Government Books

I am black and I am angry. I live in Africa, The Winds of Havoc has been a revelation because finally, the lies that went with the turf of our liberation are beginning to be exposed. This book is a good start, I salute you Adelino Serras Pires

The Winds of Havoc is much more than an adventure or hunting novel. I want to congratulate the authors Fiona and Adelino on a very special, genuine and valuable contribution to the modern history of Mozambique, and also of post-colonial Africa generally. From my experience as a scholar of contemporary Mozambican affairs, as an active participant in the Mozambique peace process 1989-1995, and as Special Advisor to the then Special Representative of the Secretary General of the UN, Mr Aldo Ajello, I can recommend this book as essential reading. But most of all, it reads easily and really well. It takes you on a journey of adventure and passion and tragedy, and I found it impossible to put it down before I had come to the last page.

If there is a single book that informs and clarifies issues pertaining to Africa, from European colonization to the new millennium, this is the one. I am a seasoned collector of books on Africa. Nothing on my shelves, however, can compare with The Winds of Havoc. Adelino SERRAS PIRES and Fiona CAPSTICK have an intimate knowledge of Africa and I personally know many of the people mentioned in this book. I also had the honor of working with Adelino in Africa in the 1980s. This book confirms the courage and honesty he has retained throughout his turbulent life, qualities he never abandoned when many other people would have been tempted to give in to their tormentors. There are shocking revelations in this book as the reader is taken on a unique odyssey into many African countries, witnessing the fate of the wildlife as the winds of change became gales of violence which spared nothing and nobody. The book is an education. Adelino's extraordinary life and Fiona Capstick's ability with words make this book a compelling, disturbing experience. Buy it before the first printing sells out!

When I started reading The Winds of Havoc,I had the impression the book would be the memories of a gone by lifestyle, and quite frankly I was repulsed by how important the big game hunting business seemed like. Not until I reached the last quarter of the book did I realize the value of the author's memories in providiing a picture of a productive and peaceful "colonial" lifestyle and comparing it to the present state of Mozambique's existence. Clearly, African politics have changed for the worst over the last half of the 20th century. For all that was wrong about colonialism, the "indiginization" of most African countries has been a failure that will hurt Africa and the rest of the world for most of the 21st century. The fate of the African wildlife is an accurate indicator of the evolution of Mozambiquean politics. Mozambique will go as the wildlife goes.

Fiona and Adelina have hit a bases loaded home run! Adelino, I am so sorry that humanity can treat others so badly. Your days incarcerated, cold, hungry and with your hands and feet hurting so bad, brought tears to my eyes. What a horrible injustice.

If you do not know anything about East African history, particularly Mozambique, this book will show the "Havoc" that occured at this time in Africa between two factions.

This is a book makes you get a map out to see where these stories take place. You find that you want to read over at least once again.

Art Gonzalez

Tony Collings writes stories of courageous men and women who are fighting to bring the truth to their readers. Collings writes from the vantage point of an international correspondent who has risked his own life to cover world danger spots. This book should be read by anyone who values a free press.

For the American layperson who may not be familiar with the dangerous situations and murky but volatile undercurrents journalists often face in foreign trouble spots, Tony Collings book "Words of Fire" will be revealing in its accounts of journalists who have given much--even their lives--to the cause of truth and democratic ideals. As an international journalist himself, Collings knows well of what he writes. This work might even raise the level of regard in which journalists are held as defenders of the people's right to know. Here Collings is talking about the important issues shaping the growth and development of any of a myriad countries, not the latest American fad-gossip which passes for "news" on tabloid TV in the U.S. For the professional journalist with overseas experience--and I include myself in that category with friend and former CNN colleague Tony Collings--I found his work well researched, well written and a good account of what is the best in our craft.

At a time when print journalism has often been justly criticized in the U.S. as medium of entertainment, without independent moral backbone, Tony Collings has written a moving, brilliant record of the deadly struggle between a free press and totalitarian goverments around the globe. Collings is an experienced broadcast journalist and an eye-witness to much of the corruption and terror hidden and sustained by censorship everywhere, from Russia to Columbia. He argues that press freedom is an essential and enabling condition for the expansion of democratic reform in reactionary regimes. But perhaps what is most moving about WORDS OF FIRE is the many true stories of personal courage, the harrowing dangers faced by journalists in our historical era as they attempt to unmask the face of tyranny with only the truth of their words.

Author Anthony Collings knows how to bring this vital topic alive. In the USA, we take press freedom for granted. If anything, some of us feel there's too much of it about: we often sympathize with Hollywood stars who punch out swarming paparazzi. But in much of the world (and not just the kleptocracies and one-party regimes), simply getting the basic truth to press can be a career-ending or even life-threatening endeavor. Collings wisely decides to illustrate this by focussing on individual cases, many of which will astound you. This is an important book on an important subject.

At a time when print journalism has often been justly criticized in the U.S. as medium of entertainment, without independent moral backbone, Tony Collings has written a moving, brilliant record of the deadly struggle between a free press and totalitarian goverments around the globe. Collings is an experienced broadcast journalist and an eye-witness to much of the corruption and terror hidden and sustained by censorship everywhere, from Russia to Columbia. He argues that press freedom is an essential and enabling condition for the expansion of democratic reform in reactionary regimes. But perhaps what is most moving about WORDS OF FIRE is the many true stories of personal courage, the harrowing dangers faced by journalists in our historical era as they attempt to unmask the face of tyranny with only the truth of their words.

I thought this book was pretty good, although I didn't learn as much as I thought I would. What I did learn was all very frightening indeed.

The reason I didn't give this 5 stars isn't because I didn't learn something from every censored story, but rather that I felt there was a strong bias in this book. Clinton and Carter get off very easily, when compared to Reagan and Bush, who are attacked for verything they do. It's not that I believe they did nothing wrong, but I'm sure that Clinton and Carter weren't nearly as honest and forthright as this book makes them seem (in comparison to the Republican presidents).

You ever wonder if you are reading every news story or if some of the stories never make it to the paper? Do you ever wonder what you might be missing? Grab a copy of 20 Years of censored news and you'll be in for a surprise.

Carl Jensen takes you down the last twenty years with major headlines that were never seen. I was surprised and a little scared to think of what is held back from the public. I was amazed to see what was never told.

Proving the old adage "It's the media that control the people's thinking." This book certainly should wake you up to the fact that what you see isn't really what you get, because you get very little from the press.

I took just over two hours to complete the reading and I am very excited to read Censored 1999, to find out what I missed for the year. Overall this book will make a great gift for just about everyone - well done!

Never heard of East Timor until a few weeks ago? Well, you would have if the other news stories about East Timor over that past few years had made it into the mainstream news!

This book made me realize just how bad the situation is out there in the media. How controlled by corporate PR and government intervention our supposedly "free" media is. How could this happen in the United States of America?

I highly recommend this book to citizens who want to be better informed.

The news stories suppressed by Ronald Reagan (and his "administration") alone tell a horrifying story of how a politician tried to ram his agenda down our throats, without our knowing about it, so that we couldn't dissent or have opinions. And how he tried to censor everything he could, so the American public couldn't get any information about anything the government was doing.(Read Ch. 7, 1982, #6 "Ronald Reagan: America's Chief Censor".) There are also a multitude of stories censored by trans-global corporations what will scare you to death when you read them. What corporations will perpetrate on the public's health, just to continue making a buck, will shock you.

The orignial news stories are covered in summary form, the sources are cited, and there is usually an Update on what has happened since. Sometimes the update is more harrowing than the original!

It is your civic duty to read this book.

There is nothing more important to Freedom than a free, unbiased exchange of ideas. I now have a better idea of how "un-free" I am. Through reading this book, several layers of ignorance have been stripped away from my consciousness.

This is a scholarly, thoughtful dissertation encompassing not only issues of monopolization of the American press by huge multinational corporations, but many other issues ignored by mainstream media: environmentalism, nuclear power, government surveillance and other infringements on the civil rights of the world's citizens. This book is an essential collection of modern history so carefully hidden from the vast majority of Americans.

