Activism Books

The author's intent -- to examine the impact of McCarthyism on anthropology -- is a good one. Anthropology attracts a lot of liberal minded people (someone told me that they tend to register Democrat over Republican by a 30-1 ratio). However, what is disappointing about this book is that Price didn't seek out to interview more of the people who knew these anthropologists, as well as people in government who actually wrote such reports. For the most part, reports/texts are largely taken at face value, whereas in reality reports may have been received in greater or lesser degrees of seriousness and credibility. Thus, the tendency is probaby to exaggerate the degree of victimization.

Nothing is so disgusting as an author who creates in his own mind, regardless of the evidence, some historical gobbledgook under the guise of science. Price totally ignores Venona files(1992) evidence that McCarthy saved the United States and totally destroyed Soviet plans for the internal overthrow of the US government.
This book is destined for the garbage bin appropriately named "inaccurate historical fiction."

Few books can affect a reader so profoundly as this one has me. Price's book has received accolades -- "destined to become a classic," and "belongs on anyone's shelf." I wandered into the pages and, to my surprise and relief, found myself revisiting the underside of what I thought I had observed all along. Names were named, some of them among real live faculties I had known. I experienced a personal Eureka! when I learned that Jacobs and Stern, authors of that Barnes and Noble introduction to anthropology that I read in my formative years, had both been blacklisted. Now I must read that old paperback again and retrace where my interests might have started off in naive directions. I look forward to this self-study in self-censorship for the postmodern age.

I was overjoyed that Price did not stop with the accepted, formalized "end" of McCarthyism, but rather explained the brief re-emergence of relative "academic freedom" through much of the '60s-'70s and '80s, and the more sophisticated, perhaps more dangerous downward spiral today. The book helps those of us who entered college at a time when Ashley Montagu, Kathleen Gough and so many others were in the news over issues other than their research. Price has prepared a thoroughgoing catalogue of official harassment targeting scholars who operated on now-popularly-accepted assumptions of global human worth and equality.

The paradox is that, while anthropology has to rely on those assumptions if it is to operate as a field of intellectual endeavor, our audience -- any public -- does not, but they pay us anyway. Popular reactions to most anthropological contributions range from wonder to outrage. Anyone with basic grounding in anthropology would probably tell you that the field has always pushed the limits of acceptance within host countries, most of which have been main players of Western industrial civilization.

As with the job interview, it is always important to understand who holds the purse strings. Western anthropologists have long pushed the limits of societal acceptance, and that has always had consequnces. Today's "globalization" of anthropology finds many individuals from societies that were traditionally the subjects of anthropological study, pushing those limits from new and refreshing directions, and, of course, the resulting consequences are also "globalizing."

We are such good people; why are we then so villified? Tired old explanations of "cultural lag", ethnocentrism, and differing viewpoints still work. But Price's contribution is a detailed catalog-summary with specific cases showing particularly what makes the United States Government antsy about anthropology. Until "Threatening Anthropology," no one source discussed in context the prevailing governmental assumptions, and the various selected facts, political spins and, yes, myths on which government agencies often rely for those assumptions. Our tired, old explanations have finally got some help, as someone focused on the intersections between anthropology and host society as they are expressed in the United States.

I have recollections from my own past when, during euphoric rushes of "academic freedom," I presumed to speak from an anthropological perspective in ways that might draw the attention of, say, the FBI. Many of these run perilously close to Price's examples. One still wonders, but at the same time one has a grander perspective on why offers have not poured in from academia.

Price's volume is indeed chilling. The prevailing situation within anthropology since well before Boas has been chilling. I keep in mind the smaller-scale analogy of covert ostracism on a band or tribal level. At least within our society there are other avenues of endeavor, and we can retain a view of that old anthropolgy "avenue" and see what's happening and what has happened to our former colleagues.

Price does rather well with his conclusions. I am in some agreement with him over postmodernism insofar as many of its adherents appear to encourage the view that anthropology is only a part of Western science, and that as such it cannot do justice to any cross cultural perspective. Postmodernism in its "deconstruction" of positivism does appear to feed the late 20th century and continuing vogue for discounting what Mooney (The Republican War on Science) calls the "fact-based" perspective as irrelevant for today's policy-making. Such a notion would have frustrated Philleo Nash. I know it gets a double-take from me.

I also agree whole-heartedly that organizations like the American Anthropological Association would do well to treat future governmental meddling with individual scholars' employment -- present and future versions of McCarthyism -- with less timidity. All organizations need a clear understanding of just what constituties grounds for employee discipline, and they need to know that other power centers back them up.

Last time around the witch hunts came and went, leaving lasting scars. The issues are lively, and generate shouting-matches to this day. It was a political choice for organizations to remain in the background as "apolitical." It would be no more a political choice to stand behind individual anthropologists and help them make reasonable stands should they find themselves going against those big guns.

