Government and Politics Books

Randy Shilts's intricately researched biography of one of the greatest gay activists of all time, Harvey Milk, is not only a political biography, but a chronology of an entire political movement.
This is the second book I've read by Randy Shilts, the first being And the Band Played On. While there are certainly some differences between the two, Shilts's imaginative narrative writing is the same. The Mayor of Castro Street is proof positive that he [the author] can turn even the most mundane of political machinations into high drama.
Starting out when Harvey Milk was growing up in Woodmere, New York, the book traces his life from there. From his high school athletic career, to his college years, his time with the Navy, and his Manhattan years. When Harvey makes the move from New York to San Francisco, the book changes pace, and a gay political hero is born. The book is filled with snippets of his speeches, and in the back appendices, the eloquent words of Harvey Milk come alive, as some of his more famous speeches are reprinted there.
At a solid 380 pages (including appendices and sources) the book never drags. Everything appears to be cause and effect, which makes for some white-knuckle reading even if the reader is already familiar with the budding gay movement, Harvey Milk's participation in it, and the untimely tragic assassination of he and Mayor George Moscone by a homophobic zealot.
I must admit, there were certain parts of this book that gave me chills: Harvey Milk's beautiful speeches, the candlelight vigils, the many marches, and the White Night Riots. The sheer epic proportions of it all can overwhelming.
However, epic or not, this remains the simple story of a man and his dream, vision, and hope for his gay brothers and sisters, and all of humanity.

Beyond the frank and up front story of the life of Harvey Milk, this book is an incredible source of information and understanding of the gay rights movement from before its beginning to after the death of Supervisor Milk. Easy to read, albeit long, it's definitely worth the effort. No matter your sexual orientation, this brings new light to an often misunderstood movement.

I read a lot of biographies and, while I love the genre, I'm often disappointed with the writing. This book, by the late Randy Shilts, is an exception. Shilts was a great writer, able to take a variety of facts and put them into readable passages (his "And the Band Played On" is another good example of this). Harvey Milk and the San Francisco of the 1970s come to life in this book. The tragedy of Milk's assassination and its aftermath are rendered in gripping detail.

In The Mayor of Castro Street, the late Randy Shilts paints a vivid picture, not only of the life of gay politician Harvey Milk, but of the fight for gay rights in 1970's San Francisco and the nation as a whole. After a description of the events immediately following Milk's death, Shilts begins the book with Milk's youth in New York City. He briefly describes Milk's years in New York, and spends the vast majority of the book on Milk's last five years in San Francisco. It was during his San Francisco years that Milk made his critical contributions to gay history, including encouraging the development of the Castro into a gay Mecca, and running for, and finally winning, elected office as an openly gay man in a time when most thought such things simply couldn't happen.

Shilts is a meticulous reporter. In his section on source material he details how he extensively interviewed Milk's former lovers, including Scott Smith and Joe Campbell. Many of the dialogues for the biography come directly from the personal diary of Michael Wong, a longtime Milk supporter. According to Shilts, dialogues with others who knew Milk virtually always corroborated those in Wong's diary. Shilts's history of the Castro area came from over one hundred interviews he conducted with area residents.

One of the best qualities of the biography is its astonishingly objective posture. Achieving something like objectivity is a tremendous challenge for the author of any modern-day history, and nowhere is this more true than in histories of the gay liberation movement. The living participants in that history inevitably portray it in a range of ways and often fight vigorously for placement of credit where they feel credit is due. Shilts allows those participants to speak for themselves, and focuses on telling the details of the story, rather than interpreting that story for the reader. It is this author's unique degree of commitment to researching and conveying all the details that allows him to present such an apparently unbiased account.

It is also Shilts's attention to detail that makes the book so tough to put down. It reads more like a novel than a history, and each segment leads into the next with a sense of a tremendous plot unfolding. In a style that would come to characterize his later books, such as And The Band Played On, as well as Conduct Unbecoming, Shilts manages to draw the reader into multiple stories of individuals that end in cliffhangers, only to be picked up again in a later chapter. It is these stories that make up the fabric of gay history in San Francisco and a portion of that larger tapestry called gay liberation.

Randy Shilts has taken great pains to present the man honestly, exploring his political and personal lives. The result is an illimunitating portrait of the Gay Rights champion, documenting his triumphs and ideals alongside his personal ambiguities and foibles. Milk's rise to power, as well as the city's rich gay history, are depicted with candor and clarity.

The assassinations are reported in graphic detail, as is the reaction of the people. Intial shock and grief turn to righteous indignation when, on May 21, 1979 White is convicted on two counts of "valuntary manslaughter" with a maximum sentence of seven years, eight months. The city explodes. Justice is thwarted. A martyr is born. Milk's murder galvanizes the Gay Community to stand up and take their rightful place in society. A great book.

A return to savings. A tax cut is designed too encourage the rich too save. The rich create jobs and invest in ideas. The savings of the rich increase innovation by infusing money that produces products and services, in the economy. However, excessive governmental debt is the thief in the night destroying all wealth.

Banks use these savings too fund new corporate projects. The innovations attract foreign investment as they seek to profit from the new ideas. The stock market booms and jobs increase. Economic growth reaches an impass as government spending increases beyond a safe amount of government debt. Debt to finance rebuilding of natural disasters ($61 billion) and the Iraq war (est $200 billion). Perpetual debt, debt that can never be paid off. In 1990s, a $5.6 trillion surplus existed and by 2002, $4 trillion had been spent, and by 2005, -2 trillion was spent or borrowed. Debt is suppose to decrease during economic booms and the neoconomist are predicting future boom and future debt reduction. Debt slows down growth, as money becomes more difficult to risk and acquire. At the same time the government becomes increasingly burdened with the interest it must pay on the money borrowed.

The Fed attempts to slow inflation by increasing interest rates soaking up liquidity and cooling the economy. The Fed raises interest rates is hoped to keep inflation in check. High fuel costs threaten too increase inflation. The responds by raising interest rates and the rising interest rates have the affect of stifling corporate earnings and dampering Research and Development thereby slowing down innovation. The rising interest rates makes debt vehicles look more attractive increasing purchases of U.S treasuries.

