The History That Made the World Today | A Foreign Affairs Centennial Event

When Foreign Affairs published its first issue in 1922, the world was still reeling from the aftershocks of World War I. In 2022, the world is once again consumed by crises, including Russia’s war in Ukraine, a global pandemic, and American democracy under attack.
How did the events of the last century shape the geopolitical landscape today? And what are the forces that will drive the next? Please join Foreign Affairs Editor Daniel Kurtz-Phelan and leading scholars John Lewis Gaddis and Margaret MacMillan for a conversation offering historical perspective on this pivotal moment in world politics.
This discussion is part of our centennial event series, marking the 100th anniversary of Foreign Affairs.
Additional Resources:
“A Country of Their Own” by Francis Fukuyama
www.foreignaffairs.com/articl...
“The New Cold War” by Hal Brands and John Lewis Gaddis
www.foreignaffairs.com/articl...
“Which Past Is Prologue?” by Margaret MacMillan
www.foreignaffairs.com/articl...
Stay Up-to-Date on Foreign Affairs news and events:
Twitter: / foreignaffairs
App: apps.apple.com/us/app/foreign...
Podcast: www.foreignaffairs.com/podcas...

[@darlingcl4061]

Loved this talk! I wanted more. ❤️ Going to have to read their books.

[@GarethCassidy]

What was the first book that Gaddis said he recommended his students about grand narratives ? I couldnt catch the name of either writer or title .

[@happyhappynuts]

Super naive view here. Without NATO Latvia would exist at all. Look at Belarus it is essentially part of Russia now. Those that don't " do a Belarus" will get the Georgia treatment

[@lorainejones41]

History was never faced with so many nuclear arms countries before. We are in a whole different realm.

[@reydineero]

Eurocentric history ahhh we love to see it

[@romeomargot-picquendar1281]

I mean it is a Western magazine and the conversation largely revolves around a European conflict and the history that led to it, what did you expect?

[@yp77738yp77739]

The arrogance of looking at these issues as one of containment of other states is marked and historically dishonest. From the very clear expansionist activities of the political “west”, it would be more logical from a neutral perspective for other countries to take the converse position to try to limit the further expansion of the US. Therefore, from a global neutral perspective we are on the wrong side of history now. Having time in both the PRC and the US, I see the political administration of the PRC as far more effective in all ways with one exception, the one thing the US does well is war and aggression.

[@buzz-es]

So completely out of touch with the average Americans values.

[@troys3757]

They're historians, not politicians. The subject of discussion is in the title. If you want your personal views to be catered to then you're better off turning on your favorite 24-hour cable news channel.