Events Books

In the murky world of US/ Mid East foreign policy, this book shines like a beacon. One could only hope that Oprah might select this for her book club, rather than flying to a million piece. But that's my perfect world. Mr. Lippman has written an insightful and extremely well researched book that opens the curtains of US-Saudi alliance and friendship. The new paperback afterword, written in January 2005, provides timely insight: "The most important reason is that Saudi Arabia is no longer economically or technologically dependent upon the United States. The Saudis no longer need Americans to show them how to fly their planes, irrigate their crops, manage their money...."
I told my Polish friend about the book and then refused to give him my copy. He's a stickler for accurate history, and considers most American authors inadequate and biased. That he has ordered a copy is a remarkable compliment to the author.

This author describes an interesting history of Saudi Arabia and its relations with the U.S. The book traces the Saudi-American alliance from its emergence after the birth of the Kingdom in 1932 and the signing a year later of the first oil-prospecting agreement with Standard Oil of California up until the present time, ending with a discussion of the strategic ties that bind the United States and Saudi Arabia. In particular, it describes the experience of many Americans who have worked in the Kingdom, giving particularly unique insight for instance into what it was like for many to work for Aramco, to be a wife of an Aramco worker, to be married to a Saudi male, or be involved in one of many other possible relations involving folks from the US and Saudi Arabia. Thomas W. Lippman is an adjunct scholar at the Middle East Institute in Washington. In four years as the Washington Post's Middle East bureau chief, three years as the Post's oil and energy reporter and a decade as the newspaper's national security and diplomatic correspondent, he has traveled extensively to Saudi Arabia. In all, he has spent more than thirty years as a reporter, editor, and foreign correspondent for The Washington Post, specializing in Middle Eastern affairs and American foreign policy. He is known for and described as writing in a very even-handed manner. Unlike most other books I have read, the author remains respectful towards the Saudi people. One of many messages that I got from his book is that some Americans have not been able to adapt to life in Saudi Arabia while others have done amazingly well at settling into the unique and very different culture. Americans who have been able to adjust to life in the Kingdom showed a great willingness to bend to Saudi's cultural norms and a willingness to reach out (and frequently live) outside of the compounds and/or otherwise seek opportunities to actually connect with Saudis. For instance, he talks of the Nance Museum in Missouri, perhaps the only museum dedicated to traditional Saudi Arabian art and crafts in the U.S., developed by a former Aramco couple (the Nances) who simply fell in love with the native traditions. Although Lippman acknowledges that there are a lot of problems in Saudi Arabia which they must face and resolve, he generally shows the Saudis in a very positive light. He has travelled to Saudi Arabia a number of times since September 11 and his last chapter discusses changes in Saudi culture since this terror attack. In the paperback version he has added an additional chapter. Lippman is a very responsible writer, taking seriously the affect he knows his words can have upon the reader. His love for the US is clear. However, he is not arrogant about his nationality. He also shows sympathy and agreement with many of the complaints registered by Arabs, while not being an apologetic. He is among the most diplomatic of all authors on Saudi Arabia and he concludes his book with at least the possibility for hope. Lastly, while admitting the need for real change - both in the U.S. and in Saudi Arabia - he doesn't feel the need to resort to cheap alarmist warnings.

I chose to read Lippman's book in an effort to better understand Saudi Arabia's history and place in the Muslim world. The author offers a detailed and nuanced survey of U.S.-Saudi relations from the 1930s up to the recent war in Iraq. His book filled many of my knowledge holes (which I expect are shared by many other Americans) and unexpectedly made me very interested in this fascinating nation.

Lippman describes how Saudi Arabia's Saud dynasy has quickly modernized the country in terms of technology and wealth while retaining staunchly devoted to a specific brand of conservative Islam. The combination of close economic and military ties with the U.S. and a contentious position in the Muslim world is highly complex and truly unique, and it has given rise both to important partnerships and some strong resentments. Saudi Arabia has been a vital ally in recent conflicts, yet many of the September 11 hijackers hailed from there. Lippman helps sort out this strange tangle of relations, and he does it in a very reasonable, non-polemic way and with a compulsively readable writing style. I'd like to see this very thoughful history be widely read by people interested in one of the United States' most vital yet precarious allies against terrorism.

The Chinese and Indian societies are two of the oldest, continuously-existing societies in the history of man. Both share many similarities; one of which is that in either society, when one enters into a business arrangement with another person, it often involves a comingling of families such that the spouses get to know each other, the children get to know each other, and so on and so forth. Many Americans find this to be quite difficult to handle upon first encounters. For example, many Americans doing business in China are quickly frustrated how their Chinese business partners request positions for their family members and friends. Though it seems cumbersome, this type of arrangement serves a very useful purpose; it helps each group get to know the other group better, thereby reducing the chances of surprises down the road.

By this example, we can now examine the US-Saudi relationship over the past ~80 years, and specifically how it is portrayed in this book. In short, the US has had a very special relationship with Saudi Arabia, and one that is built on mutual ignorance. Specifically, when oil was discovered in the Saudi desert, American companies were so quick to get it flowing out and to the market, that neither side had the time to learn about each others cultures, norms, values, etc... Yes, many American geologists learned Arabic and some even became Muslim. Yes, many Arabs went on to work in America and send their children to American schools. But overall, this exchange of ideas was limited to a small minority, even within the expatriate community of each side. American oil workers lived in their own neighborhoods in Saudi Arabia, and Arabs in America tend to be concentrated in a few cities; i.e. Detroit. The relationship was essentially all business. But like any relationship between two persons or two countries, nothing is ever all business; politics sooner or later gets involved. In America's case, the vast majority of Americans were so ignorant of Saudi-American relations, that the terrorist attacks of 9-11-2001 came as such a big surprise.

This book shows the extent of the American - Saudi relationship at various levels in business, politics, and military relations. It shows how Saudis and Americans related and dealt with each other's cultures and persons in both American and Saudi Arabia. These including interesting stories of how Saudi women first learned about the bra; by seeing it on the wives of American oil executives and geologists. This book also shows the lack of understanding between the two cultures and peoples, and how this is often the unstated goal of the governments of both countries; out of sight - out of mind.

This book does not go too much into Osama Bin Laden, Wahabism, Al Queda, or the extent of terrorism in Saudi Arabia. Instead, it is more of a primer on American - Saudi relations. Overall, a good book to read.

Thomas Lippman has provided a prescient discussion of the long and interconnected relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia. This relationship has been among the forefront of the problems U.S. policymakers have been reexamining since 9/11, and is among one of the most complicated of the U.S.'s bilateral relationships today.

At the turn of the 20th century the area that is now Saudi Arabia was then a disparate mixture of clans soon to be united by Abdul Aziz ibn Saud. The lifestyles of the inhabitants of the land were not much different than their ancestors from millennia before. Within a few years a relationship would be started that would change the world.

The first American geologists came to Saudi Arabia in the early 1930s. These geologists first found oil in 1933 and found the first large and profitable oil fields in 1938. From the time of that first large discovery of oil on, the U.S. and Saudi would a close mutual relationship. The Arab American Oil Company, or Aramco, was set up to extract the new oil finds. In exchange, the Americans were charged with creating a modern, industrial society in the Kingdom. For the next 60 years, American government officials, private contractors, and the U.S. military would undertake projects that would lead to such things as a modern infrastructure for moving oil out of the ground and the country (Aramco, Bechtel), would establish the Saudi national airline (TWA), create a modern civil service (the Ford Foundation). In addition, U.S. government officials helped establish a paper currency and a central bank. In addition, since 1951, U.S. policy has been to recognize the protection of Saudi Arabia from outside threats as a vital national interest. This policy meant supplying military equipment and training for five decades and condoning harsh treatment of Saudi dissidents or those who long for many of the freedoms Americans hold dear, such as freedom of religion and speech.

