Events Books

Over a decade old, Is It Utopia Yet?, remains the essential text introducing Twin Oaks, now 40 years on, America's highest profile and most successful intentional community.

With witty cartoons (by T.O. member Jonathan Roth) extrapolating personable, organized prose, co-founder Kat Kinkade riffs on the title query, playing with palpable relish the role of the avuncular, wry debunker of her own idiosyncratic, yet primary, role in building a sustainable piece of Sixties mythology - then living with (and in) it as Twin Oaks matured and mutated into a living organism independent of her initial design.

So the 'angle' here is Kinkade provides both insider and outsider accounts of Twin Oaks. Vivid, honest, warm and entertaining. Cheers to the good life!

Easy to read, fun and honest. Does it miss anything? Most likely it does, does it gloss over anything, perhaps. But what is life in community like, it covers it. Is it a manual on how to start a community... NO, but it is a look at a community from the heart of one of it's founder.

Highly recommend this book!

Kat has given us a close-up view of what it is like to live at Twin Oaks Community. As a regular visitor since 1993, I can say that her book captures the benefits, joys, and strains of living in community, and many of the quirks of Twin Oaks in particular.

Kat's writing is as lucid as her thinking. A must read for anyone considering community or thinking about visiting Twin Oaks.

kat's at it again! her personal style makes this second accounting of the history of twin oaks read like a conversation with an old friend. supplemented with great cartoons, it's a funny book for those involved within the communities movement & those who never even knew there was such a thing.

though i've yet to make it out to twin oaks, i have met some incredible people who make their home there & am currently a part of an urban commune. this book helped my family see a bit clearer what my vision for life is & how it's not just a bunch of crazy, drug addicted, occultists that wish to live together recreating the world they've inherited.

I visited the Twin Oaks commune in 2002 and was amazed at the size of it as well as the sophistication of their housing, dining center, and production warehouse. Also, the people there were pretty cool and progressive. I bought every book they had about the place at their little book store.

Is It Utopia Yet captures the lifestyle of people at Twin Oaks about as well as any written book could. Kat Kinkade was one of the founders over 35 years ago and is one of the very few who has seen Twin Oaks evolve from its very beginnings to what it is today. The book is full of funny cartoons that poke fun at the life of Twin Oaks too.

If you're interested in the concept of economic democracy where workers themselves make decisions over how the production process is run, you should get this book. If offers a glimpse of what a possible better future could be... a real, live, breathing model that exists in the here and now.

A GREAT BOOK,OBVIOUSLY WRITTEN TO VERY HIGH STANDARDS,AS IS USUAL FOR READER'S DIGEST.AS THE TITLE SAYS, IT THOROUGHLY COVERS JESUS'S LIFE, AND THE POLITICAL,SOCIAL AND RELIGIOUS CLIMATE OF THE PROMISED LAND, FOR SEVERAL YEARS BEFORE HIS BIRTH, AND SEVERAL DECADES AFTER HIS CRUCIFICTION ( I.E., PAUL AND PETER'S TRAVELS AND TEACHINGS, THE FATES OF THE OTHER APOSTLES,ECT.)BEAUTIFULLY ILLUSTRATED WITH MAPS, PHOTOS AND PAINTINGS OF BOTH PEOPLE AND PLACES, IT ALSO INCLUDES AN APPENDIX TO IMPORTANT TOWNS AND CITIES IN JESUS'S TIME. THIS IS A MUST HAVE FOR ANYONE INTERESTED IN JESUS'S TEACHINGS AND BIBLICAL HISTORY.

This beautiful volume has a short introduction titled Jesus And The Four Gospels. The first chapter, The Birth Of The Savior tells of the census that brought Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem and the visit of the wise men from the East. The attached portfolio illustrates the events surrounding the birth of Jesus by artists like Andrea della Robbia, Federico Barocci, Jan van Scorel, Giotto and others.

A Troubled Land, chapter 2, deals with the political situation of the time and a brief overview of the ancient history of Israel, Alexander The Great, Hellenism, the Romans and Herod. This includes information on the famous historian Josephus, maps of the Holy Land including a political map of the kingdom of Herod The Great, full colour pictures of the landscape, a chronology of Israel and tables of the Hasmonean line and the Herodean family.

The next: Classes And Masses, looks at Herod in greater detail, especially his building programmes, with photographs and illustrations of amongst others the remains of Herodium, the aqueducts and roads, Masada, Sebaste, the palace at Jericho, jewellery and household utensils. There are also maps of Israel and a political map of the division of Herod's kingdom into the territories of Archelaos, Herod Philip, Herod Antipas and Salome.

Chapter 4: Village Life, discusses life in the countryside, rituals and rites dictated by the seasons, family life and family home and the festivals of Israel. The next chapters deals with Jerusalem and includes impressive photographs and maps of the city, the old city, the temple mount, the wailing wall, illustrations of King Herod's temple and other landmarks.

Chapter 6: The Life Of The Mind, discusses the Torah, educational life, the synagogue, the scribes, Greek education, the arts, the Alexandria library and Hellenistic Jewish Literature, whilst the next one: Trade And Travel, deals with the vigorous flow of trade and travel around the Mediterranean, Europe and the East.

Chapter 8: Religious Conflict, addresses the political situation, religion, the priesthood, the Pharisees, synagogues, the two great teachers Hillel and Shammai, the Essenes, John the Baptist and the baptism of Jesus. The next: The Mission Of The Messiah, looks at the areas of Capernaum, the Sea of Galilee, the family of Jesus, the Twelve Apostles, the travels of Jesus, the trial, crucifixion, the resurrection and the ascension. It includes beautiful works of art by Duccio, Claude Lorrain, Domenico Fiasella, Giotto, El Greco, Rembrandt, Velazquez and others.

With its many maps, chapter 10: Spread Of The Gospel, traces the growth of the gospel message from Pentecost, the conversion of Saul and the spread of the Word to Asia Minor, Greece and Italy, also dealing with the destruction of 70AD, the further growth of the church and Constantine The Great.

The reference section includes Places In Bible Times which lists place names from Alexandria to Tyre, Biblical Citations and an extensive Bibliography divided into General, Bibles & Commentaries, History & Archaeology, Biographies, Jesus: His Life & Times, Daily Life and Art. The book concludes with an index. Jesus And His Times is an absorbing and richly illustrated text and also a valuable reference work.

Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus

Yeshua: A Guide to the Real Jesus and the Original Church

Yeshua: The Name of Jesus Revealed in the Old Testament

The Sacred Names

This is undoubtedly the best book ever written about life in the times of Jesus. It is comprehensive yet detailed, with voluminous illustrations, maps, geneaologies, etc. There are chapters on village life, schooling, trade and travel, and internal politics. A few chapters are devoted to Jesus' life, and here the editors make a number of mistakes. For example:

- they seem unaware that the proper translation of almah is "young woman" and not "virgin" (p. 17)

- they make the common error of translating "tekton" as "carpenter" (p. 26)

- they seem unaware of the fact that the village of Nazareth didn't exist as a village at the time of Jesus (p. 91) and it was more than a century after Jesus' death that a synagogue was build there. As a consequence, they translate his name as "Jesus of Nazareth" when in fact the proper translation is "Jesus the Nazarene."

But these errors are few and relatively minor, when weighed against the plethora of interesting details that they supply.

Anyone looking for a desciption of what life was like in the times of Jesus needs to get this book. This isn't necessarily the best book about the life of Jesus, but it surely is the best book about his times.

This is a very good book for the student of faith who seeks a more thorough understanding of what life was like during the time that Jesus lived in the flesh on earth. Rich with photographs, drawings and maps, this book is a visual treat as well as providing much insight through the text.

The book is hard-cover, very study and well-made, and is 336 pages in length. There are 10 main chapters and some appendicies. The book begins with the significance of the expectation of a Messiah and his birth in Bethlehem. Then the political intrigue of the day is presented, especially a history of Herod the Great and the Roman Empire. The daily life of a typical Jew is then presented, how a person lived, what they did, what they ate, and how they raised their families. Jerusalem has a chapter dedicated to itself, with emphasis on the Temple that King Herod built for the Jews. The middle chapters deal with education, trade, travel, and religious conflicts of the time. Finally, the last two chapters explain the mision of the Messiah and how the gospel of his teachings spread after his death and resurrection.