This book deals with a very important and timely topic. The Cold War had a major impact on academia, and Price is to be applauded for undertaking such an extensive archival research project to document how these dynamics were manifest in anthropology. His greatest weakness, however, is an uncritical acceptance of the egalitarian rhetoric of the Soviet Union and the US Communist Party as signifying a genuine committment to humanitarianism and equality. This grossly inaccurate assumption underlies Price's key theme in the book: that the FBI and other security agencies in the United States (aka the bad guys) persecuted leftists and communists (aka the good guys) solely as a means to maintain existing race and class hierarchies in the United States. Anyone with a passing familiarity with the violence and aggression of communist party politics in the 1930s, or the history of the Soviet Union (including its genocidal approach to ethnic minorities within its own borders) should realize this is quite a crock. Price is certainly not alone in his myopia in this area: his assumptions reiterate many cherised illusions of the Left. While these shortcomings may have been forgivable in the past when knowledge about the Soviet Union was more uncertain, any contemporary scholar who ignores the overhwelming array of evidence and testimonials that have emerged from Soviet archives since the end of the Cold War renders himself and his work largely irrelevant to contemporary academic debates in this area. In that sense, Price's work fits in well with earlier anthropological activists, such as those who militantly defended the Rosenbergs as innocent victims of anti-Semitism and US Cold War hysteria. Soviet archives have shown, of course, that the Rosenbergs were quite guilty and their defenders in academia were willingly duped by the barrage of Soviet propaganda released on their behalf. Price continues to reiterate the same theme in his work, never once considering that a peek in the Soviet archives might offer interesting revisions to his assumptions. Did the KGB maintain files on Franz Boas, Margaret Mead and Gene Weltfish? This book would make a much greater and more lasting contribution to Cold War scholarship if the author had even a token awareness of the Soviet side of things. Unfortunately, like so many leftists, he is more intent on using FOIA to bash the United States rather than to undertake a serious analysis of the way anthropology became suspended (or distorted) between rival superpowers during the Cold War. For an insightful and disturbing account of how these dynamics have influenced other social sciences, see Harvy Klehr and John Haynes recent book "In Denial: Historians, Communism and Espionage." It is much more enlightening than Price's work.

A fresh view not only of the FBI's oppression of American democratic movements, but of the federal government's use of the FBI to maintain racial segregation. I've read anthropology for years but hadn't heard of most of what is unearthed and carefully documented here in a gripping narrative.

A few Amazon reviewers claim Price ignores the Venona files. This is false. Price cites and discusses Venona documents (for example see his discussion Venona documents on page 22, 181, 184, etc.), he just doesn't uncritically worship Venona like some crank from the National Review. He adds a refreshing interpretation of how insignificant Venona information was for American members of the party who weren't interested in Soviet communism, but were interested in working for equal rights for American Blacks and others.

I was recently invited to present seminars on the environmental backlash at Princeton and Stanford Universities, and Beder's well-researched book provided me with excellent information on some of the tactics employed by the political right aimed at undermining science. Most importantly, I want to put the negative reviewer's comments (below) into some perspective: in 1998, ALL environmental NGO's (including Greenpeace), spent a paltry 4.7 million dollars lobbying members of Congress, whereas all self interest groups spent a combined total of 76.2 million dollars on diverse issues ranging across the political spectrum. In the SAME year, the agribusiness industry alone spent 119.3 million dollars lobbying members of congress, whereas the combined expenditures of all industries added up to a staggering 1.2 billion dollars. This money includes only that used exclusively for lobbying, and not the "soft" money corporations use also to buy political influence. So, to answer the critic below, I would reiterate, we need to put this in perspective.

I don't want to use my position as a scientist to defend NGO's when they exaggerate problems, but I am frankly much more concerned when immensely powerful multinationals attempt to manipulate science. At present, corporate power is being used question the seriousness, or even the existence, of environmental problems such as global warming and rates of species extinction, even though these are areas where there is broad consensus amongst my peers. As Paul Ehrlich said, this has very little to do with science, but more to do with dirty politics with the agenda of looting and polluting for profit.

I applaud Beder for her efforts and this book reflects that.

Very good expose, naming details, of the campaign to discredit environmentalism by the various conservative business groups at risk from public awareness of the issues. From the use of fronts, to the thinktanks to the public relations industry, the account shows how public opinion, which favors some kind of action on these crucial issues, has been consistently thwarted by the massive onslaught of opinion-manipulation.

Its hard to convey the value of this book by just writing a review.

Not only does it gives huge amounts of referenced data on what is going on with corporations and the environment, but it also clairfies how its all just about monster, money-making trans-national corporations who are out of control, and who are not even really trying to move towards the kind of business model outlined in wx3 natcap dot org, and to make it worse many of those trans-national corporations are themselves going down the tubes as outlined in wx3 fingleton dot net.

The same author has another majorly insightful book on the subject of the work-ethic.

You gotta get 'em.

The truth really does help to set us free.

Well written and researched overview of the methods utilized by corporations to influence and dominate ecological discourse. Using the words and documents of the corporations, Beder shows how they consistantly (big surprise) put profits over the health and well-being of the community... Extremely relevant book, particularly with the most inept and bought president in the history of the nation in a position to enforce the corporate agenda...

Re: Greenpeace. Earlier this year Beder released a second edition of Global Spin in which she asks the question 'Is Greenpeace Selling Out?' This new inclusion, as well as the new section on the Sydney Olympics, adds to Beder's valuable evaluation of the global political, social and economic climate. An excellent read!

I remember reading a book on Ralph Bunch about his time in the Congo, and he said something to the fact "how can millions of African men allow a few pasty faces to rule them so thoroughly?"

Lumumba was an interesting character. I learned a lot from the book.