U.S. Middle East policy, including the invasion of Iraq, the inability of the Saudi leadership to create the conditions for its newly educated young people to find jobs, and other issues are all swirling to create conditions inimical to the continuation of this marriage of convenience. While Lippman is unable to provide answers or speculation about the future, he has provided a valuable service by giving a remarkably balanced telling the story of the long, complicated relationship.

Robert M. Clark's "Intelligence Analysis: A Target-Centric Approach" is an up-to-date, practical manual on the conduct of analysis in the context of the current global war on terrorism. This manual is well suited for classroom use for intelligence professionals, whether in the military, in civilian government agencies, or private industry.

Clark divides his topic into three principal sections. In the first, he provides a detailed break-down of the target-centric approach as the collaborative, interactive, information network-enabled analysis that has replaced the hierarchial stovepipe architecture of the Cold War.

In the second section, on modeling, Clark explains in clear and understandable language the process by which analysts synthesize available information into a conceptualization of the intelligence problem. This key step produces the basis to which analysts will apply predictive analysis.

The heart of the book is Clark's exploration of the techniques and potential pitfalls of predictive analysis. Clark discusses a variety of methods to approach analysis, along with their practical limits and familar challenges such as bias and customer interaction. His liberal use of examples from recent intelligence failures help make clear just what a challenging combination of art, science, and team effort good intelligence analysis should be.

This book is not without some faults. His definitions of Strategic, Operational, and Tactical intelligence are imprecise and not those commonly in use in, for example, the Department of Defense. Strategic intelligence is better defined by the level of the customer served and not by whether it is long range or short range. Similarly, his breakdown of the standard intelligence disciplines achieves simplicity at the expense of considerable accuracy. As an example, his explanation of TECHINT confuses the acquisition of foreign materials with their actual exploitation for intelligence value. It should be noted in Clark's defense that the U.S. Intelligence Community lacks standardization, which fault contributes to the challenges of collaboration.

This book is very highly recommended to intelligence professionals interested in a systematic and unclassified exploration of the techniques of good analysis.

This is a great book and necessary for anyone who wishes to really focus and direct thier thinking on a tactical and operational level. Although more of a government/ military oriented book, I can see some real world applications as well dealing with planning and organizing a plan of attack for any problem an organization is dealing with.

This is the best work for an account of the role of analysis and its relationship within the intelligence industry. I recommend this book as required reading prior, or in accordance with the first semester of the research methods series of courses at the graduate level.

The material is applicable across various disciplines including law enforcement and military operations, diplomacy, and business. Besides a consistent introduction to tools, arrangements, and concepts, Dr. Clark introduces novel methods such as Delphi; "A major advantage of the target-centric approach is that it formalizes the process of obtaining expert opinions. It also lends itself readily to techniques, such as Delphi... One objective of the Delphi method is the encouragement, rather than the suppression, of conflicting or divergent opinions." Pg. 116.

Much of what can be said about the need for new mechanisms to plan and coordinate U.S. national defense missions also applies to homeland security operations. Every significant policy, plan, and operation against terrorists, drug traffickers, and other criminals demands a coordinated response. Therefore, a full understanding and appreciation of intelligence analysis and the analyst's role is rudimentary for consumers of intelligence products.

Most books about intelligence end up being boring discussions about the intelligence cycle or intelligence sources and never get to the heart of the process. Clark begins with a brief discussion about the intelligence process, but quickly focuses on why it is important to accurately define the problem that you are trying to assess. This step is often missed, even by seasoned intelligence analysts, who frequently leave many of their assumptions unclarified. Clark uses many references to actual historical case studies to make valid points about common failure tendencies. The real value of this book is in the area of predictions. Clark states rather emphatically that "(D)escribing a past event is not intelligence analysis; it is history. The highest form of intelligence analysis requires structured thinking that results in a prediction of what is likely to happen. True intelligence analysis is always predictive". He goes on to dedicate a sizeable share of remainder of the book to predictive techniques. Many who claim to be intelligence officers do not employ the predictive techniques describes in this book. Intelligence folks have a propensity to gravitate to current intelligence and retell what has already been told, while neglecting to take on the challenging task of predicting what is next. This is one of the best overview books on intelligence analysis. Highly recommended reading.

The book was very revealing into the structure and tactics the intelligence community has to go through in the new age of terrorism. Intelligence gathering methods of the past and of our fathers and grandfathers is no longer effective in this age of technology and political ideology.

This book was very good at pointing out the problems now facing the intelligence community and revealed some really good stratagies and techniques now being explored in the world of intelligence gathering.

I would recommend this book as a good read for any educational institution looking for a suppliment to their academic requirements.

How and why did the United States fail in letting AIDS get by us? After twenty years of such a tragic pandemic that kills 8,500 people daily worldwide, and infects 14,000 daily, one would think the United States would have taken a more aggressive approach in attacking this disease in its early stages. How did we let HIV/AIDS get to this point? This is the U.S.A! We should be able to fight a successful battle against AIDS. Instead, we are losing it. Plus, 65 million people worldwide have been affected by it.

I applaud Greg Behrman for exposing the real facts about the Global AIDS Pandemic. He is factual and his story instills in the reader anger and frustration that our government failed in the AIDS pandemic. We are in the midst of the worst pandemic our world has ever seen, and STILL our government and people aren't doing enough to stop the spread of this insidious disease. Is it because we don't like to think about it? Maybe there's just too much apathy. Well, we can't afford to stand by and let complacency take over. Too many lives have been lost... many more lives will be lost throughout the world in the next few years. AIDS doesn't discriminate...It affects young and old, men and women, democrats and republicans, babies and grandparents, affluent and indigent, gay and straight.

Mr. Behrman does an excellent job in explaining how our government failed to address this disease in the early 1980's and throughout the past twenty years. President Reagan was reticent to mention the word AIDS until 1987 after thousands of Americans had died of AIDS, and thousands more had succumbed to this disease in other countries. But can we put the blame solely on President Reagan? Probably not. His advisors questioned whether the Lord brought down this plague. AND also whether it was God's punishment!! With people like this at the helm, how could our government attack this epidemic aggressively? People were dying, but no one cared or noticed. According to Behrman, Jerry Falwell preached, "AIDS is God's punishment.." in a 1983 television sermon. Now does this really sound Christian or help in reducing the stigma of HIV/AIDS? How can we let a disease like AIDS which can be prevented, wipe out thousands of people daily? (including innocent babies, etc.) As Behrman points out, the disease is already rampant in Africa, and escalating to India, Russia, and China. What will happen to these economies? What will happen to the workers, teachers, doctors, etc.? What will happen to the millions of orphans? (At present 15 million)

Surgeon General C. Everett Koop, realized the serious threat of AIDS and found President Reagan eager to learn and do more about AIDS, but advisors, according to Behrman, advised him against discussing AIDS in public.

"The Invisible People" is a book filled with passion and straight, shocking facts. It depicts various accounts of the United States' lack of action in one of the worst pandemics our world has ever encountered. Today, the projections for future HIV infections throughout the world are staggering and incomprehensible; but they are real!