This is a great read. There are a great variety of stories (discounting the author's obsession with nuclear power) that should pique anyone's interest. Each of the year's stories provides interesting insights on what really happened that year (I found particularly enlightening the stories on the corporations, rich elite, and media empires that really rule American). This is a rare book that should be read by anyone who wants to be informed on current events. Rarely does such an important book come cloaked in such a simple cover.

AMERICAN CONSERVATISM: AN ENCYCLOPEDIA is essential college-level reading for any interested in the history, philosophy and politics of the American conservative movement: contributions from over two hundred leading scholars pack a weighty reader which blends biography with concepts and history in over six hundred entries. College level holdings strong in social science should consider this 'bible' a must-have reference: from Lord Acton to William F. Rickenbacker, cross-comparisons between theorists and their works make for an essential reference.

Diane C. Donovan
California Bookwatch

AMERICAN CONSERVATISM: AN ENCYCLOPEDIA is a monumental resource for anyone wishing to delve into the evolution of what I would term as "modern" conservatism. By that I mean, this is not a history of conservatism, dating back to its origins in American politics, but is rather a study of conservatism of the last thirty or so years. For me, that is this books only shortcoming.

I would have loved to have seen the editors trace conservatism back to such statesmen as John Taylor of Caroline, whose "New Views of the Constitution" truly expresses the origin of conservative thought in America and still exemplifies true conservative principles far more so than today's rather diluted version, but such was not the case. That is not to say there is not much to glean from this massive volume.

Heavily laden in today's climate of political discourse and polarization, too many people unfairly equate conservatism and liberalism with party politics. Perhaps to some degree, there is some validity to placing conservatism in the same pot as the Republican Party, and certainly even greater logic in placing liberalism squarely in the hands of Democrats, but then along comes a politician like Zell Miller (D) or John McCain (R) and that whole theory goes out the window. The premise of this book, however, is not to assign a label, but rather to insight to the people, concepts and ideals that make up the crux of the modern conservative movement.

Constructed in encyclopedic fashion alphabetically from abortion to Zoll, and everything in between, the book is laden with pillars of modern conservatism from scholars, politicos, activists, authors and more. The book seems adequately geared not only to conservatives seeking to better define themselves but also to anyone open minded enough to absorb the evidential presentation and advance their own conclusions as to valid and judicious modern application.

This book is highly worthy for what the editors surely envisioned, but it is not a history of conservatism. If that is your target, this one is off that mark.

Monty Rainey
[...]

~American Conservatism: An Encyclopedia~ is an insightful encyclopedic compendium offering a survey of the American conservative movement and its diverse elements. The publisher Intercollegiate Studies Institute makes it clear that the focus is upon a distinctively American conservative movement, particularly in its postwar mold following the Depression and World War II. This insightful reference book covers a litany of iconic personalities, people, events, organizations, and concepts of major importance to the American conservative movement. One thing ISI does surprisingly well is achieve a balance while allowing for a profile of an older traditional conservative thought. In the twentieth century, the political fortunes of conservatism are too often measured merely by the successes of the Republican Party. This encyclopedic reference, however, points readers to a diverse, broad conservative movement within the United States. To many outsiders, the conservative movement suffers from a crisis of identity as avowed neoconservatives, paleoconservatives, traditionalists, libertarians, and those who simply call themselves "conservatives," cling to the conservative movement. However, as this encyclopedia makes clear, the diversity of the movement is its strength, and the ensuing debates between its varied elements, has contributed to the advancement of the nation. The American conservative movement will perhaps allow for a brighter future for ordered liberty, a renewed culture and a more vibrant civil society. Herein, this volume, the student finds an erudite window into that American conservative movement. Understanding the movement, its history, and its impact, is integral to sustaining its impact on society for the better in the twenty-first century.

This powerful tome features articles from one of my former professors Dr. S.A. Samson as well.

In this highly interesting and informative book, the reader will be introduced to the main currents in conservative thought, and in a manner that is objective and with only a few exceptions free from an excess of bias. There are many names and ideas associated to American conservatism, and readers may find that they hold much more in common with it than they might have first realized. Its history and content have been tarnished greatly in recent years, due mostly to the popularity of `neoconservatism' (which is discussed in the book), and the current regime in Washington. This book will hopefully assist in putting conservative thought into its proper perspective, and illustrate to the uninitiated reader its great diversity in ideas. The average reader will probably not read every article in the book, but will instead concentrate on those of interest. There is a fair representation of the major (and minor) philosophical trends that have dominated American conservatism, along with those that have or are losing credence.

By far the best article in the book is the one entitled `Liberalism' and written by Peter Augustine Lawler. In spite of its length, it gives a fair and interesting overview of what constitutes liberal thought and some of its intersections with conservative thinking. It is a refreshing alternative to the vituperation that so frequently occurs in discussions of liberal philosophy. The author does refer to `liberalism' as being `elitist' but this is put in the context of its belief that individuals must be liberated from religion, morality, and other traditional beliefs in order to become fully human. In this sense it is `elitist' in that it makes special and frequently exclusive claims to knowledge about what it means to be fully human. Also interesting (and it is fair to say accurate) is the author's statement that American liberalism has been a mixture of conservatism and liberalism. There is fairly good evidence that suggests even more so, namely that liberals have actually switched places with conservatives in recent decades. Both liberals and conservatives will deny this vociferously of course, but the conservative thought of George Will, who is also included in the book, is a good example of this crossover effect, with his notion of "statecraft through soulcraft", which sounds suspiciously like the belief from liberalism that governmental institutions should be used to promote beneficial social change. The next article entitled `Liberalism, Classical' offers more insight into the nature and philosophy of liberalism, and in fact reinforces this `crossover' effect between the liberal and conservative camps, albeit in a much longer time scale (on the order of a few centuries rather than decades).

It is very surprising to see an article on Ayn Rand appear in this book, given that she chose to distance herself from `conservative' thought throughout her lifetime. She also despised `Whittaker Chambers' due to his extremely negative review of one of her novels. But an article on Whittaker Chambers of course appears in this book. The ideological distance between Chambers and Rand is infinite but they find themselves in close proximity in this book, separated only by a little over six hundred pages. They both are no doubt turning over in their graves over this inclusion, but if the truth be told, Rand does qualify as being a conservative, if one thinks of libertarianism as an element of conservative thought (as it is in this book, having an entire article devoted to its elucidation). Rand's atheism is no doubt one of her most annoying features, but ironically, the renowned Sidney Hook, who is also included in this book, and who was mentor to Leonard Piekoff, Rand's designated heir, was also an atheist. His atheism was apparently excused however, due possibly to his strong anti-communist stance (but Rand was strongly anti-communist?). Edward S. Shapiro, who wrote the article on Hook in the book, is careful to note that Hook did not believe in the "goodness of mankind", and it is fair to say that most conservatives consider it naive or misguided to believe otherwise. They stumble greatly here though, since statistically most people throughout history have conducted themselves honorably, even if measured by a conservative yardstick. To believe in the "goodness of mankind" is to accept the overwhelming evidence supporting the belief.

Conservatives though, it might be fair to say, have had some difficulties with empirical reasoning, and this is especially true in the scientific realm. This is brought out to some degree in the article entitled "Science and Scientism" by M.D. Aeschliman. Scientific and technological progress is at odds with most conservative thought, due to the latter's anathema for change. Most of the article concerns the effect of "scientism" on the individual person in that it negates purpose and meaning. C.S. Lewis (who is also written about in the book) is quoted in this article as support for the alienating effects of scientism, and its capacity for the "abolition of man." But interestingly, the area of science that studies human behavior and its connection with the brain, namely neuroscience, seems to support to some degree conservative thought, due to its contention that thought patterns via neuronal processes are heavily influenced by cultural inputs and are difficult to change once they are learned. On the other hand, neuroscience, and science in general, has learned to live without the concept of a soul, and even some research circles in neuroscience have given up even the notion of free will and personal identity. These two notions are hard for conservatives (and liberals) to give up, with the prospect of doing so even considered extremely frightening. The scientific doctrine of evolution is also of great concern to conservatives, as one will notice in the articles in the book, one being on the Scopes trial.

