Events Books

This book is brilliantly written. It has many stories of famous Anarchists, including poems and recipes for homemade weapons and survival items. Overall a great book and worth ten billion times the money. I give it two thumbs and two toes up!

An amazing, amazing book stuffed full of anarchist ideals and provides real, documented evidence of anarchist collectivism in ACTION. Society was reorganized based on the fundamental principle: From each according to his ability to each according to his need. The book provides first-rate accounts and an objective analysis of the Spanish Social Revolution. If any of you are doubting anarchism or simply need proof to support your anarchist convictions, BUY this book. The ideas in it are simply priceless. It doesn't take much to bring you down. Read this book. It will cement your belief in libertarian communism. Bask in the righteousness that springs from the truth!

This is an odd but interesting volume. Sam Dolgoff edits a volume, using primary sources, to discuss a little known aspect of the Spanish Civil War. Indeed, partisans would say that the term "Civil War" is wrong, and that what is described in this volume is actually a "Revolution."

The work begins with a useful essay by Murray Bookchin on the Spanish context. He outlines the dizzying array of groups with a stake in the conflict between the Republic and General Franco's forces. The focus of this book is the anarchist collectives--and how they functioned--after the start of the Civil War/Revolution until the eventual triumph of Franco and his allies.

The first part of the book is a set of readings that Dolgoff puts together to present the background and context of the "Revolution" (anarchists describe the conflict as a "Revolution," while others use the term "Civil War"). Among subjects covered: the trend toward workers' self-management (also referred to as syndicalism), the rural collectivist tradition, and so on.

The heart of the book is a set of essays by actors of the time (as well as some quick essays by Dolgoff himself): Augustin Souchy, Diego Abad de Santillan, Gaston Leval, and Jose Peirats). Focal points include urban collectivization (e.g., the efforts by the anarchist unions to collectivize Barcelona) and rural collectives.

This volume ends with an essay by Gaston Laval written many years ago as well as a concluding essay by Dolgoff.

The work is useful, as it describes what was going on in parts of Spain that were not often reported upon by reporters or others at the time. George Orwell (if memory serves) was with POUM, the Trotskyite organization), although he wrote of the anarchists in his "Homage to Catalonia." It provides a somewhat different perspective on the events in Spain in the mid-1930s that helps fill out the picture of the desperate struggle between different groups--from fascists to Republicans to various Marxist groups to anarchists. A fascinating period of time. . . . Too sanguinary for my tastes, but still fascinating.

This is not a book about making bombs. If you read this book you will know what anarchism really is and why it's original meaning has been bastardized. Anarchism is a legitimate and serious political ideology. This book was recommended to me personally by the famous MIT professor and scholar Noam Chomsky. Sam Dolgoff's work is very well documented and insightful. It will give you a peek at what a meaningful democracy really is and how IT CAN WORK!

The interviews are well put together. He asked important questions, and allowed those being interviewed to share their thoughts. Some of the answers are entertaining, and others really give you the insight that only a person that was there can give.

Read only the interviews you want, or catch your fancy.

Anarchist Voices: An Oral History of Anarchism in America is a real treasure. It's more than 450 pages long, but I couldn't put it down. The book allowed me to escape into the lives of the real participants of the Anarchist movement of North America in its previous heyday of the 1890s-1930s. Originally published in 1995, Paul Avrich interviewed hundreds of Anarchists and former Anarchists who were mainly in their eighties and nineties in the 1970s, the majority dying within a few years of the interviews. I was especially impressed by this, since it gave hundreds of people who had led amazing lives a sort of last memoir before they passed, much in the same style as Working by [by whom?]

It is divided into six sections covering much of the American Anarchist movement. It is mainly centered around the east coast, especially New York. They are 1) Pioneers, which focuses on relatives and close friends of the famous Anarchists like Alexander Berkman and Ben Reitman, 2) Emma Goldman, who was hugely influential and left a strong impression on everyone interviewed 3) Sacco and Venzetti, which details mostly Italian Anarchist experiences around the famous trials and frame-up of the Italian immigrants, 4) Schools and Colonies, which focus on the Modern School movement like the Ferrer school or the Stelton colony in which Anarchists tried to build communities and separate themselves into a lifestyle, 5) the Ethnic Anarchists, focusing on different groups which really brought ideological Anarchism to the United States, like the Russians, Jews, Spanish, and Italian immigrants, 6) the 1920s and beyond, which links the activities after the big decline on the US Anarchist movement after the 1920s until the 1960s and the rise of the "new anarchist movement" starting in the 1980s.

