Events Books

Wishard states that the next three decades may be the most decisive 30 year period in the history of mankind. He's offering a perspective on the meaning of our times, trying to understand how all the monumental changes of science, psychology, technology and culture are affecting how we live and how nations live. And he asks how we can find new inner meaning amidst this "soul-crushing change". That's a huge chunk to bite off and I wasn't sure he'd make it. The satisfying thing about this book is just how well he fulfills his goal. In broad strokes he moves from the picture of a present interregnum period where change is bringing the birth of a whole new civilization, to a decade by decade historical recap of those 20th century changes in science and technology, economics, social and politcal life, and global events. I found this a well paced and fascinating historical ride. (An appendix at the book's end neatly summarizes this data and is worthy in itself.) He doesn't stop with mere diagnosis, lucid as it is. His analysis, deeply rooted in a moral and ethical context, gives modern man a corageous challenge to "rethink what is the very purpose of human beings in a world of total technological possibility." Between Two Ages ends up being a book of hope based on reality and a dose of vision.

The forecasts of technology for the next two decades are quite amazing, well researched, and not a little scary. But, of course, look how far we've "advanced" in the last twenty years! He writes about C.G. Jung and the "psychological interpretation of history." That analysis is an excellent framework for the elements he brings into the book. Very worth reading.

I've been in and out of this book over the past couple of months and I would sum up my reactions in three ways: 1) I will never be able to sum this book up or feel I have gotten all I could out of it--it would be on my list of books to take to a desert island and read over and over again; 2) it is, together with Will and Ariel Durant's "The Lessons of History", a remarkable short-hand survey of the past two centuries; and 3) at the end it cuts to the chase and agrees with Zbigniew Brzezinski--the big global challenge today is about moral, ethical, cross-cultural, philosophical *grounding*.

I don't see the author's vision happening in any sort of structured officially-sanctioned way. And I don't see this book impacting on people the way "IMAGINE" or "Cultural Creatives" can impact--but if you have the time and the intellectual curiosity to go deep, this is a very engaging book that will take a long time to fully appreciate.

The second half of the book summarizes his findings and creates a context that helps us inderstand this critical period by asking the question,"what is the meaning of our new century and where are we going?" It offers a bold and original approach for the next 30 years as technology exerts an ever more powerful hold on our lives.

Wishard explores these questions in a way that is both unexpected and profound, going to the very root of the nature and makeup of the human individual. His conclusions suggest ways of raising the level of human consciousness that could enable us to live in an ever more complex and integrated world.

Quite a read.

I did not examine the readers' comments on Black Looks until completing the book, but I too would like to take the opportunity to give the book my whole-hearted endorsement for everyone's perusal.

Unlike the reader who began a review highlighting his leftist political affiliation and interracial marriage/family, I DO believe that this book was intended for that individual reader, as it was intended for me, a white female -- and for all men and women of all colors, backgrounds, and sexual orientations. One's skin color, (marriage) partner, children, class status, political affiliation, sexual orientation, and gender, among many other characteristics, do not determine one's dedication to overcoming the racist, heterosexist, capitalist patriarchy. Indeed, I think that this idea is a theme running throughout Black Looks, as evidenced in bell hooks' essays on Clarence Thomas and Madonna.

I do not find incivility in bell hooks' thoughtful expressions and critiques. Rather, I find a much-needed naming of the incivilities that happen to people in this world, due to various "-ism"s and those who espouse them.

Complaints of "bias" or "slant" in bell hooks' essays and other works seem nonsensical to me, when I recall that no human being's thoughts, feelings, and perspective are "objective." Moreover, "objectivity" is not a quality that one desires in cultural criticism, which functions to set forth an alternative point of view that is so often silenced. An individual who feels the need for "objectivity" in Black Looks might seriously question whether any book, television program, song, or other form of media is "objective," including those forms of communication that comprise mass media.

I think that an individual who can accept that this book is for him/her can also begin to look at mass media with a more critical gaze, an activity that is sorely needed after the hours of unquestioning consumption of TV/movies that fills the evenings and weekends of many Americans.