This is not a book that is an easy or casual "fun' read. It is written for the more serious student of faith and the Bible. The information is detailed and quite extensive. A very thorough job was done in putting this book together. The reader can use it as a text book to teach themselves the cultural and religious signficance of the time. It is a good book to read for insight into Biblical times and Biblical narratives (scriptures).

At .01 cent (used), this book is a steal.

Jim "Konedog" Koenig

I only rated this book at 5 stars because I couldn't go any higher. To think I got a copy of it for $.01 (a penny) plus shipping is unreal. Talk about a steal! This is one of the best books about the life and times of our Lord Jesus Christ that you'll ever find. The pictures of the Holy Land alone are worth it but there's so much more. By all means, get your copy NOW!!!!

Despite its hard science dressings, this book is primarily a popular (versus academic) account of modern political leadership. Although Dr. Ludwig is obviously knowledgable about psychology, the scientific discourse in this book is kept to a minimum. Mostly, the book consists of a series of highly entertaining anecdotes about famous political figures, collected to support his thesis that political greatness equates possesing the characteristics of the "Alpha Male". The acceptability of this amoralistic conception of "greatness" - where Mao and FDR are co-ranked the greatest modern political leaders with Stalin a close second - is up to each reader to decide.

This is one very interesting and entertaining book. A relative recommended it to me and although he made it sound interesting, I was still a little apprehensive. I thought the book was going to be how average human leaders have similar traits as monkeys and half the book was going to be talking about 5 year studies in the jungle done by National Geographic types. I was wrong. The author completed one mammoth feat of research by researching every leader of a country from 1899 to 2000. He spent 18 years doing it and read thousands of books and articles on the subjects. Over1,900 mostly men were studied and the author came up with common personality traits that the leaders shared. The book details out these traits and how the author interpreted them in relation to political leadership and slightly how they stacked up against monkey hierarchies. .

I really enjoyed how the author detailed out certain traits and then used examples from his research to show how those traits came into being with the different leaders. What came out of the book right away was that a certain type of man has the drive to become a leader, the alpha male, and that very few leaders just happen to fall into being the man in charge. Not only was the psychology of the book interesting, but the vast coverage of interesting bits of history made the book enjoyable to read. The author would dig up relevant and many times amusing, antidotes from his research to describe a particular ruler. He also did not just focus on the most well know leaders, but showed the reader how the traits on display covered leaders from all aspects of the spectrum, from democratically elected leaders to dictators and Kings.

Probably the only sad section of the book dealt with the ways so many of these men hung one to the very last minute to the power they had and that the obsession with keeping the power tended to facilitate the circumstances for their down fall. Overall I really enjoyed the book. It is interesting and well written. It could have very easily been a dry and dull study, but it comes no where near this. The authors quirky sense of humor helped to keep the book light and fast paced. If you are interested in politics and the men on stage then this will be a good book to add to your collection.

This is one of the most ambitious and interesting works I've ever seen. The author, apparently on his own and without institutional backing, took on the study of political leadership and addressed it empirically, coding 182 features of different leaders during the 20th century. Although replete with entertaining anecdotes, the book is based on statistical analyses that are presented in a clear and intuitive manner. There are literaly hundreds if not thousands of new facts and observations. By examining so many leaders and identiying types, he shows that individuals such as Hitler are not mere anomolies but share common traits - independance of interests, excellent memories, supreme confidence in their own vision, etc. This book is similar in approach to my own (Personality, Character, and Leadership in the White House) but extends analysis to leaders in all sorts of governments. My only complaint is that some of the metholdogy underying the study could be more fully explained (for example, how many raters provided jdugments on personality traits and how these were defined?), but most readers will not miss this. A tour de force.

I loved reading this book as much as I enjoyed the funny picture on the cover. The thesis that most if not all leaders of people are similar to primate alpha males in the sense that they have more concubines and children, not necessarily more intelligence or ability but more macho desire to rule over others for the sake of ruling (whether known or not by the agent), and that much in the politics of primates and that of humans is remarkably similar is fun to examine and read about. My only desire was that after ten years of studying and researching for this book, maybe the University of Kentucky emeritus psychiatry professor could have focused even more on the roots of the nature of political leaders, both in the primate and strikingly similar human realms. I expected much from this book and did not get as much as I would have hoped, but it was still an excellent read thanks to the depth of research it contains. All national leaders from the 20th century collated and examined as a whole in comparison with primates: maybe there is ample reason to be disappointed in a 400 page book trying to take on so much. Nonetheless, the accounts of the idiosyncracies of certain leaders, the primate-like actions of many, the sloth and greed of others, and other remarkable accounts make this a fabulous book for almost any reader interested in the imperfections of people, especially the most visable people: leaders.

It is surprising that the proponents of evolutionary psychology have not paid more attention to this book. Ludwig argues that the human desire to be the supreme political ruler is rooted in the same biological nature that supports the dominance of alpha males among monkeys and apes. He supports this argument with analysis of the 1,941 chief executive rulers of the independent countries in the 20th century. He illustrates his points with lively anecdotes from the lives of the 377 rulers for whom he had sufficient biographical information.

Of the many interesting points that he makes, one is that he can explain one of the universal traits of human politics--that the highest positions of political rule tend to be filled predominantly by men. Political scientists rarely acknowledge--much less explain--this remarkable pattern of male dominance. Ludwig explains it as a manifestation of male primate tendencies rooted in the neurophysiology of the male as shaped by natural selection in evolutionary history. (Surprisingly, Ludwig does not mention Steven Goldberg's book WHY MEN RULE, which makes a similar argument.)

There is one bright spot in Ludwig's otherwise dark vision of politics dominated by Machiavellian brutality--he shows that democratic leaders in established democracies act with more restraint than those in other kinds of regimes. He doesn't explain this. But he could have argued that even this has biological roots by appealing to Christopher Boehm's claim (in his book HIERARCHY IN THE FOREST) that there is a biological basis not only for the natural desire for dominance but also for the natural desire to resist dominance, and that modern democracy expresses that ambivalent political nature by allowing ambitious individuals to compete for high office within the constraints of constitutional structures that protect subordinates from being exploited.

I have developed some of these points in my book DARWINIAN NATURAL RIGHT: THE BIOLOGICAL ETHICS OF HUMAN NATURE.

La industria empacadora de carne es de las más crueles para sus empleados que hay en los EE.UU. Su alto índice de heridas, en combinación con bajos sueldos e interminables horas, crea un ambiente de lucha de clases todos los días.

En los ochenta los trabajadores de la empresa Hormel hicieron una huelga histórica que defendió la existencia su sindicato. La editorial Pathfinder especializa en abrir espacio para que los luchadores de todo el mundo se expresan en sus propias palabras, y en este folleto unos huelguistas recuentan la historia de esta lucha conforme avanzaba. Es una de las lecciones históricas que Pathfinder encapsula para los luchadores de hoy y de mañana.

La industria empacadora de carne es de las más crueles para sus empleados que hay en los EE.UU. Su alto índice de heridas, en combinación con bajos sueldos e interminables horas, crea un ambiente de lucha de clases todos los días.

En los ochenta los trabajadores de la empresa Hormel hicieron una huelga histórica que defendió la existencia su sindicato. La editorial Pathfinder especializa en abrir espacio para que los luchadores de todo el mundo se expresan en sus propias palabras, y en este folleto unos huelguistas recuentan la historia de esta lucha conforme avanzaba.

La industria empacadora de carne es de las más crueles para sus empleados que hay en los EE.UU. Su alto índice de heridas, en combinación con bajos sueldos e interminables horas, crea un ambiente de lucha de clases todos los días.

En los ochenta los trabajadores de la empresa Hormel hicieron una huelga histórica que defendió la existencia su sindicato. La editorial Pathfinder especializa en abrir espacio para que los luchadores de todo el mundo se expresan en sus propias palabras, y en este folleto unos huelguistas recuentan la historia de esta lucha conforme avanzaba. Es una de las lecciones históricas que Pathfinder encapsula para los luchadores de hoy y de mañana.