What really struck me about this book was how similar some of the arguments of the Anarchist movement were in the past to those of the present. Past divisions between sub-groups were detailed in the text as well. As Avrich explains, the main split was between the Anarcho-syndicalists/communists and the Anarcho-individualists. Today, the main split is between the Anarcho-syndicalists/communists and the eco-anarchists. The discussion also includes people who got burnt out on anarchists because they thought the anarchists were ineffective. Many do not regret their involvement in the movement and look back on the years they spent in the movement as the best years of their lives.

In the end, the book is very inspiring because so many of the interviewees still call themselves Anarchists and see that the fight for a better world will continue no matter what. Many of them remain idealists and are hopeful that the world they have worked towards will come about someday. They have hope despite having seen the world nearly destroy itself, supposed comrades (like the Communists) betray them, and enough bickering to make anyone cynical. Many of them had not been involved in the Anarchist Movement for many years, or had simply been involved in book clubs or discussion groups that passed on the ideas. And yet they are still committed to the idea that all humans should be free of oppression and that no government can make you free no matter where you are on this earth.

I, too, am glad that AK Press re-printed this (unabridged) oral history project by the late great Paul Avrich. In this classic tome, Avrich brilliantly brings to life the fascinating stories of the heroic women and men, most of them immigrants, involved in the anarchist movement of the early 20th century. I especially found interesting the stories about Emma Goldman, Sacco and Vanzetti and the free schools inspired by the work of Francisco Ferrer. That said , I was a little dismayed that a few of the individuals interviewed espoused ideas that many activists today wound consider reactionary, such as support for Zionism and the Cuban exile movement. It bewilders me, for example, how any anticapitalist could denounce Salvador Allende and the social experiment he attempted in Chile. Likewise, I was troubled by the fact that the bulk of the book dealt almost exclusively with issues of economic exploitation and the state, ignoring equally important topics like race, gender, sexual orientation and the environment. Nevertheless, this is an important book, and despite its enormity, a surprisingly quick and enjoyable read.

I'm very, very happy that AK has reissued this book. Previously, it was only available in expensive hardcover.

What it is is nothing less than a living, breathing, oral history of the real anarchist communities which existed in the United States mostly before the second world war.

Instead of dry theory you have the voices of the people who have read the theory and have applied it in their lives in an actual movement.

You have people from the Italian Anarchist community in America, you have references to the Spanish one and how they organized in America while the CNT, the major Anarcho-Syndialist Union in Spain, was in existence.

You have recollections of the major Anarchists in America from people who actually knew them; you even have gossip over things like Sacco and Vanzetti by Anarchists theorizing about the case.

Plus, accounts of Anarcho-Communes, which did exist well into the 20th century.

If you ever wanted to experience what it would be like to sit at a table back in the first half of the century and hear the Anarchists of the time talk about their lives, their strategies to organize for social change in their communities, and their take on politics and anarchism, well, here it is.

The book is invaluable.

Better than trying to struggle over pointless legal theory in "What is Property?" by Proudhon...although other of Proudhon's works are good.

Hear the living, breathing, heart of the early 20th century anarchist movement: read this book.

In a highly cerebral and compelling argument, White attacks the fallacies behind censorship efforts: hazy legal definitions, attacks on materials based on personal responses to them rather than their inherent qualities, efforts to promote or preserve orthodoxy rather than to admit free exchange of ideas, fear of mass communication of ideas rather than a fear of the ideas themselves, legal statutes and decisions based on class prejudices rather than fact, and attempted restrictions based on perceived harm or threat of harm rather than on hard scientific, causal evidence linked to harm. Thought-provoking and unique, this book should be read by anyone interested in preserving intellectual freedom.

White's case is logical, clearly presented and very witty.I highly recommend this book.

