Government and Politics Books

This is probably the best political biography I have ever read. Phil Burton was a fascinating man, and Jacobs does a terrific job of profiling him. Whether the reader is liberal or conservative, he will enjoy this book.

Burton was out there. Great book though despite the author being overly enamoured with the subject. Good info and California politics.

The best background piece on California politics. Similarly, a fantastic insight into a legislative master whose personal vices cut short a meteoric rise to power and influence.

As a San Franciscan who grew up hearing about the exploits of Burton and other more-or-less mythical characters, I feel I owe Jacobs a serious "thank you" for providing this view of what went on inside. The man who nearly became Speaker, who wielded and exercised his power lustily and well, who was known for both creating environmental protections and shunning nature, is now a lot more real.

John Jacobs has done a spectacular job of capturing and relating the career of Congressman Phil Burton, a swaggering, ruthless liberal from San Francisco who came within one vote of serving as House majority leader in 1976. For anyone who wants to understand the history of the contemporary Congress, they need only read "A Rage For Justice," and "The Ambition and the Power," by John Barry, which tells the story of Congressman Jim Wright, the man who beat Burton by that one vote. Both books are chock with candid interviews and revealing anecdotes, and written with style. Each serves as a model of congressional biography.

In this engaging book, George Pyle avoids clichéd hand-wringing about the "Crisis of the American Farmer." Instead, he delivers an informative, fascinating farmers'-eye-view account of US agricultural policy within the larger context of economic globalization, the energy crisis, global warming, water pollution, the US obesity epidemic, genetically modified foods and terrorism. Pyle enriches his account with links to slavery, communism, the Dust Bowl, Star Trek and Nobel economist Amartya Sen. Sprightly, direct writing, clear information and convincing analysis, all in 200 pages. Read this book, and you'll to understand where your dinner fits into the Big Picture.

I 'm a city girl and though I was raised in Kansas, I know little about the argricultural market. This book was an eye opener. The author's premise is sound and believe me, it took a lot of convincing on his part to bring me to this point.

Let's stop feeding the poorer nations with our "surpluses."

Since the 1930's when subsidies were provided to farmers that grew program crops (corn, soybeans, wheat, cotton, tobacco...), we were told by pretty much every politician running for office that such subsidies were necessary to save the family farm. Finally, somebody has taken the effort to point out that telling this lie for over seventy years hasn't made it true. In fact, if there is any one factor which is working to limit the viability of mid-sized family operations, it is the grain subsidies which encourage overproduction and mismanagement of the land and water resources and has created a producer base whose primary skill is "farming the government" rather than being true stewards of the land.

While I agree with the author's main point, that grain subsidies are putting family operations at a disadvantage relative to the larger "mega-farms", I respectfully disagree with the point that the subsidies are being maintained for the benefit of all agribusiness entities. While major players in the grain market (Cargill, ADM, Continental Grain) have a vested in interest in having a lot of bushels of program crops around which they can handle and thereby tack a fraction of a cent/bushel margin on, I don't think this conspiracy includes the beef packing industry. Rather, this industry just evolved to its present state to operate in the environment which the subsidies created. If such obscene profits were being realized by all agribusiness entities, IBP (Iowa Beef Processors) would not have been boughten up by the poultry industry juggernaut, Tyson Farms and Swift Packing Co. would not be on Smithfield Farms acquisition list. In fact, I think these events provide a certain degree of circumstantial evidence that the grain subsidies provide a comparative advantage to the pork and poultry industries over the beef cattle industry. However, this one slip can easily be dismissed on the basis that the author is an aging baby boomer and raging against the establshment is what boomers do and shouldn't detract from the point that the grain subsidies are causing more problems than they solve.

I've known farmers and always wished them well. However, I never really had a burning passion for their survival. Growing up in Houston didn't exactly make me a "man of the soil".

Yet, after reading George's book, I understand and finally do care about their success. This is a great book for folks who, like myself, don't understand. A side bonus - unlike a textbook, it's fun to read. George brings the issue down to the level of the consumer, then elevates that level to greater understanding. You learn about the health, security, and economic reasons that you care...even if you didn't know you cared.

I had the honor of working with George in Salina. Anyone who knows his body of work has to feel that, whether you agree with him or not, he's an excellent and entertaining writer. He's also a great guy.

Bryant

RAISING LESS CORN, MORE HELL: THE CASE FOR THE INDEPENDENT FARM AND AGAINST INDUSTRIAL FOOD by George Pyle is an eye-opening treatise on the damage that overproduction and overdevelopment of food does to our economy, our health and our ways of life. These wrongs are committed through the industrialization of food that has occured in the United States in the twentieth century, and Pyle makes a convincing case in easy-to-read reportage that outcomes of this process are not good.

Pyle, who is currently an editorial writer for the Salt Lake Tribune, was raised in Kansas and spent several years as editorial page editor at a newspaper in Salina, Kan. He was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize in 1998, and this book shows his valuable journalistic sensibilities in an issue of great public interest. He is able to clearly (and colloquially) make his case in all the areas he focuses on through thorough citation and primary reporting.

The book (after an interesting prologue titled "Searching for Roots: Or, How I Learned to Start Worrying and Love the Small Farm") is divided into sections with chapters that explore the aspects of "Wealth," "Health" and "Security." "Wealth" deals primarily with the faulty economic assumptions that spur American growers to grow not just crops but their own operations, borrow money for bigger and better machinery, and commoditize themselves right out of a profit. He also deals with the corporate farms and giant cattle and hog farms that are springing up all over the nation. (The farmers make all the investments in facilities and the corporations take none of the risks, but control all the prices. The corporations can also decide not to use a farmer for whatever reason after he or she has made the investments in all the facilities...) This sections lays the groundwork for the fundamental pricing issue of Pyle's thesis: Overproduction drives down prices for American farmers, causes worldwide commodity "dumping" and discourages developing nations from growing their own foods. It's really a "death cycle" of farm economics, but individual farmers feel compelled (and are supported by short-sighted governmental policies) to get as much as possible out of their lands to get bigger profits (or smaller losses) each season, even while this action contributes to driving down real farm wages over time.

