscite the Austrian Social Democrats supported Aunscluss while the Christian Socialists and most of the Catholic Church opposed it.
  I completely agree with Burleigh's analysis of the Salazar government in Portugal. Salazar was anti-Communist, anti-Fascist and anti-Nazi.
  He saw little difference between Communists, Fascists and Nazis, all of whom were wedded to the totalitarian ideal "to whose ends all the activities of citizens are subject and men exist only for it's greatness and glory'.
  The Salazar administration disassociated itself from Nazi anti-Semitism, welcoming Jewish refugees fleeing their oppressors.
  The author does not not hide the participation of elements of the Catholic Church in the atrocities against Jews and other minorities in the Nazi puppet regimes,during World War II of Slovakia and Croatia, but also highlight the activities of the the Vatican and many Catholic clergy to save Jews and prevent further atrocities, such as the sterling role of Father Caselli in opposing Nazi genocide.
  According to the author the Catholic Clergy were far more prominent and active in resisting Nazism in Germany and Italy than were their Protestant counterparts, and a large part of the book is a spirited defense of Pope Pius XVI, who the author puts forward as doing all he could to prevent the genocide of Jews.
  The author strongly states that there is not a shred of evidence to refer to POpe Pius XVI as "Hitler's Pope", pointing out that this is a title more befitting Hitler's Mufti, the anti-semitic Haj Amin al-Husseini, if one seeks seeks a spiritual leader who endorsed Hitler's racial views.
  
  The author outlines the role of clergy, priests and nuns in hiding and rescuing Jewish children from the Nazi killing machine, and the role of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church in influencing the King of Bulgaria to save that country's Jews during World War II.
  This is contrasted to the horrors perpetrated by Romania's Fascist regime during World War II, often with the support of the Romanian Orthodox Church.
  
  The author details the role of the Communist dictatorships in violently suppressions religion in all the countries they held under their yplk in Eastern Europe.
  
  Moving forward to more recent times I congratulate the author for pointing out the obscenity of German terrorists waving guns over the heads of Israel Jewish hostages when Baader Meinhof gangsters helped Arab terrorists take the Jewish hostages that were rescued at Entebbe in 1976.
  
  Moving to Northern Ireland, the author's Catholicism does not at all make him sympathetic to the terrorist IRA.
  He points out that the father of Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams father lit bonfires lit bonfires on the Black Mountain to guide Luftwaffe bombers towards Belfast, where they killed over a thousand people in devastating air raids that wiped out 50% of the housing stock. Sinn Fein also annually celebrates around a statue of Sean Russel, an IRA terrorist whose organization declared war on the British in January, 1939, putting the Nationalist community under the protection of Nazi Germany, to where he was sent to train as a spy.
  Sinn Fein and the IRA is a long standing supporter of Basque and Palestinian terrorists.
  he media, in it's decades long love affair with the IRA, has highlighted IRA casualties( such as the 'martyrdom' of IRA terrorist Bobby Sands) and events such as "Bloody Sunday", we are reminded less of IRA atrocities such as the "The Claudy Day Massacre" of 31st July 1972, in which nine innocents dies including nine year old Kathryn Eakin.
  
  The last chapter deals with the rise of Islamic terrorism, with the author tracing the roots of the Al Qaeda terrorist network. The arch terrorist Abu Musab Al-Zaqarwi formed his organizational network in Iran, whose evil regime is perpetrating terror in Iraq in order to deflect any attack on their illicit quest for nuclear capability.
  The author exhorts Europe to gain some backbone in the face of the Islamic onslaught praising leaders like President Bush, and Spain's courageous former Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar, who was repacked by the appeaser of Islamic terror and tyranny, the Socialist José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero. Governments that have taken a stand against terror in Europe have often been victims of the mania in Europe to appease Islamo-Nazism together with a sick anti-Americanism and anti-Zionism.
  While much has been made of the minor successes of the far-right parties in Europe as a direct result of the Islamicization of the continent, less has been said about politicians who have gained success by courting Islamic extremism, and anti-Israel hate such as the demagogue George Galloway in Britain.
  He condemns those who howl about the rights of terrorists arrested and imprisoned, while ignoring the rights of innocents not to be blown up.
  