From the metaphorical title to its thorough and inclusive bibliography, _The Anatomy of Censorship_ presents with laser-sharp accuity the rebuttal to the judicial "I can't define it but I know what it is when I see it" definition of pornography. White presents us with a concise history of those individuals or factions of society who have engaged in activities beyond their contemporary mores and then proceeds forward to describe how our confused Puritanically-sex-addicted society simultaneously reels in disgust at "smut" and yet spends more time concerned with the topic of sex than most other social concerns. White deftly explains how traditional definitions of pornography avoid the fact that most cases of "pornography" actually and rightly involve personal choice and individual freedoms, and how the givers of these definitions impose a distorted view of exactly what acts constitute wrongdoing or coercion upon others. In addition (and I'm sure to raise some hackles with this statement), this book could be described as an "un-feminist" or better yet a "person-ist" track in that it dares to define many heretofore thought-of sexist activities, whether depicted in various media or just part of daily life, as NOT being misogynist because of their consentual nature. This really seems to form the crux of White's argument: "Pornography ain't pornography if all involved are adults, enjoying it, and haven't forced the other person(s) to engage in it." _Anatomy of Censorship_ takes on its subject head-on and with aplomb and accumen. At the least, this book should be on the reading list of every person who is worried about personal freedom in these days of encroaching conservatism and Internet watchdogging and V-chips; at worst, it should end up on every ACLU card-carrier's bookshelf. And if you have any friends in the Bible Belt, this would make a most interesting Christmas present. Any way it's taken, _Anatomy of Censorship_ is an intelligent, logical entry into the corpus of books defining just "what's dirty" in our world.

If you support or oppose any form of censorship, you should read this book. Make no mistake: this is strong fare, aimed squarely at the reader who enjoys a good challenge. It is sprinkled with hilarious examples that underscore the seriousness of the subject. I really enjoyed it.

This book really opened my eyes to the conditions in which animals are being raised. Not only is it inhumane to the animals, but it is contaminating OUR food. It has many pictures, which I like, being a visual person. Read this book and you will find it very educational.

When I was first exploring the issue of eating meat vs. becoming vegetarian, a friend recommended this book. Mason and Singer look inside the world of modern factory farming, providing an unsentimental look at the reality behind your dinner. Even those who don't give a damn about animals and their suffering will be alarmed at the information concerning what's in animal feed and the conditions in meat production. An eye-opener.

If you're not a vegetarian, you probably will be by the end of this book. It's like a nightmare on paper. The book was a very informative read. Jim Mason & Peter Singer are two of the best sources for books on animal rights.
It was appalling to read what happens to animals that are being raised for slaughter. Some of this book is difficult to stomach. While it may seem unbelievable, it is a true account. Male chicks are literally thrown in the garbage, others are debeaked with a hot iron, pigs are kept confined in tiny stalls.. so tiny that they cannot turn around. I'm sure there are a lot of people out there who think that this kind of abuse can't possibly happen.. but it does. This is a life changing book.

I bought this book years ago and became a vegetarian after seeing how horribly the animals are treated and how wasteful meat production is. I don't think there is anything worse than closing your eyes to what really goes on just so you don't have to take action and possibly change your lifestyle. This book will open your eyes.

I read the Federalist Papers before I read this book and was convinced that the Constitution was a wonderful document. Then I heard the other side. It turns out that the Anti-Federalists were right...in most cases. The book greatly added to my understanding of the Constitution and the change that occurred in our government when we left the Articles of Confederation behind. I was left wondering whether we should have simply modified the Articles rather than embracing a consolidated government. I only wish the Anti-Federalists had one the debate about taxation. It was foolish to give the federal government the power of unlimited taxation.