Patrice Lumumba is the subject of so much distortion and so much mythology that the simple truth is never said. He was a bad leader who destroyed Congo and them himself. This book is the long tradition of lying about africa in the west. Local politics and reality are ignored in favor of the evil colonialist conspiracy.

What happened in Congo? Patrice Lumumba took power and incited an army mutiny. He dealt with the army mutiny he created himself by making speaches inciting violence against europeans and watching their blood flow. Literally within days of taking power, he had managed to reduce the entire country to chaos. When the "evil" Belgians tried to step in to put down the army mutiny, Lumumba screamed about colonial oppression and called in the UN.

And the UN came in. It came in with ten different countries following ten different agendas. Each country (including african countries and Indian) started funding politicians and parties within the congo to pursue their own interests. Rather than bringing order, the UN brought more chaos. Lumumba gradually alienated everyone around him and ended up dead. The politics of the situation are complicated because every politician in Congo was one SOMEONEs payroll at the time including Lumumba himself.

Ludo DeWitte in this book presents the classic stupid view of events. The great Lumumba was going to build a magical socialist utopia in Congo and the evil colonialist conspiracy had to stop him at all costs including eventually killing Lumumba. The plain facts that Lumumba was a terrible leader are swept under DeWitte's very large rug. The fact that the political leadership of Congo was fractured and not behind Lumumba is also ignored.

The book inflates the role of Belgium in the matter. For all practical purposes, Belgium was pushed to the side the minute that Lumumba brought in the UN. What went on in Congo was a world-wide "land grab" for what had formerly belonged to Belgium. Russians, Americans, British, French, Africans and Indians all wanted a "slice" of Congo. And they all interfered politically in the country.

The sad truth is that the book is right and wrong. While it is correct to say that the international community is responsible in part for the death, it is wrong in that the factors that brought about Lumumba's death were local. He was a disaster as leader and he had to go. He did not even have the skills to be a competent tyrant. He made the decisions that sent the army into rebellion and he brought foreign intervention into the country. Any real history of the Congo (and hopefully someday there will be one) will accept those simple truths.

Generations of Africans have paid the price for those who listen to the Ludo DeWittes of the world in their love of the incompetent leftist strongman as savior of africa. Wear sunglasses and fatigues, scream about colonialism and socialism....and you will have a free hand from those people to plunder and ruin any country in Africa. After sixty years of blood and murder in Congo, its time to bury Lumumba. One more strongman crocodile more or less in Africa in the 1960s would have made no difference.

What we need is books about modern africa. In terms of Congo, we need honest books about how its african neighbors lined up to plunder the country with their armies in the 1990s. The truth is that the colonial era and the era of Lumumba are irrelivant to the africa of today. There is nothing useful in this book and printing it was a waste of paper.

For readers interested in the facts about Patrice Lumumba's murder, this translated book is a very valuable source of new information. In addition to giving a detailed narrative of what happened, it backs up that narratie with numerous illuminating quotations from now-unclassified documents, recorded interviews and writings of persons involved in the murder. As a writer and analyst, the main author is thorough, meticulous, and accurate.

The main takeways from the book, for me, was first that Belgian officers and diplomats were integrally involved in the capture and murder of Lumumba, even to the point of leading and being members of the firing squad that killed him. The second was the participation of high UN offiicials in actions that led to Lumumba's murder.

On an interpretive level, the book is interesting because, like the book Overthrow, it shows how the post-colonial nations' actions against politicians such as Lumumba were motivated by antipopulism more than atnicommunism.

The main downside of the book is that the first author is not conversant with the documentary record in English, especially that arising in the US or from US nationals working abroad. It's important to read it in the light of the Church Report, which you can access on line through a link in Wikipedia or through the U.S. Congress website, and Raoul Peck's two films on the assassination.

Other lessor problems with it are that it is very difficult to read if one is not a researcher very interested in the subject and not as fully illustrated with photographs as it could have been, in my opinion.

But here is a circular issued by the Lumamba Govt.

On September 15 he issued the following lengthy and highly revealing directive to the heads of the various provinces throughout the Congo:

SUBJECT: Measures To Be Applied During the First Stages of the Dictatorship.

Sir,

I have the honour and the pleasure to inform you that with a view to the rapid restoration of order in the country, the House of Representatives and the Senate [of the central government], meeting in special session on 13 September of this year, decided to grant the government full powers.

Full powers should be understood to mean that the government is free to act as it thinks fit in all respects, for the purpose of suppressing abuses, disorders and any action which is contrary to the will of the government over which I have presided legally since the attainment of independence by the Congo. . . .

The most effective and direct means of succeeding rapidly in our task may be summarized as follows:

1. Establish an absolute dictatorship and apply it in all its forms.

2. Terrorism, essential to subdue the population.

3. Proceed systematically, using the army, to arrest all members of the opposition. I will be personally responsible for those at Leopoldville including the Head of State and his close supporters. A few weeks ago, in view of the present situation in Katanga and Sud-Kasai, I sent the National Army to arrest Tshombe and Kalonji and even to kill them if possible. . . .

4. Imprison the ministers, deputies and senators, who sometimes abuse their parliamentary immunity. In such a case I should be glad if you would not spare them but arrest them all without pity and treat them with ten times more severity than ordinary individuals.

5. Revive the system of flogging and give the rebels 10 lashes, morning and evening, for a maximum of 7 consecutive days.