I remember sitting at dinner with Hormel strikers in 1984 or 85, visiting, trying to gain solidarity not only for their strike, but for workers around the country. I remember what they told about what was happening in the meat packing industry in Minnesota, and why the workers in that union fought not just the company, but the union bureaucracy. What they faced then is more like too many workers, not just in the meat packing industry but especially there, face or know they will face soon. This book about the strike is not a sociological or journalistic analysis, but the analysis of a longtime working class leader, who was also one of the central leaders of the anti-Vietnam war movement. In this pamphlet we have the voices and struggle of the Hormel Strikers displayed so that workers of today, around the world, in and out of meat packing can learn from their successes and failures, and use this pamphlet as a weapon in their struggle.

Este es un folleto de gran importancia por cualquier trabajador en cualquier país del mundo. Traza la historia de una huelga importante por trabajadores de la carne en los Estados Unidos contra la empresa Hormel a mediados de la década de los 1980.
Con muchos detalles, explica el porque de los ataques patronales que obligaron a los trabajadores a lanzar una huelga tan larga y tan difícil. Detalle la rica historia de lucha de los obreros de la carne, y los enormes retos que todavía enfrentan para construir un movimiento sindical capaz de luchar y ganar en contra los capitalistas. Yo he trabajado en las matanzas en este país y reconozco la verdad de lo explicado en este folleto.
También ayuda al lector entender la crisis mundial del capitalismo, y la posibilidad de unir las luchas de trabajadores en países del Tercer Mundo (pienso hoy en Argentina, por ejemplo) con nosotros en los países más poderosos del capitalismo. ¡Léalo y discútalo con sus compañeros de trabajo!

This is a dead-on description of law practice today. I can't speak too highly of this book. It disillusions would-be lawyers and validates the second thoughts of practicing attorneys. All this in a well-written, mercifully concise format.

I practiced litigation in fairly large New Jersey firms for five years. I didn't read this book until I had been out for a year. I wish I could have read it during my transition out of law practice; it would have saved me a lot of self-doubt, anguish and guilt. Now I recommend it to law students, "pre-law" undergrads, and lawyers. I also assigned it to an upper-level undergrad class I taught recently on law and legal studies.

Buy this book. Read it. Then lend it to someone who needs it.

This book is mind opening for those who want to be lawyers. It presents the reality in the life of the lawyer within himself, family, work and society. It also presents the truth that lawyers are afraid to say when working for a firm. After reading it you might learn that the time and money spent might not be worthy. It is an insight in the career for those who know nothing about what they will be facing.

A seasoned attorney gave me this book when I was in my third year of law school. Eight years later I remain very grateful that I received this gift, because it is the most poignant, blunt, and accurate synopsis of the legal profession I have ever come across. The point of this book is not to deter people from being lawyers or scare the daylights out of them. Rather, it aims to prepare aspiring lawyers for what lies ahead of them in the real world of the law. If you're in law school or thinking about going to law school this book will open your eyes to the practice of law, but even if you're already a practicing attorney there is plenty in here that you'll recognize and appreciate.

This book is EXCELLENT and the kind of book to buy and KEEP on one's shelf as a law student and lawyer. Fast moving, easily read in one afternoon but material to be digested slowly. The author's vivid, extraordinarily creative analogy of lawyering to a money experiment - only that one short chapter - is well worth the price of this book...and then some. That analogy was well-crafted, like a great trial lawyer would tell. What the author begins here on his sociological analysis is absolutely TOO DAMN GOOD to skim as he did. I was left wanting of more depth to his observation, more thought, more help.

To me, this book did not warrant five stars because I place a higher burden on this author with what he has started here. I feel it is the duty of an author of such intellect and keener, stronger analytical ability than others to take us not further, but deeper, into understanding what this book has the potential to do, what it introduces us to in its 140 pages.

NONETHELESS, this is the kind of book that needs to be written, one which needs to be read BY EVERYONE, NON LAWYERS ALIKE!!!! to better understand ourselves and our present society. Excellent beginning job for Walt Bachman.

In nine quick and easily accessible chapters, Bachman outlines many striking truths about what an aspiring lawyer can expect to encounter in contemporary practice. This text is an absolute must read for anyone pondering law school.

Bachman reveals some brutal truths, such as "Lesson Seven: 10% of a lawyer's soul dies for every 100 billable hours worked in excess of 1,500 per year" (p.107). I appreciated his earnest approach to quantify, as scientifically as possible, his ideas about problems in the law.

As for others criticisms of this book- that he outlines only the problems and does not present possible solutions- well, that's just too bad. The very fact that he chooses not to is a direct reflection of the severity and fixed nature of these problems.

If you are interested in the history of the American Left or are a militant trying to understand some of the past lessons of our history concerning the socialist response to various social and labor questions this book is for you. This book is part of a continuing series of volumes of the writings of James P. Cannon that were published by the organization he founded, the Socialist Workers Party, in the 1970's and 1980's. Cannon died in 1974. Look in this space for other related reviews of this series of documents on and by an important American Communist.

In their introduction the editors motivate the purpose for the publication of the book by stating the Cannon was the finest Communist leader that America had ever produced. This an intriguing question. The editors trace their political lineage back to Cannon's leadership of the early Communist Party and later after his expulsion to the Trotskyist Socialist Workers Party so their perspective is obvious. What does the documentation provided here show? This certainly is the period of Cannon's political maturation, and the beginning of a long political collaboration working with Trotsky. The period under discussion- from the late 1920's when he was expelled as leader of the American Communist Party to the early 1930's and the start of the great labor upsurge which would bring wide spread unionization to the working class. Cannon won his spurs in this struggle to orient those organizations toward a revolutionary path. One thing is sure- in his prime, which includes this period- Cannon had the instincts to want to lead a revolution and had the evident capacity to do so. That he never had an opportunity to lead a revolution is his personal tragedy and ours as well.

As an expelled faction of the American Communist Party, which continued to stand on the program of the defense of the Russian Revolution, the Cannon group needed an orientation. That they considered themselves an expelled but loyal faction of the Communist Party was the correct orientation for a small propaganda group. The party was where the vast bulk of the advanced political workers were. Immediately going to the "masses", as has occurred with other expelled groupings, then and now, would have proved disastrous. Cannon's group needed to cohere a programmatic basis and recruit a cadre to win over workers and intellectuals from the party. Its Platform of the Communist Opposition, a generally good programmatic statement, was its key analytical tool to win cadre. There are two points in that document that should be of interest to today's militants. Those are the slogans for a workers party and for the right of national self-determination for blacks (at that time called Negroes).

In a pre-revolutionary or revolutionary period a revolutionary workers organization would recruit militants directly to the party. Other events like the labor upheavals in the United States in the 1930's fall in the same category. Thus, using some algebraic formula for drawing workers to a broader revolutionary formation is not necessary. At other times, and the late 1920's and early 1930's was such a period in the United States, the call for a workers party, presumably based on less than a full socialist program, by a propaganda group would be appropriate. In short, propaganda and agitation in favor of a generic workers party is a tactic. The call for such a formation today by militants in the United States is appropriate. In any case, no militant makes such a call for a workers party based on, for example, the model of the British Labor Party, then or now.

The left-wing movement in America, including the Communist Party and its offshoots has always had problems with what has been called the Black Question. The Communist Opposition's position on this question reflects that misconception, taken over from the party. This position has always been associated with American Communist Party member Harry Haywood (see his book Black Bolshevik). Marxists have always considers support to the right of national self-determination to be a wedge against nationalists and to attempt to take the national question off the agenda and put a working class resolution on the agenda. In any case, that programmatic point has always been predicated on there being a possibility for a defined group to form a nation. Absent that, other methods of struggle are necessary to deal with the special oppression, in this case of black people. Part of the problem with the American Communist position is that the conditions which would have created the possibility of a black state were being destroyed with the mechanization of agriculture, the migration of blacks to the Northern industrial centers and the overwhelming need to fight for black people's rights to survive under the conditions of the Great Depression. If one really thinks about it the only realistic time that this slogan could be raised or supported would have been shortly after the American Civil War when the black population was more compacted geographically and there might have been some political will by Radical Republican to back such a scheme. This misconception of the viability (or desirability) of a black nation would later came back to haunt Cannon's group when the Civil Rights struggles of the 1950's and 1960's presented opportunities for intervention in the black struggle. At that time they essentially abstained from recruiting blacks based on their program. They zigzagged between following Malcolm X and Martin Luther King rather than fighing for a socialist program among blacks. And we are still paying the price for that missed opportunity.