The second section, "Health," deals with the consequences of genetic modification of crops and the issues associated with feeding livestock corn and chopped up animal bits, contrary to nature. And there ARE consequences. Some of the consequences are trade related (the EU and other nations won't allow GM crops to be imported, resulting in trade embargoes, political conflict and accusations and aspersions cast on U.S. crop exports) and some are health related (cows should not be fed corn, as when they are, e. coli develop in their intestines... this would be fine if slaughterhouses were clean or careful enough to keep the organs away from the saleable meat, but they aren't... also, mad cow comes from feeding cattle, which are herbivores, bits of other animals, including brains, to fatten them up). Pyle makes such a convinincing case against both these practices, that it has caused me to be more careful in what I purchase and what I eat.

The third part, "Security" focuses on how easily U.S. food production could be terrorized, either by a malicious party or by nature because of its uniformity and its determined ignorance of natural threats and defense. The previous two sections figure in this argument given all that the author has laid out for readers leading up to this penultimate part.

The afterword is particularly instructive. Pyle ties together the themes of his work and focuses the reader on going forward toward something positive. We must find local growers of food, we must allow our food to be a local product, we must be receptive to nature's lessons, and we must seek change in the economic and political climate that encourages our own farmers to drive themselves out of business and our food out of natural confines.

The book is serious, but fun to read, as Pyle's voice is colloquial, strident, but personable. One of my favorite passages, in which he makes an analogy that instructs us on crop rotation, and intermixed crops: "Imagine that you are a discerning, well-cultured, and intelligent person. Imagine that you really like chocolate. But I repeat myself" (p. 187). His headnotes for chapters are diverse, interesting and eclectic, as he quotes communicators from William Shakespeare to William Shatner.

I strongly, strongly recommend this book. It's something we should all be concerned about, and Pyle's treatment of the issue is comprehensive and accessible. It changed my thinking about food, made me more informed as a consumer and a citizen, and I think it will do the same for you!

This book had me laughing from the moment I opened it. It is not only an insightful look at the former President's words, it's chock full of silly comments that keeps the pages turning and turning.

What a conversation piece!!! Politicians beware!!!! Everything you say will come back to haunt you!!! Great book for all of us who enjoy watching our politicians eat crow!!

what a collection by a true master of the pen...Shakespeare? Dickens? Frost? Morons!

This book (as well as the Bush one) is packed with rare and just plain hilarious quotes by the former USA President. Most of these I've never heard before and the author leaves quite funny and relevant comments to further the humour. Highly recommended.

The best, funniest and most enjoyable way to remember all about Clinton! His greatest speeches, his greatest mistakes, his greatest virtues, his greatest flaws! This is a very original quote book, visually attractive, easy to read, and compilated with very intelligent and creative sense of humor. You�ll enjoy it from beginning to end�and back!!!

Herf's book on "Reactionary Modernism" is important because it brings up an intellectual tradition that has been unjustly neglected since the end of WWII. Herf's "paradigm" consists of the right-wing intellectuals, Spengler, Junger, Sombart, Freyer, Schmitt and Heidegger whose main philosophical preoccupation was the impact of technology on modern civilization and the radical shift in human relations that technological progress has caused. Herf locates the peculiarity of this tradition to its love/hate relationship with modern technology. All the aforementioned thinkers realized the tremendous potential of technology but sought to integrate it within the German quasi-romantic GEIST in order to safeguard it from Bolshevism and Americanism. This analysis is complemented by a brilliant chapter on German engineers and their idea about technology and politics. Despite the original contribution of the author to the history and sociology of ideas, his analysis raises some doubts especially in relation to the chapters on Sombart and Spengler. In addition, the author neglects to point to the fact that the "suffocating" state of technology was also pointed out by Marx. Having said that, all credit to Herf who was bold enough to throw light into the "politically incorrect" aspects of German social theory and philosophy. Such attempts are useful and valuable since they put things on perspective shattering one-dimensional views about the current state of civilization. Essential reading for all those who are not afraid to search for the truth even when this is against the current!

Mr. Herf's has written a book that is well researched and fair. Too often, studies dealing with National Socialism and related idealogies lack objectivity, never revealing the full depth and breadth of the thinkers involved. Not so here. The author even points out the mistakes made by many critics in underestimating the thinkers in question.

The chapter on Ernst Junger is the most fascinating. Herf makes Junger's writings clear by placing them in the cultural milieu of the time, something important for understanding most authors, but vital for Junger. While I imagine in hindsight Junger still come off as strange to most of us, he is at least understandable now.

While I can't match the author's experience in research and reading, I remain somewhat skeptical of the extent to which the Nazis adopted reactionary modernism. Was it just a means to an end, to be abandoned once the war was won, in favor of romantic pastoralism. Why the need for lebensraum in the east if not to escape the crowded, "un-nordic" city life?

Also, I wonder if the author's reading of Heidegger isn't a bit off. While Heidegger himself may have prefered the cabin in the woods to the metropolis, I always read his anti-technological views as an attack on a technological, calculating mindset, or way of viewing the world, not as being against the machine neccesarily.

If you are attempting to understand what happened in interwar Germany then this book is worth reading. The main philosophy is that Germany attempted to combine the beauty of modernization with the romanticization of a mythological past. This book helps to explain the foundations of the Nazi regime and why it became so appealing on a mass level. At times the reading gets tough and little on the dry side, but if you can get thought that part of it, you will find the book worth your time.