  He also traces some of the Islamo-Nazi terror in recent years in Europe.
  It is a fascinating and enlightening book, one which I will not forget and has taught me a lot.
• 
  Charles Haywood

  Michael Burleigh is a noted European historian, primarily known for a synthesis approach that blends intellectual, cultural and “hard” history, frequently with a heavy focus on religious and moral elements. Sacred Causes, along with its earlier companion, Earthly Powers, aspires to a synthesis of religion and politics in all of Europe, from the French Revolution to now, with a primary focus on “political religions,” ranging from Jacobinism to Islamism, that are “the abusive exploitation of the human religious sentiment.”
  
  Sacred Causes covers the 20th Century, from World War One to the modern day. Much of this is well-covered ground, of course, but Burleigh brings a few new things. First, he is not anti-religious—if anything, he is pro-religion, but at a minimum, he’s pained by the facile and ignorant views of the role of religion in European history, and does his best to correct those views. Second, his intellectual sweep is so broad that he is able to illuminate many of his topics, even those that are commonplaces such as the religious aspects of Bolshevism, with new, or at least rarely expressed, insights.
  
  Sacred Causes concerns itself heavily with the response of the organized Christian churches to 20th-century political religions. Much of this is actually not very interesting, because it tends to get bogged down in the names of people who were obscure then and are more obscure now (tempered with occasional discussions of people still relevant today, like Dietrich Bonhoeffer). Burleigh does his best to tease out, country by country, the net effect of these interactions between the organized Christian churches and the political religions in each country, but it does tend to make the reader’s eyes glaze over.
  
  However, one particular thread, going throughout the book, on the organized Christian churches, maintains interest very well. Burleigh discusses at numerous points, each time relevant to the immediate subject matter, the role that Pius XII played in the years around World War II, both in general and with respect to the treatment of the Jews. Burleigh naturally rejects the constant libel of Pius XII, pointing out (as is not disputed) that after the war Pius was generally regarded very positively for his efforts at diplomacy, his condemnation of Nazism balanced with efforts to prevent damage to the national churches, and his active role in saving Jews from destruction. In the 1960s, with the active connivance of the anti-religious left, Communist governments planted lies, produced plays, and generally began a media campaign in an orchestrated attempt to undermine the Catholic Church’s role in captive Eastern Europe.
  
  This took on a life of its own and is today’s Black Legend. Burleigh’s approach is weary to this, not because he is tired of the topic, but because he knows that few people have the intellectual heft or interest in learning the truth or the facts, but would rather get their facts from what “everybody knows” or mendacious tracts by James Carroll, today’s Jack Chick. Burleigh’s approach gives Pius his due, with appropriate hindsight criticism, but leaves no doubt that Pius was hardly the Hitler ally today’s anti-Catholics portray him as—and Burleigh is not afraid to draw the parallel between yesterday’s Communist and today’s libertines, both eager to discredit the Catholic Church for its opposition to their programs for their version of the New Man.
  
  Other chapters cover topics that are not well known in the States. For example, there is significant discussion of Irish Protestant/Catholic relations, shot through with a bitter tone of “a pox on both your houses.” Burleigh touches on Mexico, with its little-known history of violent and murderous anti-clericalism; and Spain, with its better known internal trials. The second half of the book then focuses on religion under Communism, the role of religion in the collapse of Communism, and completes with a short but pessimistic view of the ability of Europe’s Muslims to come to an accommodation with a Europe weakened by the death of Christianity and the rise of relativistic multiculturalism.
  
  One thing that strikes the modern reader is the high level of political discourse possible prior to the 1960s. For example, German society in the 1930s was full of discussion about the path forward. Max Weber is quoted as giving an extemporaneous lecture on duties to the state, in a Berlin bookstore, citing obscure verses from Isaiah from memory and using them as the central focus for a complex discussion of how to act. In counterpoint to this, the era featured numerous prophetic charlatans, a la David Koresh, using their messiah status mostly to get their disciples to sleep with them, combined with not-complex-thinking-at-all by gutter street fighters of Right and Left. We today are left with the latter two, but unfortunately have lost the first mode of discussion.
  
  In any case, this book is not a light read. It’s easier to read with some other reference works at hand or some familiarity with the details of 20th-century European history. But it’s worth reading, because the synthesis performed really adds much to any existing knowledge of the period.
  