I only wanted to add a few points to the other reviewers. If you are looking at this page you probably know who the Anti-Federalists (AF) were and what part they played in our history. If not, I suggest you look at Saul Cornell's fine book, The Other Founders or Herbert Storing's, What the Anti-Federalists Were For.
My main point is this: as a resource for primary source material by AF writers this collection of Frohnen's is without peer. As Mr. Kelley points out, one of the great strengths of this volume is that it includes the complete writings and, in some cases, is more complete then Storing's collection since some additional writings have been discovered since Storing was published. One small correction to Mr. Kelley's review. As he mentions there is a brief synopsis at the beginning of each essay or letter. The Essays of Brutus number sixteen so there are sixteen such synopsis. Each one of these refers the reader to the relevant essays in The Federalist where the same issues are addressed. This is especially useful for Brutus in that Brutus and Publius were consciously writing in response to each other. And I would like to affirm Mr. Vick's suggestion by saying that an evening spent in the company of Brutus and Publius is an education in itself.
I have only one complaint about this book and about most of the writings I have read in regards to the AF writers and the Ratification debate. The forward by Sobran, Mr. Kelley's review below and, in some cases, the introduction by Frohnen present the AF writers as if they spoke with one voice on issues like representation and judicial review. They did not. You might as well make the claim that there is one voice for conservatism in this country at the present time. Cornell's volume is essential to understanding the various splits and factions within the AF blogosphere. Frohnen has a tendency to gloss over some of these divisions. On p. xxx, Frohnen claims that several AF writers became supporters of the Constitution once a Bill of Rights was promised. He then goes on to discuss the by now cliched point that originally the Bill of Rights was intended to only apply to the Federal government. True enough but what he doesn't mention was that within AF ranks there was much dissension at to what should be in the Bill of Rights. Luther Martin railed at the Constitution for not requiring a religious test for public office (see Cornell, p. 57). Writers like Martin disapproved of the First Amendment applying to the Federal government. Frohnen claims on p. xxvii, that AF had a fear of political elites of any kind but that simply isn't true for all of them. Richard Henry Lee very much believed in a natural elite guiding the masses. He simply felt that local elites working within a smaller governmental jurisdiction would 1. do a better job of ascertaining the common good and 2. the locals would be able to be more vigilant in watching and evaluating how well the elite were doing.
These are important distinction that speak to the complexity of the debates surrounding the ratification that tend to get glossed over in a localism/liberty versus national/consolidationist presentation.
But I have gone on too long in regards to minor flaws with Frohnen's introduction. My main complaint with this book is that there is not a cheap sturdy paperback edition that could be used in most college classes on constitutional and early national history. Anyone who reads in those area of history, anyone who wants to understand the evolution of our government and system of laws needs to own and read this book. My sincere thanks to Dr. Frohnen for putting it together.

"This government [Federal Government] will destroy the state governments, and swallow the liberties of the people." This was the declaration of Patrick Henry, found in these pages, along with many other intriguing and wonderful speeches. This text is a definite 'must read' in American History writings.

This volume is a collection of speeches, letters, essays, articles, and addresses presented during the era of American Constitutional history. Debate over the ratification of the constitution was obviously a huge debate in historical political philosophy and this volume is a great testimony of that fact.

It seems that the Federalist papers have received more attention in the classroom and in table talk conversations due to men like Hamilton, Madison, and Jay, and their respective writings. But we should not neglect a well rounded reading of political history and skip over the writings of the Anti-Federalists (Henry, Cato, DeWitt, and Brutus. In fact, I have the Federalists Papers in a collection as well as this volume and the two make for a wonderful evening of reading.

Were it not for the Anti-Federalists we would not have the Bill of Rights, and thus their opposition should be seen in history as a necessary cause if for no other reason than their concern that the State governments and rights should have some protection against federal incursion. Here is a volume of collected writings which demonstrates why, in my estimation anyway, the United States had such a well rounded and firmly established form of government and political history. These pages demonstrate an America were freedom of speech and opinion rise to wonderful occasions. If you love American history, more specifically historical American political history, then you should not be without this text and these writings.

To begin with, I wish all to understand that the title to this Review is in itself controversial. The "Finest Source" of "Genuinely AMERICAN Political Thought Available" will be well received by some, and roundly condemned by others. I intended it that way.

You see, what the study of the writings by men such as those chosen for inclusion in this volume shows, is that even prior to the inauguration of the current Constitutional order, there were profound, radical and ultimately irreconciliable differences amongst and between the polyglot people who readily and ardently considered themselves to be "American" - just exactly as is happening today.

The writings of the "Anti-Federalists" show that there were fundamental differences over fundamental issues such as "judicial review"; the threats posed by an unelected, appointed-for-life (and thus largely unaccountable and uncontrollable) FEDERAL judiciary; the scope and extension of federal power; the powers and "rights" of the several States; the meaning, scope and extent of truly REPUBLICAN government - whether vast and/or national in scope as advocated by those (deliberately misleadingly) named "Federalists", or local, community-based with primacy given to the States, as advocated by those (not-deliberately but also misleadingly) named "Anti-Federalists"; the threat posed by the Constitution of the possiblity of an all-powerful, all-dominating CENTRAL government, and whether or not this would be either good or desirable for a "free people"; the threat posed by an all-powerful Commander-in-Chief, especially when combined with a standing army and navy; the presence and effects of slavery in and amongst a "free people"; along with many other issues that we are STILL arguing about and fighting over to this very day.