The Cannon faction was not the only group expelled from the American Communist Party during the period under review. One cannot understand this period inside the Communist movement if one does not understand which ways the winds were blowing from Moscow. A furious struggle for power in the Russian Communist Party, reflected in the Communist International, was under way during this period. First, the Stalin faction defeated the Trotsky-led Left Opposition, and then shortly thereafter the Bukharin-led Right Opposition was defeated. In America, this was reflected in the expulsion of the Lovestone group, previously the leadership of the Party. The political shakeout from these events was a certain pressure to unite the two expelled factions. Trotsky, and through his influence Cannon argued strenuously that such a combination was unprincipled and unworkable.

Most parliamentary parties, and here the writer includes reformist workers parties, do not confront a question such as this proposed bloc for the simple reason they are not, and do not want to, carry out a revolution. Therefore, such parties, will freely block with any other organization under any advantageous conditions. Not so a revolutionary party. While it may unite, for the moment, with a wide range of organizations for general democratic demands it must have a fairly homogeneous program if it is to lead a revolution. The program of the Right Opposition, in effect, was a transmission belt for reformism. In short, if you unite left and right you have two parties, at least in embryo in one organization. The Russian Revolution and later the Communist International in its better days should have put that idea of unification to rest. For Trotsky, Canon and the International Left Opposition this necessary separation was shown most dramatically in Spain when the formerly Trotskyist Left Opposition led by Andreas Nin fused with the Right Opposition led by his friend Juan Maurin in 1935. The result, the Party of Marxist Unification (POUM), while being the most honest revolutionary party in the Spanish Civil War floundered over revolutionary strategy due to its confused orientation on the popular front, military support to the bourgeois government and a whole range of questions of revolutionary strategy and tactics. The POUM experience is the textbook of what not to do in a revolutionary period. Unfortunately, for confusion on this issue Nin lost his life at the hands of the Stalinists, the POUM leadership was arrested after the May Days in Barcelona and the Spanish Revolution was derailed.

In Communist history, the period under review is called the `Third Period', in theory allegedly the period of the final crisis of capitalism. The conclusions drawn by the Stalinists from this theory was that revolution was on the immediate agenda everywhere and that it was not necessary, and in fact, counterproductive to make alliances with other forces. This writer has read a fair amount of material about this `Third Period', mainly at the level of high policy in the Communist International, especially in regard to Germany where it was a disaster. This volume gives a very nice appreciation by Cannon in a number of articles of how that policy worked at the base, the trade unions and the unemployed. It is painful to see how the Stalinist withdrew from the organized trade union movement and set up their own "red" unions composed mainly of Communist sympathizers. That the Stalinist did not suffer more damage and isolation after this flawed policy was changed later during the great labor battles of the 1930's testifies more to the desperate nature of those struggles than any wisdom learned by the Stalinists. Read this book for more on how to build a workers organization in tough times.

As an addition to the historical record of this period this book is a very good companion to Cannon's own THE COMMUNIST LEAGUE OF AMERICA, 1932-34 and DOG DAYS: JAMES P. CANNON vs. MAX SHACHTMAN IN THE COMMUNIST LEAGUE OF AMERICA, 1931-1933, PROMETHEUS RESEARCH LIBRARY, Spartacist Publishing Co., New York, 2002.

In 1928 James P. Cannon is one of the central leaders of the US Communist Party known through the labor and civil liberties movement as the leader of the International Labor Defense,sent to Moscow to represent his faction in the party. In 1928 Cannon along with two of his assistants happen about Trotsky's critique of the draft program of the Communist International. They decides that these are the right ideas, and they fight for them, knowing they will lose offices, and jobs, not knowing but facing being attacked in the streets, their homes burglarized, pilloried through the labor movement from a leader of tens of thousands to a leader of a dozen. This book shows what Cannon's faith in his ideas meant and how they struggle to build a nucleus of a real movement because of the faith of ideas and in the revolutionary capacities of humanity. Anyone who thinks that Marxism had anything seriously to do with the US Communist party should read this book. Anyone who wants the courage to fight for a real future for the working and farming majority of humanity should read this book.

This might seem a rather obscure set of writings, but in reading through them I found a very rich collection of political writings, one that should be inspiring and useful for any thinking worker or young person today.

James P. Cannon was the central leader of the cadres expelled from the U.S. Communist Party in 1928 for their fight to maintain the revolutionary perspectives of Marx, Lenin and the 1917 Russian Revolution in face of the bureaucratic, conservative and increasingly counterrevolutionary policies imposed by Stalin from Moscow. The articles and speeches in this volume amply illustrate two points Cannon stresses time and again: the importance of political program, starting from a working-class world view, in building a revolutionary leadership; and the importance of knowing what to do next and doing it, based on the objective reality confronting the movement at any given time.

Cannon's writings here also present fascinating details of the working class struggle from these years, including the onset of the 1930s depression, defense campaigns for workers framed up and imprisoned by the bosses and their courts, and important strikes by miners, textile and garment workers in the United States. Don't miss them!

Cannon was a central founder and leader of the working class wing of the Communist Party. He was expelled for organizing opposition to the Stalinization of this party. In these writings Cannon explains the dangers of Stalinism and contrasts it with the revolutionary Marxist alternative that he and a number of other workers were in the process of founding. These writings also touch on little known but important working class struggles before the thirties, like the textile battles of the south and the mineworkers "save the union" movement. Cannon's insights on politics as well as his fine writing ability make this a good read, and an important one for those wanting to discover their roots in the fight for a revolutionary party.

The Left Opposition in the Communist Party USA, expelled in 1928, fought to maintain the traditions of the Russian Revolution against the corruptions and crimes of the bureaucracy of Stalin. This collection of writings by its central leader debates the issues at stake: the future of the USSR, the revolutionary potential in the U.S., revolutionary work in the labor unions, the South and the fight against racism, and much more.

"Lethal Medicine, The Epidemic Of Medical Malpractice In America" by Harvey F. Wachsman, M.D., J. D., Henry Holt & Company, Inc. NY, 1993

In engineering, there are various comments that masquerade under the name, "Murphy's Law". I think the original version stated, "If someone can put it on backwards, they will". However, all the different variations metamorphosed into something like:
"If something can go wrong, it will! And, at the worst possible time".
I was surprised that Murphy's Law also applies to the practice of medicine. Dr. Wachsman gives many different examples, and, I think, shows how arrogant some doctors can be.

As an Historian, I was particularly interested in pages 32-33, where Dr. Wachsman describes "Erb's Palsy". This palsy is a "...deformity of the arm, shoulder and hand area..." making "...the arm appear ...twisted and shriveled". The author goes on to say that Erb's Palsy is caused when "...the brachial plexus nerves in the neck and shoulder area are damaged during delivery ..." of the baby. One of the most famous victims of Erb's Palsy was Germany's Kaiser Wilhelm II, who always attempted to hide his crippled left arm. Did this physical defect make Kaiser Wilhelm more aggressive than his cousins, the King of England and the Tsar of Russia? And help to cause World War I? Since Erb's Palsy can only be caused by damage in child birth, I wonder if this case of malpractice holds the record for being the most expensive in history?

Harvey Wachsman writes this book in order to serve and protect society as well as to inform readers of the dangers of receiving medical care in today's society. He organizes the text by topic in order to give readers an in depth look at the different areas pertaining to the United States' current medical malpractice problem. Waschman is certainly qualified to assert his opinions on the issue of negligent physicians in light of the fact that he served as both a chief of neurosurgery in a hospital and as an attorney, specializing in medical malpractice litigation. The book's strenghts lie in its real-life accounts and the author's well-researched advise. I was fortunate enough to stumble upon this book while researching a project in my Composition class at Oklahoma State University. The text proved to be extremely beneficial in my research. It also encouraged me to continue in my pursuit of medicine and perhaps, at some point, help redeem the practice of medicine.

Terse, well written, an absolute gem of a book. This book by Dr. Wachsman demonstrates why you absolutely need someone by your side 24 hours if you are in hospital. We need a web site to rate doctors. Maybe I will start one.

WOW not only did doctor harvey create a real page turner he also motivated me to excel in my future career of gynocolgy. his words touched my soul as he delved into such dangers as heart surgery, anal fissures, bone marrow transplats, vaginal discharge, rectal leakage, and dental malpractice. read this book for an adventure into the daily life of my hero, dr. harvey.