N.B. Double the number in the case of ministers, senators, and deputies, reducing the number gradually according to the condition of each individual.

6. Inflict profound humiliations on the people thus arrested, in addition to the obligatory treatment described above. For example, strip them in public, if possible in the presence of their wives and children. Make them carry heavy loads and force them to walk about in that state. In case of such a walk, however, drawers may be worn.

7. In view of the seriousness of the situation of the country, which is in danger of sinking into anarchy, it would be well to imprison repeated offenders in underground cells or prisons for at least six months, never allowing them out to breathe fresh air.

N.B. If some of them succumb as a result of certain atrocities, which is possible and desirable, the truth should not be divulged but it should be announced, for instance, that Mr. X has escaped and cannot be found.

8. Those who do not succumb in prison should not be released for at least a year. In this case they shall be exiled to a country to be determined by me in agreement with certain foreign countries which have already signified their agreement in principle.

Some of the provincial presidents will say that the measures described are severe. In reply I would point out to them that certain politicians have attained power by means of dictatorship. Moreover, the measures of execution that I have indicated above constitute only the first stage of the basic regime that we hope will succeed in the Congo. The second stage will be to destroy anyone who criticizes us. . . .

In conclusion, I would point out that this letter should be communicated only to those authorities under your orders in whom you have entire confidence.

(signed) P. LUMUMBA
Prime Minister

I see no point in removing the Belgians just to put in someone worse.

This book is an outstanding piece of work that reflects the author's intellectual honesty and his passion for the truth. A truth that has been hidden and distorted in so many ways, for so long. Ludo De Witte's detailed account of The Assassination of Lumumba finally makes a breakthrough. The book is both enlightening and disturbing but, above all, educational. While providing powerful and troubling data about this horrific event, it also helps to understand the facts from the context of the struggle against the neo-colonial order in which they occurred.

It is my hope that this well documented and careful study about this important period of Congolese history will serve as basic reference and become a classic textbook for educators and anyone interested in the long and complex history of the struggle for freedom, dignity and justice in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

I am very satisfied with this purchase. The book looks like new and the price was good

This book does nothing more than give an academic look at an already easily solvable problem.
Get over it the wealthy former-Cubans deserted the island and rather than sit back in their stylish Miami homes and quip and complain about what should be done they should look to their future in America or else renounce their American citizenship and go back to the Cuba.

The author purports to update the previous (third) edition of his book. However, there are numerous places (see pp. 81, 176, 186, 193, and 197) in the book that suggest that there was no update other than Chapters 15-17 which are actually in a different type from the rest of the book. For example, the book stills discusses the Soviet Union in the present tense. With respect to the content of the book, the author spends all of 10 pages, 12 pages if one includes the map of Cuba, discussing the indigenous people of Cuba. The discussion of Castro's rule is tedious. The analysis of the future of Cuba after Castro is obvious and superficial. Save your money.

Illiterate racists might suggest that "what should be done they should look to their future in America or else renounce their American citizenship and go back to the Cuba."

Others who are pro-leftist/socialist/communist might venture into the realm of suggesting that Professor Suchlicki "descends into a series of personal opinions and observances peppered with historical facts." A simple web search on the author's name will show many more credentials than simply being "an adviser to officials in the Bush administration."

A brilliant account narrated by one of the few historians not marred by leftist bias.

This was a pretty good book, up until the period that came after 1959. The historical narrative up to that point is brisk and easy to read, as well as informative, condensing many centuries and events into a limited amount of pages. This is to be expected from any history, and in this case it suffices.

After the period of Castro's takeover of the island, the narrative descends into a series of personal opinions and observances peppered with historical facts. It seems the author patched together this part of the book from a few articles and lectures he has given. The coverage of the Bay of Pigs is practically non-existent, as is focus on Che Guevara and the impact he had on the fledgling Communist state. Toward the end of the book, the author descends even further into a minor rhetorical battle with the tenets of Cuban Communism.

I finished the book in spite of that, and there's a good section in the back on books for further reference.

My guess is that the Cuban threat still lingers in the author's mind, and for various political reasons he felt he had to water down the post-1959 section of the book. Keep in mind that the book was written around the mid-80's and the Cold War was still in full bloom. In fact, the Nicaraguan contra war against the Sandinistas was also a shadow war against Castro, who had greatly aided the Sandinistas as they took power, and this was happening simultaneously as the release of this book.

It seems that Mr. Suchlicki is currently an adviser to officials in the Bush administration. These officials are drawing up plans for a "democratic transition" in Cuba even as we speak. Anyone searching for differing viewpoints on Cuba is definitely advised to shop around and check the credentials of the author before beginning a book.

I recommend this book to anyone who has had that gnawing feeling that something is not quite right in this country we love. Do you think the big corporations have too much power? Is the middle class disappearing? What did our founders really intend when they created the separation of powers? Did we lose control of our country...and how can we get it back? David Sirota writes about pockets of discontent that are beginning to bubble and boil all over the country. Small uprisings that are having an effect on corporations, in state policies, and in Congress. If you thought you were alone, read this book and find out that others are sharing your concern...in one way or another. This book will stir you up and widen your eyes. I learned so much from each chapter and had a good laugh or two along the way. David Sirota is a great writer who has his ear to the ground and shares his wealth of knowledge in this book. Read it.