Now as to why I gave this otherwise excellent book only 4 stars. First, let me count its strengths:

- It IS the finest source of Anti-Federalist thought (and thus AMERICAN political thought, IF one takes the position with regard to the Federalist/Anti-Federalist debate that I do) READILY available today. The Editors of this volume make reference to the then-comprehensive compilation of Anti-Federalist thought, Herbert Storing's "The Complete Anti-Federalist", which ran to 7 volumes. Originally published by the University of Chicago in 1981, it is now out-of-print, and neither easy to find as the set, nor inexpensive if you can find the set. Furthermore, this much shorter, readily available edition of the Anti-Federalist papers INCLUDES ITEMS STORING DID NOT - either because they were not yet found (as in the case of the last essay by A [Maryland] Farmer) or because Storing LEFT THEM OUT (as in the case of portions of some of Patrick Henry's speeches - here included).

- This next "strength" I cannot emphasize enough: Although subtitled as a volume of "Selected Writings and Speeches", neither the publisher nor Amazon tell you that the writings and/or speeches of the authors chosen for "selection" are presented IN THEIR ENTIRETY - you DON'T get just "selections" of the writings of Cato, or of Centinel, or of Brutus, or just "selections" of the speeches of Patrick Henry with regard to the Anti-Federalist/Federalist debate over the Constitution, you get ALL OF THEM. Thus, you are able to follow and develop ALL of the thinking of each writer with respect to the vitally important issues discussed. In reality, it is more of an abridgement of the ENTIRE CORPUS of Anti-Federalist thought, than a "selection."

Now, as to weaknesses - This otherwise truly excellent volume has, in my opinion, two shortcomings:

--It does not have an Index, neither with regard to topics/subjects or people/authors discussed. It DOES have, however, a brief synopsis of the principal topics/issues to be discussed at the head of each writing/speech included, and this is a great help;

--Secondly and lastly, it does not have a distribution table, that connects the issues discussed in each paper/speech with its correspondent in the Federalist papers (i.e. "the other side" in the relevant debate).

Neither of the two "shortcomings" given should, in my opinion, hinder you in any way in acquiring this book. In addition to being a genuine and very valuable contribution to the works available on the fundamentals of American political thought, I am quite sincere when I tell you that it is a literal work of art in itself. The titles in this series are not only beautifully bound and printed, the dust-jackets are superb reproductions in miniature of actual works of art that are relevant to the subject of each particular volume; You can quite easily use these volumes as very attractive "coffee table books", that invariably lead to long and interesting conversations with virtually any guest.

In sum, this volume is an invaluable work for those who wish to understand the fundamentals of American political thought and philosophy, and also the "taproot" of many of the seemingly irreconciliable issues that confront us today. It is thus much more important than just as a piece in the history of the development of American political thought. I highly recommend it to ALL Americans who wish to understand more fully and completely what America is "all about."

Saba called this book "The ARMAGEDDON Network" because he felt he had identified a group of powerful Americans who were unreservedly pro-Israel and supported a highly militaristic American foreign policy coupled with massive support for the Israeli military and Israeli foreign policy. He believed people like Richard Perle and his friend and colleague Stephen Bryen "consistently promote policies that will resurrect Armageddon as the final battlefield for the Middle East--and the world."

This is an extremely well researched book and its information to noise ratio is very high; it gives much evidence and very little simply emotional rhetoric. For those who wish to understand what I believe to be perhaps the most serious foreign policy problem America has in 2006, its "special relationship" with Israel, this book is invaluable.

Muslims do not "hate us for our freedom"; those that hate us do so largely because of our nearly unconditional support for Israel's mistreatment of the Palestinians.

I read this book almost a year ago, and the reason I decided to write this was because I was surprised and glad to see it available in a mainstream source. The book is about a specific, terrifying incident of American statesmen illegally giving top secret American (military) information to Israel. The author is not a professional writer, so it has its flaws, however, one must admire the courage it took for him to write it. The establishment does not appreciate criticism against Israel, an issue which the book also touches on but not nearly in depth enough. Unfortunately, the book probably isn't believed by enough people

I first read The Armageddon Network twenty years ago when it was first published and find it unforgetful. It is the story of a senior US Government official passing secrets to Israel, but the crime was ignored even after verified in an FBI investigation.