Harvey Wacshman portrays the beuty of childhood love-man realationships with poetic vigor. Each chapter permeates my soul like no other malpractivce lawyer. If reading about various feline habits tickles your fancy, then grab some hot coco and curl up along sid ethe hearth of a warm fire and grab this book!

When I left England to live in the United States for one year last August, there was only one book I took with me - Alistair Cooke's `Letter From America'. What else could I have taken? Cooke saw into America like no other Brit (or no other non-American, for that matter).

Starting at the mid 1940s, the book winds its way through post-war America nearly right up until the authors death in 2004, picking out the best of his weekly broadcasts. The subject matters range from politics, history, current affairs, entertainment and the topics from the New England fall, jazz, Robert Kennedy's assassination and O.J Simpson.

But it is not the subject matter that makes this book so special (for we already know about most of them anyway) it is none other than Cooke's insight and writing style. The articles flow like the finest novel or poem (which is probably attributed to Cooke's background in theatre). Each time you come back to read the book again it feels as though you are receiving the opinions of a familiar friend, and not some distant journalist.

There are drawbacks. Cooke was often criticised, and quite rightly so, for ignoring the darker side of the American dream. The other possible drawback, depending on your viewpoint, is that Cooke was a committed conservative, especially in the latter half of his career. Many of the final articles from the late 90's and early 00's lament the current position of America and (what he saw as) the sliding standards of journalism. Maybe, but you also can't help feel that he was by this point slightly out of touch.

These minor quibbles, however, cannot undermine Cooke's overall achievement of helping us better understand this important nation, which could be described as love letters to America.

Alistair Cooke is an observer of the American social fabric, of our heros, of our blemishes, of our short history and sense of place. His first hand accounts of American and Americans is not unlike a nation looking at itself in a mirror. He is at times generous with his observations. At other times he is very British in his ability to be critical with a smile. He can describe a familiar person and make us see the person anew. The book is a pleasure to read, each chapter a new adventure of wit and insight. He wanders a bit but his style makes you enjoy the journey and look forward to the next excursion.

For many years I listened to Alistair Cooke's ' Letters from America'. The calm, erudite voice , the super- civilized tone , the suggestion of great intelligence somehow always promised to provide insight into America that no one else had. The British Tocqueville of the airways who knew more about the Americans than the Americans knew about themselves.
Yet somehow I more often than not felt a certain disappointment in the communications. Reading them without the Cooke tone and pause, without his special emphasis diminishes them further. There is it seems to me a great deal of observation and color , and not enough striving for deep general understanding.
And there is too in the calm of Cooke's tone something strange and distant.The many rich voices of America, its ways of shouting and making itself felt are not transmitted strongly here.
Nonetheless in close to sixty years of reporting there are numerous insights and observations and much that entertains.
I think of Cooke's elegy for his old friend Isaiah Berlin. I think of reports made from all kinds of whistle stops on Presidential campaigns. I think too of his capacity for friendship, and how that does move through these letters and give them a warmer feeling of comraderie.
I think also of Cooke's basic real affection for America, his interest and appreciation of much what is good and beautiful in it.
I think too of how many listeners he delighted with his wit, and dry humor and clear - cut language.
This is a lifetime work of special meaning and value for the many thousands who waited each week for those fifteen minutes of his often most delightful and insightful talk.

Alistair Cooke's wonderful Letter from America broadcasts were heard world-wide and were an institution for close to 60 years. In that time, Cooke - UK born but for most of his life a resident of New York City - sought through his thoughtful pieces to convey the complexity of life, of society and of politics in the United States.

In this collection of essays, organised chronologically, Cooke takes us from post-war America through to mid 2005, and his subject matter ranges from the specific relatively "small" topics (for example McLaren's dogged creation of San Francisco's Golden Gate Park) through to large, world-changing subjects including the Vietnam question and the assassinations of both John and Robert Kennedy. The latter is a riveting account because Cooke was there when it happened and his journalistic and observational skills come through as finely honed, dispassionate yet all the more powerful.

What gives this volume real richness are two things in particular.

First; Cooke has an unfailing grasp of history. In writing each week's snapshot of a changing nation, he manages to contextualise what he sees, and to draw upon both his enormous grasp of history and his unparalled contact with top politicians, writers and artists over 60 years. In today's age of soundbyte editorializing and glib simplifications (history seen through the eyes of Forrest Gump, if you will), Cooke's essays are thoughtful, well researched and highly reasoned. As a reader I'm struck by how prescient his comments are, and I'm also struck at how relevant his thought provoking comments about previous political events resonate in today's unfolding history.

The second facet of this rich gem is Cooke's beautifully crafted writing style. He wrote these essays for radio and perhaps this is why they read so beautifully. In his portrait of Charles Lindbergh, for example, he talks about the man for 500 words - creating a vivid, recognisable picture before he even mentions the name of his subject. In so doing, Cooke furnishes the reader (or listener) with the frisson of a delightful guessing game (he's talking about Lindbergh, right?) that allows us to hear more about the subject matter without letting us backfill the story with our own preconceptions. His humour is delightfully wry, and his ability to choose surprising and sometimes quite earthy quotes from the history makers of the past 60 years provides additional pleasure. Cooke clearly laboured over each and every essay to ensure their seamless recipe of wit, fact and observation.

This volume is a remarkable collection of essays: a format that encourages thoughtful, enjoyable bedside reading. In devouring this marvellous book, you are taken to the heart of a complex nation. An easy 5 stars; I'd add that this book makes an excellent gift, regardless of which way your friends vote.

When I left England to live in the United States for one year last August, there was only one book I took with me - Alistair Cooke's `Letter From America'. What else could I have taken? Cooke saw into America like no other Brit (or no other non-American, for that matter).

Starting at the mid 1940s, the book winds its way through post-war America nearly right up until the authors death in 2004, picking out the best of his weekly broadcasts. The subject matters range from politics, history, current affairs, entertainment and the topics from the New England fall, jazz, Robert Kennedy's assassination and O.J Simpson.

But it is not the subject matter that makes this book so special (for we already know about most of them anyway) it is none other than Cooke's insight and writing style. The articles flow like the finest novel or poem (which is probably attributed to Cooke's background in theatre). Each time you come back to read the book again it feels as though you are receiving the opinions of a familiar friend, and not some distant journalist.

There are drawbacks. Cooke was often criticised, and quite rightly so, for ignoring the darker side of the American dream. The other possible drawback, depending on your viewpoint, is that Cooke was a committed conservative, especially in the latter half of his career. Many of the final articles from the late 90's and early 00's lament the current position of America and (what he saw as) the sliding standards of journalism. Maybe, but you also can't help feel that he was by this point slightly out of touch.

These minor quibbles, however, cannot undermine Cooke's overall achievement of helping us better understand this important nation, which could be described as love letters to America.

"Letters from Lexington : Reflections on Propaganda" is a compelling collection of letters which reveal the role of the US major media in justifying and championing US government and corporate actions throughout the world. One chapter which illuminates Chomsky's dissident analysis is the chapter entitled, "The PC Thought Police". In this chapter, Chomsky compares the US propaganda system to that of Brezhnev's USSR:

"In the study of any system, it is often useful to look at something radically different, to highlight crucial features. Let's begin, then, by looking at a society that is close to the opposite pole from ours: Brezhnev's USSR.

Consider policy formation. In Brezhnev's USSR, economic policy was determined in secret, by centralized power; popular involvement was nil, except marginally, through the Communist Party. Political policy was in the same hands. The political system was meaningless, with virtually no flow from bottom to top.

Consider next the information system, inevitably constrained by the distribution of economic-political power. In Brezhnev's USSR there was a spectrum, bounded by disagreements within centralized power. True, the media were never obedient enough for the commissars. Thus they were bitterly condemned for undermining public morale during the war in Afghanistan, playing into the hands of the imperial aggressors and their local agents from whom the USSR was courageously defending the people of Afghanistan. For the totalitarian mind, no degree of servility is ever enough.

There were dissidents and alternative media: underground samizdat and foreign radio. According to a 1979 US government-funded study, 77% of blue-collar workers and 96% of the middle elite listened to foreign broadcasts, while the alternative press reached 45% of high-level professionals, 41% of political leaders, 27% of managers, and 14% of blue-collar workers. The study also found most people satisfied with living conditions, favoring state-provided medical care, and largely supportive of state control of heavy industry; emigration was more for personal than political reasons.