You will learn something new from reading this book. David Sirota provides first hand accounts of populist movements around the US. I learned about the Working Family Party in New York and fusion. I also got a new perspective on Washington driven faux uprisings vs. real uprisings.

The book has a great mix of personal story and the uprising description. It has a good flow to it and is divided up into distinct sections. If you don't like a section - just skip it. I enjoyed reading all of it.

Well-written, better than "Hostile Takeover." You can tell now by reading this book that Sirota has more confidence in his writing style and isn't afraid to pepper his stories with a very human narrator, something that's important in titles like this where readers are given a very close-up look at a particular institution. The book is extremely informative (I had never even heard of "Third-Party Fusion" before reading this book, and now I want to know how I can bring it to Wisconsin!), and the intimate glimpses inside Washington and everywhere else shows readers various sides of issues that we don't normally see in the corporate press. I'm actually quite surprised to see another reviewer attack Sirota because of his chapter on the Minutemen on the border. I thought the chapter was actually quite fair, maybe TOO fair given how many of the people he meets seem to be struggling to hide their racism, but that's just one opinion. Either way, it's an intimate glimpse into a movement, just like every other chapter, and every chapter offers something we can learn from.

Excellent writers are like great chefs; you don't really need to know what they're writing/cooking to know you're in for a treat. In this case, we've got David Sirota riffing (and reporting) on how a bunch of "disconnected and atomized" rage is "frothing" in America.

Whether it's anti-illegal-immigrant vigilantes, frustrated high-tech workers, "blue chip revolutionaries," "Uprising Television" (or radio or blogs), netroots activists, the anti-tax movement or the anti-anti-tax movement, there certainly appear to be a lot of pissed off people out there in America today. Just look at polls that show 80%+ of people who feel the country's headed in the wrong direction. Look at the huge turnout in this year's presidential primaries -- particularly on the Democratic side -- and the upsurge in political energy being shown by people around the country. Look at the anger at the President, at the Congress, at many of our institutions.

The question is, does all this add up to a "populist uprising?" Even David Sirota is skeptical, but he certainly sees the potential for such an uprising, and apparently so does a nervous corporate American and insider political establishment. In the end, I'm not sure that Sirota has completely proved his thesis, that "the disparate pieces of this uprising are all part of one enraged backlash." However, after reading his well-written, well-researched, informative, and entertaining book, I'm far less likely to write off that thesis as a definite possibility in coming years.

It starts out great, the chapter on "The Thrilla in Montana" was a joy to read. Then the book seems to slide, and about half way through I gave up. I just couldn't stay interested. The author, somewhere about halfway through the third chapter, loses sight of what the book title suggests the book is about. Maybe I am being dismissive, but with so many books on modern politics it takes a great book to get a good review from me. This isn't that book.

Most current affairs tomes are dense and daunting. This one's hilarious and helpful at the same time. While exposing the president's record, it offers specific how-to's on what people can actually do to dump Bush. Not just the standard struff like voter registration, but innovative activities like organizing a "Pub Crawl" or chalk stamping the sidewalk. Fun and useful, from the guy who brought us Cherry Garcia.

Whatever your political stripe, it is easy for the ordinary voter to feel that there is nothing they can do to affect political change. It outlines ways that almost anyone can get involved in national campaigns and make a difference. This book happens to be for those who favor re-defeating Bush, but it could be used by anyone by just substituting names. Each idea comes with suggestions for 3 different groups; busy people, people with a little time on their hands, and partisans with lots of time, motivation, and energy.

With campaign finance out of control (despite McCain-Feingold) and Florida 2000, many feel that individuals don't have a voice. This book may change their opinion.

I'm already putting one of their ideas for busy people to use. We are inviting people to a party in honor of Bush's military service. If you send a donation to John Kerry, you don't have to actually attend the party, but we'll provide a scrap of napkin to support your claim that you did.

So it's come to this. After reading through this book I realize that the people who write these books are really serious, and that is beginning to scare me because they actually have an influence on people with books like this who are ready to be told what to think without actually thinking for themselves. Once again it's always easy to see how Conservative and Liberal books are written. The Conservative writers try to explain world events and bring out facts. Books like these have cute insults and goofy parodies and half-truths filled with hatred and intolerance, but under the banner of being a concerned citizen. After reading this book I decided to toss my last pint of Phish Food into the trash and switch ice cream companies altogether.

I know that it may seem unusual that a conservative would actually purchase a book like this, however as a Bush supporter, I was interested in seeing what I could expect from those that are activists on the left in this election. To be honest, what I read didn't surprise me at all.

Firstly, among the various recommended methods of convincing people to vote against Bush, was a simple bit of advice: pretend to be a disgruntled Republican. Write letters, or call in to talk shows, and pretend to be a Republican disgusted with Bush's ultra-conservatism or warmongering. Never minding the commandment that this suggestion breaks, this is an example of pure disgusting dirty tricks that I would expect of win at any cost leftys.

Also, a few ideas are pure garbage. One was dressing up as a rabbit, and sitting around telling people you are `hopping mad' at the Bush administration. If you don't mind being made a fool of, I say go for it.

There were other usefull suggestions, building email lists, online campaigning and registration guides, but the average angry radical will find this book wanting. And unconvincing.