• 
  Isidore

  Burleigh must be one of the most sarcastic historians since Gibbon, which I, for one, find hugely satisfying. The study of history should leave you disillusioned and irreverent.
  
  The subject of this book is the interaction between traditional and secular religions in 20th-century Europe: put plainly, it is mostly about how Christianity dealt with Communism and Nazism.
  
  Burleigh is Catholic and takes obvious satisfaction in demolishing the common belief that the Vatican did nothing to stop Hitler. Given that he has long been one of the foremost experts on the Third Reich, and provides copious well-documented data to support his case, I am now willing to accept that Pius XII has got a raw deal from posterity.
  
  The sections on the Soviet Union are more orthodox, but his gift for coming up with unexpected tidbits of information never fails him. Did you know the Russians kept Buchenwald in operation until 1951? I sure didn't.
  
  Burleigh is at his most sardonic when he deals with the Irish "troubles", and his detestation of both sides leads to many passages in which ghastly events are described with savage humour. There is perhaps more detail on this subject than a North American reader will readily assimilate, but it's never dull.
  
  Burleigh is less convincing when he writes about current events, but, if anything, he becomes even more entertaining. So, the last chapter, in which post-9/11 Christianity finds itself up against Islamic Fundamentalism, is slightly unhinged but refreshingly uninhibited.
  
  Extremely informative and fun to read—what's not to like? You don't have to agree with everything he says to have a good time.
• 
  Andy Holdcroft

  It started OK but after a few chapters degenerated into pure (right wing) polemics with very lazy over simplifications & personal venom: there was no academic argument nor adduced evidence. A great disappointment & a toxic read towards the end. I was interested how after several chapters "explaining" why Pope Pius XII and the Catholic Church were not to blame for their weak attitude to the Nazis, suddenly come the Northern Irish "Troubles", Catholics were at fault. His predictions are all pretty inaccurate too......
• 
  Kym Robinson

  This is a book that reads quite incoherently. Not because Burleigh, a talented writer, lacks any skill but because it seems to have a lack of direction. The book proclaims to address religion and politics in the past 100 years and yet it really only covers, with fine detail European politics and the nuances of its Christian faiths.
  
  The book does stroll towards Mexico in the early 20th century, it is more a foray to compare events happening in Europe however and it is brief. As a book that focuses on Europe and its 20th century, it does so well. Though often it reads more as an attempt to illustrate the complicated relationships between national governments and the Catholic church. This is a subject matter that in many ways needs to be addressed as it has been an easy point to condemn during all of its history. But most especially during World War Two, as though the Church and Pope had any wider powers or abilities to contain Hitlerism or Mussolini's fascism, let alone the terrors of World War Two. Here the book does well to show the various incidents of heroism and politicking made by religious figures to either defy or appease political rulers.
  
  Many of the various Popes critics forget that it was the Church and many religious leaders who opposed the horrible mass waste of life that was World War One, while national churches, notably protestant, acted as cheer leaders for this futile war of unending consequence. And while the Pope was isolated in Europe and did attempt diplomacy at times, while hiding refugees, many of the 'noble' powers acted in complacent disregard to the many innocence who were the victims of BOTH sides of the war to save Joseph Stalin.
  
  The book is strong in highlighting the role of the churches in inspiring nationalism and assisting in the war effort, as was the case most especially in the Soviet Union, when the boastfully atheist communists re invited the Orthodox church to reappear so as to help the people in their war time despair. Or in the roles that many unknown religious leaders played in sabotaging efforts to deport and execute human beings, while others were responsible for acts of heroic rescue. It grants anecdotes of sniper priests during the Spanish Civil War through to vomit consuming cult fiends who adored their Germanic cult leader with such rampant lusts of religious fervor, it is here that the book does well to both depict the futility of human Belief while also depicting heroes who happen to also Believe.
  
  The book weakens in its post World War two components, meandering as a social science essay as it attempts to explain the 1960s and Cold War attitudes, while briefly flipping to the United States where it crudely, for a book on religion and politics, relegates administrations and policies to mere sentences. The book does well to show a biased depiction of the troubles in Ireland while also giving light to the Churches role during the solidarity movement in Poland. Some how quoting a poem or lyrics to a Beetles song some how helps to define a decade and millions of peoples social attitudes as they walk away from the stuffy conventions of doctrinal beliefs and approach a swinging sexual revolt of immorality.
  