_Reactionary Modernism_ deals with the way in which certain thinkers on the German Right dealt with the ideals of rationality and technological progress fostered by the Enlightenment. Thus, as distinguished from the traditional Ludditism (i.e. rejection of technology) and anti-technological focus of the traditional right, certain thinkers among the conservative revolutionaries in Germany after the First World War were able to accept the idea of technological progress while rejecting the Enlightenment ideals of rationality. These thinkers distinguished between Technik and Kultur and tried to bring Technik into the realm of Kultur and out of the realm of Zivilisation. Brought together by the experiences of the front (Fronterlebnis) during World War I, the reactionary modernists praised a masculinized ideal of technology. Such reactionary modernist thinkers including Oswald Spengler, Ernst Junger, Carl Schmitt, Martin Heidegger, Werner Sombart, and Moeller van den Bruck were precursors to fascism and national socialism (and in fact many became outright Nazis before the Second World War). _Reactionary Modernism_ focuses upon the thinking of such "conservative revolutionaries" as these thinkers as well as upon the thought of the German engineers and their understanding of capitalism and socialism and various aspects of the Third Reich and Hitler's movement. On one side were the ideals of "blood and soil" and the Volk, opposed to the modern "liberal" ideals of capitalism, communism, and modern finance. The reactionary modernists often were quite antisemitic contrasting the life blood of the German Volk with the more nefarious qualities of "Jewish finance and Bolshevism". While much of the thought of the reactionary modernists fueled the catastrophe that became the Third Reich, reactionary modernism offered a unique perspective which synthesized the aspects of Techniks and Kultur while rejecting the ideals of the Enlightenment.

A review of Jeffrey Herf's "Reactionary Modernism: Technology, culture, and politics in Weimar and the Third Reich." By Michael J. Saporito, MA History candidate, Salem State College. "Reactionary Modernism: Technology, culture, and politics in Weimar and the Third Reich." By Jeffrey Herf. New York: Cambridge University Press. 1984. pp. ix, 251.

Jeffrey Herf's Reactionary Modernism studies the complexities involved in Weimar and Nazi Germany's attempts to simultaneously modernize and antiquate their nation. Herf explores the conservative, anti-democratic groups during Weimar and how they were able to bring together the technological modernization of Germany, while at the same time rejecting almost of the liberal qualities of the Enlightenment. Herf looks to the intellectual, political writings of Juenger, Sombart and Spengler (also, Heidegger, Schmitt and Freyer) to demonstrate how the intellectual community desired to bring Germany into the modern era, while still retaining their distinct German Kultur. Other interesting sources that Herf uses to state his case are German engineering journals and the research of historian Karl-Heinz Ludwig. These sources show how German engineers were brought inline with the reactionary modernist line of thought. Herf successfully demonstrates how the synthesis of technology and German Kultur not only existed, but also thrived. Reactionary Modernism's incorporation of anti-Semitism is detailed if full. Herf explains that this explanation of modern German anti-Semitism is more solid than the version set forth by Adorno and Horkheimer in "The Dialectic of Enlightenment." Anti-democratic groups in Weimar Germany saw the Jew as the reason behind everything that was wrong with Germany. Herf's conclusions show how the Nazis became lost in their ideology and this ended up making technology that was needed for the war effort suffer. The popular myths of German technological supremacy are put to rest. a "Reactionary Modernism" is a valuable source for anyone studying Weimar, the Third Reich or the influence of the Enlightenment in totalitarian governments.

This is the best Russian history book I have read in a very long time. You should all be "Russian" out to get it as soon as possible. History was never my favorite subject, but this author made the subject come alive. My father's parents were born and raised in Russia and had to leave at around the turn of the twentieth century, so reading about the Tsars and the rebellions of that time period gave me a vast new understanding of my ancestral origins when my family members were strangers in a strange land. Great Job, Pete. History rocks!

This book is real tight now ya hear...pick it up pronto. huzzah for the j man

Mr. Julicher is the best teacher at Cranbrook. This book is great and informative.

I am in the process of reading this book and am
fascinated by the authors detail description of the
tsars. It's wonderful to read a book with substance
and not fluff! I am impressed!

Julicher's book is a great book for anyone who wants to read-up on Russian history without referencing several sources. The book easily divides periods of history into readible and understandable chapters. This is a great book for any college or high school student who is interested in Russian history

This was a Christmas gift for my college age son. Book was in excellent shape and delivered in a timely manner.

Plato's philosophies regarding how to organize society is very real in today's modern world. The ideas regarding the honor class are clearly seen if one looks closely. I think this book should be required reading at some point in high school--perhaps people would be better able to see the reasoning behind many social structures thereby allowing them to make more informed decisions about what they believe and to whom they consider to be good leaders.

Plato's 'Republic' is one of the most important works of ancient Greek philosophy, and one of the foundation pieces of political science and political philosophy of that and subsequent ages. It was one of the first pieces I read when undertaking a political science degree.

Plato was not only a great philosopher, but also a great writer. While few master the classical Greek language sufficient to undertake its study in the original language, the text appears in countless translated forms of varying degrees of integrity. This particular translation is one that is often used in schools, and is fairly careful to the original text.

The text is traditionally divided into ten sections, although some scholars see this as being a function of the papyrus and scrolls of original composition more than being integral to the structure of the text itself. One of the interesting features of the Republic is that it was not originally intended for scholars and philosophers primarily, but for the common (albeit educated) reader, and remains one of the more accessible texts of ancient Greek philosophy.

