Events Books

This is an excellent book, a long awaited and much needed factual account of a group of courageous men whose activism had major impact on the movement. Hill has produced a wealth of documentation to prove the history he has brought to the fore.
This account does tribute to those brave and unsung (heretofore)
heroes who refused to further degrade themselves and thier communities by turning the other cheek! Must reading.

This book kept me up reading all night. I had in the past heard that their had been a group that pre dated The Black Panther Party, and were operating in the deep south. However there was not much information on this clandestine group. Well there is now. This is the book. My chest burst with pride as the tears fell down my cheeks. If you read nothing else this year please read this book if you want to know what our people were really doing during the "movement". The media had been lying to us about our role in our own history! This book is about us!

excellent coverage of a little-known but very important part of the civil rights movement. if you're tired of the conventional view of the crm with everyone on their knees praying, this book is for you.

An important corrective to the nonviolence theme that domninates most histories of the Civil Rights Movement. The Deacons were mostly home grown Black Veterans from working class neighborhoods in small southern towns like Bogalusa and Jonesboro Louisianna. When the Klan and Police beat on civil rights workers and local protestors the Deacons fought back. In July 1965 when a mob of whites attacked a group of civil rights, mostly children, marchers in Bogalusa a Deacon shot a Klan member sending him to hospital. This incident had a profound impact on the response to Black demands for equal rights in Lousianna. Finally, the White Establishment began to make changes that led to a better life for Louisianna's Blacks. Professor Hill's(History, Tulane Univesity) book is full of such incidents and proves that the Deaon's impact on the souhtern Civil Rights struggle must not be overlooked.

you have to speak the language of the wolf." - Henry Austin, Deacons for Defense

This is truly a lost history of the civil rights movement that author Lance Hill has found under the layers upon layers of mainstream narratives which conveniently dictate false truths that - when repeated enough - become larger than life.

Following the organized self-defense philosophy espoused by Robert F. Williams in Monroe, N.C., a small group of men in Jonesboro, Louisiana, founded an organization that had great influence in the civil rights movement of the mid-1960s. The success the Deacons had in defeating the KKK and other haters on the streets by standing up, moving forward and staring them down with guns loaded brought a new sense of empowerment in demanding that justice truly be served today.

Hill explains how he became aware of the Deacons and then began his quest to research the history. Initially founded to protect civil rights workers, the Deacons' influence in the Deep South grew with a regional organizing campaign in Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama, along with chapters being founded in several Northern cities.

The success and expansion of the program brought interest from the FBI, coverage by an oftentimes adverse media and linkage - oftenetimes quite temporary - with a number of revolutionary organizations.

But through the comparatively brief time the Deacons operated - about four years - Hill successfully argues that the organization forced the federal government to aggressively enforce the 1964 Civil Rights Act and was the bridge to the Black Power movement that emerged later in the decade.

The Deacons' legacy continues, as former members have strongly stated over the years that the group has never actually gone away. And, as Hill writes, "Finally, there is something inspiring in a story of people who stood up to injustice when everyone around them was afraid. That is a fable that will always serve us well."

The Deacons for Defense lives in the souls of those who do their part on a daily basis to bring real justice to this country.

Lynn Suzanne has a hit on her hands! Now let's see who is brave enough to promote this book and who will ignore it out of fear or ignorance. It has been years and years since I read a book that did not feel formulated or boxed. I am very pleased that the author of Dear God/Jesus took the risk she did in the way she has delivered this amazing book.

Usually I don't find myself buying spiritual or self-help books because I don't feel the author goes deep enough or strong enough. I also get exasperated with books that seem to come from a high-n-mighty viewpoint and assumes to know it all. (I like how Lynn Suzanne terms this 'stupid-consumer-false-spirituality.') I like how she intertwines words and viewpoints. Each page was an adventure and I never knew where she would take me next. But, after I got 'there' I was delighted to have relaxed and trusted her to take me on a path that wasn't set in stone.

I was not disappointed in this book, I was left wanting more, more, more of her verbage and intuition. She is truly a teacher at heart. I look forward to reading all future books by Lynn Suzanne and I am hopeful that I will hear her speak live one day. It was wonderful to read an opinion that truly took real courage to share.

This book is written in a way that is both artistic and real at the same time. My guess is that this book will not be promoted in the mainstream because it doesn't follow the rules. And that is precisely why I believe this book is imperative for us all to read (whether you agree with the ideology or not). Lynn Suzanne speaks in a manner that would serve us all to communicate. The main point of this book is one mother's desire to protect her children and to walk her daily walk fully alive. This book transcends gender and demographic by the tenacity and honest conversations with her Higher Power.(I admire her willingness to swiftly kick me in the butt!)

There isn't a topic that this book doesn't address and I found myself thinking of different entries throughout my day at work. I also found myself more keenly aware of those around me and my potential impact to others. It has been a long-time since I learned this much about my own journey by reading someone elses.