Worse, the perpetrator was promoted to the highest levels of the Department of Defense and given more responsibility and more access to vital secrets.

Now we may watch the same story unfolding again in the case of Larry Franklin passing secrets to AIPAC currently being investigated.

How will this play out?

My bet is that Franklin will drop from the news and the case will never be tried.

Jim Ennes
Survivor, USS Liberty

It is books like the Armageddon Network that make people sick, because it reveals how corrupt their government is. It also unveils the blatant arrogance of the self-serving elites and untouchables. The elites genuinely believe that the majority of the people are stupid, therefore, they can get away with anything. I think the majority of people are too afraid to see the truth, because it is extremely unsettling to go against one's own political socialization and training, and the alternative for that is denial. Denial makes a great coping mechanism.
The Armageddon Network is a well documented and written expose. It is highly recommended for the curious mind!

Dr. Pascual has managed to cut right to the nerve of some very complex current issues: the roots of Islamic terrorism, the anger focused against the U.S., the troubles with our long-term allies, and U.S. policy in the Middle East, explaining it in such a way that anyone can gain an understanding of the events that are shaping our future. If you are looking for a well-written, interesting overview of the situation, this is the book for you. Pascual quotes policy experts extensively, but you don't have to be a political scientist to understand what is there; in fact, the research is presented in such a way as to make the book a fascinating, but easy, read. Buy this book to see what only an "outsider" who has come to love our country can teach us about ourselves.

arma against faith is a well thought out way of looking at our great american society in the light of middle earstern cultures
it can be a great way of introducing those who are just begining to understandthayt the middle eastren world looks at us americans from a very diffrerent point of veiw

this comes froma man who can stand outside our culture and look in. an excellent read

Its a compelling book with everything thats happening now.Thrilling and informative "arms Against faith" is a must read.

A must read for all radical anarchists! In "Arms Against Faith" Dr. Eladio Pasqual presents a bi-cultural perspective on how America's complacency led to it's own demise on the fateful day of September 11th. Dr. Pasquals' religious and spiritual background assist him in analyzing the Islamic faith and offshoot radical fundamentalists and how their interfacing with the United States ends in near implosion. With great passion he speaks of the America that he loves having become so grandious that it enters a war alone and with no end in sight.
A brilliant read! I encourage you all to go on this journey with Dr. Pasqual as he examines pertinent issues of this war from his American and Spanish roots; countries each that he cherishes but only one that he grieves.

This book is an excellent summary of the holocaust and the controversies which have arisen around it in the past years. Everybody who has ever had any doubts about the holocaust should read this book to realize how dangerous is to deny a historical event for the collective memory of the people. Vidal-Naquet is brilliant in his sociological-discoursive method. A first-class historical treatise.

Great insights on the truth about the Holocaust

This book is an excellent summary of the holocaust and the controversies which have arisen around it in the past years. Everybody who has ever had any doubts about the holocaust should read this book to realize how dangerous is to deny a historical event for the collective memory of the people. Vidal-Naquet is brilliant in his sociological-discoursive method. A first-class historical treatise.

This is a commentary on our age as much as it is a series of essays about the people Vidal-Naquet calls assassins of memory. And a sad commentary it is. For it features some of our greatest minds and some of our most revered institutions.

Here is Chomsky, proudly proclaiming that "It is the responsibility of intellectuals to speak the truth and expose lies"... shortly before penning a preface to Robert Faurisson's book--a book that denied the Holocaust. (Chomsky later realized what he had done and frantically called the publisher to omit his preface).

Here is an institute that finances revisionis activities offering $50,000 to anyone who could prove the existence of a gas chamber. A gentleman who had seen his entire family murdered accepted only to find that the conditions of "proof" were set so high that only a person who HAD been gassed could, in fact, prove the existence of a gas chamber.

Here is Jean-Paul Sartre's report on genocide--a report which omits the Armenian genocide so as not to offend the Pakistani and Turkish authorities.

Here is the origin of the book's title for those who would deny the Holocaust, "chose their target well: they are intent at striking a community in the thousand painful fibers that continue to link itself to its own past."

Here is the French Court struggling with the concept of "crimes against humanity" on December 20, 1985.

And here is the state of the French libraries. "Neither at the Sorbonne nor at the Bibliotheque Nationale can one find fundamental documentation concerning Auschwitz, which has to be consulted, for the most part, at the Centre de Documentation Juive Contemporaire, which itself is far from possessing all that it should."