In typical fashion, this is done in a dialogue fashion, with the lead character Socrates (fashioned after Plato's teacher, the great philosopher Socrates, although the words Socrates utters in this and many other Platonic dialogues are undoubtedly Plato's own). There is a discussion on method (the Sophist Thrasymachus shows up early to make disparaging comments about the Socratic method) whilst trying to determine an adequate definition of justice, as well as a discussion on the virtues and/or utility of wealth and old age early in the text. Socrates moves the discussion of justice away from the individual toward the communal, and this is where the political philosophy gets played out in full.

Book II shows the setting out of an ideal city (city-states being the most common form of political organisation in Greece at the time of Plato, with Athens and other cities competing for dominant role). Division of labour becomes an immediate necessity if a city grows beyond a small village setting, according to the theory here. These essentially become classes of people, with different rights and responsibilities, and different expectations of education and material well-being. The guardians or army class is the first one introduced, including an extensive discussion of the type of education and indoctrination such a class should have - this involves political and religious aspects.

It follows from this discussion that censorship is not only tolerated, but selectively preferred. The guardian class is elaborated upon - they are to be divided into rulers and helpers (officer and enlisted class, perhaps?), and they should live separately from the city they guard, owning no private property so as to not be corrupted or corruptible.

After establishing the just foundation of the city, the discussion returns to justice for the individual (interesting to note that what is not discussed is if justice is attainable in a non-ideal city). Justice, after all, is that state when everyone is doing what he or she should be doing, not meddling in other affairs, and exhibiting the virtues of moderation, wisdom, and courage. Justice becomes one of the virtues, and is part of an inner state of the soul of one living in such a society.

Interesting parts of the Republic include the very early idea for equal rights and responsibilities for women, particularly in the guardian class. It is unclear whether Plato was aware of how self-serving his dialogue would seem, since his argument leads to the `natural' conclusion that the only ones who could really be in charge in such an ideal city would be the philosophers. Plato is not an advocate for democracy, and pokes fun quite a bit at democratic structures; he similarly disapproves of most of other types of government (oligarchy, plutocracy, timocracy, etc.) - one can discern the frustrated politician here.

However, the real power of the Republic lies in Plato's remarkable images and metaphoric stories in the second half of the dialogue. These include his expositions on theories of the Forms, and trying to explain what the Good is, and how humankind interprets such things. The images of the ship, the Sun, and the men in the cave are powerful images that have lasted in popular literature since the time of Plato.

This is a classic of Western literature and of world literature.

The Republic is a grandiose work, without doubt the most important of Plato and one of the most impressive mankind' s intellectual monuments. Although it has regarded the Republic as the first politic utopia, one must not interpret this book solely as a work that it purposed itself as the description of an ideal State, but, above all as a text disposed to offer norms that, applied to the existent regimes at its historical moment, would rectify its deficiencies, specially in what concerned to Athenian democracy.

According Plato, the foru historical regimes are: the timocracy, the oligarchy, the democracy and the tyranny. So the democracy remained in a transient state between oligarchy and tyranny.

But this extraordinary essay does not exhaust itself in the theory of the State. Also contains the essence of the metaphysics and the theory of the knowledge. Specially famous the cavern's allegory, that exposes through a myth ( what so weird didn't you?) the platonic theory of the knowledge.

It has been said - with knack - that Peloponnesian War was the first ideological war in the history, dispute in which Esparto and Athens confronted themselves I mean the authoritarianism of the first one against the Athenian democracy, a true maritime Empire in those ages. and I think to myself that for Athens, the dispute was still more dramatic whereas some of their main families were traditionally enemies of its democratic system and obviously were congenial with Esparto, being perhaps the fundamental device that impulsed Plato to write this supreme bequeath for the posterity.

I just had one brief comment to make, more on the concept of justice as a whole as expounded on in The Republic, rather than on the many other facet's of Plato's classic.

Early on in the book there is the famous exchange between Socrates and the Sophist, Thrasymachus. Socrates asks him for his definition of Justice, and Thasymachus responds that "Justice is the interest of the stronger."

Socrates then uses his famous eponymous method to seemingly demolish the Sophist's position, and then presents his own view instead.

Unfortunately, I have to agree with Thrasymachus here, if only on practical and historical grounds. Justice usually is the interest of the stronger. Perhaps this is not what Justice should be in human and social terms, but that's the reality.

Socrates' definition is a nice ideal to strive for, but it rarely works out that way in practice. If one thinks of Thrasymachus' definition as simply pragmatic and realistic, and Socrates' definition as being the ideal that a true republic (or whatever society) should strive for, then I think this is a more accurate view of the situation. Socrates makes Thrasymachus' idea appear invalid, but in fact, his idea is more accurate in terms of how things actually work out in most parts of the world (and even in the US) than is Socrates' idea.

Furthermore, one only has to think of the U.S. and how much influence the special and monied interests have on the political process to see that Thrasymachus is basically right. Money is power, and power is what politics is all about. And whoever has money controls the political process.

Not that this is right or even desirable, it's just the way things are. Finally, it seems to be human nature to falsely profess to high ideals that one has no real intention of following oneself, but that if one can get others to ascribe to them, you will have an advantage. Perhaps this is another factor at the root of politics, in addition to the obvious ones, which are the money, power, and sex that ultimately drive it.

Cleveland and Noyes make a great case in their book for (as they say) shifting back to "bottom up government" as our founding fathers envisioned.

They both definitely know their subject and have well thought-out all issues they discuss in the book including taxes, prisons and the drug war, energy policy, farming, etc. There is a lot of ground covered here.

After reading each topic, I found my self in agreement with nearly every core belief of the libertarian party - it just makes SENSE as opposed to how we've been doing things here in the U.S. the last hundred years - we've sure strayed from the founding father's principals, including "limited government" - in today's society, you can't do ANYTHING without government involvement and taxation - so much for a "free market" economy. The book reads very well and the is a wealth of information in the Appendixes.