Dear God/Jesus is exceptionally written and is at times heartbreaking, quiet, sad, beautiful, creative, and very funny.

Since reading this book I have visited the author's website frequently to read more of her thoughts and opinions. www.lynnsuzanne.com

Lynn Suzanne asks us to wake up and shed our silence and apathy and I couldn't agree more. If more individuals like this author had a platform I believe that revival she is seeking WILL take place before it is too late.

Reviewed by Helen Fischer


I have to say right up front that I am hoping this book lands Lynn Suzanne an interview with someone like a Rosie O'Donnell or an Oprah - I haven't heard someone take on the women's movement or social issues in such a wickedly terrific way in years. I would dearly love to see this author in a live debate with some of our self-appointed gods (we all know who they are). And Lynn Suzanne takes on the Church Leaders, the Political Parties and their Leaders (particularly the Secular Progress/far Left),and Mainstream Media. And she takes everyone on AFTER she thoroughly shows willingness to skewer herself. I find this author's writing breathtakingly refreshing!

I could feel this writer's soul in this manuscript. I heard her absolute mandate to herself that she will continue to 'march forward' in her search for those who share her belief system. Lynn Suzanne is grieving the fracturing of our children and has come to the conclusion that being quiet about what she is witnessing is not the solution. In addition to her vast life experience, her personal recovery from addiction, eating disorder, and violence coupled with her professional clinical experience makes her voice that much more compelling.

What Lynn Suzanne is saying to us all is to get off the fence and look around at the chaos taking place around the globe. What moved me the most was her unapologetic pride in being an American citizen and her absolute determination to not remain silent while her country faces critical obstacles.

There was so much offered in this book -- Lynn Suzanne has offered up a whole boatload of treasure and we only benefit from her conversations with God.

I found myself chuckling, gasping, sighing, and reminiscing while reading this tremendous manuscript. I placed no expectations on this book and thought I might read excerpts -- three days later I emerged from my home having read the entire book front to back. And I plan on reading it again and again until I have gleamed every last morsel of unparalleled experience and hard-earned wisdom of a woman of substance.

Have you ever "accidentally" overheard an interesting, intriguing, and powerful conversation? This book is just like overhearing such a conversation. You will smile, laugh, and experience some provocative, powerful thoughts as you listen to the conversation between Lynn Suzanne and God/Jesus.

Both "witty and light" and "thoughtful and intense". This book was a surprise in that it presents multiple layers of meaning as clear as having a conversation with the writer herself. I found that I could read the entries easily, and glean simple, yet powerful, insights to my own life and walk on this earth. I was also able to read the entries (many times the very same entries) and work through some intense thoughts, attitudes and experiences. The uniqueness of the book covers many topics that either we don't speak with each other about today, or topics that are simply "not spoken about". Yet for my own life and those of my children, I must, and for our culture, WE must, consider the topics covered in the book and yes even have conversations around these same topics.

Read this unique, courageously and excellently written work. You will find that you look within yourself, and look at others differently. You will evaluate your own thoughts and attitudes making changes or, hopefully, being more confident in the ways that you are walking today. You will be able to read it multiple times and experience different thoughts on different levels each time. It is such a fun read, I highly recommend this book as it created many self-help thoughts and attitudes without telling me how to do it.

I am telling all my friends about this book, the blessings that I have received through reading it, and the laughter, thoughtfulness and open attitude that she uses as she approaches the topics and yes God Himself!

In this great country of ours we are all holders of the right to freedom of expression and freedom of religion; for this I am grateful. When asked to review Lynn Suzanne's book, "Dear God/Jesus," I was looking forward to seeing a result of those freedoms, and I wasn't disappointed. Here is one woman who is standing up for her rights and what she believes in.



The book reads like a journal, a blog, and letters written to her higher power all wrapped up together. Add a sprinkling of political commentary, a touch of editorial essay and some heartfelt real life stories and you've got an offering that might seem to stir up trouble but will also get you thinking. The reader will see what they will; some may come away enraged and others may feel uplifted.



Lynn's life has not been an easy one and as a result she is a strong person who wishes to reach out to others. "Dear God/Jesus" is a culmination of many different aspects of her story, giving us a broad picture. Lynn speaks to God of her recovering addictions, the needs of others in similar situations, her work, her hopes, her fears, and a great deal of her deep concern over what she sees as a war between Neocons and the Secular Progressive. (My personal opinions on this matter are not what is up for review but suffice it to say that I disagree with the author's stance on a few things.) This particular issue seems to be most important to Lynn, along with apathy, to which she wishes to say, "Witness or Deny; Just Please Do Not Ignore."