What will our children and grandchildren ask when we are gone? Maybe, "Why didn't they do something to stop this dreaded disease?" Let's not let this happen to future generations. We will be judged on how we responded to AIDS. We must come together as a UNITED country, (Democrats and Republicans) and find a way to stop the spread of this GLOBAL Pandemic. Thank you Greg Behrman for waking this country up to the greatest humanitarian catastrophe of our time.

Nancy A. Draper (Author) A Burden of Silence: My Mother's Battle with AIDS

No one can question Mr. Behrman's command of this subject as the reader walks through colorful personal accounts of the United States' action and lack of action in regards to the global AIDS epidemic over the last 20 years. But what this book does so well is provide a human element to each of the stories that allows the reader to connect to the plight of the activist and, more importantly, the devastation felt by so many mothers, fathers, sisters, and brothers who innocently and unnecessarily fall victim to this pandemic.

"The Invisible People" is a well-crafted narrative that forces the reader to recognize that we can no longer passively isolate ourselves into two camps, "affected" and "not affected." We must stand outstretched between the two as we strive to redefine one camp, "no risk of being affected." An amazing feat by Mr. Behrman.

This work stands as an incredible tribute to the victims of the AIDS epidemic; do your part and read it today.

The Preface of this book alone will shock most readers, even those--including myself--who, prior to reading this book, THINK they know about the HIV/AIDS pandemic. For example, currently there are over 8,000 AIDS deaths every day, totaling approximately 25 million so far--more than the ALL the deaths of ALL the wars of the twentieth century--COMBINED.

The primary theme throughout Invisible People is how at each critical juncture the ignorance and inaction of political leaders has encouraged the virus to thrive and spread, unnecessarily infecting and killing millions.

I am not the first nor the last to say that history will one day show that the HIV/AIDS pandemic will be the defining health and humanitarian issue--if not the single most important issue--of our time. Our descendants will no doubt look back and wonder why so little was done so late in the face of such a horrible tragedy.

While the shear amount of information is at times daunting, Behrman skillfully weaves a story of the pandemic and its activists, scientists, politicians, and victims that reads like a novel.

This was the most difficult book I read all year, of many that I read, bored at sea and often bored with the book in hand. Difficult because it poses a damning question about America and its policy priorities. Difficult because it carefully, throughly reveals to the reader with a fair eye how poorly the US (and world) response to the AIDS epidemic has been. There are villians and heroes (many heroes in fact), tragic figures and inspiring ones, but what remains throughout is the compassion the author gives them all. No one is villified by criticism in this book, their actions (and reasoning) speak louder than words, for better or worse. Difficult because it is just so damn heartbreaking and galling that we failed so miserably for 20 years.
I don't like to see the US fail in anything, but I am afraid that we are failing and failing miserably in a war we are tepid about fighting. For this epidemic not to rip apart Russia, India and China the way it is ripping Africa apart now, more and more people will need to read this astonishing, revealing story of how the US nearly lost the war on AIDS before George W. Bush even started it in January 2003, so that we can learn from our past mistakes and not make them again. We can only hope Pres. Bush is learning from those mistakes so the massive amount of capital he is infusing into the fight (and more later) is not wasted. A must for anyone interested in international affairs, medicine, society (both in America and in the greater world), economics, history, politics and just about any other field that has any connection to this increasingly interconnected world.

Here's a pop quiz. What is AIDS? Some replies - An illness. Treatable. Starts with HIV. Used to be a terrifying death sentence, but now it's under control.

All true. But in this book, author Greg Behrman has some different responses to the same question: "What is AIDS?" Here are his answers: a cause of global terrorism; a time bomb; an unanswered moral challenge.

These are all shocking words. What makes them so is a horrifying contrast - the disease called AIDS is a treatable illness, and it is also a death sentence. How can this be? The answer is two words: money and geography. If you live in the USA and the developed world, it's highly unlikely you'll die from the disease. If you live in Africa or India, you're doomed. In order to understand this frightening paradox, Greg Behrman has written a masterful and heartfelt book, a history with the facts laid bare.

At school or for pleasure, most of us have read histories - of the Civil War, and other important events. We read about events that are done with, where the consequences of actions undertaken are known, where decisions and indecisions can be analyzed. It's a very different feeling to read - and, I imagine, to write - a history in the middle of the events you are describing. This is the huge task that Greg Behrman undertakes in a brilliant summary of the history of HIV/AIDS and what it means for the safety and the future of the USA and the world.

Greg Behrman fiercely challenges the world's response to the AIDS epidemic - all that suffering that is so far away, so removed from our everyday lives. It's too hard to do anything about, so why not just ignore it? Behrman lays out a harsh and frightening overview. He is a brilliant, young policy researcher and analyst who sounds a warning that AIDS - "the greatest humanitarian catastrophe of our time" is also a national security threat to the USA. The AIDS epidemic is a time bomb because it can destabilize continents and destroy countries.

However, on the evidence, he's going to have a hard time making his point, at least as long as Africa is seen as the main area scourged by AIDS. The disease isn't incurable - it just needs wealth and access to drugs. The ruling elites in Africa will get treatment, and the poor will suffer and die. Africans are already victims of the miseries of war, poverty and disease; very little is being done for them by the international community and even less by their own governments, with a couple of exceptions.

Africa gets all the publicity because the continent is too weak to hide its sick and dying from the international community. The real danger lies in Russia, and to a lesser extent South East Asia. That is where instability can lead to terrorism and the collapse of economies. Russia, China and other semi-developed countries will continue to lie about their AIDS statistics because, like Africa, they can't do much to help the infected. It needs a very well developed government infrastructure to deliver health care to people, and there is neither the will nor the money to do it. In the future, countries with increasing wealth, like China and India, will face the crisis and solve it. The weak countries will continue to cry out for the world's assistance. In this book, Greg Behrman constantly makes the point that the USA has a moral obligation to assist - we are wealthy, powerful and able, and it is unconscionable to look away.

Certainly, the tragic need is heartbreaking and huge. Three out of every hundred households in South Africa is headed by an orphaned child, taking care of other, even younger children. Almost a million children have lost their mothers to AIDS, and the numbers are rising. Zimbabwe, South Africa's northerly neighbor, is undergoing an ecological crisis because all the forests are being cut down to make coffins for AIDS victims.

In response to information like this, people want to help. But how to have an effect? On the smaller, familial level, a family in Kirkwood here in St. Louis, has set up One World Family (www.oneworldfamily.us) to improve the quality of life of children affected by the disease. The assistance is often very basic - food and shelter - since the children lack everything. On a larger scale, the FreePlay Foundation (www.freeplayfoundation.org) has developed the Lifeline radio, which plays non-stop using wind-up energy and solar power and is the first radio ever produced solely for humanitarian use. The foundation gives child-headed households these radios, which provide advice and reassurance to the frightened and lonely children, huddled together, starving in the dark.
So there is hope, but not much. It will have to do.

Quoting from the back cover:

"On August 27, 1960, more than 200 whites with ax handles and baseball bats attacked members of the Jacksonville Youth Council NAACP in downtown Jacksonville who were sitting in at white lunch counters protesting racism and segregation. Referred to as Ax Handle Saturday, It was never about a hot dog and a Coke chronicles the racial and political climate of Jacksonville, Florida in the late fifties, the events leading up to that infamous day, and the aftermath."

This informative memoir is about a dangerous time. The events are a part of our history, and through Rodney's story we learn more about the people and groups involved and the courage it took to sit. The book is well-written and well-edited. Thanks, Rodney, for taking the time.

Kaye Trout
Reviewer

The title, "It was never about a hot dog and a Coke!" was enough to make me want to read this book. I had to know more.