It seems Vidal-Naquet is amply justified in concluding "Will the truth have the last word? How one would like to be sure of it....."

Michael Twohey sets aside the long-standing disposition to see political arguments in China in the past hundred years from a liberal or Marxist point of view, argues that to call them "Confucian" is too simple, and demonstrates their strikingly pragmatic continuity from Kang through Sun Yat-sen and the early Mao and Deng to the present. The result is a clear, powerful and persuasive intellectual history, of the first importance for understanding China in the twentieth century and its likely progress into the twenty-first.

Geoffrey Hawthorn University of Cambridge

Twohey's book re-thinks the usual Confucian-centered view of the development of Chinese political and economic thought. Focussing instead on the influence of Xunzi, Twohey convincingly demonstrates that China's leadership has, for centuries (and particualarly at the present time), relied extensively on the practical thought of Xunzi to provide sound economic and social moorings for the development of China. His views on New Authoritarianism help one better understand the philosophy and thought processes behind the decisions of China's modern leadership. I found the book to be readable, thorough, and well-researched. I strongly reccomend this book to academics, business people, or anyone else interested in China

In this thought-provoking study, Michael Twohey persuasively argues that the Confucian conception of the relationship between authority and welfare, informed by Xunzi's political thought, is a pertinent frame of reference for understanding contemporary Chinese statecraft. He has demonstrated that familiarity with Xunzi's ideas of group, natural inequality and great harmony can significantly enhance our appreciation of the rhetoric and ritual of exercising power in the People's Republic of China. His analysis of the debates on New Authoritarianism offers a fresh perspective on democracy and socialism in China.

Tu Weiming Professor of Chinese History and Philosophy, Harvard University and Director, the Harvard-Yenching Institute

Michael Twohey has written a book that is vast in scope, innovative in theme and clear in execution. Who would have thought Confucius irrelevant to Chinese political traditions? Who would have thought Deng Xiaoping a follower of ancient philosophical virtues? These and other revelations come to the fore as Twohey challenges one orthodoxy after another, supports his arguments with over six years of extensive research and re-positions contemporary Chinese authoritarianism on Xunzi's classical notion of welfare. The result is a must read for China specialists and non-specialists alike.

Dr. Sepideh Gharai Thornhill, Ontario Canada

I picked this book up on a whim and couldn't put it down. Simple and easy to understand, it answers every question I hear about in the news almost daily. This is the first book that I have read which really explains how 9/11 unfolded.

This is the first book I've read that really explains why 9-11 happened. Nowhere else have I found the FAA failings detailed. It is scary to think that our government enabled the hijackers to do what they did. Even more scary is the fact that it could happen again - after all the billions and hassle.

As a resident of Massachusett's South Shore and a frequent user of Logan Airport, I am saddened and angry at what Mr. Thomas has revealed in his case study of Boston's Logan Airport - a culture of compromise. Despite the steps Logan has taken since 9/11, the genie is long since out of the bottle. FAA Civil Aviation Security was responsible for oversight of the airport and airlines at Logan and failed miserably in the lead up to 9/11. Massport, then and now, was the least culpable entity charged with security responsibility. The airlines and their fawning sycophants within the FAA's New England Region Civil Aviation Security Division have the blood of thousands on their hands. Willie Gripper and Mary Carol Turano should be fired. I thank Mr. Thomas for recording their wretched performance and at least holding them guilty in the court of public opinion. Mr. Thomas is absolutely correct when he says "No accountability - No justice - no progress." The state of aviation security today leaves much to be desired. We certainly are not getting what we've paid for from the TSA. The airline industry, so critical to the economic well being of our nation, remains vulnerable, but the margin of error has been reduced significantly. I can't imagine what would happen to the air industry and our economy should we experience another downed aircraft in a terrorist attack. The problem is, as before, it is not a question of if, but when. Without accountability we will continue to see a culture of bureaucracy more focussed on trying to convince the traveling public that it is safe to fly, rather than one which actually has the chutzpah to make it safe to fly. Where are our elected representatives who are charged with providing the necessary oversight to insure the American public is protected? What an outrage!!

In this riveting account, Thomas has pieced together the sad history of aviation security. A great read, it made me very angry. Intensive research and attention to detail show how aviation security BEFORE and AFTER 9/11 is still not taken seriously by our government. A necessary book for all Americans.