I've always enjoyed the diary form in books. Often it leads to a light read, though not quite so with this one. The feel of being able to open the book to any page and come away with a glimpse of the author is key. The overall tone of Lynn's book is one that many will be able to relate to. Her personable writing is sure to sound familiar and comforting to those who have felt the same way. Her openness is refreshing, even though we might not agree with her on some topics. An interesting read to me may be a rave for some, a thumbs down for others, but for the writing itself, the process is complete and the result a testament to our freedoms.

I am a sixty-seven year old grandmother who found Dear God/Jesus a refreshing book to read. Despite being a practicing Catholic all of my life, I did not read this book from a rigid religious perspective; rather, I read it as a means of going even further in my prayers to God.

I have become disenchanted by the course the Church has taken in the past several decades particularly in the realm of politics and social issues. I found that this book, Dear God/Jesus, expressed many of my own observations and perceptions of what is taking place in the world. I was surprised to read a book by someone else who shares the very same concerns for the condition of our country.

My faith in God has only grown deeper as I have grown older and yet I have found that I don't want to have to pray with a predetermined form. I still recite many prayers but I like how Lynn Suzanne talks to God. I also speak to Him as if He is sitting right next to me. I want to share with God my thanks and gratitude as much as I need to express worry and angst with Him at times. I do not want to recite words written by somebody else; I want to pray from my heart. As the world grows colder and harsher, I find solace in the quiet moments alone with God.

This book, Dear God/Jesus, is an important tool in a time of unease, change, and stress and I encourage people of all ages, religions, politics, and demographics to read Dear God/Jesus with an open mind. I believe you will find great blessings as a result of listening to one woman speak her heart to God.

Dr. Francis J. Beckwith's Defending Life is simply the best, most comprehensive, most logically sound examination of abortion & the meaning of personhood available in print today. Excellent summaries of the book are available elsewhere, so let me focus on some unique features.

First, Dr. Beckwith argues for a definition & moral value to humanity that provides a defense for innocent humans in a wide variety of circumstances, not just those who are tiny & preborn. The general philosophical arguments used here are helpful for evaluating human value among those in undeveloped, famine plagued regions of the world; among populations of hardened, committed career criminals; among those yet to be conceived several generations after our pollution-promoting public policies; & those who are physically and/or mentally disabled, etc.

Second, Dr. Beckwith treats abortion rights advocates with respect & honesty, not merely fairly representing their views & arguments, but even improving their arguments when he can & yet showing that even the best abortion rights arguments fatally undermine basic human rights based on the nature of humanity. A number of years ago, I role-played an abortion rights advocate in a public debate with Dr. Beckwith. He was concerned that his opponent be formidable & insightful, but he couldn't find an available true advocate he thought would do a credible enough job. I gave it my best shot (& Dr. Beckwith kindly said I was his toughest opponent to date), but Dr. Beckwith's arguments remained compelling & invincible. That generous respect & yet actual superiority is reflected in this book.

Third, Dr. Beckwith's sharp wit makes this book a serendipitous pleasure to read as well. Without demeaning his opponents or trivializing the issues, he is able to broach illustrations packed with humor & allude to cultural comedy to make telling points. As Dr. Beckwith's students will attest, he is nothing like the typical boring philosophy professor.

Fourth, this book provides such a wide spectrum of issues, arguments, & approaches that if you only have one book on the subject in your library, you should have this one -- even (or especially) if you are an abortion rights advocate.

Regardless of your familiarity with the subject or other volumes you might possess, you can't afford to miss getting & studying your own copy of Defending Life.

Beckwith's primary purpose is to provide a thorough defense of the pro-life position and its grounding in the "substance view" of human persons--a view he claims best explains human equality. He writes: "This book is, in a sense, then, not really a book about abortion, but rather, a book about human equality." Frank contends that the larger metaphysical question--who are we?--should be answered by enlarging our definition of the human family to include the unborn. His secondary purpose is to examine the relationship between abortion and law, politics, and public discourse.

The pro-life argument Frank defends can be outlined as follows:

1. The unborn entity, from the moment of conception, is a full-fledged member of the human community.
2. It is prima facie morally wrong to kill any member of that community.
3. Every successful abortion kills an unborn entity, a full-fledged member of the human community.
4. Therefore, every successful abortion is prima facie morally wrong.

The book is divided into three parts. Part 1 deals with moral reasoning, the law, and politics. Part 2 is the core of Frank's case for the pro-life view, which includes both the scientific and philosophic considerations. Part 3 takes on cloning and embryonic stem-cell research.

The thrust of the text is philosophical and jurisprudential rather than religious. In each case, the arguments presented pass the test of public reason. That's not because he thinks theology doesn't count as real knowledge (indeed, he argues elsewhere it does). Rather, he's cutting-off secular critics who unjustly dismiss pro-life arguments with the wand of "faith"--which they define as non-rational and subjective.

Frank sums up the current controversy this way: "At the end of the day, the abortion debate is about who and what we are and whether we can know it."