  The last chapter which addresses the war on terror and Islam seems to read as though it was written as an afterthought, as though the publishers desired its inclusion. While Mr Burleigh does well to define the complex nature of Orthodox, Protestant and Catholic faiths in Europe and the periods of calamity that befell the continent during the two world wars and the turmoil between and after. The book simply looks to Islam as a malignant oriental faith, a diseased religion unlike those of occidental complexity and divinity. For those infatuated with Europe and the apparent supremacy of Western Civilisation then this confirmation bias is no doubt a welcome read, for any others it is so very lacking that it almost seems insulting.
  
  For a book that proclaims to look into the role of theological religion and politics it fails in its many omissions. The influence of theology in the Eastern Asian cultures and nation states, most notably Japan and China would have been worthy of inclusion. No discussion of the Japanese Shinto faith and how budo helped to transform a semi liberal Japan into a militant power. Or the complex period after the Boxer Rebellion in China through to its wars within itself to those against its many invaders. Not to mention the division between Pakistan and India, the Tibetan occupation, Burma and its dictators, Thailand and its monarchs and the faithful through to the Philippines and its occupation beneath the United States up to the present. The Vietnam war and the role that religion had in the two regimes and the peoples during each conflict. Instead Asia is an unknown realm despite its many indigenous and imported faiths and how much influence and conflict that they hold against their political rulers and in opposition to other faiths.
  
  Just as is Africa and the meeting between Islam and Christianity intermingled with the many native 'pagan' faiths. None of which are mentioned no nod to the role of faith during the apartheid, the discourse between West African Islam and the Wahabi extremism or the complex role that dictators have with the tribal traditions of past theologies. Witch doctors, the ever increase of Catholicism, Islamic slave trade to Boko Haram are all points of interest that simply do not need to fill any pages in this book.
  
  South America, a continent of so many believers is ignored, the role of the catholic church alone in its support and resistance to dictators. How faith influences terror groups, narco gangs and insurgents. The Mexican blood cults through to the assassinated clergy thanks to pro American despots and their kill squads, all ignored. The sacking of politically involved priests by the Clergy through to crucified thousands murdered by American trained militants. Nicaragua, Honduras and Colombia places not of any interest to Mr Burleigh and his fixation with the Old World of European apparent supremacy.
  
  The near East of Israel and its Arab neighbors is also ignored, simply the inclusion of such a simplistic clumping of Islam and its terror groups into one evil pot of oriental nihilist terrorists is perhaps enough to satisfy the reader who already has a world view of such dim arrogance. Or for the atheist, those new atheists of constant anti religious attack that Mr Burleigh seems to have written the book to defend the role of faith, of which he at times does well, could look to this collection of essays to simply say 'Islam is an evil ideology'. Christianity however is nuanced and complex.
  
  The United States and its many obsessed rhetorical patriots and political powerful Judaeo Christian groups make for an interesting book in itself and yet, as mentioned above it is barely considered. Arabs are all homophones, American soldiers clean living, Soviets are drunkards, Reagan a christian in language only and so on. All single sentence of off handed disregard that lacks any confirmation or depth. Islam is the faith of terror, yet the fanatic evangelist terrorists of the United States alone, the KKK, Nation of Islam, White Supremacy groups, organised militia organisations and so on are all non factors. The only terror and theologically related terror beyond Ireland are those found to worship Allah, notably related to the 2001 attacks.
  
  If this book focused on Europe and looked at its past one hundred years then it would work well. Beyond that it fails in many ways. A shame because the subject matter has such potential, Mr Burleigh is an excellent mind and writer and at times it reads well and informs. But it is in its omissions and simplistic declarations that truly taints this book for me.
  
  40 %
  
• 
  JoAnn Hallum

  Fascinating take on religion’s role in politics, but I really struggled with the Irish/English conflict. The first half was the best half. There were many pages where I just “survived” because I wasn’t informed enough to know who we were discussing, but I think it was still worth it.
• 
  Pieter

  Burleigh takes the challenge to unravel parts of history that are not so well known to the public as well as to counterargue myths that were created to make black particular thinkers/ Catholic priests or politicians.
  
