An article just came out on Salon (Why Neville Chamberlain Was Right) with a reassessment of Chamberlain’s actions prior to WWII, applying a proper historical approach: considering events in their context and avoiding the temptation of whig history, i.e. judging the past with the view of the present.
At the very least it is a compelling reading, and most of all I enjoyed this part: "Historians often find themselves moving against popular opinion. In the case of Chamberlain, though, the gap between public perception and the historical record serves a political purpose. The story we’re told about Munich is one about the futility and foolishness of searching for peace. In American political debates, the words ‘appeasement’ and ‘Munich’ are used to bludgeon those who argue against war. But every war is not World War II, and every dictator is not Hitler."