Bombers, Bolsheviks, and Bootleggers: A Study in Constitutional Subversion, by Leon F. Scully, Jr. (Publius, 464 pp., $29.95)

Since 1914, American courts have held that the fruits of an illegal search are inadmissible, regardless of their bearing on the case. Neither the Fourth Amendment nor any other constitutional provision requires this conclusion. Yet in the name of deterring police misconduct, the "exclusionary rule" routinely derails prosecutions, arguably to the frustration of justice (and certainly to that of the public). While others have made the case that the exclusionary rule was invented by judges, Leon Scully goes further, contending that the "test cases" establishing the rule were in fact "a series of frauds perpetrated on the Supreme Court and the American people."

Scully presents a broad view of these cases, including the political pressures on the actors involved, beginning with Weeks v. United States, the 1914 Supreme Court decision that created the exclusionary rule. Fremont Weeks was convicted of using the mails illegally to transport lottery tickets; to secure the evidence against him, police had entered his house without a warrant. The Court did not dispute the evidence, but, reasoning that the police had stepped over constitutional bounds in obtaining it, overturned the conviction. Scully argues that the Court ignored the probable cause that a crime had been committed, which justified the search.

To Scully, the result in Weeks was all too convenient for the Progressive movement in light of Ryan v. United States, also called the "Dynamiters case," a politically charged prosecution of union leaders who were accused of dynamiting the Los Angeles Times building in 1910. The Dynamiters case, which was ongoing at the time Weeks was decided, also involved allegations of illegal interstate transportation, and its outcome hinged on documents found with dynamite and alarm clocks in a basement vault halfway across the country. Without these documents the testimony of two other bombers who had turned state's evidence could not be corroborated. Scully notes that the wrongful police action alleged in Weeks was nearly identical to that alleged in the Dynamiters case; he concludes that Weeks was manipulated in order to obtain a precedent to dispose of the Dynamiters case, and to aid in the Progressives' relations with unions.

Scully's painstaking reconstruction of these and other cases makes a convincing argument that the precedential underpinnings of the exclusionary rule are judicially created precepts that lack grounding in the original meaning of the Fourth Amendment. His legal history is thus the story of an activist judiciary guided by the doctrine of an "evolving" Constitution, imposing political will instead of implementing constitutional principle. Scully's call for a return to the search for truth in courts of law deserves a wide hearing.

I was a political science major in college in the United States. I! tried hard to understand the logic of the world while studying hegemonies of various nations. However, I can tell that this book was the most powerful book for me to understand the world, not all the thick textbooks or ugly notes from the boring lectures.

So, why don't you give it a try and order this phenomenal book with Amazon!

Thank you very much, Dr. Ohmae & Amazon.

Minoru Nadai, alias NORM

From the outset, the decision to allow a racist demagogue like Kahane to run for a seat in the Israeli legislature raised ethical issues of the most troubling kind. The decision to revoke that privilege was no less troubling: as they fought to have Kahanism outlawed, advocates of tolerance and democracy came under bitter attack for defying the very principle which they claimed to support. The book provides a reasoned, thoughtful and comprehensive explanation of the ethical questions underlying this problematic position. And as we know only too well, no country is immune from such questions; i.e. from the emergence of would-be political parties brandishing blatantly racist or xenophobic slogans, or advocating blatantly racist or xenophobic measures. The analysis set forth in the book examines the most sensitive implications of such a development, particularly the need to reconcile the sacrosanct principles of freedom of speech, on the one hand, with the obligation to stem any tangible threat to democracy, on the other. In trying to gain a better understanding of this complex paradox, I found Cohen-Almagor's lucid description of the distinction between freedom of expression, per se, and infringements of the Harm and Offense Principles particularly enlightening.

I too believe, like the author (and indeed, who doesn't?), in the solution outlined in Epilogue - education - as the ultimate means of delegitimizing and eventually eradicating racist politics. And yet, while pursuing the educational route, it also behooves us to continue grappling with the excruciating moral and legal dilemmas which these politics force upon us. I would heartily recommend Cohen-Almagor's book as a quintessential case study, capable of shedding light on one of the most problematic challenges to the democratic system.