Dissidents were bitterly condemned as "anti-Soviet" and "supporters of capitalist imperialism," as demonstrated by the fact that they condemned the evils of the Soviet system instead of marching in parades denouncing the crimes of official enemies. They were also punished, not in the style of US dependencies such as El Salvador, but harshly enough.

The concept "anti-Soviet" is particularly striking. We find similar concepts in Nazi Germany, Brazil under the generals, and totalitarian cultures generally. In a relatively free society, the concept would simply evoke ridicule. Imagine, say, that Italian critics of state power were condemned for "anti-Italianism." Such concepts as "anti-Soviet" are the very hallmark of a totalitarian culture; only the most dedicated and humorless commissar could use such terms.

Well-behaved party hacks were guilty of no such crimes as anti-Sovietism. Their task was to applaud the state and its leaders; or even better, criticize them for deviating from their grand principles, thus instilling the propaganda line by presupposition rather than assertion, always the most effective technique.

With these observations as background, let us turn to our own free society.

Begin again with policy formation. Economic policy is determined in secret; in law and in principle, popular involvement is nil. The Fortune 500 are more diverse than the Politburo, and market mechanisms provide far more diversity than in a command economy. But a corporation, factory, or business is the economic equivalent of fascism: decisions and control are strictly top-down. People are not compelled to purchase the products or rent themselves to survive, but those are the sole choices.

The political system is closely linked to economic power, both through personnel and broader constraints on policy. Efforts of the public to enter the political arena must be barred: liberal elites see such efforts as a dangerous "crisis of democracy," and they are intolerable to statist reactionaries ("conservatives"). The political system has virtually no flow from bottom to top, apart from the local level; the general public appears to regard it as largely meaningless.

The media present a spectrum of opinion, largely reflecting tactical divisions within the state-corporate nexus. True, they are never obedient enough for the commissars. The media were bitterly condemned for undermining public morale during the war in Vietnam, playing into the hands of the imperial aggressors and their local agents from whom the US was courageously defending the people of Vietnam; a Freedom House study provides a dramatic example. For the totalitarian mind, again, no degree of servility is enough.

There are dissidents and other information sources. Foreign radio broadcasts reach virtually no one, but alternative media exist, though without a tiny fraction of the outreach of samizdat. Dissidents are bitterly condemned as "anti-American" and "supporters of Communism" as demonstrated by the fact that they condemn the evils of the American system instead of marching in parades denouncing the crimes of official enemies. But they are not severely punished, at least if they are privileged and of the right color. Again, the concept "anti-American" is particularly striking, the very hallmark of a totalitarian mentality."

Just one example of Chomsky's brilliant analysis contained in this seminal study of how the major US media works together with the US government and its corporate interests to undermine democracy. A must read for any student of journalism.

The double entendre in the title of my review is intentional. Chomsky's letters not only sketch how the USA government manufactured domestic consent for its foreign policies during the early 1990s, it also (perhaps intentionally?) adumbrates by demonstration the salient aspects of the "propaganda model" Chomsky and Edward Herman explored in considerable depth in their work *Manufacturing Consent*.

As for the content of the work, I recommend that readers consult the excellent reviews by Chris Green (always, always read his reviews), Egalitarian, and "Reader" (10.10.99) on this page. I couldn't possibly improve on them.

One last observation: Chomsky resides in Lexington, but I can't help but wonder if the title selection plays on the historical significance Lexington has as the location for the beginning of the American Revolution. Perhaps I am poeticizing the title. Nevertheless, I am quite certain that this work will make the canon of literary political dissent as so many of Chomsky's works have already done.

Chomsky writes that the Sandinistas won an election in November 1984 widely perceived as free and fair but U.S. elites put this down the memory hole. Michael Kinsley noted the "Orwellian" rhetoric of the Reaganites in blaming the Sandinistas for Nicargua's ruined economy, after it had been the official policy of the U.S. backed contras to destroy it. But he praised Nicaragua's 1990 elections as free and fair. Anthony Lewis praised the elections too but criticized the Central American policies of the administration--which included the economic embargo on Nicaragua supported by liberals like him. Chomsky quotes the UNO economist Fransisco Mayorga as estimating that the embargo cost Nicaragua 3 billion.

The implications suggesting that the U.S. is a terrorist state in that it was telling the Nicaraguan people that Contra terror and the embargo would continue unless they voted out the Sandinistas in Feb. 1990, was not noticed in the U.S. media. Indeed Time magazine celebrated the attacks on Nicaraguan civilian infrastructure i.e. U.S./contra war crimes as causing the Sandinistas to be voted out. The killing of the poor by the U.S. backed security forces in El Salvador and Guatemala, which ran elections under extreme terror, received little sustained attention.

Chomsky observes that Laurence Pezullo, while the last U.S. ambassador to Somoza, had advised the National Guard to continue its final mass murder operations which were killing tens of thousands. After Carter couldn't prevent the Sandinistas from taking power, the National Guard, the future Contras, were flown out in U.S. military planes with Red Cross markings (a war crime). The media had nothing to say about the U.S. successfully pressuring the new UNO government in Nicaragua after 1990 to drop its demand that the U.S. comply with the World Court ruling of 1986 that the U.S. stop terrorizing Nicaragua and pay 17 billion dollars in reparations. After the U.S. withheld desperately needed aid, the Chamarro government dropped its demand for U.S. compliance

The media suppressed that evidence of Libyan involvement in the murder of one American that led to the "retaliation" against Libya in 1986 which killed many dozens of civilians, was non-existent according to the West Germans. . Chomsky writes that likewise evidence for Libyan involvement in the Lockerbie bombing is negligible (and years later this is still the truth, see--William .Blum's new book "Freeing the World to Death). In any case, Lockerbie may have been "retaliation" for the U.S. shooting down an Iranian civilian airliner in 1988, killing 290. The commander of a nearby vessel, David Carlson later wrote that the Iranian plane was clearly civilian.and not acting otherwise.. The shoot down, by the U.S.S. Vincennes, Carlson suggested,was designed to test the ship's Aegis missile system. This atrocity was the culmination of U.S. support for Saddam in the Iran-Iraq war; for a few days later Iran capitulated to a cease fire on Iraq's terms. When the commander of the Vincenes came home, he was awarded medals by George Bush Sr. In another case of the U.S. and blowing up planes, Chomsky writes that George Schultz later admitted "in a backhand way" that the terrorists who blew up the Air India Flight over Ireland in 1985 killing 329, originated in a mercenary training camp for Central America in Alabama. It was a sting operation that went haywire.

The U.S. funded Noriega's candidate in 1984 elections in Panama that Noriega stole with great violence, a period when he was knee-deep in the drug trade.. George Schultz went down to the inauguration of the candidate, Barletta. The U.S. later soured on Noriega of course, for reasons having nothing to with his bad qualities. As the U.S. invaded Panama to install more reliable drug tycoons in the name of freedom, the Bush senior administration was resuming high tech sales to China and lifted a ban on loans to Saddam's Iraq. After the U.S. suppressed peaceful settlements of the first Gulf war and killed tens of thousands of Iraqis, Thomas Friedman and Alan Cowell explained that after the first Gulf War the U.S. undermined the anti-Saddam rebellion.. They hoped Saddam would remain in place until a more pliable clone of the dictator could overthrow him and restore Iraq to the "iron-fisted" rule that the U.S. had so admired before August 1990.. Ahmad Chalabi complained in the British press about the U.S. supporting Saddam's butchery of the rebels. Chomsky notes that the late Senator Moynihan was heard a great deal during this period about his devotion to the UN charter/international law. Of course, Moynihan had bragged in his 1978 memoir about blocking UN efforts to stop Indonesia's aggression against East Timor in 1975 while U.S. ambassador to the UN. He admitted that the invasion, supported by the U.S. until 1999, had killed 60,000 people by early 1976... The media did not juxtapose proclamations of U.S. opposition to aggressive dictators with U.S. support for aggression in East Timor, Morocco in Western Sahara(also helped along by Moynihan at the UN), Turkey in Cyprus, Turkey's ethnic cleansing of its Kurds, South Africa in Namibia and Angola, etc.

Chomsky analyzes a review by Caleb Carr about a book about America's mid 19th century Indian wars and notes its similarity to a hypothetical apologetic for Nazi expansionism. He exposes some embarrassing contradictions and fallacies in the venerable A. Schlesinger's claim that JFK intended to withdraw from Vietnam without victory.