As long as innovation remains strong investors will not flee from stocks because this sector represents growth. A tax cut on earnings increases the amount of money moving into the commerical sector. As money becomes tighter, companies cut back workforce, insert technology to increase production, and delay product introduction. What is expected is more with less. More productivity from less employees.

Investors become uncertain about stocks and seek refuge in Bonds or Commodities. The Fed attempt to quell fears in the bond market about rising inflation. If an investor believes the Fed has contain inflation than the investor will be more optimistic that growth and continue investing into the market.

If the economy is perceived to be slowing down that current bond prices go up. Economic slow downs hold longer-term interest rates down making existing bonds yields more attractive.

In a recession, government is expected to increase debt, spending more, in order, too stimulate growth. So during a boom the new revenue accumulates from taxes. Cut social program whenever possible. The government social machine is a false ideal and will not produce a greater society by spending tax money as its fuel to build infrastructure. The only hope is growth and innovation produced by private machinery.

However, if economic growth does not increase than government revenues will not increase. Economic growth is the key to government revenue. Government spending can not remain constant and perpetual without dramatic impacts on the economy. With $5.4 in surplus, the government believed it could afford a tax cut and spent $2 billion on debt reduction and $1.4 trillion too the emergency reserve.

The author presents an interesting question, "What happens when a country can not pay its interest payment?" The author briefly explains how these countries experience hyper inflation and destablized currencies. At $500 billion a year in interest payments pressure not to increase debt seems prudent, yet more debt continues to accumulate. I think this is the heart of the issue raise about the new economy, "Can it make its interest payments"?

Tax cuts were expected to generate revenue, however, heavy debt and inflation inhibit tax revenue generation because companies don't produce as much. Inflation means higher interest rates and higher taxes.

The following correlations are not true: 1. Unemployment decreases shortly after a tax cut 2. The poor will immediately spend their tax refund money. Most of the poor were discovered to save their tax money. 3. Research and Development will produce immediate innovation cash flows.

The rich save over 50 percent. The savings can be used to invest in company projects that stimulate economic growth . However, if the economy is contracting, company put off new project because money is hard to get.

Research and Development offer a marginal return on the investment. The biggest problem with R&D is that the innovations do not alway equate to profits, increased consumer demand, and immediate introduction in the market place.

How does the government eliminate Taxes over a trillion dollars in taxes? Getting rid of the capital gains tax, dividend tax, interest tax, and estate tax. Taxes targeted at the working class. Interestingly the author does not talk about the consumption tax that congress wants so desparately to pass into law.

How does the government raise money for government spending? U.S Treasuries which are considered the most stable security in the world. Are there any limits to how much money can be produced? A policy of a strong dollar means foreign investment finds favorable investments in dollar denominated securities. A strong dollar means U.S manufacturing production and profits go up and higher profits means more tax revenue.

The author points out that the Laffeur curve did not gain strength. The Laffeur curve suggested the same amount of tax revenue could be gain at a low tax rate verses a higher tax rate. By lower the tax, the consumer had more disposal money, and spent more and the increasing in spending produced tax revenue.

Individualized Social Security accounts may not mean investment profits. The stock market may become bearish and return to a mean of 15 PE causing billions in reduced equity. Fees associated with the broker, transaction, and maintenance will cut into investment profits. The assumption of 7 percent growth perpetually may not hold up.

Imagine it is 2012, what will the new economy look like? By neoconomist standards the economy will be a pulsating capitalist machine with individuals incomes surge higher and money being stashed away. Economic growth will exceed 4 percent. Tax collections will be growing, debt decreasing, and interest payment reducing. The government will defray its debt and long term interest rates will be decreasing. There will be no taxes on wealth and savings. Foreigners will see the U.S stock market attractive for investing. Even China and India will not be able match the high returns of U.S companies. Innovation will create and insatible demand for American Labor. The Unemployment rate will fall. Individualize Social Security accounts will pump billions of dollars into private companies. Senior Citizens will have a new level of disposal cash available. A new era of American economic supremcy, if it can become a reality.

"Neoconomy', along with `What's the Matter with Kansas' are probably the two most influential books I've read in the last five years. Forget all you know about Supply-Side Economics and Trickle Down Theory, Daniel Altman has written an easy to understand book on what the heck the Bush Administration is attempting with all those tax cuts and why they target the wealthy.

In a nutshell the Neoconomy is about reducing taxes on unearned income and savings in order to increase the accumulation of capital. This capital could be used to modernize, increase productivity and raise the holy grail of economics, the GDP. The country would theoretically attain more wealth, higher standards of living and a happy future for all. It's not an insane plan and it has the support of many well respected economists. The first problem with the plan is that it seems rather self serving. George W. Bush assembled a cabinet with an almost unprecedented cache of wealth. The author estimates their combined assets at between 3 and 30 times the value of the second Clinton administration. These are exactly the people who will benefit most from tax cuts on unearned income. They are also people who can afford to take considerable risks with our economy and still come out fine if things go sour.

The other larger problem is in the very nature of the leadership of George W. Bush. He surrounds himself with like minded people and gathered an economics team consisting almost entirely of supply-side adherents creating an echo chamber of ideas. These are people who have taken economics beyond mere theory into the realm of religious dogma. Unfortunately when tax cuts and growth are the only path to salvation everything else tends to get shortchanged. It has occurred to business owners that some of the things holding back growth include employee benefits, high American wages, regulations and assistance for the poor. The obsession with growth sometimes seems to reach the level of pathological and government finds itself ripping away at society's foundation in order to raise the tower higher. The author also points out that capital accumulation on its own is useless. You also need an educated society in order to both develop and use new technologies. Meanwhile the administration has consistently under funded education programs, worked to cut college grants and shown disdain for the scientific process (Read `The Republican War on Science' by Chris Mooney to see how bad it has gotten).