There are numerous historical characters from the civil rights movement in this book; some many may not have heard of. You will find them, and the time frame interesting; I did.

Mr. Hurst was born in Jacksonville, Florida; in 1944. He lived through the time of segregation and activists; being recognized as an activist, and member of the Jacksonville Youth Council NAACP. Mr. Hurst later became president of the Jacksonville Youth Council NAACP. He has been married to his wife Ann for forty-one years. They have two sons, and two granddaughters.

Although this is a book about the civil rights movement of the 50's and 60's in Jacksonville, there is much more to this story; as seen through the eyes of a person that was there and witnessed Ax Handle Saturday. As a reader, you'll get a perspective of truth about living in that era from one who did. I would recommend this book for anyone interested in the civil rights movement and segregation that used to be in the southern states.

Reviewed by William Phenn for Reader Views (4/08)

A Jacksonville, Florida former councilman Rodney Hurst Sr. is a grandfather, father of two sons and has been a loving husband for over forty-one years. The inspiration for his book began when he was eleven-years-old and was introduced to his first youth group.

Joining a youth group at the age of eleven would be uneventful to an average child, but for Rodney; it was the beginning of an adventure. Who would have thought that this would be the beginning of a long road? This road caused him pain, sorrow and depression, but yet gave him the greatest joy of his life, freedom. In a time of "White only" restaurants, "White and Colored" restrooms, Rodney grew to become a notable activist for the struggles of his people. From his first sit-in at the "Woolworths Department Store," to his election as Councilman for the city of Jacksonville, Florida; the book does a wonderful job of tracing Rodney's plight. Tracing his exploits every step of the way, it kept you glued to the pages.

With all the adventure of a war novel, the book takes you to all the places history was made. It takes you to the front lines, the battles and the victories of the marches and the sit-ins. With such good attention to actual events and the truth of what took place, this book makes you one with the protestors. You become a part of the movement and feel what they were feeling.

I enjoyed "It was never about a hot dog and a Coke" and thought it was well-written and very nicely presented. The quality of the print, the front and back cover art and the reprints of historic pictures; all made for an interesting read. This historic 191-page book is a fast and informative read and I gave it my well-deserved A, and recommend it to the general audience.

Just by the title, the reader knows that this book is charged. Most everyone in the country from young children to elderly adults knows about the super-charged racial tensions in the South during the 1960's. Most adults are keenly aware of the tension between "blacks" and "whites" still existing. With this presidential election containing an African American candidate, the race issue is upfront and personal in our nation. As Colbert King, an op-ed columnist for the Washington Post brought up in a recent article, race can no longer be a non-issue. It is an issue. It will be an issue until people of all colors of skin can sit and have open, honest dialog. I say, it's about time!

It Was Never About a Hot Dog and a Coke is an honest and in depth look at the community of Jacksonville Florida during the height of the civil rights movement in the United States from the perspective of an African American male. It is written by the then president of the Jacksonville Youth Council NAACP. He was there and helped organize the sit-ins that challenged the segregation policies. The anger from this challenge led to unforgivable (in my mind) Ax Handle Saturday.

What this book has to offer beyond what I have read in other places is the unsung heroes. Rodney Hurst Sr. has done his homework and presents pictures, newspaper articles and names of the key people from both sides of the issue. The good and the bad, Mr. Hurst documents the situation well.

The best part of this narration, to me as a white woman reading It Was Never About a Hot Dog and a Coke, was the fairness. This book could easily have been a black supremacy, whites are evil manifesto. Many white people committed atrocious crimes in that era (and many other times) and justified it by thinking somehow a few genes' difference made them better than another. Instead, the narration of the book simply states the actions taken by the parties in the area. There are countless stories of senseless actions that justify anger and hatred but the book is instead filled with dignity and respect. I applaud the author for treating this subject with divine amounts of grace and tact.

To me, race is one of those things that I was raised to ignore. I credit my mom mostly for that. She is the epitome of the "Aryan" race with blue eyes and naturally light blond hair but she taught me from an early age that the color of someone's skin doesn't matter one whit. I still think she's right. She taught me "by their fruits ye shall know them" and I believe her. Underneath it all, we are human. We all bleed red. Some stupid cosmetic difference does not grant one person more rights than another.

I also know that I have never endured racism. I have friends that are minorities that have told me stories of having to physically protect themselves from being attacked simply because of the color of their skin or the slant of their eyes. I feel blessed that I have only once witnessed racism. Without incriminating myself, I was appalled and took steps to ensure the event never repeated. I think the most shocking thing to me was that racism STILL existed and it was close to home. Shouldn't we be enlightened by now? Really, is it that hard just to play nice and get along?

Mr. Hurst states in the book that there isn't a simple answer to this problem. I don't have any magical solutions to this problem which has affected our nation for centuries either. I feel at times I am an insignificant speck in a pool of tension and not big enough to make a difference. I am not wise enough to have the magic key but I do have hope for the future. As I looked into my baby daughter's eyes after finishing this book, her smile gave me hope. Maybe, if I'm a good enough mother and teach my children to follow the example of our Savior and love everyone regardless of frivolous differences, I will be a part of the solution.

This book is awesome and eye opening. This is a book everyone, regardless of race, religion or creed should read. I hope teachers everywhere will consider this book as part of curriculum in American History classes. I also hope it can be a tool to opening people's eyes to the damage stupidity and ignorance can bring. Bless Mr. Hurst for this non-media biased peek into the events of that era in out history.

Reviewed by Kam Aures for RebeccasReads (5/08)

"It was never about a hot dog and a Coke!" is author Rodney L. Hurst's first-hand account of the sit-ins in Jacksonville, Florida in the 1960s. Throughout his lifetime Hurst has been a very active and influential member of the Jacksonville community. He has served on the Jacksonville City Council. He was the first African-American to be a TV co-host in Jacksonville. He was the Executive Director of Florida's Construction Industry Licensing Board. Besides these and other accomplishments, the one that this book centers around is the time period in which he was involved with the Jacksonville Youth Council NAACP. He joined at age 11 and became President of the group at age 15.

During this era everything was segregated. There were restrooms specifically designated for "Coloreds" and ones for "Whites." There was even s a separate section of The Florida Times-Union newspaper that had a black star at the top and was "News For and About the Colored People of Jacksonville." This section of the paper was not included in home deliveries to white households so white people of the time knew little about the achievements and news in the black community. Among other areas, this segregation also applied to the educational system and to lunch counters in department stores, which is the main focus of Hurst's book. As President of the Jacksonville Youth council NAACP group he played an influential role in leading the sit-ins at these lunch counters in the 1960s in a protest of segregation and racism. As the title of the book implies, these sit-ins were not "about a hot dog and a Coke," they were about "...human dignity and respect. Lunch counters were just visible and convenient vestiges to attack racial discriminations."

Although the sit-ins were peaceful demonstrations, the reactions by the white community were not always so peaceful. There was one incident that was dubbed "Ax Handle Saturday" that occurred on August 27th, 1960 in which mobs of white people attacked black shoppers with ax sticks and baseball bats.

"It was ever about a hot dog and a Coke!" is a look at the events by someone who truly lived and breathed them. It is a first-hand look at the civil rights movement of that era that has not become misconstrued by going through numerous sources. Throughout the book are numerous pictures of the people involved and also some of the few pictures of the events that took place. One of the pictures included is a disturbing one taken on "Ax Handle Saturday" which features an innocent bystander splattered in blood from being attacked. These pictures give you a true sense of just how horrific the events were that took place.