This short book is lucidly written and full of Chomsky's subtle humor. It is Chomsky at his best and most accessible.

Chomsky is the American Empire's worst enemy. Like anyone who challenges powerful interests and their claims to authority, he has been the target of an unrelenting, but increasingly ineffectual (sometimes comical), smear campaign. Noam Chomsky is a national treasure and a credit to the human species. Read Chomsky's "Letters", or anything else by one of the world's leading advocates for democracy and freedom.

Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) wrote "Leviathan" in 1651, it was his most important philosophical work. I think you should know something of Hobbes to understand how his thinking was influenced by his experiences. He was born 2 months prematurely on the day the Spanish Armada approaches the English coast. His mother's fear of invasion caused the premature birth. Hobbes remarked late in life, "his mother brought forth twins-myself and fear." Fear seems to be Hobbes life long companion and the key passion in his political system, which uses human passions as its foundation. He was a child prodigy reading Latin and Greek at the age of six years old. At fifteen, he entered Oxford University and hated his educational experience there. He thought the curriculum was too immersed in the ancient Greek philosophers like Aristotle. He called them "erroneous doctrines," and throughout his life he railed against English universities for there stodgy curriculum.

At the age of 22, he graduates and takes a job to tutor the son of the Earl of Devonshire. It gives him the opportunity to travel throughout Europe where he meets with Galileo in Florence and Descartes in Paris. Descartes calls Hobbes the greatest political philosopher of his day. During the British civil war, Hobbes flees to Paris because he is a well-known monarchist sympathizer. In 1651, he publishes his monumental work "Leviathan." He returns to England, submits to Cromwell's government, and withdraws from politics. He is on friendly terms with Charles II when the Stuart's are restored to the throne.

Hobbes philosophy is "materialistic"; he is greatly influenced by Galileo's mechanistic approach to science, and Euclidian geometry. His ambition was to explain all phenomena, man, and government with mathematical precision. In "Leviathan," he explains human conduct is a product of human passions. The most dominant passions are fear of violent death and desire for power, both are manifestations of man's most basic impulse, "self preservation." Hobbes asserts that the basic impulse is the right of the individual; he calls it a "natural right." All men process this natural right equally. This theory leads Hobbes to believe man's natural state to be one of constant conflict with each other. This leads him to write the following quote he is most known for: "men's lives are solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." So as not to have to live in constant state of fear or conflict, men make a contract for protection with the state. Hobbes believes that the best state is one led by a single sovereign whose power must be unrestricted with all three branches of government devolving to him. A single sovereign who has absolute power and cannot be replaced by the people.

His political writing had immediate influence in the world and influences other philosophers like Spinoza, Hutcheson, Locke, and Hume. Hobbes is the first man to write about political philosophy in such methodical terms. He is an excellent writer and his theories are easy to understand by the laymen. As a graduate student of political philosophy, I recommend if you have an interest in politics, philosophy, or government then you must start with reading Hobbes "Leviathan."

There are lots of editions of Leviathan around, so why buy this one? The things the editor, Ed Curely, has done to make this edition accessible yet scholarly, like:

1. Updated spelling and punctuation. Although I personally miss Hobbes' original spelling (see the Penguin edition for that), as a teacher I appreciate Ed's making it easier for beginners to read Hobbes' words.

2. Index. Most editions do not have one.

3. Glossary. Hobbes used many terms that are now archaic, and Ed's brief but clear glossary helps clarify the text.

4. Ed's Introduction. Curley is one of the most careful and knowledgeable commentators out there, and he briefly but expertly introduces some of the major themes of the book.

5. Latin variants. Hobbes wrote Leviathan in English and in Latin, and there are some interesting differences between the two versions. Ed presents many of these in the footnotes, plus he includes English translations of the Appendices of the Latin version.

This is one of the few books in western thought that cannot recieve enough praise. It is all at the same time a compilation of classical and medieval thought, a biting commentary and critique of 17th century Europe (England in particular), an exploration of philosophy as science, and to top it all off the first truly modern work of political philosophy. This is one of those works that anyone who truly wants to call themselves educated must read, whether their focus of studies is philosophy, politics, literature, science or even mathematics.

The fundamental nature of this work is to construct a reasoned materialistic account of human behavior starting from basic definitions and postulates (very similar to geometry). From these basic principles Hobbes constructs an account of human physchology based on human desires which then culminates in man's need to leave the natural state of the world into the constructed society, which Hobbes calls the leviathan. I cannot even attempt to give a summation of the steps of Hobbes's argument here that would do him justice, but suffice it to say that Hobbes's conclusion is that in order to be happy and safe man must give up his rights to a strong soveriegn. This is a conclusion that may not look modern or attractive at all to most readers, but Hobbes's reasonong is so clear and detailed that it forces the reader to, if not agree with all of his principles, at least take them very seriously. This is one of those books that forces one to reaxamine all of their assumptions about the world. Hobbes is also one of those misunderstood authors who are portrayed as being cold and ruthless, but are simply trying to provide their readers with an accurate and analytic account of humanities problems and hopefully providing solutions.

If all of this hasn't scared you away yet I do have to say that Leviathan is not an easy book to read. Its thought is difficult and its language is archaic, but for those who are willing to accept the work this book can be very interesting and rewarding. Hobbes might be a dense writer, but unlike many philosophical writers, he is a very clear and concise and often surprisingly witty and wry.

There are two editons that I recommend. The first is the Hackett edition. Not only does it take the liberty of changing the veried spellings of Hobbes's 17th century english, but it also includes textual variances from the earlier Latin edition of the work. Some of these variants are significant and should be takin into consideration by the serious student. The other is the Cambridge Student Edition, which is the edition I used because I'm one of those students that enjoy reading the early english texts with their strange spellings. The disadvantage of this edition is that it does not include the latin variations. The introductions and suplementary material in both of these editions are fine, but my personal favorite is the introduction written by Michael Oakeshott which can be fond in a collection of his essays entitled, "Hobbes on Civil Association". Another work which greatly elucidates some of Hobbes's strong almost vehement reactions to anything democratic is Hobbes's "Behemoth" in which he provides his account of the English Civil War. If you are really interested in Hobbes I also highly recommend his work "De Cive". Hobbes is hard, but he is unavoidable for anyone interested in understanding our modern world and our world in general. You may even find that, like myself, you just can't get enough of Hobbes.

Hobbes is a misunderstood philosopher. He envisaged that executive power would be based on the will of the people who allow it to be exercised. In this way Hobbes saw the development of a social contract between members of society and those who govern, based on individual rights not to subsciptive service as vassals. He also warned that agreements (or covenants) without either armed or moral right to be enforced would remain simply that - words. Hobbes does indeed speak to all peoples who live in our society - white, black and any shade in between.

Why Absolute Sovereignty Can Not Offer Perpetual Peace
-On the Desires of Men

In the Leviathan, Hobbes brings forward the theory that Commonwealths arise because without governments, people live in a state of nature with the constant danger of death. Furthermore, he believes that the best form of Commonwealth is one ruled by a monarch with absolute power; just like a person with two brains will not function, if the power of the monarch is not absolute, the commonwealth will fall back into the warring state of nature. When the sovereign power becomes truly absolute, Hobbes believes the Commonwealth could "live as long as mankind" unless attacked by foreign powers (p210).

Indeed, Hobbes is right in that life under any government is better than life with no government, and also that multiple powers inside one commonwealth will cause an end to the commonwealth. Nevertheless, he is wrong in asserting that absolute monarchy is the panacea for perpetual internal peace. There are two intrinsic flaws in the his system which are bound to push the commonwealth into the state of nature: one flaw is the unchecked greed of the monarch, another is caused by the unfulfilled desire for power of the subjects. Although this paper can not offer a better formula for governments, it will show that absolute monarchy does not provide the perpetual security that Hobbes promises.

First of all, extraordinary greed of the absolute ruler can break the Commonwealth. A ruler's greed can impoverish his subjects so abjectly that they no longer have enough food to survive on. Since the purpose of the commonwealth is to guarantee the security of life, and without food there is no life, the greed of the ruler will force the absolute Commonwealth to fall back into the state of nature.