The last problem is that the Neoconomy may just flat out fail. Like the weather, economics can be affected dramatically by small unexpected perturbations. It's difficult to predict what will happen in six months or next month much less decades in the future. The Bush administration is treating economics like a hard science when in reality it's based on difficult to predictable human psychology. Changing the tax codes may have exactly the opposite intended effect. By reducing taxes on dividends people may actually begin to save less rather than more if they have specific retirement goals. Unfortunately Bush's extreme tax cuts are intended to handcuff lawmakers and force us down one path. The Republican groupthink is also the likely cause of the wildly optimistic (bordering on obscene) predictions about job creation that rivaled anything made in the run up to the Iraqi war. People forget now but the numbers being offered by the administration weren't just wrong they were `we have no idea what we are talking about' wrong. The scary thing is that these same people who were as wrong as wrong could be on job creation numbers seem to have absolutely confidence that they can precisely predict the effect of Social Security privatization decades in the future.

`Neoconomy' is Daniel Altman's first effort and he smacked this one out of the ballpark. Economics can be a rather dry and confusing subject but Mr. Altman manages to write a book that is lucid, informative and engaging. I would highly recommend this book to anyone interested in the direction the United States is traveling.

Lets start out by saying this is book to bash president bush but rather it shows what the president and his economic advisors ideas and plans and what the effect and possible effects will be.
This should be another one of those books that should be red before the election because some of these ideas will be considered radical by some.

The main idea for the bush plan is to have the tax cuts and such to put more money out for companies to have pools to borrow from and this inturn will stimulate the ecomony. But this is an experiment could go wrong. This administration can afford to experiment because if it does go wrong bush and his cronies will probably lose some money but they will still have many millions to live on, it will really hurt the middle class on down.

It is no secret that most of the tax cuts have benefited the so called rich by cutting taxes on estates dividends and savings. All of these people get the most of their income from stocks and real estate. Yes these cuts are for everybody but how many people from the $40,000 level on down can save and invest to get these breaks. Would you not think that if the president really wanted to stimulate the economy he would gear cuts toward the majority. With the tax cuts bush signed into law in 2001 the book shows that for those making $50,000 or less the tax difference is less than a $1,000 compare that that make $500,000 or more they get breaks at least 10 times that amount don't you figure those on the lower end of the scale could use the money the most.

Another example is the estate tax cut while they figure if they cut the tax it will encourage more investment but in reality it has probably encouraged them to save more for there heirs because of course less tax.

Just like in the Reagen era alot of these cuts are based on future years where they figure the economy will be strong but what will the effect be if the economy is in a poor state as it is in now you do not have all the projected revenue and you have record debt that has to be paid sometime

This book is written so that it is pretty easy to understand on a subject that at times is dry and difficult.

We all know about the war on terrorism. And the war in Iraq. The debates about these things are fairly clear. Or at least ubiquitous.

And yet perhaps the Bush Administration's central and most groundbreaking effort has to do with none of these topics, but rather with the economy. The Administration is seeking to re-orient it from top to bottom. And there is little coverage of this in the news.

Daniel Altman explains it to me in crystal clear and easy prose. What I liked the most was the sort of intellectual history approach he takes, showing where the ideas for the "neoconomy" came from, as in what professors espoused them, who their students were, and how they came to positions of influence in Washington, and the responses over the years to their ideas. It's a fairly small group with a distinct lineage--think of the economists' equivalent to Wolfowitz and the Straussians.

One striking thing, if I read it right: the desired endpoint for the Neocons is a society in which only working people are taxed. A person who derived their income not from salaries, but entirely from stocks, bonds, and the like, would not be taxed at all.

The neoconomists' measures, supposedly undertaken for the bland and admirable goal of enhancing savings, inevitably end up being regressive.

Altman is quite rigorous and judicious, weighing the arguments on their own terms, following them to their logical conclusions, noting contradictions and inconsistencies in their own logic.

What's being touted is quite different from what's really going on, as the neoconomists themselves admit. It seems, apparently, that an attempted revolution is in the works, behind the scenes. This book peels back the veil and lets us know what is really going on.

I came away from this book with a better understanding of both basic economics and the real paradigm shift that is potentially underway in the largest economy on earth.

With presidential elections on our doorstep, Altman's 'Neoconomy' comes to bat with light to shed on future repercussions of the Bush Administration's economic plan. Altman's 'Neoconomy' is refreshingly un-biased allowing the reader, whether PH.D or undergrad, to determine what America's economic futrure holds in store.
Altman is charismatic, intelligent and makes his points fairly and concisely. I was thouroughly convinced of this after listening to him speak in San Francisco.

As much as other reviewers were raving about this book, I thought I would like it just as much. I really thought it was a mediocre work of writing. It consisted of haphazardly organized observations about empire, presented with very little sense of coherence. The observations were often superficial and rarely put into context. It's like reading a collection of notes from a conference on globalization, mixed with a few writing exercises from a creative writing class.

This book would make good reading material for a coffee house. Read it where you don't care if you're interrupted. Read it where you'll get more insight out of the conversations it sparks with strangers and acquaintances.

I don't recommend reading this book unless you have at least a couple of semesters of Spanish on your high school or college transcript. The author writes a lot of the fictional (?) dialogue in a mixture of Spanish and English, and she doesn't always provide enough context clues to figure out the Spanish if you don't already have some education in the language. (Fortunately, I did.) The Spanish-English mixture really wasn't necessary for the book; it was more distracting than helpful, and at times it seemed to stereotype the speakers a little bit.

It would be difficult to add to the depth of insight other reviewers have already provided. Chellis' insight and passion are reinvigorating planetary healing on multiple levels. The best gage for this is the example of her own life. Read everything she writes. A modern visionary with a powerful and compelling voice.

What impact has three hundred years of Western imperialism had on the way we treat each other -- and the Earth -- today?

How is today's global economy simply our latest expression of colonization?

How can our personal woundings become doorways to self-healing and form the basis of a commitment to sustainable planetary culture?

In her new book, Off the Map (An Expedition Deep Into Imperialism, the Global Economy, and Other Earthly Whereabouts, Pulitzer-nominated author and psychologist Dr. Chellis Glendinning explores these themes with a directness, clarity and emotional intensity that awakens the reader to profound insight about the nature of today's world.

In a lyrical braiding of three stories, she weaves the threads of her personal story of sexual abuse in a European-American (and Anglophile) family in the 1950s, the history of the last three hundred years of Western imperialism and a present-day horseback ride through the recently colonized Chicano world of northern New Mexico, where she currently resides.