We live in an age of paradox. On the one hand, scientific concepts are confidently and systematically understood, and our control of the physical world continues to expand through our employ of thorough, rigorous scientific method. On the other hand, the poverty of moral discourse is such that, in the words of J. Budziszewski, "it is...like a great smoke which fills our houses and dulls our minds and makes it difficult to complete any thoughts." Trying to discuss moral issues such as abortion in my experience does not lead to reasoned discussion; instead it is waved off as uninteresting or intractable, or the "right to choose" mantra is immediately invoked.

Francis Beckwith, however, notes that the climate has changed a bit in recent years. People are not so sure of moral relativism in the post-9/11 West. As stem cell research and the spectre of cloning bring to light alarming technological possibilities, we are forced to confront issues of what it means to be human. The thrust of Beckwith's argument, then, is to at the same time clarify the abortion debate and also advance the prolife position, by blowing away the smoke of confusion and appealing to our basic moral intuitions.

On January 22, 1973, Roe v. Wade was issued, and with its companion decision, Doe v. Bolton, it effectively legalized abortion on demand for all nine months of pregnancy. However, the reasoning used by Justice Harry Blackmun, who authored Roe, was flawed. To build his case, he had to overcome two legal impediments. The first was regarding the purpose of the anti-abortion laws that many states had enacted beginning in the nineteenth century. The reason, he said, these laws existed was not to protect prenatal life but rather to protect women from dangerous medical procedures. Since abortion was now a relatively safe procedure, there was no longer a need to prohibit it. Going back into common law prior to the nineteenth century Blackmun claimed that abortion was "a fundamental liberty, found in our nation's traditions and history." Therefore, given the right to privacy which the Supreme Court manufactured in the 1965 Griswold v. Connecticut decision (but which Blackmun said was older than the Bill of Rights), abortion was declared a constitutional right. Beckwith points out that "since 1973 the overwhelming consensus of scholarship has shown that the court's history...is almost entirely mistaken." It is clear that the primary purpose of the state laws was in fact to protect the unborn from harm.

The second flaw in the court's reasoning in Roe involves the Fourteenth Amendment which protects U.S. citizens from having their rights violated by the government, and whether the unborn are persons protected by it. Blackmun argued that since the court cannot resolve the difficult question about when life begins, the state ought to remain neutral and not prefer one theory of life over another, and therefore not rule against abortion. But in practice he really is taking a position: by legalizing abortion the state is saying that the unborn is the kind of thing that should not be protected by the state and is thus outside of membership in the human community. His argument actually provides a compelling reason to prohibit abortion, since it admits that abortion may result in the death of a human entity who has a full right to life (but we just don't know for sure).

Under scrutiny, these pillars no longer seem to be able to support Roe, so one would think that when the opportunity arose it would be reversed. Such an opportunity was the 1992 case, Planned Parenthood v. Casey which unfortunately upheld Roe in a narrow 5-4 decision. What is interesting is that since the original discredited reasoning could not be sustained, all the court could do was to base its decision on stare decisis, the principle that the court respect precedent. Chief Justice Rehnquist, in his dissent in Casey said that "Roe continues to exist, but only in the way a storefront on a western movie set exists: a mere facade to give the illusion of reality." The language of Casey indicated that the court had shifted the basis of abortion from the right to privacy to a new right that they found in the Fourteenth Amendment: the right to personal autonomy. It would seem that the right to abortion was derived not so much from sound legal reasoning as from the sheer force of judicial will.

It is claimed that the prochoice position should enjoy a privileged standing in our legal framework because the prolife position is religious. Beckwith argues that this is false: both positions presuppose some metaphysical point of view. If one is a materialist (believing that the physical world is all there is) one will reject the idea of a unifying human nature. A human being, then, is not a substance ontologically, but is something that comes into being only when sufficient parts or attributes are in place, whether these are brain waves or self-awareness or whatever criteria one chooses. In this view the whole is equal to the sum of its parts, much like an automobile or a table. Many prolifers, on the other hand, argue, as does Beckwith, that the human being is ontologically prior to its parts. From conception it has a human nature that defines and maintains its identity as long as it exists. Personhood is not achieved after a minimum number of attributes are evident, but exists immediately as an integral part of our human nature. The point is that both the prolife and the prochoice positions are in a sense religious; there is no metaphysical neutral ground.

Beckwith deals extensively with popular arguments for abortion choice, and the common denominator seems to be that they all beg the question as to the humanity of the fetus. That is to say, the arguments only work if one assumes from the outset that the unborn is not a human person, but this is the very point in dispute. For example, the argument that abortion on demand would reduce the number of unwanted children and child abuse begs the question, and this can be shown by extending the principle of the argument to post natal persons: would the killing of three-year-olds be acceptable if it would eliminate the abuse of five-year-olds? Obviously not. So the primary issue is whether or not the unborn are human persons or not. Furthermore, making wantedness a criteria for the relationship between a parent and a child is destructive for family life; it gives the parents far too much power if the value of the child is defined by the parent's feelings. Surely wantedness has bearing on value only with things, not people.