Pretense is the basis of this book. Pretend to be homeless, pretend to be Republican, pretend you like the Democrat more than Nader. It's a good example of what bare bones intellect the average liberal activist puts into winning the hearts and minds of USA voters. This book at least gave me some optimism, if Bush makes people this mad than he's doing the right thing. As for winning elections, try being honest with people and winning the war of ideas. That war is difficult to win while wearing a bunny suit.

This book does for activism what Cherry Garcia did for the ice cream industry. It's taken everything hardcore, traditional activists know, combined it with updated and creative strategies, and added the fun-loving, humorous attitude that could only come from someone crazy enough to develop Chunky Monkey. The book is well written and contains excellent research, such as an expanded appendix with voting regulations for each state, that will be useful long after George W. Bush is defeated. The ideas range in both commitment and orginality, from writing a letter to the editor to singing anti-Bush Karaoke songs that anyone from the "practical, concerned and busy person" to the "anybody-but-Bush guerilla" will enjoy. One thing is for certain: Cohen and Salzman are passionate about showing George the door and they need our help to do it!

Mohaddessin's book is by now, unfortunately, rather dated. Published in 1993, the work can not address the myriad changes we are currently witnessing in Iran, including the 1997 election of reformist Khatami as President of Iran, and the recent election of a reformist majority to the Majlis, or national assembly.

Apart from this criticism, Mohaddessin's book suffers, as already noted, from a decidedly one-sided point of view. He and his organization have quite an aze to grind, and they grind it with vigor. This unfortunately colors his scholarship. As an example, he reports (without citation) the startling claim that Tehran is in possession of four nuclear warheads. Yet the Center for Non-proliferation Studies discounts this claim, which may have has as its source, a dubious report by a Jerusalem newspaper.

The saving grace of Mr. Mohaddessin's book is his differentiation between the state-sponsored theocratic terror which is "Kohmeniism" with a more moderate, liberal Islamic fundamentalism, which he argues is more true to Islam. For this reason, and because I can supplement his text with current events and scholarly criticism, I will continue to use this book in my course.

The book "Islamic Fundamentalism" is an excellent addition to already published books on this subject. Mohaddessin's book originality comes from its more detailed examination of the role the Islamic regime in Tehran has played in propagating the ideology of "Islamic Fundamentalism" around the region in particular and around the globe in general. This book goes to the distressing fact that our government and we as a nation have closed our eyes to the patron of the global terrorism and Islamic Fundamentalism. It reminds us of the cold war era. That Soviets were the godfather of global communism movements. Other states such as East Germany, Yugoslavia, Cuba and many others like them supported communist movements. Once the Soviets collapsed, the rest of them collapsed as quickly as their grand patron did. According to Mohaddessin's documentation in this book, Islamic Iran is playing the same role as the Soviets did during the cold war. Being the god father and grand patron of Islamic Fundamentalists movements in the region and globally. I strongly recommend reading of this book to understand the roots of our current crisis. I find this book as an eye opener to be added to the collection of other books that has been published on this subject in the recent years.

If you're looking for a thoroughly researched and documented account of the brutal zealots that have held Iran hostage for the past 23 years, look no further. Muhammed Mohadessin offers documents that clearly expose the terror that Iran's evil regime has exported and continues to export all throughout the muslim world (not to mention the West, but that's not the focus here). Highly notable is a rather detailed list of the numerous victims of the mullah's totalitarianism and violent oppressive tactics...the victims of the Iranian regime's favorite export are just as likely to be Iranians as anyone else.

The book "Islamic Fundamentalism" is an excellent addition to already published books on this subject. Mohaddessin's book originality comes from its more detailed examination of the role the Islamic regime in Tehran has played in propagating the ideology of "Islamic Fundamentalism" around the region in particular and around the globe in general. This book goes to the distressing fact that our government and we as a nation have closed our eyes to the patron of the global terrorism and Islamic Fundamentalism. It reminds us of the cold war era. That Soviets were the godfather of global communism movements. Other states such as East Germany, Yugoslavia, Cuba and many others like them supported communist movements. Once the Soviets collapsed, the rest of them collapsed as quickly as their grand patron did. According to Mohaddessin's documentation in this book, Islamic Iran is playing the same role as the Soviets did during the cold war. Being the god father and grand patron of Islamic Fundamentalists movements in the region and globally. I strongly recommend reading of this book to understand the roots of our current crisis. I find this book as an eye opener to be added to the collection of other books that has been published on this subject in the recent years.

Islamic Fundamentalism is the best book. It pictures the real stories with ducuoments, all whys, and hows of terrorism regime of Iran.
It opens the targets of terrorism, and some of the inhumen activities of the Iran's rulers in the past, present, and future (if the regime exist).
Khomeni and his heirs, abuse Islam and Koran. The regime use the name of Islam, but it is just the Mullahs nickname, and they actions are against Islam and Koran. The Mullahs in Iran are the Godfathers of the fundamentalism. The regime is like an encapsulated abscess within the tumor in our democratic world.
Mojahedin, the resistance of Iran, has prevented and minimized the regime's terrorist and inhuman activities. Mrs. Rajavi, the ellect president for future of Iran, a Muslem and high educated woman,is trying to overthrow the regime, and estabelish democracy and freedom. She dislike Mullahs, strongly believes freedom, human rights, and democracy.