Glendinning sees Off the Map as a continuation of her past work. "My focus is always the relationship between the personal and the political," she notes. "This book is an effort to make clear that everyone on the Earth is still experiencing the legacies of the classical age of empire, that corporate globalization is just the latest expression of Western imperialism and that, ultimately, it cannot work."

Throughout the book, we follow Glendinning's story of sexual abuse at the hands of her father, through her healing to the reclamation of her essential self and her reconnection to the power of land and nature. We also follow the story of the land-based Chicano peoples of northern New Mexico, a story that goes to the heart of the unspoken wound of imperial systems: the relationship between the colonizer and the colonized.

Glendinning, a highly respected eco-psychologist, received a Pulitzer nomination for her book When Technology Wounds (William Morrow). Other earlier works include My Name is Chellis and I'm in Recovery From Western Civilization (Shambhala) and Waking Up in the Nuclear Age (William Morrow). Off the Map is a compelling look at the unexamined implications of our rapidly expanding global economy and, as such, should cause a great stir among economists, sociologists and all those concerned about the future of humanity -- and all of life -- on Earth.

To the thorough reviews below I'll just add:

It's nice to see someone in my field working for rather than against the social forces that oppose the conformity and imperialism that show up nowadays as well-marketed, hyperconvenient, quick-fix "psychotherapy" (or is that psycho therapy?). Listening to the soul of the world, Chellis Glendinning hears in it an anguish echoing her own--and acts bravely and actively on behalf of both.

There's an annoying idea at my school (Pacifica) that all such activism = acting out, a kind of puerile and heroic impulsiveness--whereas working the imaginal, perhaps from within a well-lighted office on convenient days, should be enough. The example of the author's way of being indicates otherwise. We certainly need to monitor our activism, lest it become just another kind of colonizing arrogance so characteristic of our empire-driven civilization; at the same time, to say and do nothing except in private is not enlightened or soulful, it is cowardly.

Good work, Dr. Glendinning!

Off The Maps: An Expedition Deep Into Empire And The Global Economy by psychologist, social activist, poet, and a pioneer in the field of ecopsychology Chellis Glendinning offers a unique look at globalization -- the modern-day alternative to the economic empires of European and Western history. Using maps as allegory, Off The Maps peers between the lines at the individual hopes and lives of workers and the working class at home and abroad as they struggle beneath the crushing spread of politically imperialistic, homogeneous mass-culture invasive, free-trade oriented, international corporation dominated, western-style consumerism. Off The Maps is a welcome and timely contribution which is very highly recommended for the non-specialist general reader with an interest in international politics and economics.

This book has a lot of useful information and is a fun and easy read. It is a must for anyone looking to join the ever expanding right wing conspiracy lol. As a conservative I wish such a conspiracy exsisted. R. Reagon for 2008

The book is pretty similar to the 2006 and 2007 editions. The author provides some pretty solid refutation of the most common liberal arguments. But it is nowhere near as in depth and comprehensive as Gregg Jackson's "Conservative Comebacks to Liberal Lies." Smith's answers are more tongue and cheek than Jackson's more thoroughly researched and documented responses. It's not a bad read though.

Have you ever had an epiphany and realized it was about how nasty the Democratic party is???? Well, this book will bring that realization to the front of your cranium, and give you a lot to think about!!! GET IT NOW!!!!

As always, The Official Handbook of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy undeniably lives up to its title. Now in an updated 2008 Presidential Election Edition, The Official Handbook of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy remains a solid block of strategies for debating with the extreme liberal left. Chapters attack and destroy the arguments supporting such left-wing causes as amnesty for illegal immigrants, giving constitutional rights to terrorism suspects, hysteria over global warming, unilaterally giving up in Iraq, using the Fairness Doctrine to censor conservative talk radio, "inside job" 9/11 conspiracy theories, same-sex marriage, and more. Liberals will also want to read The Official Handbook of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy, the better to understand and anticipate the counter-arguments that are coming, and moderates are sure to chuckle at Smith's tongue-in-cheek take on the issues regardless of personal political preference! "...welfare hurts the exact people it is meant to help. By paying people to remain unemployed and giving extra subsidies to non-working parents who had additional children, between the 1960s and the 1990s welfare policies perpetuated poverty by removing the incentive to work while adding to exploding rates of illegitimacy. Since Congress approved comprehensive welfare reform in 1996, however, we've seen dramatic improvements in child poverty and illegitimacy rates. What a surprise - when the government stops paying people to be unemployed and to have kids out of wedlock, people find more jobs and have less out-of-wedlock children. Who could have predicted that?"

A quick and fun read for anyone who is sick and tried of the baseless attacks from the vast left wing conspiracy. It provides clear cut answers to virtually all of the accusations of liberals. In the past I chose to not debate most of the topics in the book. Now I do not shy away from a discussion. It provides you with enough amunition to make a liberal stammer and stutter.

Kagan's Pericles of Athens and the Birth of Democracy is an extremely well-written book on a remarkable statesman who lived nearly twenty-five hundred years ago. The historian Thucydides called him Athens's `first citizen'. During his thirty years of near dominance as that city-state's leader, Athens enjoyed great wealth, a democratic form of government, and gloried in the arts and building projects that reflected that city's heightened status. Kagan's defense of Pericles (though not without criticisms) and the form of government he helped implement are admirably and ably argued.

Kagan's sources are fairly limited, which is to be expected. He relies mostly on the famed account of the Peloponnesian War by Thucydides, the later writings of Plutarch, and the works of some of the famed literary figures of the day. Perhaps the greatest surviving symbol of Pericles's influence in Athens is the Parthenon. Democracy in Athens began under Cleisthenes, as Kagan mentions, but Pericles advanced this system by opening political participation and voting to more of that city's citizens. He also promoted a paying system for public service. It is tempting to try to compare our political system with the system in Athens (though quite different) and say that ours is more inclusive, which though true technically doesn't mean that the political system in Athens is any less deserving of a certain amount of admiration.