I lived in Jacksonville for a short period of time so the references to certain streets were familiar to me but most of the history of the black community in that area was not at all. I feel like I learned a lot by reading Hurst's book, "It was never about a hot dog and a Coke!," and I think it would be a wonderful addition to the required reading list of any history class or to anyone who wants to educate themselves of the events that occurred in America's past.

There was a brief stage in my college career when I hoped to get into newspapers. Unfortunately, I'm a very slow writer. I would sweat bullets over remarkably simple stories, and my editorial prowess was equally dubious. It was at that time I discovered Carl Hiaasen and his remarkably subversive novel, TOURIST SEASON. His author's bio indicated that his newspaper setting was drawn from authentic experience -- he was a columnist for the Miami Herald.

Unfortunately, the web was just in its infancy, and access to Hiaasen's newspaper writing was apparently one of the few exclusive benefits of living in South Florida. KICK ASS turns out to be just the sort of collection that I had been craving for many years.

KICK ASS does not disappoint. It begins with a nifty introduction that provides a smattering of biographical information on Hiaasen, as well as a context for the subjects and tone of his columns. Hiaasen clearly resides in a longstanding tradition of muckraking American journalism, and I mean that in the best possible way.

This is no mere sampling of his work -- there are more than 200 columns here, organized by topic, and just about every one of them meets the mandate stated in the title of the collection. Hiaasen has a passion for the environment, consumer protection, crime control, and good government. His portrait of a Florida reeling after the flood of growth and development of the last three decades is even starker than the one in his novels. Speaking of the novels, it is also fun to see where he "lifts" some of his ideas for the things that happen in his books. The overamorous dolphin of NATIVE TONGUE appears in KICK ASS as well.

If there is anything to regret about this book, it is that the topical organization often generates confusion for the reader when certain figures re-occur. Some of them almost develop a roguish charm. After all, us non-Floridians don't have to live with the direct consequences of local corruption. A little wrap-up to let us know how some of the notorious figures and controversies ended up would have been nice. I always hated that device at the end of his novels, but it would be perfect for a collection like this.

As a lifelong resident of Florida (albeit a ninetten-year-old one), I have seen Florida at its best and worst. Hiiasen's columns represented in this book illustrate the "politics" and people of a great but confused state. If you live in Florida, have visited, or even have heard of it, this book will both amuse and depress you, as is the nature of the state. Everyone will identify with the outrage Hiiasen evokes over the disregard of the envirnment, the sham of politics, and the overall life in Miami, and indeed, all of Florida. This book will remind readers of what Marjorie Kinnan-Rawlings and Marjorie Douglass once experienced in Florida, and tells both the good and the bad of what has happened after a hundred years of exploitation If you want a non-stop laugh and a big dose of reality, read this collection - it's one of the best books in print right now.

This book is; to borrow another Hiaasen title a real Hoot. He is without a doubt not only informative,and thought provoking but he does it while leaving his readers in stiches. I think he shows a genuine affection for the idiots he writes about

I've never set foot in Florida, but I can't get enough Carl Hiaasen. I've read every single novel he's written and I have to say his columns are just as worthy a read.

From the opening column of the book (Carl Hiaasen's Florida Stress Test) to some of the more serious writings (the group of prostitutes he talks to, the crumbling county health building) Hiaasen writes it all with a razor-sharp flair and zeal that can't be matched. You know this guys just loves going to work every day.

Who else would refer to the newly elected mayor of Miami as a "pernicious little ferret"?

Keep them coming, Carl. I'm waiting on Volume 3.

Sidenote: I also wrote this review for "Paradise Screwed" b/c it's the same book, just different selected columns.

If you've ever read a Carl Hiassen book (or Tim Dorsey for that matter) and you wonder where he became so cynical, or where he gets his outrageous ideas from, read this book. Taking only the best of his newspaper columns, this book gives little glimpses into the absolute mess that was Miami/South Florida in the 80's/90's. Taking on anything from connected land developers, to cartel-backed politicians, to prostitute employing evangelists.

Each column is 1 to 1.5 pages in length making it the perfect length to read here and there, or big bites at a time. If you're a fan of Carl Hiassen, try this book not for Hiassen's opinion, but just for the shear knowledge of ludicrisiosity he imparts.

The idea behind the book is great, but it lacks the satirical bite of The Wandering Jew. As a "realistic" novel it suffers from the fact it has only one source, the Bible

This is another masterpiece from Stefan Heym, the pseudonym for Helmut Flieg. The author is an East German/American Jewish writer, known for his controversial political standing, and as an advocate of "real socialism" he has been a victim of totalitarism and western democracy alike. In "The King David Report," Hyem has retold the old biblical/legendary/historical story of King David. The main character, who personifies the author, is Ethan of Ezra, a wise, truthful man who has been entrusted by King Solomon to write the official version of King David's life and deeds. Ethan is the intellectual who must face the conflicts of time and who is tormented by the limitations which are set to his writing the truth, who soon realizes that learned men are an annoyance to the people and a bother to the servants of the King. To what extent should he expose the truth of King David's life, who setting aside his political glory can also be accused of being a murderer, adulterer, and a machiavellic leader? How does history deal with a King whose only purpose was power, who only loved himself, whose God was made exclusive to himself and justified his crimes in the name of the Holy One? Ethan soon realizes that the outlaw will cover his tracks rather than leave behind accounts of his exploits, and a high price is to be paid by those who are willing to bring forth the truth.

How are we to deal with historical undesirable matter? Tell it all, tell it with discretion, or don't tell it. Heym's intention is to extrapolate the story of King David to events taken place in our recent history, something that comes out quite easily for the reader. But despite oppression, torture, false witnesses, perversion of the facts, plariarism, and the death of the innocent, the author is a positive, optimistic thinker. He believes that it is impossible to entirely divorce history from truth and expect it to remain credible. "As the sun breaks through the clouds, truth will break through words..."

"The King David Report" has a complex structure, a well-documented background, and a clear ironic transparency. It is a well-elaborated piece of literature, which must be seen as a historical novel, a biblical account, and a political satire.

An amazing portrayal of an honest man caught in the forces of a history driven by less-upright minds.

An eminent scholar is asked by King Salomon to write a true - nothing but the truth - biography of his father King David.
The scholar's research reveals a not so quite divine portrait of the late king. It is heavily stained by incest, sodomy, treachery, lechery, manslaughter, bloodbaths and opportunism. In one word, it exposes a satanic character.
King David followed the advice of his counsellor: 'In order to reign you should have but one goal: power, and love only one person: yourself.'
The scholar discovers also some very compromising facts about the present king.

He recognizes all too well that he lives in a split world: 'I do not say what I know; I say what I don't think; I think what I don't say; I want to say what I should not think. I am a dog turning around and around trying to catch a flea on my tail.' 'Truth is the daughter of ill fate.'

His report becomes a tohuwabohu: a rewrite of a rewrite ... until he looses his job.
The king's command of a true biography turns into an order for censure. There should be a yawning abyss between reality and what his subjects should believe: 'Do as I say, not as I do.'

This novel was (and is) an extremely intelligent attack on the 'newspeak' of one party-communist regimes, which wield(ed) complete control of the communications sector.
But the problems it tackled are even more actual and widespread today. Our world is dominated by big media monopolies, which are controlled by the powerful, who in turn control the government. These powerful people are not interested in the truth, only in 'their' truth.
Sabotage or direct liquidation of free objective journalism is rampant all over our planet.