The only troubling omission in the book is an article entitled "War" or one that would shed more light on the conservative philosophy of war. The article on Neoconservativism says a lot, as does their behavior in real life, but one would like to see an article that compares the different schools of conservative thought on war. Many individuals, who refer to themselves as conservatives, and who are popular in the national press, such as George Will and Patrick Buchanan, have come out strongly against the current conflicts.

As this book reveals, sometimes succinctly, conservative thought and liberal thought are intertwined, and to omit any influence of liberalism on conservatism (and vice versa) is to destroy both systems. One cannot view them as two separate dogmas, and both will have to deal with the unique challenges of the twenty-first century. Maybe one could say that conservatives generally view themselves as cautious and pragmatic, while liberals generally view themselves as future pointing and idealistic. But the twenty-first century is about change, extremely drastic change, and conservatives are intimidated by change, even perhaps frightened by it. It is difficult to predict what elements of conservative (and liberal) thought will survive this century, but whatever strands are left will no doubt be chastened by radical technological changes. The technology itself will create its own ideas, its own history, and its own politics, all of which it might indeed classify as being conservative.

This is one of my favourite `encyclopedic dictionaries', an underappreciated genre if there ever was one. The "American Conservatism" now stands pride of place along side two worthy peers. Namely Robert Nisbet's superb "Prejudices - A Philosophical Dictionary" and Richard Milner's "Encyclopedia of Evolution", a dictionary style encyclopedia of Darwinism that spans not only the science, but the history, pop and folklore of evolution.

I can see the critics pounding away at their word processors now. They'll say the volume doesn't give sufficient cubic mass to George W Bush and his merry band of Vulcans; or that the neocon movement doesn't get the required number of column inches; or that GOP Republicanism herein seems more a trickle than the mainstream. And why does Eugene McCarthy seem to get more coverage than Tailgunner Joe McCarthy?

I can see their point, and there are a few facets of American conservatism that I would have liked to have seen better represented. For instance, that rare, but tough sub-species, the American monarchists. There are at least two that I can think of. Charles A. Coulombe, a traditionalist defender of throne and altar, who hails from Hollywood, and Hans Herman Hoppe, an anarcho-monarchist libertarian professor from that hive of chivalry, Las Vegas.

Still I think this kind of word processor pounding is misplaced. The book is, after all, a single volume encyclopedia / dictionary. It is meant to be comprehensive in width, not depth. That's what is great about it. It is meant to sacrifice detail for coverage. It is more important that conventional narrative histories dive deeper into the murky depths of the mainstream. The dictionary format, in contrast, gives a Cooks' Tour of the lesser known, but rarely paddled alternative creeks, tributaries and billabongs. And that's what "American Conservatism" does superbly.

The pounders' may as well criticize the Oxford English Dictionary for being full of words most of us never use. That's the point. Dive in and increase your conservative vocabulary.

This book was my introduction to anarchist principles and economics. I found it to be enlightening and inspiring. The Spanish were able to create an amazing society in Barcelona and many other villages and rural areas in the country. They created a federation of collectives which emphasized personal dignity and freedom and celebrated the community and solidarity. These values are in sharp contrast to the ones of our own rapacious state capatalism, which celebrates greed, selfishness, and the destruction of communal values. If you are looking for a better, brighter way to live that actually worked until it was destroyed by brute force, this is a book you should read.

Rocker's work is the finest marriage of classic political liberalism and economic equality. Rocker grounds the spirit and ideas of anarchism proposed by Bakunin in a concise social/political agenda. A far more lucid vision of a social order which is both economically socialist (or communist) and politically open, than any other theorist before or since.

Some may find it a bit dated. The sorts of labor organizations he refers to bear little resemblence to those found in contemporary societies. That is, not syndicalistic.

Still, I believe he is one of the most overlooked influences upon contemporary, Western, left-wing thought.

I also believe that the books first section 'Anarchism: Its Aims and Purposes' should be read by more social activists. It would help focus the often disparate voices of opposition, giving them a clearer vision of the road ahead and what needs to be done to travel upon it.

"Anarcho-Syndicalism" provides readers with an engagiong account of an egalitarian political philosophy that has its roots in Enlightenment thought. Author Rudolph Rocker presents a systematic conception of the development of anarchist thought towards anarcho-syndicalism, writing that "anarchism is not a fixed, self-enclosed social system but rather a definite trend in the historic development of mankind, which, in contrast with the intellectual guardianship of all clerical and governmental institutions, strives for the free unhindered unfolding of all the individual and social forces in life. Even freedom is only a relative, not an absolute concept, since it tends constantly to become broader and to affect wider circles in more manifold ways. For the anarchist, freedom is not an abstract philosophical concept, but the vital concrete possibility for every human being to bring to full development all the powers, capacities, and talents with which nature has endowed him, and turn them to social account. The less this natural development of man is influenced by ecclesiastical or political guardianship, the more efficient and harmonious will human personality become, the more will it become the measure of the intellectual culture of the society in which it has grown." Rocker shows that there is value in studying "trend(s) in the historic development of mankind" that do not articulate a specific and detailed social theory. Although intellectuals and social commentators alike dismiss anarchism as utopian, formless, primitive, or otherwise incompatible with the realities of a complex society, Rocker states that at every stage of history our concern must be to dismantle those forms of authority and oppression that survive from an era when they might have been justified in terms of the need for security or survival or economic development, but that now contribute to -- rather than alleviate - material and cultural deficit. "Anarcho-Syndicalism" remains an amazing intellectual and politcal statement containing a message of egalitarian hope.

Rocker writes lucidly and forcefully. He presents a clear alternative to political socialism, including Marxism. Anarcho-syndicalism seems well-grounded ethically and as if it would avoid the problems of concentrating power inherent in both capitalism and socialism.

But can it work? The biggest argument that it can seems to be CNT in Spain in the 1930's. As Rocker described it, they were highly effective and fully anarcho-syndicalist. They were defeated largely due to the involvement of powerful foreign powers. In the U.S. before World War I, the IWW (similar to the anarcho-syndicalists in Europe) grew in influence but were suppressed by the government.

Today in the U.S. the only sizable organized anarcho-syndicalist activity appears to a mucher smaller IWW. They continue to support unionization efforts and refrain from political activity.

If people can organize around trade unions, as Rocker describes and as the IWW does on a small scale, with sufficient involvement as to be able to run industries themselves, then anarcho-syndicalism as Rocker describes it seems wonderful. There would, however, many practical issues to work out. Rocker says that the CNT in Spain did that. However, if people prefer to be led, then anarcho-syndicalism won't work, as someone will undoubtedly step in to lead and, in doing so, enforce preferences for themselves.

For over 70 years, anarcho-syndicalism seems not to have been won over many people. Will conditions change so that people embrace it? Would educational efforts help revive it? Or has capitalism adapted and won? Is self-government just too much effort for most people? This work by Rocker seems about the best place to start in exploring such questions.

This book is a classic. Rocker provides a concise but thorough history of the labor movement and how it has evolved into modern anarcho-sydicalism. He also delves into methods that may be used to implement an anarcho-syndicalist society in the modern world. It was written 60 years ago, but most of the content is still relevant today. If you're interested in the labor movement, socialism, anarchism, or any related topics, you won't regret picking up this book.

Carl L. Becker's book on the Declaration of Independence first appeared nearly eighty years ago, and yet it is still a valuable and stimulating study of its subject. It is dated now, for two large reasons:

First, Becker wrote before the revolution in studying the history of ideas, and thus unavoidably predates the close-focus examination of the controversy between Great Britain and her American colonies in the years from 1765 to 1776. Two recent books should be read alongside Becker's monograph -- Pauline Maier's AMERICAN SCRIPTURE: MAKING THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE (New York: Knopf, 1997; Vintage paperback, 1998), and John Phillip Reid, CONSTITUTIONAL HISTORY OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION, abridged ed. (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1995).