Athens was also an empire, though Pericles could persuasively argue its merits despite the seeming contradictions. Athens's wealth and prestige did not come without costs. Sparta and various other Greek people were suspicious and resentful of the growing influence of Athens. The Spartans, as Kagan claimed later in the book as the Peloponnesian War began, would claim the mantle of liberators of the Greeks. Pericles's policies were seemingly always guided by an intelligent, rational way of thinking. He tried to pursue the moderate course between the extremes, as Kagan states. This seems to become most evident in the opening scenes in the war against Sparta.

I find that moderation to be very admirable, even if his policies could be wrong on occasion, as the Peloponnesian War would prove. He was perhaps too stubborn in adhering to certain strategies, but he did what he believed was right for Athens. His ability to influence his fellow citizens was indeed quite remarkable. But even Pericles had enemies and for a while even he was cast out of office when things weren't going well for Athens in the early stages of the conflict. Pericles died in 429 BC, only two and a half years into the war that would last twenty-seven years. His military strategy had not worked, though very clearly thought out and believed by its architect. But one thing was sure, after his death, Athens would sorely lack that high-minded and able leadership that he represented so well.

This is the second book by Kagan I've read and he doesn't disappoint. He makes a strong case for Pericles and Athenian Democracy, though he can be critical, especially of Pericles's strategy for fighting and winning the war with Sparta. Then again, what if Pericles had lived longer? Makes for a great what if, but then again maybe it wouldn't have changed the ultimate outcome of the war. A fascinating period, but a tragic one.

When I was just a youngster I remembered reading about the "Golden Age of Pericles". What was this "golden age"? Who was Pericles? What impact did he have on the world today?

To begin with, the "golden age" marked the beginnings of the Athenian Empire. Athens became the Mecca for the world, attracting the greatest minds. It became an important trade center. With this, Athens became one of the greatest cities in the mid-Fifth Century BC world. At the center was Pericles.

Pericles rose to prominence under less than favorable circumstances. He came from an old family that was involved in a sacrilege to the gods about one hundred years earlier. His family was cursed and expelled from Athens. When Pericles came of age he neglected politics, as the Athenian aristocracy was firmly entrenched. When his opportunity finally came Pericles was able to win over the citizens to his way of thinking by the power of his oratory.

Pericles didn?t invent democracy but under his leadership democracy flourished. He firmly believed that when the opportunity for power belonged to all the citizens, instead of only a few, that the best people would rise to leadership roles. This was democracy?s strength. The critics?and there were many?feared mob rule. For that reason it would be a long time before democracy rose to prominence in the world again. Even our own founding fathers feared mob rule, but representative democracy would prevent that while preserving democracy?s strength.

The legacy of Pericles was that he was a true statesman. He understood the ramifications of the peace with Sparta and what would happen to Athens if she caved into the demands of Sparta. The result was a great Peloponnesian war that would eventually cost Athens her empire. It was faulty strategy, wrong assumptions, and a lack of strong leadership after Pericles died that did Athens in. Donald Kagan mentions the connection with Winston Churchill, who found his country facing a great danger from Germany because its prime minister backed down. Like Pericles, he knew Great Britain would have to stand and fight. One can only wonder what the world would be like if Pericles? Athens had won as Churchill?s Britain had?

Donald Kagan of Yale university is perhaps the foremost authority on Periclean Athens in the world today. As such, it is only natural that he should write a treatise on the life of the great man known as Pericles.

All of the major facets of Pericles' life are brought together in this edition, from his rise to prominence to his scandalous affair with Aspasia to his strategy of fighting the Peloponnesian war against Sparta and her allies. The latter topic, of course, will gather the most interest to modern readers.

While I have read Thucydides, I felt that Kagan did a wonderful job of elaborating on a lot of details of the Peloponnesian war that were a bit unclear in primary sources. The problem with historical primary sources is that they many times take as a given the reader knows all the background information behind specific events. Kagan makes no assumptions and walks the reader through the various political and social aspects that underlie sundry events of 5th century Greece.

One of the more surprising elements of this book is that Kagan is not reticent in his criticisms of many Periclean policies and war strategies. While moderation is typically seen as a positive thing (just ask Aristotle!), Kagan points out how Pericles could over-rely on human reason and be moderate to a fault. In short, this book is NOT an encomium on the Greek leader. Rather, it is an open an honest examination of his life & times. Kagan disinters both the best and the worst in Pericles' character and foresight.

This book is highly recommended to all persons who are interested in Greek history. For those who wish to become more acquainted with Athens in the turmoil of war, this book is a can't miss.

Donald Kagan's knowledge of the subject is likely unequaled. Having essentially written the premier history of the war Pericles hoped to avoid, The Peloponnesian War, Kagan was in the unique position to write a similarly authoritative biography of this classic statesman. And that he has.

The book is well-written, thoroughly readable, and tells the story of Pericles better than its predecessors. That said, those who've read Kagan's four volume series on the Peloponnesian War will find that most of the text in this book has already been covered. This is not to say that new insights and clever evaluations are not to be found, for they are, but only that the author is, unfortunately, a victim of his own superb and exhaustive account of Pericles' life in prior works.

Also note: this is an excellent history of the political framework of early Athens. If you require an introduction to Athens' early democratic structure, including a wonderful description of the Assembly (a fusion of legislative and judicial branches into an open forum), this is the book.

Those who are new to the author and/or the subject will not encounter an issue with the text and, indeed, could not ask for a better biography.

This is a good biography of a great man. Kagan not only distills a great deal of information into a very accessable book, he also manages to impart understanding and insight about Pericles and his Athens. This book is valuable to anyone interested in classical Greece. With particular emphasis - anyone contemplating an attack on "The Peloponnesian War" by Thucydides would do well to get "Pericles" as a companion. Even if you already have Thucydides under your belt, you will probably gain fresh insight into that famously difficult work through Kagan's lucid exposition.

Wonderful workings of writing the whole truth. A must have, must read, must distribute widely!

This book is about the relationship between the United States and the Sioux Nation from the signing of the 1851 Ft. Laramie treaty up to the present. The book centers around the efforts of the Wounded Knee Survivors Assoc. and their attorney Mario Gonzalez to obtain a formal apology from the U.S. government for the 1890 Wounded Knee Massacre and the establishment of a National Tribal park at the massacre site. This book includes:

*Gonzalez' diary entries from 1989-1992--an excellent window to see firsthand how contemporary tribal governments work and how Native Americans on reservations interact with each other on a daily basis.