Hobbes believes that the interest of the ruler and the interest of his subjects are so interdependent that the actions of the ruler will always be in the interest of his people. He writes,

"Now in monarchy the private interest is the same with the public...the riches, power, and honor of a monarch arise only from the riches, strength and reputation of his subjects." (P120)

Hobbes is right; the sovereign is the incorporation of its subjects, and so any injuries to the people are collectively an injury to the sovereign. Nevertheless, arising out of the great complications of the businesses of state and the wide expanse of a Commonwealth, there will always be a lag between when acts of the sovereign takes effect with people and when the sovereign feels the reactions of his people himself. A ruler with perfect prudence might be able to see through the gap and act in ways that are only ultimately good for the people and himself, but as Hobbes rightly observes, no one has perfect prudence (P14). This imperfect prudence becomes especially short-sighted when the ruler's reason is clouded by his present desires. Hobbes acknowledges these desires, for he says:

"And hence it is that kings, whose power is greatest, turn their endeavors to the assuring it at home by laws or abroad by wars; and when that is done, there succeeded a new desire, in some of fame from new conquest, in others of ease and sensual pleasures, in others of admiration or being flattered for excellence in some art or other ability of the mind." (p58)

So clouded by the lack of prudence and by excessive desires, the monarch might take actions that seem good at the moment for himself, but which turn out harmful for himself later. To illustrate this, let us observe the following scenario:

The new ruler of a poor but secured country builds a modest palace, for he has learnt from history books that he should not splurge. A couple years later, however, a desire for great things tempts him, and he wants to build a winter palace. He seeks advices from ten advisors, who had all the qualities that Hobbes praises (Chapter XXV); nine out of ten advisors privately dissuade the king from this luxury for a flood is raging and their nation is poor. Saddened, the king turns to the last advisor, who, seeing an opportunity to gain favor with the ruler, loudly exclaims that the other counselors do not love their king who needs a winter palace to escape the cold. The king happily agrees with him as his reason becomes clouded by desires; and soon, the construction begins.

Having gained favor, the 10th advisor convinces the ruler to imprison the other advisors for their "bad mouthing" of the king, making him the sole voice by the ruler's ear. As time goes on, the king exerts ever greater taxes on his people to pay for ever grander palaces, and every time, the advisor not only finds more elaborate excuses for the king but praises him for his greatness and also funnels some of the money for construction into his own coffer. The affairs of the nation are in utter neglect.

One night, the king remembers his father's warnings against indulgence, and he shakes with fear; but when he sees his gardens filled with singing girls half naked, lacking the prudence to see the future awaiting him, he says to himself, "I have been endowed differently by God, the fate of others can not be my own."

The poor people of this nation become more desperate by the day, yet the ruler who lives deep inside his palaces can not know their suffering. Some years later, the harvest is so bad that people have barely enough to feed themselves, yet the king sends his money collectors for even higher tax quotas. Realizing that they could either die of starvation or die fighting against the dictator with at least a chance to live, the farmers revolt. Hobbes would support them, for he writes, "the obligation of subjects to the sovereign is understood to last as long, and no longer, than the power lasteth by which he is able to protect hem." (P144)

When the farmers' army charges into his bed chamber, the king finally feels the injuries that he has done to the people and to himself, yet reason and prudence are too late.

Absolute sovereignty means absolute power, and as the old saying goes, "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." In fact, Hobbes acknowledges the greedy corruption of the monarchs, and even gives his justification. He writes,

"A man may here object that the condition of subjects is very miserable, as being obnoxious to the lusts and other irregular passions of him or them that have so unlimited a power in their hands...not considering that the estate of man can never be without some incommodity or other, and that the greatest that in any form of government can possibly happen to the people in general is scarce sensible, in respect of the miseries and horrible calamities that accompany a civil war." (P117)

Hobbes makes no mistakes here. Any government is better than no government, but as mentioned before, he makes the claim later that Commonwealths, "by the nature of their constitution they are designed to live as long as mankind" unless attacked by foreign powers (210). In the same chapter (XXIX), Hobbes attributes all the internal infirmities of the Commonwealth that shorten its "natural" life to variations of the lack of absolute power, but describes no infirmities when the Commonwealth is ruled by an absolute monarch. He thus makes it clear that if there is absolute power, then the commonwealth will "live as long as mankind" even if the monarch is corrupted. However, as shown in the illustration above, Hobbes' absolute monarchy does have tremendous infirmities.

Hobbes can, however, still argue that the previous illustration is an extreme example that barely happens in reality. Hobbes might say that if only the absolute sovereigns all studied the Leviathan carefully, they will always initiate policies for the interest of the people. Granted, Hobbes' excellent book can convert many, yet, even when the absolute sovereign is good and strong, the Commonwealth can still fall back into the state of chaos.

To Hobbes, the foremost law of nature is to find security ("a man is forbidden to do that which is destructive to his life" [P79]), but is survival the only thing that men search for? No. As Hobbes points out himself, survival is the means and not the ends of life. And while people all want to survive, they live for different ends of life as influenced by their education and upbringings. Hobbs indirectly talks about the fulfillment of some ends life when he writes,

"In such condition (of war) there is no place for industry, because the fruit thereof is uncertain, and consequently, no culture of the earth, no navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by sea, no commodious building" (p76)

For certain people, the end of their life lies in gaining political power-to be the ruler instead of the ruled. Hobbes indirectly recognizes people's "unnecessary" desire for power, when he writes (OL) "there are those who, from pride and a desire for glory, would conquer the whole world, which they pursue farther than their security requires." (P75)

This kind of desire, nevertheless, can not be fully satisfied in a state of absolute sovereignty. For one, the greatest prize of all, the prize of becoming your own sovereign is off-limits. Additionally, although those borne with the heart of Napoleon might be few, lower offices and positions in a state of absolute power come merely at the mercy of the sovereign-for one eager for any honor and position, his dream may never fly high because the sovereign can give the honor he deserves to someone else. As Hobbes says himself, "a man may be worthy of riches, office, and employment, that nevertheless can plead no right to have it before another, and therefore cannot be said to merit or deserve it." (p57)

For some, the limitation on of the fulfillment of their political dreams results in nothing other than the acceptance of their fates, yet history never fails to produce some who have the eagerness and bravery to challenge the ultimate authority and break the bondage of power.

Hobbes would call the act of such eager men anti-nature, since dissenters will almost certainly face unnatural deaths by the sword of the king, or face the danger of death by returning to the state of nature. However, again, survival is the means, not ends of life. The following example illustrates why people might endanger their means for their ends.

Colonized people have throughout history fought for independence against their colonial sovereigns. To Hobbes, these wars for independence must be irrational: for one, the colonized people could be enjoying many benefits either from direct aid or commercial links with their colonizer; additionally, hundreds of thousands of colonized people might die in the immediate war or during the consequent internal power struggles caused by the revolt. Yet, despite the "practical benefits" and the peace that the colonial sovereigns bestows upon the colonized, this smooth highway of subjugation is not the one that the people want; they desire for a road, smaller and rougher maybe, but one that is built by themselves to a destination that they determined for themselves. Thus, in their search for the power that is forbidden to them, they set out for the "unreasonable".

To be sure, Hobbes' Law of Nature still holds: on the battle fields, those who fight against the sovereign will always do all they could to triumph over their enemy and avoid death, but again, the need for survival is only a part of the story.

Regarding this fight for independence, Hobbes might say, as he writes, "those men that are so remissly governed that they dare take up arms to defend or introduce an opinion are still in war." (P113) This means that since the any revolutionaries must never have been a part of the commonwealth, and hence the commonwealth was only attacked from the outside and did not fall internally. Nevertheless, Hobbes also says that a monarch's "subjects" are delivered from their former obligation, and become obliged" to the victor in a war against their original sovereign. (P145) The new subjects of the monarch might have a high tendency toward revolting against ruler for the same reasons mentioned before, and in this case, Hobbes must certainly recognize that the revolutionaries are a part of the Commonwealth.

In the Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes dedicates himself to finding the best form of government, that perfect house which can last forever and provide eternal peace for all. The book is quiet admirable with its precise arguments and high ideals. Nevertheless, Hobbes ignores the fact that people will always willingly take actions that might hurt their security because they are either short-sighted or desire for something other than mere survival. Still, the Leviathan is a work of Epic proportion, and this essay does not find a form of government better than absolute sovereignty.