My small Indiana "hick town" has recently become the target of a proposed Vera Sun ethanol fuel refinery site. Had it not been for Ms. Perlman's book "Citizen's Primer for Conservation Activism: How to Fight Development in Your Community" I would have sat on my hands and been too timid to take on Big Brother. Having read it I am now involved and prepared to at least put up one helluva fight against it. I was attracted to Ms. Perlman's book because of the words "primer" and "community" in the title. I needed something elementary, something easy, to guide me and educate me in the basics of fighting development in my small community. Her book did just that and more. I now have a foundation of knowledge to build on. Did her example fit my situation perfectly? Am I ready to take on every big corporation in a big metropolis? No, but I feel informed enough to know where to start digging for information and places to go for answers if need be. I didn't get the impression that Ms. Perlman's intention was for this to be "THE" book on conservation activism and one should look no further. I may end up with an ethanol plant in my back yard, literally, but I won't hold Ms. Perlman or her book responsible if my community loses the fight. I feel more empowered as a citizen and come away with more determination to exercise my rights and make my vote count in the upcoming election. This book was the perfect "first step" for me and for others whom I have shared with.
Ms. Perlman has taken the "fire in her belly" and produced something of value. I hope she writes even bigger and better "guide books" on conservation activism. I'll be watching for them.

I was excited about using this book in my own non-profit work---until I had a chance to actually read it. It is only applicable to certain types of activists who fight their fights in small and/or rural communities.

I'm happy that Ms. Perlman and her friends were able to stop counterproductive redevelopment in their own community. However, I am also concerned that she generalizes too readily about the immediate applicability of this book to all people's situations.

Like other reviewers have previously noted, she does not recognize that different environments need adjustments in organizing strategies. This is an embarrassing mantra for somebody who positions herself as an author and activist.

One of my long-standing pet peeves is activists who are ultimately in love with the idea of `being progressive' rather than actually following through on it. Because they will not concede the flaws in their own arguments, these people are often more shallow than the society which they seek to change.

Yes, it worked for her, but many of the tactics would be impractical in a metropolis where activists are expected to work through and with boards in order to impact social change. Increasing gentrification of `redeveloping' urban centers means smart development policies can be a hot seller there too---with the right sales pitch.

Her social justice prescriptions aren't going to provide anything to people who cannot use the remedies in their own organizing environments. Unlike John P. Kretzmann and John L. McKnight (authors of `Building communities from the inside out') she generalizes about communities. What was her point of writing a `practice' book if the tenets cannot actually be put into practice?

This book would be better off repackaged as a handbook for rural and small suburban communities. It has no applicability for the realities of organizers in larger communities. Selling it as a general organizing book does a tremendous disservice to the people who are seriously committed to helping all communities organize.

Pearlman has provided an inspiring and essential guide to preserving valued natural land, especially when under developmental pressure from characteristically greed driven developers who rarely have any vested interest in the post-development future of the land they desicrate.

A must read for caring citizens who will learn thatdevotion and extraordinary teamwork can truly work miracles!

-- JC

The last two statements in Judith Perlman's book, "CONSERVATION ACTIVISM, - "Keep fighting the good fight. The universe will thank you.", should not be taken lightly. Keep fighting" is the most important as it is the theme throughout her book - never give up! Universe can be brought down to state, county, township, etc. - even your own backyard.

The first statement, on the cover - before the title is: "Citizen Primer for" (CONSERVATION ACTIVISM), also explains it all. This is a guide for the preservation of natural areas. Judith Perlman's book will be used by untold numbers of individuals and groups involved with (or planning to be involved with) small and big skirmishes regarding the preservation of unique areas. The subtitle explains that: "How to fight development in your community."

Whether the "good fight" pertains to small local governments (as her book has) or to large governments, this book is a valuable guide. The entire text from the cover to the closing statements is well organized and written in a manner that citizens can understand and follow.

All too often, we are told that "you can't fight City Hall." This thought is put to rest in Judith Perlman's book.

Bernie Brouchoud, Founder and Executive Director (retired), Woodland Dunes Nature Center, Two Rivers, Wisconsin

Judith Perlman has successfully battled development projects, working for the preservation of natural areas and the defeat of sprawling subdivisions. She was involved in three efforts around her small town in Wisconsin, and two were successful while the third was in progress at the time of writing. Perlman's experience makes for a book that can be useful for those who are up against similar battles in their own communities. Some of Perlman's advice is fairly obvious, such as exercising your constitutional rights at public meetings or building coalitions with sympathetic organizations, though Perlman fleshes out these suggestions with strong practical details. Perlman also has some not-so-obvious recommendations as well, such as filming council meetings, or hiring lawyers to simply concoct stalling tactics when a governmental body is trying to rush a vote on a development plan. Such simple tactics can really alter the power balance when local citizens are up against developers and their pocketed local politicians.

However, in the introduction to this book Perlman states that her goal is to extend her personal experiences and successes into general recommendations that can be used in many different types of situations. Unfortunately, this is only true if your battle is in a political environment that is not especially different from that faced by Perlman. Granted, some of her tactics will work anywhere, such as setting up 501(c)(3) tax status or making use of media resources and local experts. But the biggest forms of government ever faced by Perlman and her colleagues were small town planning boards and county commissions. The book offers no practical knowledge on battles that would take place in much different political environments, such as large cities, or public lands in which state or even federal government agencies would be involved. Additionally, the book's expertise is only based on resisting relatively small residential developments, and battles against large-scale commercial or industrial interests would also face much different political realities. So in the end, this book is certainly a practical and detailed primer for the conservation activist, but it is based on limited examples and the details apply mostly to very specific types of local efforts. [~doomsdayer520~]

This book was required for my class so I had no choice but to buy it. It actually turned out to be an intersting read, though, so that was a plus. It arrived before I expected and was much cheaper here than it was in the campus bookstore. Overall, Amazon was a great way to go!

