Politics Books

Mandelbaum has a great writing style -- he takes complex topics and presents his ideas in ways that make them appear simple and even obvious. A great book that every lay person with an interest in world economy and government ought to read

On page 398, Mandelbaum provides what I consider the most significant words in his book: "So a world of liberal sovereign states qualifies as the second-best solution, after WORLD GOVERNMENT, to the problems of nuclear war, economic collapse, and global climate change. If not the best of all imaginable solutions, it is the best of all feasible ones."

However, the greater the number of, and the more powerful, the illiberal states are, then the so-called best feasible solution becomes even more infeasible. There must be integrated frameworks or solutions for the enhancement of peace, democracy, and free markets, which happen to work only when they do, and only when they work together.

But how do we get them to work as a triad, not individually ? This is the important question. I believe that the answer lies in any framework that promotes direct genuine people empowerment within each state.

One way is the creation of positive composite institutions, or the transformation of the well-funded international foundations into positive composite institutions, the end-object of which is the promotion of direct people empowerment within the illiberal zones of their own countries, and within the less liberal states in the less-developed world.

It is no longer a question of "what" and "object", but of "how" and "ways and means".

Veredigno Atienza
"Creating Systems of Justice: Philanthropy at the Highest Level"

This is a magnificent book - I can happily recommend it to anyone, regardless of their politics (an all too rare thing these days, as the culture wars spread ever wider). The West ought to remember its roots, and why it is where it is today. A book like this is therefore very timely and well worth reading. Christopher Catherwood, historian, teacher and author of CHRISTIANS, MUSLIMS AND ISLAMIC RAGE (Zondervan, 2003)

Michael Mandelbaum clearly explains that the liberal theory of history is made up of two tenets:

1. Free markets, through their workings such as constitutionalism, civil society, the rule of law, property-protecting and contract-enforcing state, entrepreneurship, competition and mass consumption, tend to promote democracy and enrich most of their economic agents over time (pg. 11, 234-237, 257, 268-274, 289-295, 313-318, 394). A responsible social safety net, however, is key to stability of free markets (pg. 299-304, 340-341, 402).

2. Democracies are inclined to conduct peaceful foreign policies (pg. 11, 237). Popular sovereignty, constitutionalism, civil society and political habit of compromise are key drivers of peace and minority protection (pg. 249-250, 259, 269). Furthermore, defense dominance and weapon system transparency are built on the recognition that the problem of collective security can only be solved through systemic cooperation nurtured over time (pg. 113-114, 129-131, 231).

The common denominator of free markets, democracy and peace is their focus on the individual (pg. 31). Illiberalism such as Communism and Fascism stresses the strength of the state through group cohesion and solidarity rather than the welfare of individuals (pg. 254, 336).

Before WWI, this set of liberal ideas was not firmly established in the British Empire and the U.S. from which it came. Britain was the most fervent advocate of free trade but was clearly ambivalent about self-government beyond its White Dominions and dismissal of any limit to power projection. The U.S. was protectionist rather than a convert to free trade, was an impire rather than an empire until the 1890s and had not yet granted the benefits of democracy to all its inhabitants in spite of its unequivocal constitution (pg. 33, 87).

At the Conference of Paris in 1919 just after WWI, President Woodrow Wilson could not convince the victorious empires how closely related were the rise of free markets and the devaluation of war. The high price of war to the victors and perhaps more importantly poor salesmanship from President Wilson himself in the U.S. and abroad ultimately led to the rise and dismissal of an emasculated League of Nations and disastrous economic protectionism in the 1930s (pg. 20-24, 359, 363, 393).

The emergence of Fascism and Communism, two new murderous, inefficient rivals to Liberalism, was the bitterest legacy of WWI, the Conference of Paris and subsequent peace conferences (pg. 33, 41, 54-55). Liberalism succeeded in defeating and discrediting Fascism at the end of WWII in 1945 and Communism at the end of the Cold War in 1989 (pg. 253).

The liberal theory of history has found its historical validation for example in the successful conversion of fascist Germany and Japan to Liberalism in the decades after their crushing defeat in 1945. These successful conversions to Liberalism demonstrate which way the lagging peripheral countries should go to ultimately emerge in the limelight (pg. 6, 79-86, 174-181, 279-280).

Mandelbaum also reminds his audience that in the post-cold war era, the core countries have lost much interest in what is going on in the periphery (pg. 96, 198-199). China, Russia and the Middle East are three major exceptions to this loss of interest in the periphery (pg. 7). Core countries legitimately fear that undesirable developments in some peripheral countries, especially failed states, if left unchecked, could have a negative impact in their backyard (pg. 182-187).

The Middle East is of interest to core countries due to its reserves of oil, the existence of weapons of mass destruction and the presence of fearsome terrorist networks on its soil (pg. 97-99, 199-230). Operation Iraqi Freedom is an expression of this interest in the region on behalf of a well-understood Liberalism (pg. 403-412).

China and Russia remain a source of concern to the core countries because they have not yet fully embraced the tenets of Liberalism (pg. 306-307, 390-391). Like Germany at the beginning of the 20th century, Russia and China are not satisfied with their military place in the world today and can become a source of instability tomorrow (pg. 160-174). Furthermore, both countries harbor powerful economic ambitions (pg. 160). The inability of economic socialism to be productive enough and meet the wants and needs of its economic agents behind the military sphere has made a gradual transition to economic liberalism vital to the survival of the Chinese and Russian nomenklatura (pg. 48, 52, 66-67, 99-104, 261-265, 291, 309). No Communist regime in the 20th century came to power through a coup d'etat staged by an impoverished, mobilized and ideologically committed working class (pg. 233).

The current liberal hegemony, which is not per se irreversible, does not make everybody happy. Some of its most determined opponents include Middle Eastern terrorists and the western-inspired anti-globalization movement who do not offer any constructive, workable alternative to Liberalism (pg. 38-39).