To sum it up: Clyde and Ed have written one of them most inspiring books about the POTENTIAL of government I have ever read - I'm so glad they have shared this vision as I'm sure this book will inspire many other people!

This book is amazing. It is written in a clear, simple, succinct manner. Clyde and Ed have really opened my eyes to the way our country is run. I knew that our government was out of the hands of the people, but I had no hope that anything could be done about it. Now I have not only learned the details of the corruptness of our power- and money-driven government, but I know that things can be changed. By adopting the principles of the Libertarian party, we can return our political structure to one that truly is of, by and for the people. We can return our earth and all its people, and our economy, to a state of health and vitality. I highly recommend this book to anyone who wants to understand why things are the way they are in this country, to anyone who wishes things could be better, to anyone interested in living a better life. After reading this book, I was delighted to go to the polls on election day and vote for all the Libertarian candidates. I only hope that our citizenry is deserving of what those candidates have to offer.

If you are like me, you are completely bored and frustrated with politics in our country. Our candidates flood the TV, airways & press, with personal attacks and negative campaigns. I am continually amazed at how hard they work to say nothing and make it last 30 minutes. Finally, there is a breath of fresh air. Finally, we have candidates that have alot to say. So much, that it took this book to make the information available to the public. This book explains their plans for restructuring the property tax system, eliminating state income tax, generating green energy for the entire state, restoring the power of the individual and much, much more.

Both authors of this book are running for office in Iowa. Clyde Cleveland is running for Governor and Ed Noyes is running for Attorney General. Regardless of the campaign tactics of the other candidates, Mr. Cleveland & Mr. Noyes continue to run their campaign's using the golden rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Their campaigns demonstrate the respect that they have for the individual and that is something that is in short supply in our government today.

Read a single chapter and you will be hooked. You won't want to put it down until you've finished it! Enjoy!

Clyde Cleveland and Ed Noyes have written a detailed plan for restoring Iowa, what they call America's "heartland." I was so moved by the PRINCIPLES by which these men live that I moved from Cleveland, OH to support Mr. Cleveland. I left my family and friends; I left two bands, found a new home for my dog, and left my full-time job working with the disabled to labor for the restoration of our true law. In my opinion, I have lost nothing in comparison to what the human race has to gain.

These two men have a plan for Iowa, but the principles--those of our founding fathers--can change the world.

I remember reading Orwell's "1984" and "The Tomorrow Files" by Lawrence Sanders and thinking this is great fiction, but what if they're right? It seems as if we have and continue to create the types of societies that authors with foresight have been warning us about.

Not being very political, I see it happening and have always thought that I can't do anything about the way we have been duped into thinking our two party system gives us choices.

"Restoring the Heart of America" not only discusses the problems our government has created, but offers real solutions for returning to a country of true freedom as outlined by our great forefathers. It is time to undo the damage that has been done, such as our dependency on foreign oil (or any oil, for that matter) and the way we have allowed large corporations to mold our future. We owe it to ourselves and future generations to stand behind leaders that will look out for the people, and not foreign entities and corporations with deep pockets.

At first, I thought that every Iowan should read this book so we can help lead our country in changing the world. I now urge all Americans to read this book and tell their friends to read it as well. It's a book that is clear and easy to read and can do a great deal in restoring our faith that we have the ability to make changes for the good of all. My hat is off to Mr. Cleveland and Mr. Noyes for the courage to take a stand on making changes that are essential to our continued freedom and way of life.

Morrow was a great editor, a great journalist, a man who captured the spirit and realities of the Spanish civil war, not as an uncritical supporter of the Republicans, but as a revolutionary critique familiar with the lessons Leon Trotsky tried to give about the Russian Revolution, familiar with the betrayal of the class collaborationist leaders of the Communist and Socialist parties in Spain.
In this book we see in the flesh what we may here about in other writer's analysis of this civil war. I was always struck by how he shows the imporance of the struggle for land and support to the small farmers, not by analysis but by describing the debates he heard on this subject between Spanish peasants and Franco's troops.
The rise of Le Pen and France and the attempts of the same social democrats and stalinists to get workers in that country to subordinate the struggle to supporting Chirac is an errie echo of the same policies that Morrow shows led to the defeat in Spain.

Morrow's book concludes with a chapter entitled "Two Roads," to revolution or to counterrevolution, to workers power or to Franco. It was not only the abstract need for socialism, that Morrow explains the Spanish revolution could have won only by going to workers power. The disastrous policies of the Stalinists, the social democrats, and the anarchist labor bureaucrats subordinated the struggle to the dictates of big business in Spain and imperialism abroad, the same forces that welcomed Franco.
Morrow is very good at explaining how this policy prevented the workers, peasants, and oppressed peoples in Spain from solving the many national and democratic tasks, supposedly solved in the US in 1776 and in France in 1789: land to the tiller, freedom from feudal rights and powers of nobility and church, national independence for the colonies in Africa, linguistic freedom and national rights up to self-determination for Catalonia and the Basque Country, to name a few. Fighting for these things was the natural reaction of popular masses in Spain as soon as Franco tried to overturn the republic. Sadly, Morrow shows how the Republican government lost because it turned its back not only on these rights, not only on socialism, but even the basic democratic right of workers and peasants to organize political parties, unions, workers councils, to publish and speak freely.
Morrow is not all depression and criticism. He saw with his own eyes the natural response of the working peoples in Spain to fight beyond the limitations of class collaboration. He saw how that power nearly defeated Franco and how it could have defeated Franco especially if the Republic had joined with the struggle of the colonial masses and oppressed nationalities to gain freedom Read Morrow and learn how the coming struggles will be victories and not defeats.