Second, Becker focuses on Jefferson as *the* author of the Declaration, neglecting that he was actually the draftsman selected by the Continental Congress and his colleagues within the drafting committee. Thus, the Declaration -- no matter what Jefferson said about it in later life -- was not primarily a window into his own thinking about natural rights and democracy, but rather the final statement by Congress as to the reasons for breaking ties with Britain. To be sure, later generations have read it as an expression of Jefferson's mind -- rather than of "the American mind," as he put it. But, as Maier shows in AMERICAN SCRIPTURE, Jefferson's thinking was nowhere near as unique or advanced on these subjects as later hero-worshipping biographers have suggested.

In particular, as Maier has shown, the age-old dispute about whether Jefferson was or was not influenced by Locke is somewhat beside the point. Even so, Becker's fine book is indispensable for deciding whether we should read the Declaration through Lockean or Jeffersonian lenses, and whether we should regard it as a codification of American aspirations or as a hypocritical catalogue of principles we cannot live up to.

R. B. Bernstein, adjunct professor of law, New York Law School

This was a required reading for a graduate humanities class. Carl Becker expertly researched the events leading up to the birth of the Declaration. Carl L. Becker's research on the philosophical influences on the Declaration of Independence is some of the best scholarship on the subject. Becker notes that a by product of the Enlightenment is that "In the eighteenth century as never before, `Nature' had stepped in between man and God; so that there was no longer any way to know God's will except by discovering the `laws' of nature." Not only are the force of the ideas, such as pleas to natural law important, but also how the words sounded to the ear would become equally important for the Declaration to move people to rebellion.

John Locke, Algernon Sidney, and Charles de Montesquieu helped form Jefferson's political and philosophical ideas towards government, public service, and leadership. The Declaration is replete with the Natural Law philosophy of John Locke (1632-1704). David Lundberg and Henry F. May conducted a study of the 92 existing library records from before the revolution, to determine which authors colonists were reading. Their research found that John Locke was by far the most read philosopher in their study. Becker postulated that Locke's ideas had made a significant impression on Jefferson, since he found that the general tenor and phraseology of the Declaration closely followed key sentences from Locke's Second Treatise of Government. Jefferson must have read Locke's work several times to be able to borrow so liberally from them, and to be able to mirror his language so accurately. To illustrate the point, the following is an example of Locke's writing showing just how closely some of the phrases match from his Second Treatise of Government, and the Declaration of Independence.

The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges
every one; and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind who
will consult it that, being all equal and independent, no one ought
to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions; for men
being all workmanship of one omnipotent and infinitely wise Maker.

Jefferson's original draft reads.

We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are
created equal & independent; that from that equal creation they
derive in rights inherent & inalienable among which are the
preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness.

The "self evident truths" of the Natural Law philosophy espoused by Locke and enumerated in the Preamble of the Declaration, and found that both, essentially, declared that no person should be subordinated to another because of birth or class standing. In addition, people choose to leave the state of nature on their own free will and consent to be governed by a government of their choosing. Locke's specific concern is, "Men being, as has been said, by nature, all free, equal and independent, no one can be put out of his estate, and subjugated to the political power of another, without his own consent." Algernon Sidney (1623-1683), a contemporary of Locke's and a political theorist who Jefferson reads, writes in his book, Discourses Concerning Government, "That man is actually free; that he cannot justly be deprived of that liberty without cause, and that he doth not resign it, or any part of it, unless it be in consideration of a greater good." The Declaration's wording is, "that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." These "self evident truths," that government is by consent of the governed, is the beginning of a political reasoning that all British subjects on both sides of the Atlantic came to understand was their right after the "Glorious Revolution" of 1688 in Britain, which was the inspiration for Locke's political philosophy.
The other reason for Jefferson to turn to Locke's writings, is his well-known ideas among the colonists regarding the rights and duties of citizens to overthrow an existing government when it ceases to provide for the proper welfare of its citizens. Locke, near the end of his treatise writes:
But if a long train of abuses, prevarications, and artifices, all
tending the same way, make the design visible to the people,
and they cannot but feel what they lie under and see whither
they are going, it is not to be wondered that they should then
rouse themselves and endeavor to put the rule into such hands
which may secure to them the ends for which government was
at first erected.


Jefferson, in the second paragraph of the Preamble to the Declaration takes Locke's words and constructs them thusly:
But when a long train of abuses & usurpations, begun at a
distinguished period, & pursuing invariably the same object,
evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it
is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government &
to provide new guards for their future security.

To prove to the world that rebellion was finally justifiable within the framework of Natural Law, Jefferson included a list of twenty-seven "abuses and usurpations" by the king in the Declaration.
The list of abuses by King George III, are an integral part of the Declaration, which proves that the king has, "in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over the States." Becker wrote that the list not only delineates the continued abuses by the king against the colonists, but it also "comprises a list of American political commitments." The next few sentences are a few examples of the twenty-seven charges leveled against the king, and the political commitments that the delegates enacted during their tenure in the Continental Congress. The king was accused of impeding and disrupting the legislative process, and in some cases, dissolving them in the first six charges. These charges are especially important to the colonists, considering their penchant for legislative authority above any other branch of government. The eighth and ninth accusations charge the king with not protecting the judiciary from the interference by the executive branch of government. This idea of a separate judicial branch of government was an idea that was picked up from the French philosopher, Charles de Montesquieu (1689-1755), and would be incorporated in the U. S. Constitution. The king was accused of forcing the colonists to quarter British soldiers in their homes and with disbanding the local militias. Both of these acts were so egregious to the colonists, that they would not soon be forgotten, and a prohibition on quartering soldiers and supporting the militias would become a part of the U. S. Constitution. One can easily see that reading through the list of grievances reveals that it also reads like a bill of rights, which the Continental Congress is declaring to the patriots as values that it will protect. The Declaration also takes umbrage with the king for disregarding the years of legal pleas made to him by the colonists to prevent this long train of abuses from causing such drastic actions as breaking away from the mother country. Becker astutely notes that nowhere in the Declaration is the word Parliament mentioned. All of the grievances listed are blamed on the king, even though they refer to laws enacted by Parliament. This important omission proves that the colonists were never given representation in Parliament. They created their own legislatures in the colonies, since they believed it was the natural right of any group of British subjects under British law to do so. Therefore, on July 4, 1776, after adopting the Declaration unanimously, congress resolves that the title read "The unanimous declaration of the thirteen United States of America," and that every member of Congress sign it. Thus, this summary or compact of the eighteenth century American political mind and Enlightenment ideals burst into the world screaming for attention.

As a graduate student in philosophy and history, I heartily recommend this timeless classic to anyone who is interested in political philosophy, and history.

I have read this book, off and on, several times. It never ceases to amaze me. I tend to be a controversialist and rely upon this book often to help those who seem convinced that the Founding Fathers were of a particular religious persuasion. While foundationally on a personal level this may be true, in general they bowed down to a higher power: Reason. Yet this was not new to them nor were their political theories. Their roots came from somewhere else and that somewhere else was from the European soil they had left.

Becker does an awesome job dissecting the Declaration and its influences primarily from Jefferson through Locke. The natural rights philosophy chapter is awesome. This book is over seventy five years old and its arguments have been revisited and even countered but the book is still foundationally necessary for anyone who seeks to study the Declaration of Independence. In terms of studying the Declaration, there is before Becker's book and there is after.

There are many revealing insights and oddities that appear when Becker displays the lines that have been cut from the original draft (e.g. notice there is no mention of slavery in the final version; the reasons for its excision are included in the book). These little tidbits opened my eyes a bit to the relatively benign history of this document that I had been taught. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing so have a little fun and check this book out.