This novel is an extremely clever and magisterial exposure of the all important 'the media and the powerful'-issue.
A must read.

Being the account of the life and times of the Biblical King David, this historical novel, masquerading as an official report from King Solomon's designated historical interpreters, shines a brilliant light on the Biblical David as well as on the process by which fact becomes "historical truth". Imagining the court of King Solomon, a somewhat small-minded, self-seeking, albeit reasonably clever, Near Eastern potentate, Stefan Heym here conjures for us a picture of a reluctant scholar sucked into the maelstrom of politics and revisionism by which governing bureaucracies have historically secured their rule. Called to Jerusalem by King Solomon to help glorify the memory of his father, David, and establish the regime's bona fides, Ethan of Ezra, an actual Biblical personage credited with writing one of the psalms, must seek out the varying threads of King David's life from those who have survived him and meld these with the official records and documents of Solomon's court, all with an eye toward creating a legendary king who will give legitimacy to the rule of the petty tyrant, Solomon. Ethan does this at continued risk to his own life and to what is his, driven by an insatiable desire to ferret out and preserve some semblance of truth. All the while, he must find ways to compromise and get away from the court intrigues in one piece. The King David he discovers is not a particularly lovely specimen of humanity and it is Ethan's challenge to preserve a glimpse of this true David, through the smoke and mirrors of the official history he must write. Satiric and ironic by turns, the tale has one real flaw: its characters, though sharply realized, remain aloof from us, people we see but do not greatly care about. However, the book is so well written otherwise, the ancient world of the Bible so brilliantly evoked, that this deficiency does no harm to the book itself. This one is finely wrought as it lays out a convincing tale of how the Bible we have may actually have come to be and of what must really lie beneath the surface of the confused and folklorish tale of David that has come down to us from its ancient authors.

SWM The King of Vinland's Saga

This remarkably scholarly book by Colson combines both his profound knowledge of Christian ideals with a well-versed political understanding garnered from his years in the problematic Nixon administration. Colson's own experience in government and his rather unlikely conversion to Christianity gives the book credence even to those who may not fully agree with his arguments. Colson judiciously inserts historical fact amidst modern day arguments, and my husband said of the book, "Every time I think, `I'd like to hear that backed up' he provides exactly that in the very next paragraph."

Colson's wide range of sources make him a pleasure to read. He cites works ranging from Cicero to Nietzsche, C.S. Lewis to Augustine. He quotes from Supreme Court decisions and references the Bible. Each chapter is heavy with both footnotes and endnotes, and Colson also provides a list "For Further Reading." This is a great read, perfect for academics and the casual reader alike.

Although not strictly a scholarly work, Colson draws enormous breadth and integrity of expertise into this epochal exposition of the relationship of church to state.

I must confess that it took me 20 years to pick up this book, and that only on a whim. I had no desire to read Colson, having little belief in the value of celebrity or notoriety in lending value to a man's words. Though not a hater of things American, I am not starry-eyed about American mentality, especially when it comes to politics, and rather turned off by the way Americans (and others) confuse the domains of religion and politics, not just on the political right but at all points of the political spectrum. That Colson had been a special advisor to Richard Nixon during the Watergate scandal had pretty well put him off my radar.

I could not have been more wrong about him.

This book is the first I have read in which a comprehensive exposition of an appropriate relationship of church to state is laid out. Colson cannot be accused of confusing the two domains, yet he is clear about the valuable relationship between personal, and collective, faith, and public domain politics. A man highly qualified to speak about both, and his education in the school of hard knocks has paid off in spades. Though some reviewers appear to regard the book as a vilification of the religious and political right this is quite unfair -- Colson is balanced in both domains and his writing reveals little pandering to partisan interests. He could equally address a Republican Convention, or a Democrat one, or stand aside and offer telling criticism of both parties. The same balance is evident in his theological writing. I am reminded of the angel leading an army whom Joshua met and asked, "Are you with us or with our enemies?" The angel replied "Neither. I am for the Lord".

As for the book itself, it has an engaging style. The chapters are short, mostly in the form of parables. The first is an account of a fictional American president whose religious zealotry leads the world to the brink of war, a cautionary tale. Other chapters are straight retelling or dramatizations of the lives of men and women who held in their hands the keys to major world events of the 20th Century, retelling in gripping form the rise of the Third Reich, the behavior of the Church in Germany, the weak response of Chamberlaine, slippery dealings in the hallowed halls of American government, murder, redemption and forgiveness in the Phillipines and Northern Ireland, and much more.

The weakest point is a short digression into science and cosmology early in the book, a subject Colson would probably to best to leave untouched in his writing. It's the only blemish I can find on what is otherwise a masterwork.

Although written to the current state of the world 20 years ago, prior to the Fall of the Soviet Union, the Tienamen Square massacre and the First Gulf War, and the rise of globalized Jihadism in its current form, the book is strikingly current and insightful. Perhaps it is because the context of his writing is merely context---he does not write for it, but he draws on that background to write timeless wisdom.

I highly recommend the book not only to Christians but to anyone interested in answers to the unsolvable political and religious conundrums in the world. Although Colson offers few answers beyond Christ, it is perhaps enough to note that the answers he does offer are rock solid, and his book is more of an arrow in a direction than an 'X' marking the spot where treasure is buried.

When reading this book back in 1989, one had to assume Colson was thinking of Pat Robertson's run for the White House when he wrote this book. Eleven years later the American people elected a born-again Christian as President in George W Bush. Some of the things Colson warned about have now come to pass.

Although the events of 9/11 were out of the President's control and demanded action, there is little doubt that his Faith has shaped his view of world events.

"Kingdoms in Conflict" is a warning that God's Kingdom is not of this world and it cannot be forged through politics or war. Man's kingdoms and God's Kingdom are in conflict.

Colson's time in the Nixon White House and his born-again experience has allowed him to see the dangers of using politics to advance a religious belief. This book is more relevant today than it was in 1989.

Like Colson's other books, Kingdoms in Conflict challenges you to think deeply about what and why you believe.

The title focuses on the precarious balance Christians experience between heavy involvement and no involvement in politics. Colson's thesis seems to be that Christians need to maintain a balance - being in the world while not being of the world and Christians must be a light to the world and salt of the earth.

Colson uses the examples of Christian involvement (and lack of) in resisting Hitler, Marcos, and other brutal figures in history to illustrate the importance of Christians being involved in the political process without being consumed by the power that goes with politics.

Read and be encouraged to be rightly involved in politics while remembering that ultimately we are citizens of another kingdom to come that will last forever!

Colson takes a topic that has been discussed by Christians ever since the disciples questioned Jesus about it when He was in Galilee with them, i.e., the role of God's kingdom and that of man's. Colson contends that the kingdom of God is within a person. It is not an external means of control exercised by political power. In the Epilogue he cites Winston Churchill's last words, "there is no hope." But Colson counters that statement by explaining that spiritual things are not based on the circumstances of this present world.
On the other side of the coin, however, Colson presents specific examples throughout history where Christian have actively been involved in politics and government because of their belief in the eternal, unseen kingdom of God within. Having an awareness of things eternal, while contributing in this life is the balance he is seeking to describe.

I bought this book as a step in investigating fires and arson steps of investigation in writing a novel. It does have a lot of good information, but it's very generalized--not specific. Good for the amateur fire sleuth that wants to get enought information to be able to 'talk the language.'