  The book focuses on the (sometimes) tense relationship between Christianity and politics in the post WW I-era in Europe. During the interbellum, Burleigh's focus is the co-existence between Christian churches and totalitarism. In mostly Southern European countries like Spain, Portugal and Italy, this seems to go quite well. In countries like Germany, Belgium and France, the Catholic Church supports its own political parties. Protestant churches seem to go better with the new national-socialist regime.
  
  In my opinion, the book shows that the Catholic Church is quite opportunistic in supporting totalitarian regimes. As long as the regime does not challenge the Church its political power, all is fine (e.g. Spain). The same goes when the Church could make use of the weakening of a challenging religion (Russian Orthodox Church) during a revolution (Russia). It is willing to put pressure on totalitarian regimes when the latter want to build an own political religion (NS Germany) or when the Catholic population is strong enough to face an atheist leadership (Poland).
  
  In the end it is difficult to decide on an overall policy of the Catholic Church. E.g. in Belgium, almost all local archbishops supported the French-speaking upperclass, while a lot of small town priests in Flanders were more open towards Flemish autonomy.
  
  The author spends quite some time to tackle the myth as pope Pius XII would support the NS-regime in Germany.
  
  Next to that, he discusses the change from the religious 50s into the rebellious 60s. The Second Vatican Council was a turning point in that respect. Only 10-15 years later, behind the Iron Curtain, the exact opposite happened when the Catholic Church in Poland overruled the communist regime.
  
  The last chapter focuses on Al Qaida and the impact of islam on European politics. I share the author's opinion that islam should adapt to our European culture. But I do this disagree that non-European countries like Turkey and Algeria should join the European Union. Erdogan proves that Turkey has turned its eyes towards the Middle East and its back towards Europe.
• 
  Drew Reilly

  I'm really disappointed that I didn't like this book, I wanted to like it so much. It's obvious that Burleigh is knowledgeable about the subject matter, but his style of writing was torturous to read. He also took a bunch of little potshots against non-religious folk, which made it hard to take him objectively.
• 
  Chris Wray

  The author describes this as a history of modern Europe primarily organised around issues of mind and spirit rather than the merely material, in a meeting of culture, ideas, politics and religious faith. Heavy! The main thrust of the book is Burleigh's shrewd observation that the religious tendencies of man were readily served by the political religions of Bolshevism, Fascism and Nazism. These shared the religious goals of fashioning a new man and establishing heaven on earth, but living firmly in Romans 1. He also writes a very acidic chapter on the Troubles in Northern Ireland Troubles, and ends with a consideration of militant Islam, in which he draws fascinating parallels between Islamic extremists and the Bolsheviks and Fascists of the 20th Century.
  
  Most of the book is spent in an extended analysis of Bolshevism, Facism and Nazism as political religions. He describes these ideologies very memorably as political manifestations of mass spiritual need in deranged times. Totalitarian regimes not only adopt a pseudo divinity for themselves, but have it thrust upon them by masses of insecure and frustrated people who demand a powerful and venerable object of faith trust.
  
  The only organisation or group who consistently opposed these political religions was the Roman Catholic church. This opposition was generally courageous, often futile, and generally unknown and unappreciated today. His demolition of the notion of Pius XII as someone sympathetic to Nazism was particularly compelling. I quite enjoyed his barbed point that while, for historical reasons, the Church was itself part of the privileged, unlike professors of sociology, it also operated large-scale charities for the disadvantaged.
  
  His critique of the Protestant churches (really the mainline denominations) is much more scathing, and largely justified. Statements like "This was not the first or the last time that a Protestant Church inclined to a secular creed in the expectation that its adoption might fill empty pews, a cycle those Churches have endlessly repeated with environmentalism, campaigns against the Bomb and soft Marxism ever after." These comments are fully justified, and show the moral and spiritual abdication of responsibility characterised by the movement of these denominations away from historic Christian orthodoxy.
  
  In his chapter on the 1960s, he shows that in the West this was a time of generational revolt born of unparalleled affluence. Another highly acidic comment is reserved for the academics who have come of age from the 1960's on: "Unlike their predecessors, future generations of academics had no experience of code-breaking, being parachuted into France or Greece, or commanding a tank squadron on the Normandy beaches. Instead they inhabited a peculiarly trans-temporal space where the quest for vicarious rejuvenation often meant remaining juvenile into one's retirement, sometimes manifested through vampiric interest in female students." Ouch!
  