*Commentary (called chronicles)by Elizabeth Cooke-Lynn explaining events described in the diary entries including Gonzalez' efforts in stopping the payment of $100 million claims commission for the Black Hills in 1980, and his efforst in Europe from 1981 to 1984 to get the World Court to issue an advisory opinion on the illegal confiscation of the Black Hills.

*Appendices that include a complete chronology of Sioux land claims from the signing of the 1851 treaty up to the present--a must for anyone interested in Indian land claims.

*Excellent footnotes with valuable information found no where else including information about Chief Crazy Horse's family members contained in the probate records of Chief Crazy Horse's father.

This book is FASCINATING and should appeal to everyone! IT SHOULD BE REQUIRED READING IN EVERY NATIVE AMERICAN STUDIES CLASS!

what elizabeth and mario have done is to create a work that will stand for the test of time! my favorite part of the whole book was when Elizabeth proudly states THAT NATIVE AMERICAN, ABORGIONAL, AND INDIGENOUS PEOPLES ARE NOT CITIZENS OF THE WHITE MAN'S NATION ! FOR EXAMPLE A PERSON WHO LIVES IN THE DINE NATION IS NOT A CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES BECAUSE THEY NEVER ASKED FOR NOR DID WANT TO BE CITZENS OF THIS PATHETIC NATION! THEY ARE CITIZENS IN THEIR TRIBE AND NATION NOT OF THE PATHETIC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA OR THE WORLD FOR THAT MATTER! READ THIS BOOK TO LEARN THE REAL HISTORY OF WOUNDED KNEE AND ABOUT A PEOPLE WHO ARE CHANGING HISTORY EVERY SINGLE DAY!

Wonderful workings of writing the whole truth. A must have, must read, must distribute widely!

What first strikes this reader is the very frank and engrossing personal narrative, as well as the description of the on-going political struggle of the Sioux in their battle for the return of the Black Hills in South Dakota. The diary entries of lawyer Mario Gonzales and the commentaries of Elizabeth Cook-Lynn gave me an opportunity to re-think important events in Sioux and American history over the past century (including Custer and the Little Big Horn, the Wounded Knee Massacre of 1890, and others). The authors also show very clearly how these linked histories continue to influence the actions of individuals (white or Indian) and governments today. Cook-Lynn is especially deft at evaluating the political, economic,and racial motivations of the various stakeholders, from the factions within different Sioux tribes, the governors and congressmen, federal agencies, to the white landowners. The centerpiece of the book is the fight by the Sioux for the return of the Black Hills (preserved for the tribes by treaty in 1868), as well as the related fight for a monument to the Sioux massacred by government troups at Wounded Knee. But as the story unfolds, it became a means for me to understand the treaty rights and sovereign rights of not just the Sioux but other Indian nations in this country. Gonzales relates details of the legal battles and community struggles, and shows an amazing persistence and courage in his pursuit of justice for the Sioux. I hope that other readers come away from this book with as strong a sense as I did: of our need to resolve these ethical and legal dilemmas by recognition of Indian treaty rights and sovereignty. I'm grateful to the authors for their frank discussions of the real difficulties inherent in this task, and for outlining the rewards to all of us if they succeed.

Prgressive political commentary plus wicked sense of humor equals a thought-provoking and entertaining read. Even years after the publication, Bob Harris's observations on politicians, big business, oil, and the environment are just as prescient and dead-on as ever. Plus, you'll laugh harder than you have in weeks.

This is a really, really funny book. And you can see it's very, very well written because it gets a 5 star review from every single person who has ever read it. Bob Harris is really, really smart, as most of the earlier reviews have attested, and it shows in this very, very funny and very, very clever book. He really should have his own TV talk show, because this book is much funnier than David Letterman. Or maybe he should be a movie actor, and then maybe a movie director, the world would be much better place, and funnier too! :)

I got this book as a gift, and to be honest I had never heard of the guy, but I found myself laughing out loud in a lot of places. The essays are all short and bounce around between subjects, so it's an easy book to have around and read in short stretches. I don't always agree with everything, and if you like Molly Ivins or Will Durst maybe it's a fun read.

I really liked the chapter about the stock market, and how you can tell which way stocks will go by using very sophisticated ratios like that put-call ratio. I also thought that I should add a review since no one seems to have written one since September, and that's a shame for a book with so many incindiary insights.

For too long political humor was synonymous with cranky old men complaining that the audience stank. Bob Harris is young and full of piss and vinegar (organic) and not content to merely whine from afar. He tells you what Alex Trebek is really like and he's not afraid to get his hands dirty. He goes into the trenches to show how campaign financing really works and under the President's desk to show.... No one is spared. Doctors are dealt with appropiately (like self centered over indulged children) Pols are afforded as much respect as they deserve and no one or nothing that could possibly hurt you (science, media, economists, world leaders,oncologists etc.) escapes the cocked eyebrow of Bob Harris. What a tasty read.

John Lewis Gaddis is probably the foremost historian of the Cold War.

Strategies of Containment provides a complete basic overview of the subject of U.S. foreign policy during the Cold War. It is specifically a history of the U.S.'s containment policy toward the Soviet Union and the Communist-bloc and its evolution over time.

It begins with U.S. diplomat George Kennan's famous memomorandum or "long telegram" from the Soviet Union which provided the guide for interpreting the intentions of the Soviet that was used by the State Department and the Executive Branch in formulating U.S. foreign policy towards the Soviet Union and the Communist-bloc nations - especially during the early stages of the Cold War. If a U.S. foreign service officer or other U.S. official wanted to understand the Soviet Union's foreign policy or history and the considerations which would impact the Soviet leadership's behavior - he or she was directed to read it.

The initial assessment by Kennan and his subsequent use of the term "containment" in a Foreign Affairs magazine for the first time, was controversial and volumes have been written on what he meant.

His approach basically was to advise against a wholesale reordering of the world order based on U.S. values which would cause consternation in the Soviet leadership and trigger Soviet defensive diplomatic (and potentially more drastic measures) in opposing the new international framework.