Kenneth Stern caught my attention because I am a history teacher at a junior college. His account of the workings of the FBI's Counter-Intellegence program against the American Indian Movement (AIM) only covers part and parcel of the FBI's role against AIM.

A sad tale of governmental abuse of power, constitutional violations, perjured testimony, suppression of evidence, fabrication of evidence and a long list of wrong-doings that pains the conscience. It is time for the record to be made whole about the entire workings of all parties involved at the time. Justice delayed is justice denied; but justice delayed is always better than justice never granted.

Stern has written an excellent piece of work that should be required reading for all personnel in the Department of Justice, the FBI and members of Congress.

I followed up 'Like a Hurricane' with this book. It reads quite easily, like a novel. It speaks of a case against several AIM members in Oregon. The author, Kenneth Stern, became involved in the case as a law student and thirteen years later was a bar certified attorney for one of the defendents. The book is clear on the events that took place and includes interesting discussions of people of and events surrounding the case, including Marlon Brando's role in AIM. One of the most interesting parts in near the end of the book where Stern describes the problems of Pine Ridge. He paints a wonderful, if awful, picture.

The only problem I had with the book was the use of dialogue. I will admit, that is part of what hooked me, but I was also leary of dialogue from more than a decade earlier. Overall, I felt it was a very good book.

Kenneth Stern has produced this very readable firsthand account of the criminal case United States v. Kenneth Loud Hawk.

The book begins after the occupation of Wounded Knee. In November of 1975, outside of Ontario, Oregon, a state trooper, reacting from an all-points-bulletin from the FBI, pulls over a motor home and station wagon. Anna Mae Aquash, KaMook Banks, Kenneth Loud Hawk, and Russ Redner are arrested while two others, Dennis Banks and Leonard Peltier, dramatically escape from the scene. Eventually all six face charges of illegal weapons and possession of dynamite.

Kenneth Stern is an idealistic first-year law student fed up with insipid law classes. He learns of the arrest and volunteers to help the defense. He takes us through the thirteen-year-long case with great detail, starting in 1976 until Dennis Banks's plea bargain in 1988. A major focus is on the federal government's unethical behavior in their effort to try the Indian defendents. Such behavior includes destroying, manufacturing, and hiding evidence; spying on lawyer's meetings; intimidating supporters, and prejudicing potential jurors. Stern illustrates the lawyer-client relations and has an admirable devotion to his clients. His clients become friends to him, and he spends exhausive hours working on their cases. His skill at elucidating complex judicial processes make it easy to follow events as they unfold. In spite of his strong support of AIM, he preserves enough objectivity to recognize the imperfections of his clients and avoids any shrill anti-government rhetoric.

Unfortunately, the book hints at a romantic, self-serving autobiography. Since Stern was their legal advocate, he tends to focus on his clients' good side rather than criticize their actions. In certain accounts of historical events, such as Wounded Knee in 1890, he uses only one source (in this case, Dee Brown's none-too-carefully written BURY MY HEART AT WOUNDED KNEE). Like Peter Matthiessen's IN THE SPIRIT OF CRAZY HORSE, Stern seems to take everything said by the Indians as fact, such as the events that occured at the occupation of Wounded Knee in 1973.

The book would perhaps suplement Peter Matthiessen's IN THE SPIRIT OF CRAZY HORSE or Paul Chaat Smith & Robert Allen Warrior's LIKE A HURRICANE. Overall, the book is worth the read for anybody interested in a one-sided account of the events that followed the Wounded Knee occupation.

Amazing that the Native Americans living today and in the past are called the trouble makers. Each war that broke out or incident that has taken place between the U.S. Government and Native Americans has been started because the white man and his greed just can't ever seem to be satisfied with his lust for money, control, or land from the Native American people. Then when Native Americans stand up for themselves after trying to please the devil whites they are labeled red savages! This book is an eye opener and written in a way that keeps your attention. This is one of the most factual books ever written with a color of truth that can't be denied.

Brooke Biggs is a literary master with the heart of a lion and excellent taste in sneakers. Her latest volume, a staggeringly huge triumph of the written word, should find its way to the shelf of every sentient being on Earth, nestled between "Das Kapital" and the complete Nancy Drew series.

These stories of modern day activists really give you a different perspective on the world we live in and what our role should be. Biggs is an excellent story teller.

Great stories of real people today who took a look at the world and didn't like what they saw. So they did something about it. Biggs is a great storyteller.

Wow, some of you people need to read a bit more broadly. Jeepers, this is the sort of maudlin claptrap that gives maudlin claptrap such a bad name. Brave hearts, rebel spirits, lots of cheap slogans and smarmy cliches and uplifting tales of grrl power and similar blather are a good example of why people think Americans are so stupid, and Mrs. R is certainly closer in spirit to a typical American housewife than anyone I've ever known from the UK.