There are academic abortion choice advocates, such as Eileen McDonagh, who will grant that the unborn is a human person, but that we should be able to kill it anyway because of what it does to a woman's body. The fetus is regarded as an intruder who actually is causing the pregnancy, doing violence to the woman's body without her consent, comparable to the actions of a rapist. The woman may have consented to sex, but she did not at the same time consent to pregnancy, so she should have the right to expell this unwelcome intruder from her person. But this seems to be grossly counter-intuitive on a number of levels. The nature of the sexual organs, of sperm and ova, as being intrinsically directed toward procreation, suggests that the purpose of sex is pregnancy and for many people a radical separation of the two goes against the grain of their moral intuitions. Second, to assume moral volunteerism is to distort what we know instinctively about parental obligations. And if we applied this standard to the father there would be no moral reason to demand child support from him, for he could just say that he had consented to sex but not to fatherhood.

The arguments for abortion choice may make great slogans, but upon analysis they all fail, whether they are the crude coat-hanger arguments or ones from academic philosophers. Beckwith helps us to see more clearly just what the unborn are, where they belong, and what our duties are toward them. If we are truly an honest and compassionate society, we will not suppress this knowledge because it is inconvenient. We will practice generosity and virtue toward the weakest and most vulnerable in the human community, and we ourselves will be enriched in the process.

This is certainly the newest pro-life work to appear, and arguably among the best. It not only lays out the legal, rational, moral and philosophical case against abortion choice, but it more broadly makes the case for human equality and the sanctity of life.

Beckwith is an American professor of law and philosophy who has written extensively on these issues previously. This volume brings together years of thinking and debating on this contentious issue. It is an invaluable resource for all those wishing to stand up for human life at all stages of development, and to counter the arguments of the pro-choice brigade.

The first third of the book paints with broad brush strokes, examining moral reasoning, legal considerations, and political dimensions of the abortion debate.

The second third of the book looks more closely at the abortion debate per se, looking at the science, the morality and the arguments involved in the debate about abortion.

The final third of the book extends these considerations to recent developments in bioethics, including cloning and stem cell research.

The second and longest section of this book does many things, including carefully dismantling the various arguments put forward by the pro-abortion camp. All the leading pro-abortion thinkers, such as Thompson, Boonin, Stretton, and Dworkin are taken on, with their positions carefully assessed and interacted with.

On the broader issue of human equality, Beckwith argues for the substance view which states that a human being "is intrinsically valuable because of the sort of thing it is and the human being remains that sort of thing as long as it exists". That is, an individual "maintains absolute identity through time while it grows, develops, and undergoes numerous changes".

Various functions and capacities, whether fully realised or utilised do not constitute a person. Thus a human being is never a potential person, but is always a person at different stages of development, whether potential properties and capacities are actualised or not.

This view stand in stark contrast to the utilitarian and functionalist views held by most pro-abortionists. They argue that personhood is not inherent or intrinsic, but based on certain capacities and functions, be it consciousness, sentience, self-awareness, the ability to reason, and so on.

As to the specifics of the abortion debate, Beckwith responds to the numerous objections raised by pro-abortionists over the years. For example, consider the argument often heard, involving the hard cases of rape and incest. These are certainly tragic events, but in no way can they be used to justify an abortion.

First, such cases are extremely rare, making up just a tiny fraction of all abortions. Second, to argue for the legalisation of abortion because of these extreme cases would be similar to arguing that we eliminate traffic laws because in some rare cases they need to be violated, as in rushing a loved one to hospital.

Third, it simply begs the question by assuming the unborn child is not fully human. Fifth, to justify abortion in these circumstances is to argue that it is acceptable to forfeit a life for the alleged benefit of another. But a basic ethical intuition argues that we may not kill one person to possibly save another. John may desperately need a vital organ of Mary to stay alive, but he has no right to demand it, especially if it entails killing her in the process.

The more recent, and difficult, cases of embryo research, human cloning and stem cell therapies are also examined, looking at the various justifications given for them, and their pro-life responses. Similar issues arise here concerning the nature of personhood and the inviolability of life.

Beckwith closes by laying out his case as it has been argued throughout: the unborn are full members of the human community; it is wrong to kill members of that community; abortion kills the unborn entity; therefore abortion is morally wrong.

The three hundred pages of tightly-knit argumentation and logical-constructed reasoning take on nearly all the major justifications for abortion. All are found wanting - morally, legally, and philosophically. Beckwith is to be praised for assembling in one volume some of the best pro-life argumentation around.