A fascinating and powerful book, this tells the story of the Spanish Civil War of the 1930s, of the heroic struggle by workers and peasants against the fascist revolt led by Franco and backed by Hitler and Mussolini.. It is full of rich lessons for today-- including of the role of the so-called western democracies, the governments of the United States, Britain and France, in undermining this struggle for fear of unleashing a deep-going workers revolution.

This fight went down to defeat, but the leadership lessons to be learned from this experience are invaluable today. The need for workers to organize independent of the parties and policies of the bosses, bankers and landowners; the importance of championing land reform for poor peasants and the rights of oppressed nationalities (in Spain's African colonies for example) as a precondition for forging unity in struggle, come through in vivid detail here. Also the sharp test in practice of the disastrous policies of different political currents vying for workers and peasants support: from the Moscow-led Communist Party, to the anarchists and the POUM.

Written as the civil war unfolded, this book documents the tremendous capacity of ordinary working people to fight oppression and change society, and the crying need for a leadership capable of leading this movement forward.

Socialist correspondent Felix Morrow writes a powerful account of the revolutionary uprising of Spain's workers and farmers in the 1930's and the heroic battles they waged to defend the rights and organisations won through struggle.

The counter revolution began in Spanish Morocco under the command of fascist General Franco, aided and abetted by Hitler and Mussolini while the liberal democracies from the United Sates to Britain and France, sitting under the shade of "neutrality" looked the other way secretly hoping for the Generals success.

For revolutionary fighters who thought the Soviet Union's bumbling help to the Spanish toilers was due to a series of bad misjudgements came to the realisation they were in fact coming up against counter revolutionary Stalinism.

Despite the impediments posed by social democracy and Stalinism, the Spanish workers had an ability to learn the lessons of previous events at great speed and combined with their almost unlimited capacity for struggle, were able to overcome what stood in their path.

However, they were let down not by the usual suspects but by the organisation that seemed to be the most free of the Stalinist and social democratic straightjacket - the POUM.

Morrow takes the reader through the earth shattering events that unfolded in Spain at the time and takes up central challengers facing that countries working people in the battle for state power.

Although written in the late thirties, this is still one of the best titles on the Spanish civil war available. Unlike many other books on the subject, which analyze the events from either an anarchist or stalinist point of view, Morrow offers a socialist perspective. He illustrates quite well the shortcomings of both the anarcho-syndicalist CNT-FAI but does not fail to criticize the strategy and tactics of the "marxist" POUM either. Morrow takes specific events and shows how the POUM repeatedly failed to fill a revolutionary void due to its indecisive leadership. Indispensable reading material for socialist activists as well as readers with a general interest in labor history and revolutionary history.

This first of a two volume biography of FDR gives the reader an excellent introduction to the life of this most significant icon of the Twentieth Century. Although primarily a political biography, Author James MacGregor Burns gives the reader an introduction into the ancestry and early life of FDR.

FDR's education was received in the rarified air of Groton, where he under the tutelage of Rector Endicott Peabody, and Harvard, where he was a "C" student. His mother, Sara, moved to Boston to be near him during his time at Harvard, much like Douglas MacArthur's mother during his time at West Point. Formal education was completed at Columbia Law School, preparatory to his brief legal practice.

Roosevelt's life in the Democratic Party began with a call to run for the state senate in 1910. His position as a reformer made him an opponent of Tammany Hall. Over time he learned to retain his reform image while learning to work with the machine. His rise was not uninterrupted, as his 1914 attempts to run first for governor and then the US Senate were unsuccessful. His service as Undersecretary of the Navy in the Wilson Administration advanced his renown so that he was nominated for vice-president in 1920.

FDR's promising career was nearly brought to an end in 1921 by polio during a visit to the family cottage on Campobello Island. Burns tells the story of his convalescence and rehabilitation, culminating in his appearance at the 1924 National Convention to nominate Al Smith "The Happy Warrior".

Although 1924 brought crushing defeat to the Democrats, it was the start back for Roosevelt. Smith's presidential nomination in 1928 opened the governor's office for FDR who, in another Republican year, won a narrow victory, followed by a landslide in 1930. As governor he initially had to deal with a Republican legislature over issues involving the budget, electrical power and the balance between reform and Tammany. The advent of the depression brought with it new challenges of state solvency amidst rising needs.

1932 found Roosevelt as the leading Democrat in the nation, although his road to the nomination was rocky and by no means certain, with challenges from John Nance Garner, who would be placated with the vice-presidential nomination, and William McAdoo.

With election election, Roosevelt started to assume responsibility for the affairs of the nation. One of his most questionable periods was during the pre-inauguration time. As Hoover attempted to respond to the worsening economic crisis, his calls for joint action were rebuffed by the president-elect. Burns skillfully addresses the issue both from the perspectives of Roosevelt's willingness to let conditions worsen and the need to retain his own ability to act.

The main part of the story begins with FDR's first presidential inauguration in 1933 which started the fabled "First 100 Days", during which the Roosevelt magic was unchallenged. His proposals were passed with little or no opposition. With blurring speed, Congress passed the CCC, agricultural aid, states grants for unemployment relief, federal supervision of securities and railroads, the TVA, relief of mortgage debts and the start of the National Industrial Recovery Act.

Later in the year some opposition arose. One defeated measure was the St. Lawrence Seaway, which had to await the Eisenhower administration. The diplomatic recognition of the USSR and the economic downturn weakened FDR's position. Through 1934 conservative opposition held back administration measures, which led FDR to interfere in the congressional elections, not always in support of Democrats. 1935 saw a series of Supreme Court rulings which struck down New Deal measures, setting up the 1936 elections as a referendum on the New Deal. As hard as it is to believe now, the race against Gov. Alf Landon was expected to be very close. Although not officially campaigning, Roosevelt made the most of inspection tours.