The United States, spiritual successor of the British Empire, has a key role to play in the successful spread and survival of this Wilsonian triad (pg. 7, 88, 327, 358, 381-382, 404). The technological, economic, military and cultural leadership of the U.S. requires that Americans bear a higher burden than their fair share in the maintenance and development of Liberalism (pg. 88, 153, 364-365, 389). The harshest critics of the U.S. for example in Europe and Asia should keep this in mind instead of taking it for granted (pg. 153, 363-365, 388-390).

Passing interest in the (most dangerous) failed states is a recipe for disaster (pg. 193-199). In too many places around the world, democracy and capitalism are foreign transplants that must be cultivated long enough to take deep roots (pg. 259-260, 297-298, 311-313, 386-387). Ultimately, with might come not only rights but also responsibilities (pg. 388-389).

Quite a brilliant work, this book is a synopsis of the ideas that have `conquered the world' in the 20th century, ideas that remain a benchmark of America's policies in the world. The first policy is capitalism, the idea of free markets was challenged by Marxism, an ideology that proved itself a nightmare and a destructive, coercive, suppressive influence in the last century. Secondly the author brilliantly demonstrates how democracy was originally encouraged at the Versailles conference following WWI where Woodrow Wilson made `war for democracy' a policy of America. Lastly he examines how `peace' as a virtue of classical liberalism is the pursuit of today's most powerful nations. In previous periods of history powerful nations sued their power destructively in wars of conquest, such as the Romans, the English or Napoleon. Today's American `empire' is not one of war, despite the war in Iraq, but rather of a restrained giant using its power to coerce other nations to follow the methods of democracy, peace and free markets, however the coercive influence of America is not like Rome or England or Communist Russia, or Fascist Germany, rather it is one where power is used selectively, in a clauswitzien sense, only as the last resort of politics. Power organizations such as the Un, the World Bank and the IMF use pressure for democracy to go hand in hand with their loans tot third world nations, while not always successful this policy is slowly bringing democracy, equality, and freedoms to places like Latin America, where in the 1950s almost all countries were dictatorships. The `ideas the conquered the world' also run counter to the theory that human nature is hobbesian, in the sense that we are told by cynics that Islam is not compatible with democracy or that Catholicism is not compatible, these canards have been thrown out by those who seek to bring the American revolution to the world. This is the thesis of this book and the historical synopsis presented, brilliant, interesting and controversial.

Seth J. Frantzman

George Perkovich has produced a seminal work on India's nuclear weapons program. He analyzes the political, economic, security issues that have contributed to India's decision-making regarding the bomb. George has correctly identified India as being caught in a dilemma for a long time over nuclear weapons testing. India also provides the only example of a nuclear weapons program that was openly debated in a democratic society. This debate (which ranked often very low on the priorities of successive prime ministers who correctly placed socio-economic development as a higher priority) has led to India shifting its position over time -- one from being the first proponent of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty to opposing it due to is discriminatory nature today. It describes how India's opposition to nuclear weapons in the '50s which was perceived as being moralizing in the West, has now changed to embrace weapons since the nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty permanently endorsed the nuclear weapons status of the five declared nuclear powers without any comprehensive, binding time-table for destroying all nuclear weapons -- a position that India objects to as being discriminatory.

A must-read for anyone interested in nuclear weapons proliferation and arms control negotiations today.

Less to do with the bomb per se, but a scholarly history of the Indian nuclear program. This is a work that will be quoted again and again.

This is easily one of the best books I have read about my own country. Very informative.

Note to editorial Reviewers: India entered the nuclear club in May 1974 and not in May 1998 as suggested by some of your reviews.

Some highlights of the book.

* The term nuclear "haves" and "have-nots" was coined by Homi Bhabha initially and used by others and till date has been central to putting forth our country's opposition to NPT and CTBT.

* University of Chicago's late Prof. Chandrasekhar's refusal to head the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) after the death of patriot Dr. Homi Bhabha.

* One of my disappointment is the author's avoidance in the discussion of the cause of the death of Dr. Homi Bhabha, even though such an incident is beyond the scope of this book. Since Bhabha provided the impetus and leadership during the nuclear program's infancy, I expected the author to throw some light on this issue.

* Vikram Sarabhai's hatred for Nuclear tests is news, especially since he was heading the Atomic Energy commision. As a spaceman it is surprising that he headed the organization in the first place.

* Indira Gandhi's refusal to allow more nuclear tests after 1974 stemmed from her abhorence for anything nuclear after her post-Pokhran I experiences. This is contrary to the popular belief - international pressure.

* Most sections of the book has an objective view of the Indian nuclear scenario except the last few chapters where the author seems to bend towards India signing the CTBT and the NPT. Or atleast implying that India's moral stand on nuclear issue was defeated after the May 98 tests.

* BJP (and its predecessor Jana Sangh) has been the only political party to openly campaign for Nuclear power.

It is time that India and Pakistan get the respect they deserve as nuclear powers. Why is it that France, Germany, Israel, the U.S., Russia, and South Africa (now supposedly non-nuclear) have been able to garner the respect that China, India and Pakistan are alluded by? Is it becuase they are not white Europeans? Nontheless, a well researched book.

As an Indian immensely proud of his country's accomplishments and having had to enter multiple debates with other non-Indians in May 1998, I gained a great amount from the book. It is immaculately researched and it seems that Perkovich has left no stone unturned. It goes into such depth and understanding of the Indian polity's psyche as previously unseen from a non-Indian author. Perkovich is not merely narrating a set of events which led to the testing but defending a theory that goes against current understandings of international relations and nuclear non-profileration by setting India as an example. I enjoyed every chapter of the book and hope that current policy makers in the field learn from it. A must read for every Indian interested it their country's policies and others making policy for the rest of the world.

If you want to read a book of significance, look no further. While it may be a difficult read it is one of the most influential and important books ever written.

There were only 9 reviews on this book . . . what can one say. . . either something brings you to this book or it does not. . . if you are reading these reviews, then buy it.

This book is one of the most important and influential works on ethics. It is dense, not an easy read, the structure is loose and troublesome at times, but it is groundbreaking and brilliant.

There are many internet resources to guide you along the reading,. so do not be intimidated. Much of future work will rest on the contributions by Kant.