This book is simply incredible. Beckwith answers all the typical abortion-choice arguments, and builds an undeniable case for the personhood of the unborn. In particular, Beckwith spends a chapter answering the human being vs. human person objection, and a chapter answering the common bodily autonomy argument, the only two abortion-choice arguments that actually don't beg the question. This is, of course, after Beckwith builds the case for the humanity of the unborn. The book is extremely well researched, and each chapter contains extensive footnotes. Along with Life Giving Love by Kimberly Hahn, this is now my favorite book. A MUST for all pro-lifers, as well as those that support abortion who wish to know how the other side argues.

for any gov., hist., econ., soc., anth. student a must read

"Democracy in America", published in two parts (the first in 1835, the second in 1840), is the great work of Alexis de Tocqueville, a young, aristocratic Frenchman, who traveled through most of the Eastern, Southern, and Midwestern United States during a 9 month period in 1832. Tocqueville had originally set out to study the U.S. prison system but what he saw inspired him to write about much, much more.

The foresight he had for such a young man is really impressive to read 160 years later. What he saw in the morals, work ethic and government structure of the United States led him to accurately predict many of the ways in which the U.S. would lead and has led the world. At the same time Tocqueville was not oblivious to many of the ills in the America he saw. He very wisely writes of the cancer that the institution of slavery was to not only all black Americans, but to the white, Southern farmers and workers as well.

I hate having to give these books "stars" for ratings because in many cases it takes away from the ultimate importance and classic status of a book like this one. Tocqueville does tend to jump around and venture off into different topics that don't fit with the rest of their chapter, which could be attributed to his youth. Also, a few of his predictions, naturally, were way off. A native Texan, I had a good laugh at his view that "the province of Texas is still part of the Mexican dominions, but it will soon contain no Mexicans." But overall Tocqueville's view of America was honest, accurate, and the perfect explanation of why, on a daily basis, people continue to risk their lives to gain the freedom that only the United States of America offers.

This is one of the greatest books ever written on politics! Toqueville analyzes American democracy and its inherent strengths and weaknesses from the view of a foreigner, thus giving the reader a balanced view of the situation. A definite must-read for anyone concerned with politics and American politics in particular.

to read democracy in america is to confront greatness itself, to follow the reflections of one the greatest political thinkers of all time, a man of balanced rationality, with a passionate concern for the fate of democracy--true democracy, that is, not the kind we see politicians preach on tv everyday. personally i prefer volume 2 of this great work, where the author summons up his astonishingly penetrating power of analysis and prophesy

De Tocqueville was simply of one of the great social scientists writing about America and Democracy. From reading the book I deduced that De Tocqueville was a social scientist before Marx! He compares European culture and government with the fledgling culture and democracy he observes in America. He is very much impressed with what he sees taking place in America in the 1830's and hopes it will spread to Europe. He at first believed that America's prosperity was simply due to geography and their distance from powerful neighbors, he abandons this idea after his visit to America. He comes to realize that the West is not being peopled "by new European immigrants to America, but by Americans who he believes have no adversity to taking risks". De Tocqueville comes to see that Americans are the most broadly educated and politically advanced people in the world and one of the reasons for the success of our form of government. He also foretells America's industrial preeminence and strength through the unfettered spread of ideas and human industry.

De Tocqueville also saw the insidious damage that the institution of slavery was causing the country and predicted some 30 years before the Civil War that slavery would probable cause the states to fragment from the union. He also the emergence of stronger states rights over the power of the federal government. He held fast to his belief that the greatest danger to democracy was the trend toward the concentration of power by the federal government. He predicted wrongly that the union would probably break up into 2 or 3 countries because of regional interests and differences. This idea is the only one about America that he gets wrong. Despite some of his misgivings, De Tocqueville, saw that democracy is an "inescapable development" of the modern world. The arguments in the "Federalist Papers" were greater than most people realized. He saw a social revolution coming that continues throughout the world today.

De Tocqueville realizes at the very beginning of the "industrial revolution" how industry, centralization and democracy strengthened each other and moved forward together. I am convinced that De Tocqueville is still the preeminent observer of America but is also the father of social science. A must read for anyone interested in American history, political philosophy or the social sciences.

Veterans For Peace is in the forefront of the vast majority waging peace in our times. If you have a sense of humor you'll be putting this book down often due to uncontrollabe laughter. If you don't (have a sense of humor) you'll laugh anyway. If you are a peace monger, send this to your congresspersons. If you are from Minnesota, they probably have it already.

Fun and educational, especially for those free thinkers that can't get up to speed in the post 911 world. Shine up your value systems with the Department of Homeland Decency guide book. Go forth, secure that you know what IT is. You will be able to impress your conservative friends with your understanding of the new rules. There is a chuckle in it for everyone.

Department of Homeland Decency is funny. Not just ha-ha funny but laugh out loud hysterical. Hysterical because what else is there to do when there is W in the White House? This decency manual reads like something W actually did scheme up. I mean, it is good. G-O-O-D. Very good. Brilliant.