The landside win in 1936 emboldened FDR to undertake his boldest initiative, the packing of the Supreme Court in order to obtain a majority which would let New Deal measures stand. Roosevelt approached the issue in total secrecy. The unveiling of his plan set off a firestorm of opposition, including much from traditional administration allies. In this he suffered his greatest defeat, mitigated only by a change which made packing unnecessary.

After the defeat of the Court packing bill, the second term was a period of mixed successes and failures, which did little to change the overall trend of events. In 1938 Roosevelt attempted, with little success, a purge of Congressional opponents. Through this term, he was hampered by the active opposition of his vice-president, John Nance Garner, a situation unlikely to exist today.

As the second term progressed, the focus shifted from domestic depression to the worsening foreign situation. This book does a good job in showing the reader how Roosevelt gradually turned the ship of state into the rising foreign headwinds.

The final drama of the second term was Roosevelt as Sphinx, leaving everyone guessing whether he would run for a third term or not. Ultimately, conceding that he could not turn down the call of the people, his nomination was assured and his transition to a war time leader continued.

Focusing on the political career of FDR, little attention is directed to his personal life, so one must look elsewhere for his relationship with Eleanor and his family. Burns skillfully presents a balanced approach of Roosevelt's career, explaining both the successes and the failures. He helps the reader understand the distinction between FDR's personal successes and the success of the Democratic Party. Neither an uncritical paean nor a hatched job, the book provides the reader with the facts of FDR's actions from his time in the New York Senate through his first eight years in the White House, with an epilogue so as not to leave the reading hanging pending the reading of the second volume. The FDR saga justifies the book and the book justifies the reading.

Gives a fantastic account of FDR from his privileged childhood and days at Groton, to his harsh induction into the world of politics; the skill at which he maneuvered the political currents to the New York Capital in Albany, and ultimately the White House. Once there Burns gives an account of passionate dedication to the American people, both during the Depression and WWII, that most likely was not seen since Lincoln. A must for anyone's Presidential Biographical collection.

This is the best account of pre-WWII FDR that has been written. Burns combines established facts with a commentary that examines the 32nd President's possible psychological views on issues. From major decisions during the New Deal to relationships with Eleanor and staff members, Burns paints an objective picture of FDR. The picture is neither rosy nor clouded, but is an intimate portrait of the longest- serving President in American history.

FDR was perhaps the craftiest politician to occupy the White House since Lincoln. The Title, "...Lion and the Fox" is an allusion to Machiavelli's dictum that one must be stouthearted like a lion and crafty like a fox. FDR combined these qualities to achieve political mastery of his time.

This book focus on his life up to the start of WWII. It paints a thorough life portrait of the president and illustrates the events and experiences that shaped this master politician. Although enjoying congressional majorities like no other president (that certainly aided the implementation of his program), FDR had to over come the reluctance of both GOP and Democrat conservatives to rework the federal government into the active economic and social player it is today. McGreggor's book explains how FDR the man made the New Deal possible.

This is a well written book that gives evidence of being thoroughly researched. For anyone interested in presidential history, I'd recommend this book.

I recently had occasion to re-read James MacGregor Burns's marvelous Roosevelt: The Lion and the Fox and was deeply impressed by how well its has withstood the test of time. The early paperback edition of this book, which was originally published in 1956 and covers the period from 1882 until 1940, characterized it as the "first political biography of Franklin Delano Roosevelt," and it continues to be the authoritative study of Roosevelt's preparation for and then conduct of his first two terms as president, when domestic affairs demanded most of his attention. This remains a wonderful book about this country's greatest politician of the 20th century, and it also offers many penetrating insights into the American political system.

Burns's treatment of Roosevelt is comprehensive, "[treating] much of [Roosevelt's] personal as well as his public life, because a great politician's career remorselessly sucks everything into its vortex." Roosevelt was the only child of a member of the upstate New York landed gentry, and he could have led a life of leisure. Instead, he was sent to Groton School in Massachusetts, where the headmaster, according to Burns, "made much of his eagerness to educate his boys for political leadership." Roosevelt completed his formal education at Harvard College and Columbia University Law School. Burns writes that Roosevelt's first elective office, as a New York State Senator was a "political education," and he became a "Young Lion" in Albany. Roosevelt served as Assistant Secretary of the Navy in Washington, D.C., during World War I and was the candidate for Vice President on the Democrat Party's unsuccessful ticket in 1920. In 1921, Roosevelt was stricken with polio, and the crippling disease would have ended the public career of a less ambitious and determined man. Instead, he continued to work hard at politics, was elected Governor of New York in 1928 and then President in 1932. This was just the beginning of a remarkable career in high office.

Burns makes clear that Roosevelt was a progressive in the tradition of Woodrow Wilson but was without strong ideas or a specific agenda. According to Burns: "The presidency, Roosevelt said shortly after his election, `is preeminently a place of moral leadership.'" Retired Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes offered this cutting assessment: "A second -class intellect, but a first-class temperament." Action to combat the depression was necessary to restore public confidence in government, and the first Hundred Days of Roosevelt's first term was one of the great periods of legislative achievement in American history. Burns writes: "Roosevelt was following no master program." However, in Burns's view: "The classic test of greatness in the White House has been the chief executive's capacity to lead Congress." According to that test, Roosevelt was a great president. Burns writes that, "[i]n his first two years in office Roosevelt achieved to a remarkable degree the exalted position of being President of all the people." Burns explains: "A remarkable aspect of the New Deal was the sweep and variety of the groups it helped."