This version of the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals provides a clear and concise introduction. You will find it useful to understand how Kant's moral philosophy fits within his general philosophy and to get acquainted with some of the debates around his work. Although this book is rather expensive for what it is, it is useful and worth buying if you are really interested in this topic.

As translator H.J. Paton states in his introduction, 'Kant's "Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals" is one of the small books which are truly great' despite the unapproachability of the title. Many rank this book alongside Aristotle's 'Ethics' and Plato's 'Republic'. Its main topic is the supremacy of morals and moral action, and Paton gives a section by section analysis of Kant's book. The purpose of this work is not to work out all of the implications and difficulties with the a priori part of ethics, but rather to set a foundation of the supreme principle of morality.

The centerpiece of the Groundwork is Kant's most famous proposition, the Categorical Imperative. While this is often equated with the Golden Rule (do unto others as you would have them do unto you), the Categorical Imperative argues for a more universal set of moral action - for example, if one does not mind being lied to, then lying does not become a problem, according to the Golden Rule, but for Kant, this would be unacceptable as it is a violation of the rational principles of what morals are.

Kant proceeds to look at issues of law, duty, free will and the good will, and autonomy of action. Kant argues strongly for the need for philosophy to guard against whim, taste and personal desire from becoming normative agents in the way we construct the moral universe. He argue for objective principles to govern the will, and categorises these as either hypothetical or categorical. 'All imperatives command either hypothetically or categorically. Hypothetical imperatives declare a possible action to be practically necessary as a means to the attainment of something else that one wills (or that one may will). A categorical imperative would be one which represented an action as objectively necessary in itself apart from its relation to a further end.'

Kant goes from this discussion to the formulation of universal law and the way in which rational agents should formulate and view this kind of law. The final section of this work introduces ideas that will be more fully developed in Kant's 'Critique of Practical Reason', the second of his three-volume Critiques. He also covers some of the arguments from 'Critique of Pure Reason', but not very fully; as Paton states in his analysis, 'Kant cannot assume the elaborate arguments of the "Critique of Pure Reason" to be familiar to his readers nor can he attempt to repeat these elaborate arguments in a short treatise on ethics.' The finite, rational person must regard himself or herself both as a member of the world of experience/perception and also as a member of the world of ideas/rationality. This is the essence of the Empiricist/Rationalist split that Kant synthesises together in the first Critique.

This is not easy going - the original 'Groundwork' had 128 pages, contained here in less than 100 (allowing for type-face differences as well as translation). Paton's version has 40 pages of analysis, endnotes, an index, and a statement about the translation - it is the 40 pages of analysis, keyed to section-by-section sequence, that makes this a very useful edition. This is perhaps the best first text of Kant to read to get a sense of his style, thought, and the foundation of what has become known as his most important principle.

'Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals' by Immanuel Kant is easily the most important work devoted exclusively to thinking about morality in the history of Philosophy, especially considering it's size.

The cornerstone of the work, and the end result of Kant's analysis is the categorical imperative which says that a moral law are only those for which you can state should be true of all people.

In one fell swoop, Kant marginalizes all thinking about relativism in morality and at the same time distinguishes moral from religious thinking.

If you pair this up with St. Paul's statements in his letter to the Romans (3:19-28) which states strongly that adherance to the law has virtually nothing to do with salvation, it should make things pretty clear to all concerned.

Unfortunately, things are rarely that simple. As important as Kant's conclusion is, it is necessary but not sufficient for a complete analysis of morality.

One excuse may be that this work is really Kant's version of 'Cliff Notes' to his moral argument. His full presentation comes in the 'Critique of Practical Reason', which, however, is not often read.

Note that contrary to another review of this edition, the translator and commentator is the noted Kant scholar of 70 years ago, H. J. Paton.

To people who are not used to reading philosophy, I will not hide the fact that Kant is tough going. He may not be quite as tough as Hegel, the Existentialists, or the ancient Greeks, but he is definitely harder to understand than any modern nonfiction book I can think of.

The biggest argument against the 'Groundwork' and the categorical imperative is usually the fact that it does not rule out trivial rules, such as 'you must always eat a starch at least once a day'. This rule is physically possible for anyone living anywhere in the world, yet it is certainly not a moral law. It is not even a very good dietary law, but that's neither here nor there. A second argument is that Kant's argument seems a bit circular, when he says that the only thing which unqualifiedly good is a good will.

For anyone who has been vexed by moral questions, an honest reading of this work will at the very least give you hope that with the right amount of thought, one can make sense of moral issues.

A truly great book.

One of the greatest untold stories of modern history is that of Germany during the close of World War I. And Richard Watt, the author, tells this sweeping drama with a suberb style and in unprecedented detail. Watt covers every major event and intimately describes what went on behind closed doors during this extremely tumultuous time.

Despite its defeat at the hands of the Western Allies, the German armed forces continued to play a leading role (albeit in the form of independent freikorps units) during the Communist and Secessionist rebellions in late 1918/early 1919. During these desperate times, private armies of Communists, Socialists, and ideologically vague - but intensely violent - conservative battled it out, often to the death, on the streets of Germany's great cities. And all the while Germans everywhere were starved, threatened, and exhausted physically, financially, and morally. It should come as no great wonder then that anyone living through this period should desire order above all else. And this ultimately led into the hands of Nazi propagandists who turned it to their own advantage.

The book also covers some of the most fascinating episodes during this period - the Kiel Sailors' Mutiny, the Berlin Uprisings, the First Bavarian Revolution, the Second Bavarian Revolution, the amazingly amateurish diplomatic proceedings at Versailles, the birth of the 'Stab in the Back' legend by the 'undefeated' Germany Army, the birth of the Freikorps movement, the brief German fiefdoms in Latvia and Lithuania, the great scuttle at Scapa Flow (see The Grand Scuttle by Van Der Vat), the internal Weimar cabinet struggles regarding the Versailles Diktat, how the Allies agreed on particular frontier/reparations/guilt clauses, and how the German Army did ultimately lose the war.