In high school, kids spend time reviewing the Declaration of Independence and learning its meaning. This book goes well beyond that to inspect the thoughts and ideas that were prevalent in the late 18th century and how they influenced the document. Becker goes into great detail about natural rights theory according to John Locke and explores the ins and outs of its implications. This to me was the strongest and most enjoyable part of the book. He also explores the thoughts and ideas that were circulating Britain at the time.

Building on this foundation, he weaves a tale as to why certain things were worded as they were (like Britain being run as a ruthless tyrant), and why certain things were left out altogether (like slavery). He also closely examines the changes that took place in the drafts and attributes them to individuals who proofread Jefferson's draft. I really could have done without his granularity in this area.

In all, this was a fascinating read. For those of you who want to extend your knowledge beyond the simple presentation of the document you received in high school, I highly recommend buying this book!

This easy to read book disects the wording and phrases in all the various drafts of the declaration. It explores the origins of the ideas and phrasing used, and discusses why individual words or complete phrases were changed, added or removed as they were debated first in committee and later by the Continental Congress. This book is commonly cited by other authors. As an example, it serves both as a source for and wonderful companion to Bernard Bailyn's book "The Ideological Origins to the American Revolution"

The strength of this book, as some of the other reviews state, is that it clearly illustrates that the promise of technology will be fulfilled only if governments and other organizations understand how the human side of organizations either supports or undermines the implementation of technologies. This has become very clear particularly this past year as we read press reports that focus on how political divisions between government departments inhibit our ability to effectively pursue critical initiatives (e.g., terrorism is the most striking example, but decisions related to health care is another example). By describing and analyzing several real cases, Fountain identifies problems that hinder the best use of technology as well as solutions that promote best practices in an engaging way. The theoretical rigor, as well as practical application, makes this a useful book for both academics and practitioners. Personally, I hope that all people who are responsible for implementing policies related to the use of technology in government read this important book.

I whole-heartedly agree with the other reviews and add one additional comment. I used this book in my Information Technology course to Masters of Public Administration Students. The response to the book was terrific. It helped me make the point that a significant part of information technology in organizations is the people element, and led to terrific discussions on the role of social capital in organizations, among other things. In short, it is a very useful text for an MPA Information Technology course. Fountain's book is a major contribution to the literature on information technology in the public sector and is raising important points about the challenges ahead for e-government.

This book is the first work analyzing Digital Government, with special emphasis on the the risks and caveats of egov projects and dynamics between structure and technology. Fountain's "Technology Enactment" framework is specially useful for analyzing egov projects, and understanding their complexity generated by strength of institutional barriers and required operational change.

A number of books on the information technology and public management have been published. The better ones provided a solid rendition of conventional stories of either agency empowerment or implementation hurdles. Jane Fountain's exquisit "Virtual State" is excitingly different. Using clear language and razor-sharp analysis, she provides a comprehensive framework to understand the interaction of information technology and public management. Eminently readable, well researched case studies complement crisp analysis. Fountain has done nothing more than providing the new yardstick all future works of this genre have to measure against - and nothing less! A must read!

Jane Fountain wants to understand the implications of information technology - particularly the Internet - for institutional change in government. The research reported in this book deals with three experiments in applying information technology in the U.S. government in the 1990s: the establishment of an International Trade Data Base (ITDB) for administering the North American Free Trade Agreement, the development of a one-stop shopping informational web site for small businesses called the U.S. Business Advisor, and efforts to modernize the use of information technology within the Ninth Infantry Division of the U.S. Army. On the basis of these three cases, Fountain concludes that the introduction of information technology "disrupts complex ecologies of institutionalized power relationships" (p. 205) inside governments and institutional actors, as a result, attempt to reconstruct those disrupted relationships in unanticipated and sometimes regrettable ways. Sometimes the disruption is so great that the resistance to the introduction of new technology prevails and "many potential connections remain unforged, and numerous opportunities to gain stunning efficiencies, cost savings, integrated services and joint problem solving in complex policy areas lie fallow." (p. 201)

In Chapter 1, the author distinguishes between "objective" and "enacted" technology. Enacted technology is the result of the introduction of objective technology in a set of social relationships where resistance to introduction is possible. This distinction reflects the author's concern for possible gap between the potential of objective technology and the actuality of enacted technology.

Chapter 2 focuses on the National Policy Review (NPR), an initiative of the first term of the Clinton administration that was led by Vice President Al Gore. The NPR was supposed to come up with recommendations on how to "reengineer" government in a manner analogous to the contemporaneous reengineering of business - that is, via the introduction of information technologies to reduce the costs of sharing information within organizations. It was hoped that this would reduce hierarchy, make possible huge cost savings, and empower citizens. The NPR provoked a lot of discussion and debate within the government about how to accomplish these aims and the three experiments studied by Fountain were all influenced by it. Nevertheless, each of these experiments had its own impetus and logic that went considerably beyond the NPR.

The first experiment, the establishment of ITDB, followed mainly from the signing and ratification of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). NAFTA required important changes in the handling of trade-related traffic across the U.S.-Canadian and U.S.-Mexican borders. The previous growth in international trade had already forced the U.S. Customs Bureau (a sub-agency of the Treasury Department) to automate its processing of trade clearances. The ITDB proposed to go much further by integrating a variety of trade and non-trade functions at the borders to deal with trade in both legal and illegal goods, legal and illegal immigration, while simultaneously upgrading the ability of the government to collect and analyze trade data. Unfortunately, worries about the potential delayed deliveries of goods due to overly ambitious government monitoring of trade on the part of businesses gave them a good reason to support efforts of the Customs Bureau to maintain primary authority over the processing of trade documents. The Customs Bureau felt threatened by ITDB and resisted efforts by other agencies to invade its turf. A series of bureaucratic battles ensued with the results well described by Fountain in Chapter 7.

In Chapter 8, Fountain considers the efforts of an interagency task force to establish a web site to provide a single portal for information about government regulations for small business owners. The U.S. Business Advisor was developed and deployed successfully and it won awards for utility and user-friendliness. However, the incentive structure within the U.S. government was not very good at encouraging the sort of continuous interagency coordination and cooperation needed to maintain the site, so it soon developed broken links that were not repaired and needed upgrades did not occur.

In Chapter 9, Fountain describes the efforts of the Ninth Infantry Division to modernize its information systems by creating a Divisional intranet. The first problem, that of overcoming the resistance of field commanders, to substituting paper-and-pencil-based systems with electronic ones, was dealt with by giving too much power to mid-level officers to design the system. The superior officers had difficulty specifying what particular information they needed because of the complexity of the tasks they performed, so they ended up being swamped with a lot of unnecessary information. The soldiers who previously were trained to submit written forms to the mid-level officers moved to electronic submission without sufficient training and without complete knowledge of how this information would be used at higher levels. They became "de-skilled." The mid-level officers suggested intranet designs that enabled them to do their jobs more efficiently but did not enhance the quality of information that went to their superior officers.

The best feature of this book, therefore, is the honest description of what actually happens -- as opposed to what is supposed to happen - when new information technology is introduced into government agencies. In order to get to this part of the book, however, the reader is made to plow through six chapters on theory, all quite well done, that do not necessarily have to be there given the empirical focus of the research. Students of bureaucracy and technology will certainly benefit from the reading of these chapters. But other readers may be excused for getting impatient when the first empirical material is introduced on page 107. Nevertheless, Jane Fountain's book is a serious and well-written effort to understand the challenges associated with modernizing the U.S. government by introducing new information technologies.

This writer has a unique style that keeps you up late at night wanting to read more. Good points were made and I appreciated the references to back the information provided.

If you have wondered where this administration came from, Marc Umile does a great job of answering that question. He makes it abundantly clear--with compelling arguments and persuasive evidence--that George W. Bush is neither compassionate nor conservative. It brings to mind the witticism about the meaning of "compassionate conservative": they still won't help you, but they feel really bad about it! Except this guy doesn't feel a thing. Not a thing.

