Neville Chamberlain: The Passionate Radical Hardcover – November 2, 2021

I thoroughly enjoyed this biography. It covers Chamberlain's whole life and not just his prime minister years. The author takes a balanced approach to the subject and points out Chamberlain's flaws as well as his unappreciated accomplishments. It is an engaging read with my only pause being that the book was clearly written for a British audience, so sometimes the references to prior politicians are a bit obscure to an American, and the assumed understanding of the intricacies of British parliamentary procedure is not as firm as the author thinks. The arguments for a more complex understanding of Chamberlain's actions at and around Munich are well-made and supported by references, I think this is a good book and an essential read for understanding the lead up to WW2.

I thoroughly enjoyed this balanced and witty biography by noted English author Walter Reid. I admit I’m not well-read on 20th century English politics especially the rise of Hitler and the lead up to WWII. I read this biography following completion of Volume II of William Manchester’s magisterial biography of Winston Churchill, entitled “The Last Lion- Alone” when Winston was one of the few who saw through Hitler. Reading Manchester allowed me to closely compare his assessment of Chamberlain as an “appeaser” to Hitler, with Reid’s. Reid’s conclusion is that Chamberlain, that while he pursued appeasement with Hitler past the 1936 Rhineland occupation, past Anschluss (1938 annexation of Austria), and past the absorption of Czechoslovakia (1938), was not a dupe. He, according to Reid, promoted the buildup of England’s defenses from 1935-1940, contrary to widely held view by historians that budgeted-minded Chamberlain resisted the call for military buildup. Manchester, like most historians, credits Churchill for being the force behind England’s military increase, especially the RAF. Reid made a good point that prior the mid-1930’s, a policy of ‘appeasement’ was an acceptable form of diplomatic negotiation.“Neville Chamberlain” is not the type of book where you get lost in a library stall to concentrate intellectual focus, but rather, better as a summer vacation beach read. This is not to denigrate the author, his conclusions or his support thereof. Chamberlain’s greatest accomplishment was his radical reform of the human working and living conditions in post- WWI England. Of all the policies Chamberlain as Minister of Health championed, the author focuses on three: Housing, Pensions, and the Poor Law. These were his true passions. Unlike many politicians, Chamberlain, like the successful businessman he was, mastered the details to efficiently implement his policies. This biography also illuminates Chamberlain’s love of family.Overall, “Neville Chamberlain” provides a generally balanced and readable assessment of a visionary but flawed minister and Prime Minister.

An outstanding biography that corrects not only the widespread caricature of Neville Chamberlain juxtaposed with Churchill but as a key indeed, invaluable member of his Wartime Cabinet. It also emphasizes Chamberlain's foresight by rearming Great Britain while talking to Hitler, that enabled the RAF to win the aerial battle with the Luftwaffe. Chamberlain's image as an appeaser of Nazism eclipses - perhaps more actually, totally eviscerates - his role as a social reformer decades before the post war Attlee government implemented such policies.

History unfairly judges him on the appeasement issue, where he was far from the biggest advocate rather than a lifetime of achievement.

This is a well-written and well-researched book. Neville Chamberlain was undoubtedly a more interesting man than is usually assumed. The author portrays him as something of a man of action in his youth but this, it seems to me, is almost irrelevant. He is forever remembered for his 'peace in our times' declaration (although these were not the words he used) and no revelations about his youthful adventures or his wide reading can detract from his foolishness in thinking he could negotiate with Hitler. The book properly points out that he did prepare for war, but it was rather too little and, through no fault of his own (since he only became Prime Minister in 1937), far too late. However, his apparent pacifism and weakness (he was neither a pacifist nor weak) must have helped to embolden the Nazi regime in its aggression. He was not a bad man but he was not the ideal Prime Minister to have in the years leading up to the Second World War.