Weimar Germany - and perhaps much of Eastern Europe - was irrevocably and horribly scarred by this devastating period of chaos, political assassinations, and utter financial ruin. Gone was the relatively staid, quiet time, and relative tolerance of the imperial monarchies. Henceforth, Europe would be murderously divided by Communist & Fascist ideologies running like an explosive fault line running through most European nations.

Besides an outstanding text, Watt includes a few photographs of the major personalities - including a rare few action shots taken during the Berlin Spartacist and Communist uprising. Watt's conclusion is that the ultimate right-wing victory was from the Social Democratic 'sell out' to the right-wing military establishment. The SD would never so much control affairs as preside over them. Key positions in the gov't - judges, military commands, and police officials - would remain occupied by right-wing elements until a suitable opportunity came to overthrow the hated Weimar Republic. What is amazing is that this [...], stepson of a republic managed to survive for over a decade despite the fact that almost all German political parties were unanimous in their hatred of it.

This is another outstanding book by the truly talented Richard M. Watt, and I highly recommend it!

Despite a less-compelling (to me) detour into German socialist unrest, this is a suspenseful, compelling, and very well-written work which brings out the full tragedy of the Paris Peace Conference and the treaty it produced.

This is a very fair, balanced, extremely readable history of the the last years of WW1, the various revolutions and mutinies in 1918 and 1919 (mainly in Germany, but also Hungary,etc.)and the grand finale of the Versailles Treaty. When reading this book, one cannot help but agree with the thoughts of Jan Christian Smuts, who very accurately predicted the great and horrible events of the next 25 years. Apparently, Pres. Wilson did not carry out his lofty ideals in the end, Lloyd George had serious second thoughts (persuaded in part by Smuts), and Clemenceau remained angry and adament. This is among the few books that I've read that tells about all sides of the story. The six weeks between the first Versailles meeting (on the 4th anniversary of the Lusitania attack), and the final signing are especially well done here. I never realized that the Allies were on the verge of attacking Germany if the Treaty was not signed ASAP. We also forget that the Allied naval blockade continued for about 6 months after the Armistice, resulting in the deaths of thousands of German children. It did not end until the final signing of the Versailles treaty.In short, a whale of a good book!

I would heartily recommend this to anyone with an interest in 20th century history. Superb history, the way it should be written.

The author sought books on the German Revolution of 1918-1919; finding none, he wrote this one. The failure of the German military to win the war by 1918 produced mutinies, revolution, and the end of their Second Empire by October 1918. A new republic was proclaimed, and the Armistice led to the treaty of Versailles. While the Kaiser fled to Holland, his military remained as a wanted burden to the new republic: it alone could suppress the revolutions breaking out all over Germany. This left them as the striking force fro a republic that they despised; eventually they came to support the Nazis (p.527) and a new European War. This seems like the inevitable result from the Allied failure to overthrow and purge the German ruling class, or divide the German Reich into separate nations, as was correctly done after World War II. Denazification and partition, plus grouping the small nations into large blocks, kept the peace for 50 years. But nothing lasts forever.

Woodrow Wilson gave many speeches on "Democracy", but he was appointed President of Princeton, Governor of NJ, then President of the US through his personal ambition. Pages 15-20 tell of the contradictions and complexities in his personality. His dictatorial rule at Princeton led to his firing. A personal friendship allowed him to be nominated as the Democratic candidate for Governor of NJ. He promised to work with the "organization", then reneged on his promises! He drafted a torrent of liberal legislation (as did Bismarck in the 1880s). He met Edward House, and insider and power broker in the national party. House's technique" get a clean candidate and let the party organization do its job; it still works today! Jim Marr's "Rule By Secrecy" tells how and why the 1912 election was fixed to create the private banking cartel that controls our economy. Running a third party candidate helped in 1980 and 1992.

Wilson's dictatorial personality abraded many in Congress; he lectured them, he didn't talk to them. His cabinet had few men of first caliber; it was as if he could only work with subordinates. But Edward House knew how to manipulate him (p.22).

Wilson declared war as a fight to make the world safe for democracy, an idealistic crusade that overlooks the fact that wars are waged for loot: markets, provinces, colonies, etc.

Perhaps Wilson's greatest fault was that everything was handed to him; he didn't have to claw his way to the top by competitive elections (p.27). Page 36 tallies the triumphs of Woodrow Wilson. Perhaps the "errors in judgment" were due to his pride and his refusal to take expert advice (p.37), complicated by his arteriosclerosis or some other disease ("megalomania"?). Wilson gained fame and recognition through his speeches; a rhetorician, not a manager.

Vivo en Madrid, España, y unos familiares de Vitoria me regalaron por mi cumpleaños el libro "La Identidad Vasca en el Mundo" de Agustin y Pedro Oiarzabal. Mi padre salio de Salvatierra en los años 50 y cada vez que puedo, regreso al Pais Vasco a visitar a familiares y amigos. Cuento todo esto porque el libro me ha hecho pensar mucho en el hecho de tener ascendencia vasca. La verdad es que es muy, muy dificil ser vasco y ejercerlo asi en la capital del Estado Español, no tanto por tus conciudadanos sino por la crispacion que han generado contra lo vasco los medios de comunicacion y la clase dirigente de la derecha española. Bueno, lo que quiero decir es que es la primera vez que he leido algo sobre los vascos que me ha sido muy grato. Es un libro muy ameno que informa sobre la realidad de la identidad vasca, y encima aprendes, que no es poco. Deja a un lado partidismos e ideologias politicas y se adentra a descifrar lo que para los vascos significa ser vasco. Por fin tenemos un libro que merece la pena ser leido, discutido y pasado de mano en mano entre no solamente vascos sino entre los que no lo son para que dejen definitivamente a un lado estereotipos y prejuicios sin sentido sobre lo vasco. Es el libro que espero regalar a mucha gente, incluidos mis familiares y mas intimos amigos de aqui, de Madrid, para que puedan formarse una opinion real sobre lo que es ser vasco, alejada de bombas, politiqueos y maniqueismos falsos.
Enhorabuena a los autores por este impresionante libro, que aunque es sencillo de leer, creo que no habra sido nada facil de escribir. Necesitamos mas libros como estos y menos titulares sobre lo horrendo que es ser vasco.