As you read this book, think about the principles that have defined traditional Republicanism: a commitment to balanced budgets, Constitutional government, a non-interventionist foreign policy, and keeping the government out of our personal lives. This administration--with its massive federal deficits, its promotion of the Patriot Act, its aggressive wars abroad, and its intrusion into the most intimate aspects of our privacy-- violates all four of those principles.

Mussolini observed that "fascism" could be defined as corporatism, since it represents the merger of big business with big government, a coalition characterized by rampant nationalism and aggressive militarism. The leader is identified with the state, which makes criticism of the leader unpatriotic or even treasonous. Ask yourself where we find ourselves at the beginning of this new millenium. As you will discover here, the situation is more than a little frightening.

My Democrat friend begged me to read one chapter, 'just this one chapter' she said. I was bitten by the information, by Mr. Umile's straight-forward writing style and read the entire book.
His voice is fresh, he's a political independent who tracked down incredible information on Mr. Bush, his family and regime; how can I ignore the facts. Just the facts.
Read this and weep my fellow Republicans.

The remarkable thing about Marc Umile's Bush Unplugged is that it accessible to people from all parts of the political spectrum. Umile's style is conversational, the information easily absorbed. I had fun reading this book even as I shuddered at the implications of the myriad undemocratic, self serving, and downright immoral activities of the folks currently administering The People's affairs. We should ALL read Bush Unplugged - NOW - BEFORE NOVEMBER 2nd!

I'm an avid reader but I tend to focus my attention on the likes of John Grisham and James Patterson. I've never read a political book in my life because I have no interest in,or clue about politics. For this very reason a friend of mine insisted that I read Bush Unplugged and I am so glad I finally took the literary political plunge. I was riveted from the first page,and throughout the book I could not believe what I was reading.I was blown away by what I did not know about the president and his cronies and how these stories are not reported on the evening news.Thanks to MR. Umile's book I feel like my eyes are open and I should spend more time reading about the money and power issues that drive our political figures.I had no clue and always put my trust in our leaders.What a fool I've been. Umile calls himself a "research junkie."I call him a brilliant public servant who opened my eyes.


Lisa Nelson
Montgomery County Pa

This book contains four basic elements that despite the name of the book do not all deal directly with the Chinese Communist Party in power. The first element of the book deals with the political history of P'eng Shu'tse and his wife. The second deals with the theoretical differences between Stalin and Trotsky, P'eng Shu'tse and Mao Tse-tung. A third element deals with the Chinese Communist Party's rise to power. The third element then finally deals with P'eng Shu'tse's analysis of the Chinese Communist Party in power. All of these elements are important to the message of the book so I will try to cover them all briefly here.

Background, The Political History of P'eng Shu'tse

In 1911 the feudal Qing dynasty fell. It had been destroyed by years of humiliating imperialist subjugation as well as having been destroyed by its own feudal backwardness and a yearning of the people for a better society. Included in this subjugation were unfair trade policies and the British militarily enforced selling of opium to the population.

The new capitalist government, however, failed to stand up to imperialism in any meaningful way and left the feudal relations of the countryside intact. As a result, the new government also collapsed and authority disintegrated into the hands of regional warlords under the sway of competing imperialist interests.

It was during this time of chaos, in 1920, that P'eng Shu'tse joined the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). He joined the party at a time when the total failure of capitalism in China was self-evident as was the need to end imperialist subjugation. Communism held a strong appeal in its advocacy for anti-imperialist revolution as well as for worker's power, the smashing of feudal land relations, and for the end of the subjugation of women and youth to the old patriarchal system.

In 1921 P'eng Shu'tse moved to Moscow where he attended the Communist University of the Toilers of the East until 1924. There he was elected and served as secretary of the Moscow branch of the CCP for the time he was there.

At the time of P'eng Shu'tse's attendance at the university the revolutionary government of the Soviet Union was young and had only been born four years earlier of the October 1917 revolution. The revolutionary leadership in power was the Communist Party under the leadership of Lenin and Trotsky. Joseph Stalin was part of that communist party as well, and he held some power, but he had not yet risen to the position of absolute power that he would later enjoy.

Upon P'eng Shu'tse's return to China in 1924 he published two articles in the CCP's theoretical magazine, New Youth, and the CCP's official organ, New Guide, both of which he became editor of. One was a defense of the Boxer movement of 1900 as an anti-imperialist and not an anti-foreigner movement. Another was on the nature of the coming revolution in China, where he argued that the wealthy classes of China were timid and weak and utterly incapable of leading the bourgeois anti-imperialist revolution. He pointed out that the only hope for revolution would be one led by the working class that was socialist in nature.

A year earlier Mao Tse-tung had published an article in New Guide advocating the opposite position of P'eng Shu'tse on the nature of the coming revolution. In it Mao advocated a bourgeois capitalist government and called on the unity of the merchants to help bring it about.




The Theory Of Permanent Revolution, The Koumintang, And The Interference Of Moscow

The debate between Mao Tse-tung and P'eng Shu'tse was not a new one for the socialist movement. The same debate had taken place in Russia before the 1917 revolutions. The ideas of P'eng Shu'tse dealing with the conditions of China coincided heavily with Leon Trotsky's analysis of Russian conditions written in what later became called the Theory of Permanent Revolution.

Trotsky wrote the Theory of Permanent Revolution in a Czarist jail after his experiences in the failed 1905 revolution. He saw through his experiences in the revolution that not only was the working class the only class interested and capable of carrying out the revolution; he also saw that the Russian revolution would have to be socialist to succeed.

The reasons given by Trotsky were several, but the most important being that the capitalist class would sabotage production if the workers took power. He correctly saw that the only way to have a working economy was to nationalize industry and to implement a socialist economy.

Lenin later adopted these fundamental tenants of the theory of Permanent Revolution in his famous April thesis of 1917. As a result Lenin and Trotsky's parties merged at that time to lead the socialist revolution against the Mensheviks and Social Revolutionaries who since taking power in February were restarting the war with Germany on behalf of the bourgeoisie and refusing land reform and a socialist revolution.

Trotsky also explained that not only was there no need for Russia to go through a bourgeois capitalist revolution, but that the bourgeoisie was utterly incapable of leading such a revolution in Russia. He explained that the working class had developed to a point that the bourgeoisie feared revolution more than anything else because they saw that a revolution, no matter how small in its original leadership's goals, would potentially unleash the power of the working class to carry out a full socialist revolution. Thus the bourgeoisie sided with the old feudal system instead of trying to bring about their own power.

Trotsky explained this phenomenon as compared to the developments in the west, such as the the bourgeois revolution in the United States, through his theory for Russia of Combined and Uneven Development. Simply put, the technological advances of the capitalist west had become part of Russian society and had created a working class capable of overstepping the bounds of the bourgeois revolution against Czarism, making the bourgeoisie uninterested in any kind of revolution.

In Russia the Menshevik's ridiculous attempts at establishing a bourgeois government confirmed this with the bourgeois representatives they appointed trying to impose military dictatorship and hand power back to the old feudal system. Later Stalin repeated this same sort of mistake carried out by the Mensheviks in his support for the corrupt and murderous bourgeois Kuomintang in China. In fact, in Russia, Stalin had been negotiating the unity of the Menshevik and Bolshevik Parties before Lenin's arrival from exile in April.

As Stalin took the reigns of power in the Soviet Union he also exerted his influence within the Chinese Communist Party to remove P'eng Shu'tse and other like minded leaders that opposed Moscow's position of dissolving much of the CCP's work into the corrupt and brutal Kuomintang. Despite the Koumintang carrying out numerous massacres of the CCP and their worker peasant supporters, the CCP maintained this position of subjegation to the leadership of the Kuomintang from for much of the time from the late 1920's up until not long before the 1949 revolution when Chaing Kai-sheck's attacks finally forced Mao onto the road of leading the struggle for power.

Due to P'eng Shu'tse's opposition to any kind of support for the Koumintang and his defense of Trotsky and Permanent Revolution he was first stripped of his leadership position in the CCP and later completely purged with other fellow travelers. They set up their own political organization and publications. These positions in light of Chaing Kai-sheck's massacres, including his butchering of the workers of Shanghai in 1927, and Chaing Kai-sheck's failure to fight the Japanese, attracted recruits to their Trotskyist organization, but also attracted the oppression of the Kuomintang themselves.