The best fire investigation reference book on the market today. Thanks John.
Mark Howell
AIC-Fire
Denton, Texas

If you are a fire cause and origin investigator, you need this book! If you don't use it, you can bet an attorney will use it against you in civil or criminal proceedings. This book should be right next to your NFPA 921. DeHahn writes in a pragmatic and easy to understand format. I understand that the 6th ed. is getting ready for relase so you might wait a couple of weeks and get the latest. Bravo Dr. DeHaan, you've done it again!

The best book I know about fire; I like it for the strict scientific and pragmatic approach and the lot of practical hints, useful for a fire operator but also for a fire student.
Reading it, I understood a lot of things I watched in my 20 years of firefighting, and it changed my perception of fire behaviour and my understanding of a post-fire scene analysis.
A great help, and this edition is a lot better than the previous I had, the 3°.

Written in an understandable, practical manner, this book makes a difficult subject comprehensible by even the unscientifically minded.
The author writes clearly and the book is very readable. The text is accompanied by great photographs & illustrations.
What a relief to find this book after attempting to plow through some of the other texts on this subject. Highly recommended!

The four published reviews of this book are rather biased and show that the reviewers did not internalize what the author wrote. They stand in stark contrast to the 7 personal reviews. I couldn't put this book down. In a very personal way the author and his real experiences embody the reality of the co-existence, or lack thereof, in judea and samaria today. Stangely enough, shortly after a friend insisted I read this book I have shared tea with Era in his home and with his neighbors in Turmis Aya that he descibes in the book and to independently hear them tell the same stories he tells in the book.
This book should be required reading for anyone that wants to offer an opinion about the future of Samaria.

Era Rapaport effectively communicates the highs and lowes of being a settler in the land of Israel today. He is a modern day Zionist who gave up a life of comfort to face ridicule, persecution and imprisonment to stay true to his faith in the resettlement of Eretz Israel. I highly recommend this book to all who love Zion and believe in the restoration of Israel.

This book takes what has become a controvertial impersonal topic and turns it into a tale of the human spirit. Era was an the average American. He had the normal life, but he choose to follow the path G-d choose for him. His acts of desperation would be called terrorism by the media, but it is only after reading this book that one understands he was an everday guy defending his family. I would highly recommend this book to anyone interested in gaining a true first hand perspective of life in the West Bank.

Mr. Rapaport's book is one of the few honest accounts of life in Israel today. Unlike reporters who have very little understanding of the complexities of life in Israel, Mr. Rapaport lives in the heart of Israel, and has a great understanding of the problems his country encounters daily. You can't go wrong reading this book.

this book is intriging. it makes you wonder about the other side of the media. letters from tel mond prison is a book written by a man who lives his life with such pupose, meaning and honesty you wonder some times who you feel bad for - the "terrorist" or the "victim"

Liberty is a very precious and rare quality of a living condition.
As I. Berlin states, `The periods and societies in which civil liberties were respected, and variety of opinion and faith tolerated, have been very few and far between, oases in the desert of human uniformity, intolerance and oppression.'

I. Berlin explains clearly that liberty has two faces: a positive and a negative one.
Positive liberty is the answer to the question: who controls? Am I my own master?
Negative liberty circumscribes the area wherein a third person can prevent anybody to make a free choice.
On these bases, a free society can be organized, with 1) absolute rights (not absolute powers) and 2) frontiers, defined in terms of rules, within which men should be inviolable.
For the author, freedom is not an end, but a means to create `room for personal ends', for happiness. He rightly criticizes E. Fromm: freedom is the opportunity to act, not action itself.

Philosophically, freedom has been ferociously contested by the determinists, the defenders of `historical inevitability' (Hegel, Marx, Bacon, Fourier, Comte). The author remarks judiciously that if the world is ruled by determinism, nobody is responsible: there is no free will, no morality, and no justice. Individual choice is an illusion. Determinism represents the world as a prison.
A more brutal kind of determinism is presented by those who believe that there is a final answer, a unique goal, a central principle that governs our life. This principle and its executioners provoked barbarous consequences.

Isaiah Berlin's reflections on liberty are profound and still very actual.
Not to be missed.

Berlin's considerable reputation rests largely on his essays. In his chosen areas of political philosophy and intellectual history, he produced no major systematic works. His essays, particularly those in the history of ideas, are long, insightful, and informed by impressive breadth of knowledge and a humane temperament. He was a consistently excellent and sometimes elegant writer. Of all his essays, he felt his most substantial work was the writings on Liberty collected in this volume. The core of this book is the Four Essays on Liberty, which appeared originally as a book of that title about 40 years ago.
How good are these essays? They were written originally in the late 1940s through late 1950s and were directed, at least in part, at issues that preoccupied British intellectuals of that period. The backdrop was the Cold War, and debates about the justification of socialist ideals and the nature of socialism. Most of these essays have not worn well. I don't think there is much original or profound in either the first or last essays of the four; Political Ideas in the 20th Century, and John Stuart Mill and the Ends of Life. I suspect most critical readers will find the essay entitled Historical Inevitability to be fairly pedestrian. This leaves the most celebrated of these essays, Two Concepts of Liberty. It is on this essay and some of his best historical studies that Berlin's reputation rests.
In Two Concepts, Berlin developed his famous distinction between "negative" and "positive" concepts of liberty. He particularly focused on how a certain rationalist conception of "positive" liberty can become, though often via a tortuous route, a justification for attacks on "negative" liberty and assault basic human rights. Berlin argues that this conception of "positive" liberty leads to the great crimes of the 20th century. This leads to an eloquent plea for some form of pluralism in regard to ultimate human goals. Berlin develops this argument brilliantly and with a self-assured writing style that is a pleasure to read.
But how good is his argument? As he himself points out, there are circumstances underwhich the distinction between "negative" and "positive" liberty can be cloudy, casting doubt on the utility and reality of this distinction. He is incorrect in assigning blame for all the terrible crimes of the 20th century to the rationalist view of "positive" liberty. This is certainly a fair criticism with respect to Marxism and the great crimes of Marxist states. But does it apply to Fascism and violent nationalism? These movements were marked by wholesale rejection of rationalism and exaltation of emotion, quite different from what he describes as the rationalist wellspring of all the crimes of the 20th century.
Berlin is an interesting and thought provoking essayist but not a major figure in political thought or intellectual history.

I read this book for a graduate class in Philosophy. Berlin in the book is talking about different understandings on liberty. How do liberals think about liberty? Not only liberals think about liberty, many isms do, there are many different ways to think about liberty. Berlin makes a few distinctions on liberty. In "Two Concepts of Liberty," he distinguishes between political liberty and individual Liberty. Political Liberty, democratic liberty having a vote and participating, like in Greek city-state. No limit on power of the government over any aspect of citizen's life, but a citizen has some control over government through his vote. Not all are citizens, women, slaves, etc. Liberals are interested in individual liberty; choose the activities they want to do. A tension between Political Liberty and Individual Liberty. Political Liberty implies that there is majority rule through the vote. Maybe a majority won't impose on people, but that can change through the majority vote. If you have a system that you set up to insure certain individual rights like the U.S. does you protect certain liberties like the 1st amendment to free speech. These rights are taken away from voting on by the majority and to change them you need a super majority. This takes away Political Liberty, so there is that antagonism between both liberties. Unless you are an anarchist, there are certain functions and liberties that must be given up to the government. The more individual freedoms you keep from government the less value Political Liberty has to citizens the fewer things we get to decide.