Los vascos, los vascos...que vida la nuestra! nos bombardean constantemente los medios de komunicacion, "ke si los vascos esto, ke si los vascos lo otro"...sospechosso de todo, que si el tsunami, el global warming y del color de la cara oculta de la luna. Ke ya vale! y entre tanto desierto intelectual, encontre "La Identidad Vasca en el Mundo" de Oiarzabal & Oiarzabal, made in Euskalherria. Es un libro perfecto para saber mas de todos aquellos ke como yo andamos dando vueltas por el mundo, yo en London, y tu? si ya has leido el libro ya sabes de que estoy hablando...y la cosa no queda aqui, sino que intenta abarcar el significado de lo vasco tambien en Euskalherria. Es una lectura imprescindible asi ke a leer el libro, ke te abre los ojos. Si tu vecino no sabe lo que son los vascos, "La Identidad Vasca en el Mundo" es el libro a recomendar. Ondo ibili!

Hi,
I just want to say I've just finished reading the book "Identidad Vasca en el Mundo" and I think that it's fascinating. My spanish is not too good, so I might missed some conceptual meanings. However, I have learnt lots about the Basque people, identity and culture, which it has nothing to do with media headlines on ETA this or ETA that. If you are still intrigued by the Basques and you need a serious but at the same time extremelly pleasant book, this is the one. Don't hesitate and read it. You will enjoy it!!

If you thought that Mark Kurlansky's book "The Basque History of the World" was the greatest thing that you have ever read about the Basques, try "Identidad Vasca en el Mundo" by Agustin and Pedro Oiarzabal. Here, you won't find cooking tips, biased stories, and unevidenced arguments...Well, we already knew that "the Basques are the greatest people on earth" thanks Mark, and???...Reading "Identidad Vasca en el Mundo" you will learn about the diverse meanings of Basqueness from all over the planet according to many voices like mine. This is a very objective piece of work that it will satisfy your needs to know more about the Basques and our culture. Congratualtions to the authors. Eat, drink, READ THIS BOOK, and be Basque!!!!

Soy nacido en Madrid, España, y apesar de mi nombre no soy vasco. Esta es la primera vez que he escrito una reseña sobre un libro en Amazon.com. Un amigo mio de Portugalete, cerca de Bilbao (País Vasco) me recomendo la lectura de "La Identidad Vasca en el Mundo" de los escritores Pedro y Agustin Oiarzabal. La verdad es que al principio me encontre un poco reticente a leerlo, no por el tema en si ya que sigo muy de cerca lo que ocurre alli, sino porque normalmente no hay nada que se escriba sobre los vascos que no sea para demonizarlos o santificarlos. Es decir que no he leido o he escuchado nada ultimamente, desde hace al menos ocho o nueve años, sobre lo vasco que no este politizado, y esto a mi esto no me gusta en abosluto. Siempre he creido que todos, particularmente, aquellos que vivimos fuera del País Vasco necesitamos estar informados lo mas objetivamente posible para hacer juicios de opinion validos. Desgraciadamente los medios de comunicación solamente nos hablan sobre aquello que los politicos quieren que sepamos. Este libro es la excepcion que confirma la regla. Es un estudio serio que necesita ser leido por todos aquellos que nos merecemos saber mucho más sobre lo vasco. ¡¡¡No hace politica!!! y esto se aprecia enormemente. No nos habla sobre si los vascos son buenos o malos, o si son más vascos que españoles, sino que nos presenta una realidad mucho más compleja, amplia, enriquecedora y desconocida por muchos, como es la de los vascos repartidos por el mundo. Si hay algo que quiero criticar a los autores es que el libro se me hace corto. Ya estoy esperando un segundo volumen. Espero que asi sea. Enhorabuena por este excepcional libro. Libros como este son los que nos hacen apreciar lo que significa ser vasco.

The first few pages of this book drove me to my dictionary repeatedly. Hardly a single page left me without the intense need to dive into my dictionary - and an excellent dictionary at that. I found more often than not that the words searched for were not there, or that the meanings that made sense were obscure, or idiosyncratic. I realized quickly that I could not possibly get through the entire book that way and decided to just relax, understand what I could, and forget about struggling with what I could not. Mr. Millman is an independent soul and he makes up words, uses slang I am not familiar with and also uses obscure words in common and sometimes uncommon ways. I think this delights him. His travels delighted me. And Mr. Millman appears to be a delightful, jocular person who is comfortable in strange, lonely places. I am glad to have been taken on this trip with him through his book. I highly recommend this book particularly to people who are not so compulsive as to need to understand every nuance of what they are reading. Unfortunately for me, I am that compulsive person. Like Mr. Millman's journeys, it is often a journey into an unknown place.

As one who loves adventure travel I rate this as one of the best accounts ever for one chasing through this part of the world. It was especially meaningful as I have traveled the same route...The Shetlands, The Faroes, Iceland, Greenland and Labrador. How much fun to re-live it through the eyes of Lawrence Millman. Unlike Millman, I never had the chance to meet and live with the folks like he did. His encounters with the locals are so funny and engaging that you'll find yourself laughing throughout the book. If you are the least bit interested in this part of the world, read this book first and you'll hardly be able to wait to start your trip. This man is truly a great story teller and the kind of guy you'd just like to sit down with and rehash his adventures. What a great book!

There is a reason why every rating here (so far) is 5 stars - read it and you will find out why.

The best travel book I have ever read. I picked it up becasue I had been in a couple of the places covered in the book. Millman truly captures the sense of place, people, life and environment and is funnier than you can ever imagine travel writing being. He gets involved with the locals and this leads to our discovery of some very interesting local customs. He provides the best description of being sea sick that I have ever read - I could almost feel it!

I have loaned this book to so many people that it is dog-eared. It is the book we always talk about year after year and have great laughs.