Many of P'eng Shu'tse's comrades were jailed or executed by Chaing Kai-sheck. P'eng Shu'tse spent a number of years in prison under Chaing Kai-sheck himself and was only released after a Japanese bomber destroyed the prison he was in.

Yet while Mao and the CCP had the luxery of Soviet aid to bolster their movement by paying their full time party cadre and writers for much of the time from the 1920s to the 1949 revolution, the Trotskyist movement always stayed a lesser party despite their superior program, because they never had foreign aid. Mao was even able to make gains during the Japanese occupation while he was capitulating to the hated leadership of Chaing Kai-sheck, while at the same time the Trotskyist movement that had been mostly jailed before the Japanese invasion was paralyzed by their small size and Japanese oppression during the occupation.

After the defeat of Japan the Chinese Trotskyist group once again grew in size and was about 350 people at the time that Mao was on the verge of seizing power. Knowing they were not large enough to do much in the coming revolution, and knowing what kind of oppression other Stalinist regimes had carried out against Trotskyists in eastern Europe, the party's last meeting before the 1949 revolution made a decision that all prominent Trotskyists should leave the country and that those that the CCP members did not know should join the CCP.

P'eng Shu'tse and Ch'en Pi-lan moved to Hong Kong where the Trotskyist movement was also being hunted and persecuted by the British. The oppression they faced there forced them to then immigrate to Vietnam. In Vietnam comrades of theirs were under attack from the Vietnamese communists so P'eng Shu'tse and Ch'en Pi-lan were then forced to immigrate to Europe where they continued to be active around the issues of China in the Trotskyist Fourth International.

Some members who stayed behind in China were rounded up in the night by the PRC government with their entire families. Many were never seen again. Others were released from prison in 1976.

The Chinese Communist Party in Power

From exile P'eng Shu'tse continued to speak and organize on the issue of China. He held the position that an undemocratic Stalinist government had taken power in China with the 1949 revolution, and while he saw many improvements for the Chinese people come from that regime, he was highly critical of the leadership of Mao Tse-tung.

In the early years, among other things, P'eng Shu'tse criticized Mao for not holding real elections, for suppressing the freedom unleashed by his earlier slogan of "Let a Hundred Flowers Bloom", for the horrible and predictable failure of the "Great Leap Forward" and its attempts modernize China by producing useless steel in backyard furnaces, for the forced collectivizations that he saw as copying the methods of Stalin's same project with both causing unecessary hardship amongst the peasants as well as having a horrible impact on food production.

In his analysis of these events P'eng Shu'tse saw an opposition open up within the CCP to Mao's ultra-left adventurist failures that forced Mao's resignation in 1958. The leadership Liu Shaoqi, Deng Xiaoping, Chen Yun, Peng Zhen, Bo Yibo were then forced to deal with correcting Mao's mistakes. They ended the production of backyard steel, restored private plots of land in the countryside, personal ownership of livestock, and the free market in the countryside. Even where collective farming can be more efficient, it will never be unless it done on terms that the peasants enjoy. The peasants greeted these reforms with enthusiasm and production increased. By 1963 food production had risen to levels that ended the famine caused by Mao's policies.

In the international arena P'eng Shu'tse also felt that Mao was also discredited in 1965 with a U.S. backed coup d'etat in Indonesia that left half a million Communists dead. The Communists were close allies of Mao and P'eng Shu'tse saw this as a repeat on a larger scale of Mao's policy of subordinating the national, worker, and peasants struggle to the bourgeoisie just as Mao had done with the Koumintang. Some party members also blamed this defeat on the CCP's influence, with P'eng Chen stating, "Everyone is equal before the truth, and if Chairman Mao has made some mistakes he should be criticized."

After this further setback for the prestige of Mao, Mao proceeded to organize the so-called "Cultural Revolution" to regain power. Mao used sections of the military as well as highschool aged youth organized as "Red Guards" to launch a civil war against intellectuals that had criticized Mao as well as large sections of the leadership of the CCP that were fed-up with the leadership of Mao. This was a coup d'etat carried out by Mao against the collective leadership of the CCP that was supposed to be the proper channel of discussion. Mao did not feel he could get his way through the CCP.

In response to Mao's coup, many local leaders organized their own youth groups to fight back against the Red Guards, as well as turning to military units loyal to them, and even mobilizing workers on their behalf. Ultimately, however, Mao was successful in his power grab through violence that ushered in the reign of terror of the gang of four. In 1976 Mao died and the Gang of Four went on trial. Like his mentor Stalin, Mao had managed to silence his opposition and get rid of all of the leaders that had fought beside him to make the 1949 Revolution.

The 1949 revolution, among other things, made major advances in women's rights, healthcare, and education for the people of China. Yet the legacy of the gains made by the Chinese people through the 1949 revolution must always be tempered by a knowledge of the crimes of Mao.

I think that P'eng Shu'tse would have given up a long time ago if he didn't have a strong love for the truth and for the people combined with an overwhelming optimism. As a revolutionary socialist he did not feel that the Stalinist system was an inevitable product of socialist revolution, but that the money and popular influence of Stalinism at a certain point in history caused China and Eastern Europe to repeat the mistakes of the Soviet Union. There is no reason for future revolutions to repeat those same mistakes.

Today P'eng Shu'tse would also oppose the headlong jump of China into capitalism under the continued brutal rule of the CCP and instead advocate the road to democratic socialism in China and around the world.

Liberation News
http://lists.riseup.net/www/info/liberation_news

This remarkable collection of essays and reports comes from the pen of Chen Shu-tse, the central leader of the revolutionary Marxists in China from the 1920s through the 1960s. As a young rebel Chen worked together with Mao Tse-tung to develop a revolutionary party of the working people beginning in 1919. This comradely relationship lasted until the Stalinist degeneration that overtook the Russian soviet leadership in the 1925-29 period overwhelmed the Chinese Communist Party. Chen and his followers were expelled from the party in 1929 and subsequently became known as Trotskyists. As such they continued the battle to build a revolutionary workers party in China.

In the 1925-27 revolutionary upheaval, the Communist Party achieved a decisive leadership position among the masses of urban workers in China. But the party, under Mao's leadership, and working along the lines of Comintern policy, attempted to build an alliance with Chiang Kai-shek's Kuomintang. The Kuomintang was a nationalist party increasingly coming under the control of China's tyrannical landlords. This mistaken policy resulted in a massacre of the Communist-led workers in Shanghai carried out by Chiang's troops. Chen and his followers opposed this disastrous course.

A large portion of this 580-page book deals with the explanation of how the Stalinized Chinese Communist Party came to power in 1949. In the post-WWII chaos the peasant masses surged forward repeatedly demanding control of the land and its resources and an end to landlord parasitism. The weakened Kuomintang was like a rotting wooden raft in this stormy revolutionary sea which served as the only hope of salvation for the wealthy and privileged elements in China, and they found themselves desparately clinging to it.

The Communist Party, having retreated to Yenan in 1934 after a series of defeats, found itself bolstered by the massive influx of worker and peasant fighters who saw this party as the starting point of opposition to the decaying Kuomintang regime. In the years leading to the insurrection of 1949, Chen explains, the CCP (a non-revolutionary, Stalinist party) repeatedly sought to dampen the rising struggles of the oppressed masses, to limit their gains, and to come to terms with Chiang in the formation of a coalition government. The Kuomintang was too weak, however, and the outcome of the struggle was determined by its own inner logic, not the aims of the CCP.