Kennan wanted diversity in the international system, to allow the Soviet Union to participate within it, and not undermine or be alienated from it, and thus transformed by it over time. The history of the Soviet Union's participation in the UN and its institutions confirms his analysis.

Kennan initially argued for a particularist approach as opposed to a universalist approach. He also argued for strong point as opposed to wide-scale perimeter opposition to expanding Soviet spheres of influence.

Kennan's writings set the stage for an interpretation of Soviet behavior and intentions. He studied Soviet and Russian history and knew that the Soviet Union would seek to build buffer zones between it and any potential adversary. The Napolean invasion, Germany's invasion, etc. as well as the Crimean War, and the Russo-Japanes War of 1905, and the U.S. and European intervention in the Russian civil war, all shaped the Soviet leadership's thinking.

Kennan wanted to restore a balance of power at the interface between the East and West in the European theater as well as in Asia, but without contesting every Soviet move for influence along its borders and without alienating the Soviet Union from the new international order.

Truman subsequently instituted a policy review process that led to NSC-68 which expressly stated that the U.S. policy was to promote U.S. values of freedom and human dignity. Containment then moved into the shape of a perimeter-type defensive strategy in which Soviet moves on its periphery for political and military influence was to be contested.

The book then describes U.S. national security policy and how U.S. containment evolved over time into Eisenhower's "New Look" policy in which no further Soviet expansion of its power into other nations was to be uncontested and then later into "flexible response" under Kennedy and Johnson and then detente under Kissinger.

The book is an excellent introduction to the Cold War, the U.S. policy of containment and its evolution.

This book show us the strategies of Containment in the Cold War Era; an important beginning had been made with the Truman Doctrine and the Containment thesis, which established a defensive position holding back Soviet expansionism.
In 1947 the US had an exclusive monopoly on the ultimate weapon, the atomic weapon, and this monopoly should be used -the bomb "makes politically possible....the domination of the world by a single sufficiently large state". The architect of containment was George Frost Kennan, best known as "the father of containment" and as a key figure in the emergence of the Cold War.
He later wrote standard histories of the relations between Russia and the Western powers. The NSC-68, the most important of all Cold War documents, was "a plan of military rearment and development is at present going forward". It's the central document of the Cold War that transformed containment into a global crusade. Approved by Harry Truman in April 1950, it still lacked Congressional funding and support, and Truman was too weak a president to push it throught in the absence of a major crisis.
It would have been interesting if the author of the book had also used an approach from the Soviet point of view, as well as one in the West and the United States. In addition, Henry Kissinger has been widely studied and detailed, but it seems that is not mentioned in the book the figure of the first Secretary of State of the Nixon presidency, William Rodgers.

Now in a revised edition, Strategies Of Containment: A Critical Appraisal Of American National Security Policy During The Cold War is a revised and expanded edition of Bancroft Prize winner and Cold War expert John Lewis Gaddis' classic on understanding the history of containment as a policy, its role in bringing the Cold War to an end, and its possible value or pitfalls in the future. Originally published during the Regan presidency when the Soviet Union was still a superpower, Strategies Of Containment includes a greatly expanded chapter on Reagan, Gorbachev, and the completion of containment, as well as a new epilogue. A welcome scrutiny of history with the advantage of post-Cold War hindsight.

This book is still useful even 20 years after publication. Gaddis view US policy toward the USSR as a pendulum that swings between"symmetrical" and "asymmetrical" approaches. The periods are split into: Kennan's original containment, NSC-68, Eisenhower's "New Look", JFK and Nixon's détente. There is a coda covering Carter, but it is less helpful.

The symmetrical approach confronts the USSR wherever the USSR chooses to probe. In this approach, wherever the Soviets seek to advance is, by their very actions, a US interest. In contrast, the asymmetrical view seeks to identify those areas that are inherently vital US interests and protect those.

The first seeks to build a fence (containment) around the Soviets. The second approach builds its fences around US interests and lets the USSR do what it wants - within reason - elsewhere. Heck, why let them do that? The answer is "means." Gaddis stresses the point that US means are not unlimited. The US must balance means and ends and this leads to the pendulum swings.

The reasons I do not give the book the last star are: It does not cover the Carter-Reagan-Bush era and Smith over draws the magnitude of the swings. The book makes it sound like there were tremendous differences between the various administrations and does not pay enough attention to the essential consistency of US Cold War strategy. Smith acknowledges this in a retrospective on his own book available at the Hoover Institute web site.

Strategies of Containment, by John Lewis Gaddis, is a description of the evolving strategy of containment that was the basis of US policy toward the Soviet Union from 1946 through 1989. Gaddis traces the concept of containment from its inception by George F. Kennan through the modifications applied by five administrations and assesses the strengths, weaknesses, and effectiveness of each version. This book is more than another chronology of the cold war; it provides deep insights into strategic thinking and is essential reading for any serious student of the cold war. Here's a brief summary:

Kennan's Original Doctrine of Containment

* Identify and defend vital interests based on the centers of industrial strength - Britain, Western Europe, Japan -don't try to defend the entire world.
* Use all instruments of power: economic, diplomatic, political, and cultural power as well as military power. Rebuilding the economic vitality of the above areas is a high priority.
* Seek to divide the communist world. Our primary adversary is the Soviet Union. Other communist countries, if not actively supporting Soviet policy, may be led to serve as quasi-allies by depriving the Soviets of their support.
* General war with the Soviets is unlikely, so we can afford to take risks. We can limit our defense spending and not try to defend the world. A point defense of our vital interests is probably adequate.
* Define threats in light of US vital interests, not in terms of Soviet capabilities

Truman and NSC-68

* The policies articulated in NSC-68 moved toward a perimeter defense covering the entire world rather than a point defense of vital interests.
* Primary emphasis was switched to military power and to the entire spectrum of war
* US interests were redefined in response to perceived threats (anything that is threatened must be an interest).
* US strategy became based on a symmetric response to threats - responding in the same time, place, and with the same means as the adversary (e.g., the Korean War).