The structure is concise and covers decency guidelines for home, work, TV, medical issues, and, of course, for doing "it." Each section consists of snappy articles with goofy subtitles-- "How to Prevent Insertion, " "Frozen Embryos," and "Abstinence Bake Sale." At the end of each section there is an "Ask Yourself This!" which brings up tasty issues such as "ask yourself this: What could my children learn at the library that I don't know and that would make me feel stupid if I didn't know it before they did? Why wouldn't I rather have my children do research at home where parental locks have been placed on the internet and on the television?"

There are many ways to tell a story, to get at the heart of an issue. Michael Moore goes for the jugular and leaves me feeling worked up, manipulated and annoyed. Susan and Frank Fuller's approach is also direct but not like I just got punched in the gut with political dogma. The writing is accurate, consistent, and direct.

Although the writing is funny it's not like the Fuller's tip toe around charged issues. "Decency in the Lunchroom" snowballs into "Suddenly the workplace is filled with languages other than English, including Black, Spanish, Indian and the like. The workplace lunchroom is no longer a restful spot to consume a hamburger or doughnut; instead, foods like hummus and salsa take up space in the company refrigerator." This is so brilliantly written I feel as if I could give this book to any right winger and they would sanction it as Truth. The Truth. This book rings true. And the truth hurts. If I couldn't laugh about the Truth, I'd cry. I'll take a good laugh any day.

Buy this book NOW. It's the perfect size to tuck into a picnic basket, beach bag or carry on. Enjoy!

Ask yourself this: are you tired of liberals, weak-willed Democrats and manly looking females who are eroding the decency of our homeland? Do you desire to "go backward into the future" into a new "Age of Decency", leaving behind all those who are not decent (free thinkers, PBS viewers, people who buy free range eggs, people who wear religious head coverings , people who do not like to watch NASCAR on TV)? If you have recently fallen off the decency wagon or just want to take your decency to the next level of separation from the indecency around you, this rule book is for you. All of the instructions are supported by years of research by the DOHD scientists who are gifted at making their data easy to understand even if their findings are not true. With this book, the DOHD helps us comply with decency standards and live decently, thus avoiding both painful punishment and rich fulfilling lives. Expect to see authors Frank and Susan Fuller with their own FOX News show soon!

Contained within the covers of this clever, cynical little volume are instructions for living an exemplary Homeland life ruled by decency. Issued by the Department of Homeland Decency (DOHD), it covers key life areas, including home, sex ("it"), work, entertainment, health, and worship. The book is filled with inspiring mottos, for "Mottos help decent Homelanders remember the rules of decency." One favorite is "It's not how much it hurts but for how long afterwards", from the appendix on Punishments. My favorite feature of the USA Decency Act (UDA) is the LookSee. DOHD agents patrol everywhere in big black SUVs, ferreting out and reporting acts of indecency. Your actions could trigger, at any time, a Home LookSee, "It" LookSee, Workplace LookSee, Medical LookSee, or any other number of LookSees. The authors, Frank Fuller and Susan Fuller, treat their subject with the silliness and disrespect it deserves. Inspired surely by the current US government's topsy-turvy priorities and self-righteous judgments, they shred the myopic and naive pronouncements of the powerful right with their simplistic, yet stern, language of a government manual. The book's design is beautiful, and it's small enough to take with you, in case you need a reminder of what is decent. Humor is often an outlet for anger, and this book wittily lampoons the cause of so much frustration in a time when many of us feel faceless and powerless.

A wonderful introduction to and overview of the works of one of the only coherent intellectual "schools" of the 20th century. Jay describes the penetrating insights (and weaknesses) of the thought of Adorno, Horkheimer, Marcuse et al., with mercifully little of the psychologizing that one often finds in intellectual history. Ideas and their relation to historical context are the focus, rather than personalities and psyches. The book is readable enough to be attractive for non-academics and academics alike. It would have been nice to have more on the post-1950 period, but the as the subtitle makes clear, this is beyond Jay's purview for this book.

Even though a few years old by now, this is still the finest volume on the (at one time) subversive and all-encompassing attempt at rewriting the understanding of man, with special emphasis on reconciling Marx with Freud. The movement was known as The Frankfurt School, and its leading lights are examined here, both in life and thought, with a special emphasis on the former. Other books have come out since then, some had greater access to previously unavailable documents. Even so, no other book beats Martin Jay's scholarly and eminently readable account. If you must read just one book on the movement, read this one.

This was one of the best books I read in graduate school. After 20 years this is still a great reference for anyone interested in the development of American universities. This work is an essential part of the intellectual landscape to anyone navigating the currents of the reactionary neocon thought, which developed in large degree in opposition to the legacy of the Frankfurt School. While the Frankfurt School's students seemed to dominate academe for a generation or more, the new invisible college is dominated by the reaction to this major stream of thought.