A June through October vagabondage in the shadows of the Viking far-farers. Lawrence Millman wanders from Norway to Newfoundland by way of the Faeroes, Iceland, and Greenland. His engaging mix of descriptions of the local color and his own wry humour make for some fine and entertaining reading. Written in a journal travelogue style with just enough history and customs mixed in to tempt you to visit these "last places".
An excellent adventure story. Highly recommended.

Extracts: A Field Guide for Iconoclasts

As a polar regions travel junkie, I devoured Millman's account of his journey through the Faeroes, Iceland, Greenland, Newfoundland, and places in between. I thought he did an admirable job of relaying the harships of life (especially in Greenland) while always coming back to the mysterious appeal that this region holds for many.

Always a great read. Good Dog, Stay brought tears to my eyes. This collection of articles is very good. Parents and grandparents will love the comments about parenthood. Articles are short enough for a quick read from time to time.

i finished the book today. it has been a wonderful companion, all 288 pages of it. the book features 65 of quindlen's previously told tales, formerly featured in her new york times and newsweek columns during her journalism days.

i loved reading the book--and, starting with the least important reason on my list of important reasons i loved this book--her columns were all of similar lengths, retold in the book in about 4 pages each. because i have a limited attention span, and spend various amounts of time waiting in the car for kids and their activities to begin or end, the book is a perfect front seat companion--helping me make good use of the otherwise wasted waiting time.

i loved the book for lots of other reasons, too. i got to know more about an author i've come to treasure--and discovered a number of things that made me feel proud of her for being the things, and me, for liking her books. turns out quindlen is a catholic mom, feminist trailblazer, democratic idealist in the practical sense. she was the first woman more than a dozen times. she noticed the best, and wrote about it.

I am utterly amazed at how well Anne writes and is able to say the things that should be said. This book was so very thought provoking. Even if you don't agree with everything you certain will come away with a deeper meaning. Man, I wish I could write like she does!!!

As with all her other books of essays, Ms Quindlen doesn't sugarcoat her feelings--you know where she stands. And whether you agree with her take on a subject or not, she always provides opportunity for thought, some nuance or different angle you may not have considered. I enjoy packing the book in my tote or purse, so if I have to wait for an appointment or am grabbing a bite to eat by myself, I can read some Anna Q.

I am living proof that one need not agree with Anna on politics to enjoy her writing. As a Republican, I find myself at odds with just about every political stance she takes, but I so admire her style of writing that I want to read on to see how she is going to present her ideas, and I am never disappointed by that presentation. I recommend this book to all aspiring writers as a guide to the craft of essay writing.

I loved it. It's packed with explicit information on the tight relationship and revolving door between war profiteers and government officials--they're often one and the same--naming names and providing dollar amounts and sources of information. When you study this book, you will gain an understanding of what motivates the neocons to start wars. Money makes the world go around: you will learn a great deal about why the current US administration bombed Afghanistan, then Iraq, and now appears to be aimed at Iran. Why would anyone want never-ending war?

Hossein-zadeh points out that it is the industrial part of the military-industrial complex that is most problematic because it is driven by the profit motive.

I happen to disagree with Hossein-zadeh in that I think the oil transnationals also want wars in the Middle East. (He says these entities prefer stability.) This difference in views detracts nothing, however, from his analysis of the military-industrial aspect of these conflicts.

I'm a writer and use this book as a reference.

I hope it comes out in paperback so more people can afford it.

Ismael Hossein-Zadeh's The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism will greatly surprise readers who imagine that what lies between its covers is an abstruse economics argument or a rant against the war in Iraq. This accessible, lucid, and generously documented approach to the history of military engagement by the United States since World War II clearly is written with a mainstream audience in mind although its hardcover price of $80 is out of the average reader's ballpark. Hopefully libraries will pick up the title since every taxpayer deserves the chance to consider Hossein-Zadeh's thesis. In short, he demonstrates that although the economic gains of imperialism might have supported required military outlays for a period, there comes a time in every empire's life when further expansion no longer is cost-effective for the metropole and becomes a drain on the national economy. At this point, the war industry becomes "parasitic" as the dividends of empire fall more and more disproportionately into the laps of those associated with military efforts. Hossein-Zadeh considers the current period in U.S. history such a time.

Readers may have heard this claim before. But few if any will have met such a persuasive presentation of it. The book is extremely helpful in how it identifies and then dismantles what Hossein-Zadeh considers weak explanations for why the United States continues to engage in military intervention and expansion abroad. The first is the widespread theory among liberals that the neoconservative element of the U.S. political scene is attempting to take advantage of the absence of a comparable world power in order to spread American values and free market economics. The second is that George Bush is spearheading military adventurism as a result of the need to pose as a "war president" so as to mask the failings of his administration. The third is that America's Zionist lobbyists are championing the war on Iraq in order to shore up U.S. support of Israel. The fourth (and Hossein-Zadeh considers this the most widespread assumption of all) is that the United States is engaging, in the case of Iraq and other Middle Eastern adventures, in military action in order to better control the world's oil resources. Hossein-Zadeh acknowledges and discusses each of these theories, ultimately discarding them as the driving force behind continued U.S. military imperialism.

Instead, he suggests that the military imperialism we are witnessing today "can be seen largely as reflections of the metaphorical fights over allocation of the public finance at home, of a subtle or insidious strategy to redistribute national resources in favor of the wealthy, to cut public spending on socioeconomic infrastructures, and to reverse the New Deal reforms by expanding military spending." Survival of the working man and woman aside, also at stake is the question of which cabal of capitalists will come out on top--the neoliberal multilateralists who favor globalization--that is, the expansion of free markets throughout the world in order to make way for the products of multinationals largely unconnected with war, or the unilateralists, who tend to be linked to the military industry and to other industries that are not competitive in the international marketplace.