Eisenhower, Dulles, and the New Look

* Eisenhower's guiding philosophy was that defense is not just defeating the enemy - it is the preservation of our economic and political systems.
* Spending too much on defense could destroy these systems by leading to either inflation or the imposition of autocratic controls. He reduced the defense budget by 33% from Truman's last year and held it at about that level for eight years.
* Alliances relied on allies for ground forces with the US providing Air and Naval support.
* The nuclear threat became the cornerstone of deterrence across the spectrum of conflict - with goal of avoiding war - in belief that any war was all too likely to escalate to nuclear.
* Asymmetric response to threats - response need not be in same place or using same methods as Soviet threat
* Anti-colonial Conundrum: The communists are fomenting wars of national liberation while the US is trying to rebuild Europe (the colonial powers). If the US backs decolonization, it undermines the European allies it is trying to rebuild. If the US backs the colonial powers, it loses any chance of support from the colonies. The Soviets really put us in a no-win position on this issue.

Kennedy, Johnson, and Flexible Response

* Kennedy and Johnson return to NSC-68 reasoning by lowering threat of nuclear response and replaced it with flexible response, requiring a direct, symmetric response to threats - a respond in same time and place using the same means.
* These administrations applied a circular logic: Threats create interests which demand responses which require capabilities even where no interest previously had been identified. This was articulated in the "bear any burden, pay any price" rhetoric.
* This strategy necessitated greater reliance on military response versus economic, political, etc which increased demands on the defense budget.
* Kennedy abandoned Eisenhower's commitment to a balanced budget and relied on Keynesian fiscal policy to stimulate the economy. Spending was predicated on the potential of the economy rather than its actual performance. Lack of budgetary constraints led to inability to prioritize, to distinguish the essential from the peripheral, the feasible from the infeasible which encouraged more "bear any burden, pay and price' reasoning because it wasn't real money.
* Flexible response led to graduated escalation in Viet Nam which became "never enough to defeat the enemy, just enough to prolong the war". Stakes were repeatedly raised to prevent the humiliation of a defeat but this only made the eventual defeat more humiliating.
* Calibrated escalation yielded the initiative to the enemy - allowed him to define the terms of conflict. Deterrence can be made effective only if the adversary can be made to doubt that he can retain control of the situation. Taking the nuclear option away encouraged adversaries to call our bluff.

Nixon, Kissinger and Détente

* Nixon and Kissinger moved the US government from a bi-polar to a multi-polar world view by positing the existence of five significant power centers: US, USSR, Western Europe, China, and Japan. They recognized that these five power centers were far from equal. Only the US and USSR were superpowers able to exert substantial influence via military, economic, political, or diplomatic means. This strategy was a return to the balance of power envisioned by Kennan.
* In the military arena, they focused on sufficiency rather than superiority over the Soviet Union and sought to persuade Brezhnev that a similar policy would be in his country's best interest as well. Sufficiency won the logical argument over superiority because the latter invariably provoked the other side into matching every military advance, producing and endless and unwinnable arms race.
* Conceptually, Kissinger and Nixon changed the country's strategic definition of US interests and threats to those interests. For most of the interval between Kennan and Nixon-Kissinger, the US strategic view had started with the USSR, its capabilities and intentions, then identified the impact these capabilities could have. These impacts became viewed as threats and US interests were defined as anything thus threatened. Nixon and Kissinger reversed the logical flow, much as Kennan did, starting with the identification of US interests, independent of any adversary. They then identified as an adversary an entity with capability and intent to harm these interests.
* Again returning to Kennan's approach, Nixon-Kissinger sought to use negotiations to influence Soviet behavior. They took a long-term approach to negotiations, discarding the tendency of previous administrations from Roosevelt on to use negotiations and agreements with the Soviets for domestic political purposes. They discarded the approach of seeking agreements on specific areas where they could be reached and adopted a strategy of linkage - maintaining that Soviet unwillingness to negotiate in good faith on military and strategic issues of importance to the US would result in US refusal to accommodate Soviet desires for economic and trade relations and recognition of the post war division of Europe.
* The next step in the Nixon-Kissinger strategy was to seek an accommodation with China to reduce US-Chinese tensions and, thereby, free China to take a more assertive stance in its own dealings with the USSR. This was a return to Kennan's goal of dividing communism and redefined our prime enemy as the Soviet Union

Reagan

Reagan continued the return to Kennan's original concept of containment:
* Adopt an asymmetric strategy - don't let the enemy determine the time, place, and terms of conflict
* Apply economic, political, diplomatic, and moral power more than military power. A prime example was his Berlin speech: "Mr. Gorbachev! Tear down this wall!" He put the Soviets in the same kind of no-win position that they had inflicted on Eisenhower over colonialism in the 1950s by setting the Eastern Europeans at odds with the Kremlin.
* He recognized that Soviet system was bankrupt financially, intellectually, morally and turned up the pressure until it collapsed.
* Reagan was also lucky. Kennan had hoped to transform the Soviet Union with the help of a new generation of Russian leaders. Gorbachev turned out to be the leader Kennan had hoped for. He and Reagan together ended the cold war and transformed the Soviet Union from a totalitarian system to one that might have evolved into a more liberal one had the 1991 coup d'état not destroyed it first.

The "Writings of Thomas Jefferson" is an outstanding book...

Not a classic book, though: it is a compilation of many of the letters that Thomas Jefferson wrote during his long life.

My only regret here, is that many of these letters, are reply to other letters.
And it would be great to have, in either the same book, or another books, the "Letters to Thomas Jefferson" to better understand the topic, the whole story! Ideally, and easy cross-reference would be available!

There are a few letters, that I especially recommend to my friends, but it is better if you find them on your own!

I hold Thomas Jefferson Writings in such esteem, that I offered several copies (four so far) to my friends.

Thomas Jefferson is also a great bridge between European and American philosophy, wisdom... or lack of it!

This book, should be on your bookshelf, next to:

Montesquieu "Spirits of Laws" (Also "Causes de la grandeur et du declin de l'empire romain")
Rousseau "Du contrat social"
John Locke "First and second treatises of tolerance"
Edward Gibbons "Fall and decline of the Roman Empire"
And a few more, "golden nuggets of knowledge of recent US/Europe history".

At approximately $10.00 I expected a little more material than this 32 page, index card size book, provided.