As early as 1934, however, organized conservative opposition to the New Deal was forming. (A newspaper cartoon reprinted here shows a figure identified as the Republican Party holding a sign stating: "Roosevelt is a Red!") Roosevelt was increasingly attacked as a traitor to his class, but a large measure of his genius was his ability to hold the more extreme elements of the New Deal in check. Roosevelt's political skills were tested in every way. For instance, Burns writes that Senator Robert Wagner's National Labor Relations Act, which proposed to"[vest] massive economic and political power in organized labor" "was the most radical legislation passed during the New Deal." According to Burns, Roosevelt's initial reaction to the bill was "invariably cool or evasive," and the president, with what Burns describes as "typical Rooseveltian agility," announced his support for the bill only after its passage was certain. Burns demonstrates that Roosevelt's support, both in Congress and among the public, gradually eroded in the late 1930s, but he was, of course, elected again in 1940 and 1944. Roosevelt's nomination in 1940 was especially skillful. Many in his own party favored maintaining the tradition of limiting presidents to two terms, and Democratic Party leaders lined up in the hope of succeeding Roosevelt. Roosevelt outfoxed all of them and was elected to his historic third term.

I believe it is fair to say that Burns admires Roosevelt, but this book is not a whitewash. Burns candidly writes about Roosevelt's "deviousness." And the author is appropriately critical of Roosevelt's attempt to "pack" the Supreme Court following his overwhelming re-election in 1936. However, in my opinion, these instances simply are proof of the truism that great men are not always good men. Burns took the subtitle of this book from the Italian Renaissance political philosopher Machiavelli's dictum that a political leader must be strong like a lion and shrewd like a fox. Franklin D. Roosevelt was both, and that made him a great president. This is a great political biography of that great president

This is an extremely insightful examination of the election that first put Grover Cleveland in the White House. The ways in which Summers analyzes the political process remind me of Holt's masterpiece, "The Rise and Fall of the American Whig Party". (That is a much more massive book, as it covers a broader topic over a longer period). The use of political cartoons of the period to support the narrative is probably the best I've seen. The style is engaging, although occasionally I think Summers gets slightly carried away. For example, at least one discussion of the standard myths about the period goes on long enough to be somewhat disruptive. Also, while I don't detect any factual bias, there is a tendency to look at things more a Republican perspective. That is, issues (e.g., the role of the minor parties) are more often discussed in terms of problems facing the GOP and how well they did or did not deal with them. The outcome of the election is reported in language that seems rather wistful that Blaine lost. Again, this is only a matter of relative emphasis - there is excellent material on the complex relations between the Democrats at the national and state levels and the rival Democratic machines in New York City. Despite my minor quibbles, I highly recommend this book to anyone with a general interest in American political history, and it certainly must be read by anyone with a particular interest in this period.

The last half of the 19th century is a period that the historians generally give short shrift to. They dutifully plow through it in the obligatory chapter in their rush to get from the Civil War to Teddy Roosevelt, Wilson, and the Progressive Era. The campaign of Grover Cleveland against James Blaine for the presidency in 1884 is just about forgotten. This is too bad because what with the emphasis on character and values (accompanied by some really gross mudslinging), the extensive changes in technology and business, the factionalism and divided government, it was a period much like ours. Summers does an excellent job of dispelling the prevailing view of this period as a doldrum bookended by Lincoln and TR. In a comprehensive yet not overly long book, he shows that substantive issues like the tariff, the relationship of the national government to the states, morality in politics, substance abuse (ie prohibition), and other pressing matters really were at stake, he explores those issues and the men and women who had to face them. This book is one of the best treatments of the 1884 presidential campaign (or any other campaign for that matter) out there. Find a copy of this book and read about a time that is so much like ours.

As an undergraduate at the University of Kentucky some years ago, Professor Mark Summers changed my life and I eventually devoted my life to the study of history. His lectures made the past come alive and seem so fresh and real and vital. Anyone who has read any of his books can relate to the sense of excitement that I am describing, and his latest book is no exception. In fact, it is perhaps his best book yet. Lively, fast-paced, yet scholarly and thought-provoking, Summers' book is everything that his readers have come to expect. I would highly recommend this book to anyone interested in nineteenth-century politics or U.S. history in general, or for those who consider history dry and boring and would like read a book where the past truly does come to life.

Anyone interested in politics or American history should love this book. The writing style is crisp and entertaining and the author strikes the right balance between explaining long ago and long forgotten events without drowning the reader in unnecesary details. The 1884 election itself was one of the most interesting of our history with sex scandals, charges of political corruption, party splits, and campaign blunders. The author brings the excitement to life and lets the reader understand not only what happened but why it occured and, even more interesting, what the participants had hoped to accomplish with their political strategies. The book succeeds in describing how late 19th century elections looked and felt to the participants. The human dynamic skillfully set out in this book (the cynical maneuverings, the overheated rhetoric, and the intense partisanship)are very familiar with what we experience in campaigns today-this very familiarity helps make Blaine and Cleveland seem real and not just sterile historical figures. Read this book!

Mark Summers is one of the great historians of mid-nineteenth century America. He is fully capable of taking subjects which have seemingly been worked to death and making them fresh with new material and original analysis. Rum Romanism and Rebellion does just that, making Blaine and Cleveland seem more vital and alive than the current occupants of the White House. The issues engage us, the political battle grips us. This is one of the author's best (to my mind, Mr. Summers best work is his two volume work on political corruption [neatly divided between ante-bellum crooks and post-war thieves]; let's hope that Mr. Summers has a trilogy in mind and next turns his attention to wartime corruption: from the transcontinental railroad to the supply of Union soldiers and the appointment of generals, that era was rife with corruption, yet very little has ever been written about it). Well done, Mr. Summers!