In addition to providing engaging economic explanations and political commentary such as those already mentioned, Hossein-Zadeh offers a number of other helpful analyses. He makes a distinction between the military bureaucracies of past empires--e.g., Rome--and America's present-day military industry, which reflects the imperatives of an advanced capitalist economy. Bearing in mind this distinction, he suggests, unlike many who see the United States as declining in the mode of Rome, that decline of the United States more likely would follow that of the British Empire. He points out that multilateralists have in no way been eliminated by unilateralists; rather, leading capitalist countries tend to experience alternating periods characterized by resurgence and diminution of the importance of these two poles. He also acknowledges the benefits of the military industry on an economy such as that of the United States. Finally, as an Iranian-American he offers a unique perspective in terms of political economy on the issue of religious fundamentalism and the fraught relations between the West and the Muslim world. Ismael Hossein-Zadeh's The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism is a fascinating text and one that deserves to be as accessible to the average pocketbook as it is to the average reader.

Professor Hossein-zadeh takes over where the late Seymour Melman left off, showing the absurdity & perils of military spending. Those of you familar with Melman, who was a professor of industrial engineering at Columbia University know that time & time again in his many books, he demonstrated how ludicrous defense spending had become through numerous examples. The money spent on "overkill", the cost overuns, the many uneeded military projects, expensive quality control problems coupled with system & hardware failures are just several he often reiterated.
Dr. Hossein-zadeh takes the subject a bit further & in a new direction. He is backed by irrefutable statistics, documents & history itself to prove his case against excessive & unwarrented military spending. All of it very comprehensible, even to someone with no background in economics & a minute knowledge post WW2 history. By reading this book, one can gain some insight into the modus operandi of the military-industrial complex & its the effect it has on the economy,political establishment & both domestic & foreign policy.

This book brings together lots of individual facts, statistics, and citations that those with a concern about US militarism who attentively follow current events and recent US history will have come upon in disparate locations.

The genius of the book is that it puts all of this information in one place and presents it in a coherent structure. It is also very clearly written. The citations and bibliography are useful starting points for those wishing to delve more deeply into the economic underpinnings of the military-industrial complex.

most comprehencive ,well documented,well researched book exposing the essence of our heartless government subserviant to the demands of giant corporations sacrificing the ones it is elected to protect.

The Publisher's Weekly does a dis-service to this book. Better read the review in the Jan 2005 Futurist (http://www.wfs.org/revsatinjf05.htm)
This book is an outstanding and insightful description of ways in which the left and right can think together about our society's, and the world's, enormous problems, and then begin to work to solve them. Much more useful than shooting at each other. Only by finding the common ground will it be possible to break through the morass we find ourselves in. Remember the advice to both right and left, "Put your hand on your knees--they're jerking!"

I like this book very much. It is a cry from the heart--from a very informed heart--and it captures much that needs to be understood. It is not, however, the first effort in this direction. This book was published in 2004. Paul Ray and Sherry Ruth Anderson published "The Cultural Creatives: How 50 Million People are Changing the World" in 2000, coincident with the appearance of Marianne Williamson's extraordinary edited work, "IMAGINE: What American Could be in the 21st Century." Ted Halstead and Michael Lind published "The Radical Center: The Future of American Politics," in 2001. In 2002 Ralph Nader capped off decades of activism along these lines with "Crashing the Party: How to Tell the Truth and Run for President." In 2003 we had Matthew Miller's "The 2% Solution: Fixing America's Problem in Ways Liberals and Conservatives Can Love." See my reviews of all of those, and my list on democracy, to appreciate this book by this author, in a larger context.

The most important meme to come out to me--an aggressive iconoclast if ever there was one--dealt with the importance of turning away from rebellion for the sake of rebellion, and focusing instead of being a player, on bringing corporations to the table as Paul Hawken and others suggest in "Natural Capitalism" (which the author cites).

Early messages from this book include: Ignore the noise including Moore and Franken; Creative borrowing from all points of view to achieve public policy; Radical middle provides concrete answers instead of platitudes; Work with corporations instead of attacking them blindly; Idealism without the illusions. Four on key values: maximize choices, fair start for all, maximize human potential, help the developing world. The author then gives us four sections, with the highlights listed below.

Maximizing choices:
1) Universal health care that is also preventive and integrative
2) Law reform--affordable, meaningful
3) End oil dependency--parallel energies, seven paths (conservation, renewables, fossil fuels, hydrogen, nuclear, biobased, and values-change path

Fair start
1) great teachers (overlooks two-parent family, serious games, total change to curriculum)
2) affirmative action with teeth, not just letting in black-skinned white minds
3) Job for everyone and a financial next egg as well

Maximize human potential
1) corporations we can be proud of
2) biotech with adult supervision
3) bring back the draft--for EVERYONE (one of the best pieces)

Help the developed world
1) Globalization with savvy and feeling (address poverty, raise standards)
2) Make the WTO transparent
3) Humanitarian intervention in time--no more genocides (great piece)
4) Tough on terrorism and causes of terrorism

Be a player not a rebel
1) professional schools, not radical groups, are our incubators now (compassionate MDs, holistic MBAs, visionary JDs,
2) stay informed
3) join groups that matter and push them to the middle
4) run for office
5) open up the political process (free media, tax credits, proportional representation, instant run-offs, non-partisan redistricting,

Just this morning, a friend in Seattle sent me an email about a new meme that goes beyond the split between "for profit" and "non-profit" to speak of "new profit." That is the distillation of what Paul Hawken and Herman Daly ("Ecological Economics") are trying to capture. The old concept of corporate profit loots the commons. The new concept of profit, what I call Communal Capitalism, others call it Capitalism 3.0 or Natural Capitalism, understands that true profit must be perpetual and distributed.

This author has a following and is part of the solution. I recommend all the books I listed above, and this one.