  The chapter on the Troubles is insightful and very sad. While allowing that in Ireland religion was integral to the national self-consciousness of a marginalised and oppressed people, he also pulls no punches in his analysis: "Wallowing in victimhood is an essential element in the Irish problem, providing as it does the emotional and moral "justification" for bullying, intimidating and killing others, whether they belong to ones own tradition or tribe or that of the opposing group."
  He also takes quite a sympathetic view of the Catholic churches relationship with the IRA, concluding that while discreet influence may not be as glamorous as impassioned statements, if it saved even one life it was probably justified. This is quite generous, and as if indicated earlier his attitude throughout to the Catholic church is very generous, almost to a fault.
  
  The final chapter on Islamic extremism is helpful, and shows clearly that this phenomenon is not really so different from the totalitarian political religions of the past, and other self-appointed soldiers of destiny from around the world. He also challenges the churches to take up the role they have held in the past in opposing such ideologies, as no modern secular worldview has the moral or intellectual capital to do so.
  
  Another thing that strikes me is the similarities between some aspects of the totalitarian regimes Burleigh describes and our own liberal Western society. Of course the West isn't totalitarian, but some of the same tendencies are clearly visible. Our society increasingly demands conformity to what are effectively articles of religious conviction (such as related to gender and human sexuality), and increasingly seeks to crush any dissidence. It is clear to me that our supposedly secular, materialistic and rationalistic Western society is every bit as religious as it has always been, we have simply exchanged the God who has revealed himself in scripture and in his Son for gods fashioned by our own hands to suit our appetites and desires. In the end we are all worshipers, the only question is whether our god is true or false. Fantastic book, and I highly recommend it.
• 
  Ryan

  Dense...I can read about two pages before I have to stop and digest for a bit. Interesting, just a bit overwhelming.
  
  The first idea digested - or partially digested - is that of the different focus on war monuments in Britain/France vs Germany/Italy after WWI. If I understand, Britain/France have many and the focus is a memorial for the loss, a reminder to avoid this type of conflict. Germany/Italy - no central national monument, and the general attitude was WWI was a prelim for the next event.
• 
  Joyce

  Very extensive and well-researched, Sacred Causes is quite comprehensive on the interplay between religion and politics in the twentieth century - particularly in the European theatre. Burleigh's chapters on "The Churches in the Age of Dictators" and "Apocalypse 1939-1945," though long, are especially good, since those periods are his strong suit. He paints so well the delicate balancing act which Pope Pius XII had to deal with before and during WWII.
• 
  Mark Heyne

  This obviously a fascinating book, but I have some reservations about the author's views on some important matters, like the CND movement, and Noam Chomsky, both of which he denigrates quite flippantly. I was interested mainly in the latter part of the book, and the religious aspect of current Islamic terror, which he rightly sees as inheriting Marxist / Anarchist motives.
• 
  David

  A very good book, but I found it repetitive concerning the history of the century. If you are not aware of the 20th Century's Eurocentric history then this will be a great book...even if the style is somewhat dry.
  
  If you are concerned with the history of sacral politics and the dangers of this conflation this is a very important book for you.
  
  Recommended.
• 
  Vikas Datta

  Mr Burleigh sketches well his thesis of the interplay of religion and politics - even the former's hijacking by the latter - but I have some issues with his conclusions which seem rooted in a strongly rightist and conservative mould..
• 
  Emma

  Very good background reading for GCSE / A level history students!!!!
• 
  !Tæmbuŝu

  
  KOBOBOOKS
  
• 
  Lysergius

  Provocative, sweeping, definitive. A must read. Impossible to put down.
• 
  Thomas Boyle

  Ran out of steam when it up to date. Intersting thesis.
• 
  Fredrick Danysh

  An intellectual dissertation on the interlocking roles of religion and war during the twentieth century. Somewhat difficult to read and it was confusing to me.
• 
  Chris

  Author is overly critical of the political left, too often conflating the left with support for fascist leaders.
• 
  Michael Macdonald

  Fascinating analysis of the links between religion and politics. It starts with a pedestrian assessment of religious apologists for aggressively anti-clerical totalitarianism in Stalinist Russia and Fascist middle Europe. Burleigh hits his polemical stride with his attack on pseudo Marxism in academia and the general incompetence of left wing liberalism via an assessment of the failures of Christian Democracy. Perfect by no means but a change from dull conformity.