The famous concepts Berlin distinguishes between are Positive Liberty and Negative Liberty. 1. Positive Liberty means self-control over your own life. 2. Negative liberty means you are free from interference from other people. Other people can't force you to do something. Positive liberty is self-mastery, self-control. Negative liberty means you are free from interference from other people. Others can't compel you to act in a way you don't want to act. At first these sound like two sides of the same coin. What Berlin points out historically is that people who believe in Positive Liberty have taken it in a very different direction than those that believe in Negative Liberty. What they (Positive Liberty adherents) have done is to infer that from each person you can distinguish between what he or she thinks he or she wants, and what his or her better self or true self would want. Therefore, there is this idea that we all might have certain desires that we want but that they are not expressive of our real essence. An obvious case is an addict who has some part of them that really don't want the drug. Even though they put all their time and energy in getting the drug it might be tempting to think that they really don't want the drug. Once they got the distinction between ordinary desires that you are aware of and the desires that you truly want, then the Positive Liberty people are tempted to say that for someone to really have charge of their life to really have liberty than we have to make sure that they are doing what their true self wants to do, not the self that they are consciously aware of, not the self not the desires that seem to them to be strongest. But what the angels of their better nature want, that's real freedom. Even when the person is protesting that that isn't what they want, if you are making them do what their true self wants really then you are making them do good. Kant would be a supporter of this view.

We have two aspects of human nature. The numeral self and nominal self. The numeral self is our true self and is the basis of morality this is why we are morally obligated to do things because our true self accepts a certain kind of law and imposes it on us. We are obligated to obey it because it is a law our true self chooses even though we may not be consciously aware of it, we may have all kinds of desires pulling us in different directions. We are obligated to do it because it is what our true self chooses. Rousseau is very much in this tradition. He says people can be forced to be free. Historically, this is the direction that many people who believe in Positive Liberty go in.

The Negative liberty people tend to say that other people don't tell them what to do. They could have gone the same route thinking about two kinds of selves, and they could say negative liberty is when your lower self doesn't tell your higher self what to do, but that historically hasn't happened. That is not the kind of liberty they have been thinking about. Liberals generally belong to this kind of negative liberty position. The kind of liberty liberals tend to care about is freedom from other individuals or the government. Free to the extent no one tells you what to do, none of this true self-stuff. You are free if other people can't stop you from doing what you want to do. All the different liberals are going to believe that people should have a significant amount of this kind of (negative), liberty. All the critics of liberalism are not all going to want to take all this kind of liberty away, but they are going to definitely say that liberty is not as important as the liberals think it is and that it ought to be restricted in some significant ways.

Berlin says, once you see how the Positive Liberty idea was developed, it turns out not to have the same kind of tension with Political Liberty that Negative Liberty does. Since, you could always have the view what peoples true selves want can be discovered by a kind of democratic process, so that what the majority votes for is what everyone wants, even the minority, they just didn't really know what they wanted. We all really want what is best for our community, as Rousseau would say.

Recommended reading for anyone interested in philosophy, political science, and history.

Henry Hardy the devoted student and editor of the work of Isaiah Berlin has reedited and expanded Berlin's on Liberty. These essays are at the heart of Berlin's liberal political philsophy. And their most well- known conception is the distinction between 'negative and positive liberty'.
This is the way Wikipedia makes the distinction.

"He defined negative liberty as the absence of constraints on, or interference with, agents' possible action. I am more "negatively free" to the extent that fewer opportunities for possible action are foreclosed or interfered with. Positive liberty he associated with the idea of self-mastery, or the capacity to determine oneself, to be in control of one's destiny. While Berlin granted that both concepts of liberty represent valid human ideals, he believed that as a matter of history, the positive concept of liberty has proven more susceptible to political abuse. He argued that under the influence of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant and G.W.F. Hegel (all committed to the positive concept of liberty), European political thinkers were frequently tempted to equate liberty with forms of political discipline or constraint. This became politically dangerous when the relevant ideals of positive liberty were, in the course of the 19th century, used to defend ideals of national self-determination, imperatives of democratic self-government, and the communist notion of humanity collectively asserting rational control over its own destiny. In this way of thinking, Berlin contended, demands for freedom paradoxically become demands for forms of collective control and discipline - those deemed necessary for the "self-mastery" or self-determination of nations, classes, democratic communities, and perhaps of humanity as a whole. There is thus an elective affinity, for Berlin, between positive liberty and political totalitarianism."

Another of Berlin's major essays in this work deals with the conception of 'Historical Inevitability'. Here he is most fierce in his critique of Marxism with its posited inevitable stages of history. Something of a great man himself, Berlin was a strong champion of the idea that great individuals shape human events, and introduce novel transformations of reality.

A third center of Berlin's thought has to do with his 'pluralism' his sense of the differing ideals and values different societies have. His pluralism however is what he called an 'objective pluralism' as he thought that there are certain values such as 'individual liberty' which should prevail in all societies.

Ultimately though he claimed that both for the individual and for society 'ideal ends' often conflict, and that perfect realization in action, is therefore impossible. Life for Berlin moral decision for Berlin thus has a tragic element of incompleteness and contradiction.
In this sense of our limitation deriving from our own ideal ends and actions, Berlin 's thought ultimately corresponds to arguments concerning the limitations of Mind which have been made in modern thought regard to a wide variety of other areas of human inquiry, from theology to mathematics.

I've read amazon reviews of this book that seemed to claim Berlin's liberalism for some kind of conservative or neo-liberal stance.
I find this misleading. I hope that nobody will be kept from looking into Berlins writings by that.
It is true that, especially in this book, Berlin argues against the fallacies of Marxism. And some shorter texts that the editors published here for the first time and an editorial essay make altogether clear, that Berlin intended a defence against the totalitarian currents in contemporary thinking of his time – being a victim of the Russian Revolution himself.
I read these essays very closely to see whether Berlin appeared to me like some kind of precursor of neo-liberlism (like Leo Strauss) but he is nothing of the kind. I am quite sure, that given the different situation today he would argue just as concisely against the neo-liberal ideology as he did against Marxism. For instance he admits that certain material means have to be furnished for freedom to be properly acted out. He does not leave everything to the supposedly free (if poor) individual. But active social politics were not the problem of his time. The welfare state was growing if anything rather too strong than to weak – it is missing today when the state is abused by neo-liberals.
His point was to defend freedom against any claim that there was „only one true way of seeing things“ which is precisely what Marxism did and what the preachers of the Washington Consensus etc. and propagandists like Fukuyama with his silly „end of history babble“ do today.

Berlin's argument is basically defensive – against the totalitarian impact of nationalism and communism. That is why he favors „negative freedom“ instead of positive freedom (i.e. the aspect: who governs which he links to the well-known totalitarian concept of true self, higher self, higher political conscience and so forth in the name of which so much manipulation and pressure was executed).

But while one sympathizes with his motives and his scepticism one can't overlook that negative freedom is just one important aspect. Berlin writes the basic image of freedom was the man tied to a tree or put in jail. Negative freedom meant being free from such (political) obstacles.
He doesn't seem to see that he is confusing liberty and liberation.
The main question (to this reader) is: what will we do once we ARE liberated?
That leads me to the question of inner freedom, i.e. psychological aspects of consciousness that Berlin avoids like most other scholars. That doesn't help.
If one wants to understand why man – born free – always enslaves himself again, negative freedom (liberation) alone is no answer.
Berlin stresses – although sceptically – the importance of knowledge to avoid prejudice and nationalism. But he doesn't care enough about the functioning of the subject that is supposed to use this knowledge.
He might have argued like so many before and after him that this was much to tricky terrain. But so is history, so is politics.