See also:
A Power Governments Cannot Suppress
Society's Breakthrough!: Releasing Essential Wisdom and Virtue in All the People
The Two Percent Solution: Fixing America's Problems in Ways Liberals and Conservatives Can Love
The Radical Center: The Future of American Politics
The Cultural Creatives: How 50 Million People Are Changing the World

This book is nothing more than 200 pages of smoke and mirrors.All Satin believes that is need to make the failed ideology of Socialism work is to pile on more government and programs and sock the cost to taxpayers.Of course,he doesn't use the word taxpayer,he uses the word government when he talks about who is going to foot the bill.You see,taxpayers are the problem,they've learned to look after themselves.Socialist's clients are those who buy into the concept that they can't or won't look after themselves and hand it over to the government to do it.
Satin has spent decades as a dyed- in- the- wool Leftist and now thinks he's seen the light.His ideas are far to the left of JFK
who believed that it was not the role of government to provide a person with a job but to provide the person with an opportunity to look after himself.Even he was a Liberal;then along came Johnson with his War on Poverty,and after spending 3 trillion dollars on it ;the end result was that even a larger percent of the people were living below the poverty line.What else would you expect from Socialism.
Satin's ideas about proportional representation have already been rejected by another reviewer and all I would like to add is that, it is being pushed for here in Canada;and these proposers are not even Liberals,but Socialists.
Search as you may,for some enlightenment in this book;you will not find ideas like,self-reliance,taking on responsibility,pride in accomplishment,etc.What you will find is a load of ideas like programs,entitlements,assistance,government creating jobs etc.
Figure a way to take care of yourself,and don't fall for the idea that you need these Socialists to do it.They haven't done it anywhere else and you'll be sadly mistaken if you believe they'll start in the USA.
Even the author has come to the point where he went back and learned a skill to better his lot.You don't see John Kerry ,the great caring Liberal giving away anything.And how about Teresa when talking to people gathering up clothes to send to recent hurricane victims---"Let them go naked"was her help.

One of Mark Satin's most engaging charactistics is his honesty about himself. I have followed him from his first newsletter to his first book "New Age Politics" to his current newsletter and the book by the same title ("The Radical Middle"). He clearly has morphed into something new, which comes through well to me in this book. His writing style is engaging and energetic; he has good documentation; he earnestly believes we need to create something new in our society to replace the extreme polarization we are currently experiencing. He is inclusive and optimistic, believing in each citizen to think independently. His writing is not "academic," but well-researched and well-cited. I highly recommend this book for anyone looking for even one glimmer of hope for us as a society with a positive and constructive future!

Edryce Reynolds
Tacoma, Washington

"Radical Middle" is several things: The title of Mark Satin's new book being reviewed here, the title of his newsletter, the title of his web site and the name of an exciting new political concept.

I have followed Mark Satin for a long time, having been a charter subscriber to his previous newsletter, "New Options" and to his current "Radical Middle" newsletter. And I have read two of his previous books in addition to "Radical Middle."

Because of occasional disagreements with some specific content from the current newsletter, I was ready to be skeptical of Mark's new book. But instead, I must admit that I am highly impressed. I believe the book does a thorough job of explaining the Radical Middle concept to readers, regardless of their background, political leanings, or even newsletter subscriber status. In each book chapter, Mark expanded upon past "Radical Middle" newsletter articles and included more nuances and detail, which help to flesh out and explain his positions better.

While there were still a few points where I winced, there were many more knowing smiles and nods. In fact, in some cases I found that my position was not that far away from Mark's after all, once I finally understood his position more fully. And even where there remain points of disagreement, I commend Mark for creating, thoroughly explaining and maintaining his voice and his ground.

I should also state that I had my wife read the education chapter. She is a former full-time teacher, and currently does some substitute teaching. She had not read any of Mark's past books, newsletters, web site, etc., so had a fresh perspective. And she loved the chapter, agreeing with Mark's central thesis that quality teachers are what great education is all about.

The resource lists at each chapter end are also very useful, and I recommend readers to pursue some them to follow up with your own investigations of issues. I am doing so.

Overall, I deeply respect how Mark has utilized all his varied life experiences in coming to a mature, organized synthesis of ideas.

And in our polarized times, the Radical Middle political concept is exactly what we need to grow from concept to full-fledged reality.

I'm not a fan of politics, and I really enjoyed this book! The part with the aliens was my favorite because it, like the rest of the book, took a serious political issue and made it into something more accessible to the average reader. I really enjoyed the way that the author turned even the most boring (or so I always thought) political issues and turned them into a fun, entertaining story that easily keeps your attention from beginning to end. I would highly recommend this book to anyone, most especially those who think that politics can't be interesting--give this book a chance to prove you wrong!

I thought this book was going to be about serious politics, and I was surprised to find out it's a lot more than that. I think the younger generations have no interest for what's going on with our government because it's so hard to understand. But this book simplifies everything so it's easy to understand, and also brings up issues that should be more of a priority to our people and our government. There is also a lot of humor throughout the book that makes you laugh out loud, well at least I did. Lastly, it's easy to read because it is in diary form, so if you have to put the book down for a little bit, it's easy to get back involved from where you left off. Great job Patricia Favaron - I hope to read more of your future writings!!

I enjoyed reading this book. The author's thoughts are conveyed in a simple way. Her ideas are seen from another perspective, our very own: a citizen willing to make many changes.I can relate to this great book, and Im sure many thoughts just like her's have crossed the reader's mind at some point or another.

Favarone's book really makes you think how complicated the government has become, and how simple life would be, if we, the american people paid more attention to what's going on around us. I really liked her ideas and found the book hard to put down.

This thought-provoking little book comes packed with big ideas presented in a kind of dreamy way. The details are obscured, but the big concepts punch through, as if through a mist, or in a half-awake dream.

If you're at all centrist, you'll draw back in horror at the possibilities presented by this scenario. Mao Tse Tung had nothing on this girl. It's a lesson in what could happen if we lose our freedom - if the checks & balances in our system are eliminated and we become centrally controlled. We could all become the faceless "Average Person".

If you're far left or right, you'll relish the thought of an enlightened dictatorship, like Singapore only better. One with leaders who are the smartest, wisest, and who's good & pure intentions are realized. After all, who cares about the "Average Person", when the best people can run things so well that everybody is content.

History won't really play out as depicted in the book for 2 reasons:
1) Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
2) The "Average Person" is smart enough to screw up the best-laid and most well-intentioned plans (as economics shows us).
It could play out as a disaster though, rather than the utopian outcome presented.

A very scary book. Read it if you can!