Forced to flee to Hong Kong in 1948 Chen continued to guide the Chinese Trotskyist movement as well as to participate in discussion and debates among revolutionary Marxist leaders worldwide. He supported the 1949 victory of the Chinese revolution, which was a giant gain for the masses of workers and peasants in spite of the Stalinist leadership. A workers state was formed. But he stressed that the accession to power of Mao's party did not change its essentially counterrevolutionary character. In order for the masses of Chinese people to achieve their liberation from all forms of exploitation they would need to effect a political revolution to bring to power a genuine Marxist party. This party would then serve as the vehicle for bringing the weight of the Chinese masses to bear in the worldwide struggle for socialism.

The Chinese revolution that triumphed in 1949 was a mighty event, which shook the world. The Chinese workers and farmers, in spite of their misleadership, tore one-fourth of the world's population out of the hands of U.S. British, German, French, and Japanese capitalists (all had investments and huge holdings in China at one time or another), out of the hands of what Malcolm X called the "Western or American system of imperialism." Read this book and "The Third Chinese Revolution And Its Development" and " Maoism Vs. Bolshevism", and learn what Malcolm found so admirable about the Chinese Revolution. Also here you will find the history of betrayals by the wish-they-were-capitalists-themselves Maoist-Stalinist bureaucrats who still rule today.All this in the testimony of two veteran communist fighters, Peng Shu-tse and Chen Pi-lan, who opposed imperialism and its puppets in action, as well as the monstrosities of Maoism. The resistance of the Chinese working class to the pro-capitalist "reforms" and to the attempted selling of the nation, its wealth, and its people by the bureaucracy to the same imperialists kicked out in 1949 has barely begun (3,000 illegal strikes in one year alone in the midnineties). That resistance will shake the whole world again.For the story of China today you need "Capitalism's World Disorder" by Jack Barnes.

I had the honor of knowing and working with ST Peng a little in the 1960s and 1970s. This was a man who had worked with Lenin and Trotsky in the Comintern who had stood up the Chiang Kai Shek, and to Maoism. This was a serious revolutionary Marxist who became a focus for former Red Guards escaping Mao who went all the way to Paris to learn from him. These articles and documents explain the nature of the Chinese revolution, its strength and its betrayal by Stalinism, as well as the capacities of Chinese workers and peasants to change the world. In his writing, Peng had the gift to be both theoretically clear as a revolutionist, and to be concrete as a writer showing how what he was talking about affected the real lives of the Chinese people. Of great interest is his depiction of how the "higher officials" actually lived their lives of privilege and luxury in the supposed days of "Maoist austerity.: As new battles are simmering in China-- strikes, demonstrations, protests--the new generation of fighters must find this wonderful book by one of China's first generation of real communists.

I was fascinated reading this unique and important collection of writings -- a detailed analysis of the Chinese revolution and the Maoist leadership. The articles cover the 1949-53 revolution and the overthrow of capitalism in China as well as major turns in Maoist domestic and foreign policy and political struggles within the ruling bureaucracy. Very useful discussion of the People's Communes and forced collectivization in the 1950s, the so-called Great Cultural Revolution of the 1960s, and the Tien An Men protests in 1976.

P'eng Shu-tse's was an early member and central leader of the Chinese Communist Party-- one of the many young rebels won to revolutionary struggle inspired and educated by the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia and the leadership led Lenin and Trotsky. Although imprisoned by the U.S.-backed Chiang Kai-shek dictatorship and later forced into exile by the Maoist regime, P'eng remained true to the course of working class struggle, leading small revolutionary forces in China, Vietnam and later in exile in Europe. H writes to explain and to encourage others to join the struggle.

I also found very useful the lively article and interview by Ch'en Pi-lan, P'eng's companion and fellow revolutionary, on the course of the workers movement in China and on the "Cultural Revolution."

I began with a prejudice. Winston Churchill is one of my greatest heroes.
Another prejudice. Martin Gilbert is also one of my favorite authors. Gilbert writing on Churchill could be nothing but wonderful.
The book was up to my expectations, and then some. I have read volumes and volumes on the life and activities of Winston Churchill, but found many new facts in insights. I was totally pleased and highly reccomend this book to any one . Admirer or critic.
Herschel Sennett

Winston Churchill, for as long as he can remember, has been connected with Jews. Coming from a family with close Jewish ties, though not through blood, he has always had friends from this ethnicity. His father, Lord Randolph Churchill was often rebuked by the English aristocrats about his many Jewish friends. Learning about the biblical characters in his school, he was often fascinated with their stories and with their lives.

Martin Gilbert, Churchill's official biographer, draws on letters, speeches, newspaper articles and other resources to provide a clear depiction of his friendship with one of the most persecuted races in the world: the Jews.

Reading this book was very eye opening. I have always heard about Churchill through his famous quotes often featured at graduations and other ceremonies-and through those I had developed a certain respect for him. However, after reading this book, I consider him one of the greatest men who ever lived. Sure he had faults; he would be the first to admit that. But what set him apart was the fact that he was willing to stand up for what he believed in, even when popular opinion was against it. He was an ardent supporter for a Jewish state and played a key role in bringing that to pass. Many considered his love for Jews one of his major faults; however, he was not swayed by what others thought him.

Martin Gilbert's portrayal of Churchill and his relationship with Jews is very enlightening. It explores this often-neglected topic, captivating the readers from the very beginning as it traces his first Jewish friendships to his Jewish friends he had during the time he was Prime Minister. I really enjoyed this book that also includes photographs that chronicle his relationship with them.

Armchair Interviews says: Highly recommended to any history buff!

This is an exciting account of Churchill's relationship to the Jewish people from the earliest phase of his political career. He developed a strong bond with the developing state of Israel, and it seems unlikely, without his brilliant supportive speeches in parliament for several decades that we would have a state of Israel today. Gilbert does a superb job of bringing us up to date on Churchill's contributions, from the time of the Balfour declaration to Israel Statehood in 1948.

The 20th Century produced many astounding men, many of them evil. One of the few great democrats of the age was Winston S. Churchill. Martin Gilbert, the official biographer of Churchill, has produced one enthralling volume after another.

Churchill's involvement with public life and, more importantly, his impact upon it never ceases to amaze. To read of everything Churchill was involved with - some of the most momentous events of the century that still reverberate today - staggers the imagination.

In this volume, Gilbert examines Churchill's relationship with Jews in general and his involvement with the Balfour Declaration, Zionism and the creation of the State of Israel.

Churchill's first 'political involvement in Jewish concerns" occurred in 1904 when he stood for election for Manchester North-West, where a third of the population was Jewish.

From that point on, Churchill's career often came into contact with Jewish concerns or, conversely, concerns about the Jews. He long supported the aspirations for a Jewish homeland. He protested mistreatment of the Jews by the Russians, Germans and others. He was deeply offended by the radical Jewish terrorists who sought to hasten the creation of Israel. He believed there was a need to turn Jews toward Zionism and away from Bolshevism.

Churchill, indeed, considered himself to be a Zionist.

Churchill's humanism, tolerance, foresight, classic liberalism and just plain decency are all on display in this wonderful volume. By concentrating on this one small aspect of Churchill's many interests, the magnificence of the man is brought into sharp relief. Others, such as Franklin D. Roosevelt and Ernest Bevan suffer in comparison to Churchill in this particular area.

All in all, this is a wonderful book, typical of Gilbert's skill as a researcher, historian and writer. It is also necessary reading for anyone who wishes to be more fully informed about the seemingly intractable problems we face in the area today.

Jerry

This smart, well researched and readable book makes an often controversial subject easy to understand and easier still to be sympathetic towards. Famed author and historian, Sir Martin Gilbert offers us through direct sources, a simple yet profound road map in which we see Mr. Churchill navigate his way through his many relationships with Jews, and those opponents in his own political party, as well as the minefield which is Middle East politics. I for one, though a student of the Middle East never knew just how close Mr. Churchill was to the Jewish people, Zionism, and his continued support through out the decades for a Jewish state in the region.

"Some people like Jews and some do not, but no thoughtful `person' can doubt the fact that they are beyond all question the most formidable and most remarkable race which has ever appeared in the world" Winston Churchill

I strongly recommend this book for your reading pleasure, education, and enlightenment. It is an outstanding historical document.