28 years after its initial publication, Martin Jay's "The Dialectical Imagination" is still the best introduction and most indispensable guide to the Frankfurt School's history and thinkers. Jay can easily be forgiven his occasional historiographer's dryness and insistent reminders of the boundaries of his project (I would be a rich man if I had a nickel for every time he writes that "such considerations fall outside of the area of the current inquiry" or something to that effect). Moreover, even if subsequent publications of the translated correspondence and unpublished papers of figures like Benjamin and Adorno have robbed Jay's book of some of its potential for novelty and scoop, Jay still provides the best and most pithy assessments of the major points, and he does so without sacrificing the scholarly rigor that organizes "The Dialectical Imagination."

The book could certainly better fulfill its role as research tool if the publishers would sponsor an updating of the notes and citations; now that everything has been published and republished by presses like Fischer and Suhrkamp in Germany and by the likes of Continuum, Columbia, Harvard, etc., in the English-speaking world, Jay's opus might be more helpful were it not to insist on citing the original issues of the institute's journals, to which most of us simply don't have easy access.

That's a small bone to pick, though, with such a thorough book. Jay's chapter on the philosophical roots of critical theory moves quickly but surely (despite the occasional dependence on disciplinary argot that may slow down readers not steeped in the vocabulary of "isms"), providing a crucial backdrop to his reading of the Frankfurt School's entire intellectual contribution. This chapter grounds Jay's book safely, and the subsequent chapters make good on this very promising start.

"The Dialectical Imagination" is sure to remain the best available introduction to the thought of the Frankfurt School on the whole. I cannot recommend it highly enough for those interested in the history of philosophy in the 20th century, in radical politics, or in developments in literary theory.

Frankfurt school is now a part of history. Not much of its arguments are reproduced now a day. For example, their critical cultural theory opened up the vast terrain of cultural study in capitalism. But their characterizing cultural consumer as dumb passive receiver is too much extreme to be real. Now nobody hold up such a position. Its perspective seems locked in the interwar period. Indeed, the power of the school comes from the distinctive problematic derived from such a peculiar era. But the strength is the source of weakness. But even we don¡¯t follow their lines, we should know what they said at least in cursory manner, for their theories are now classic in each field.
This book must be still the most authoritative history of Frankfurt school from its inception to 1950. but it deals with not only chronological events but also what the first generation of the school, such as Horkheimer, Adorno, Marcuse, Walter Benjamin, and Fromm, worked. This book is the intellectual history of the school. The author illustrates the school against the time of school. As Hegel said, thought is the child of its time. So the thought should be located in the right context to understand. The society of Western intellectuals faced a crisis in the interwar period. The impact was severe especially to German intellectuals. The thought of Frankfurt school is one of the reactions to the crisis. Marin Jay succeeds in reconstruct their time in front of us. This book is the ¡®must¡¯, if you want to be oriented to Frankfurt school.

Joly's work is important. Reading this obscure 140+ year old text tells much about the past, present and future. It is almost prophetic.

Waggoner does an excellent job and I thank him mightily for allowing us access to this text. The commentary is a bit extensive, as I did not look forward to reading it upon completion of the consuming Dialogue. However, it is helpful, necessary and worth getting through.

I had not read "The Prince" nor "Spirit of the Laws" prior, but had general understanding of them. Needless to say, next are they on my list. My motivation for picking this one up was the "Protocols" scandal. All in all, I consider this a remarkable work providing insight on the tyrants of the 19th/20th centuries and the ones presently budding. Those especially for which the Dialogue proved a heavy and indirect influence vis a vis the forged "Protocols". Perhaps it makes sense such a telling tome remains obscure, as the masses seem to prefer their dose of soma (McDonalds, iPods, TV...) rather than actual thought, in this "brave new world".

Before I can even begin about the book, the story BEHIND the book is amazing. It would not surprise me if Cheney had a copy of the German version somewhere in his desk as Bush probably wouldn't understand a third of the amazing ideas put forth in this formerly banned book.

Watching the news is like watching Machiavelli's Dialogue come to life. Listening to Democrats is like hearing Montesquieu's feeble attempts to say that in the end, the good guys will win because of Justice and Liberty. If the Dialogue were a swordfight, Machiavelli would have not only killed poor Montesquieu, but eviscerated and beheaded him as well. Waggoner's commentaries and insights are a little dry when compared with the excellent text but are a good read and do well to put some of the outdated points in the text into context. I strongly reccomend this for anybody who is questioning the course of events that our world is being swept up in.

The reason why you see such a high price tag on this book [...], is because it is a "How-to" guide that explains how a president in a Republic acquires dictatorial powers and changes the Republic into Empire.

The model for this insightful, "spill-the-beans" work is Louis Napoleon III of France. Louis was elected president of France in 1848 in an election that was probably more legitimate than ours in 2000. The Constitution of the French Republic limited a president's term to four years. Louis was able to convince his parliament to extend this so Louis would have time to implement his policies. Louis then staged a coup d'etat and seized dictatorial powers, passing new constitutional statutes masking his power and Louis reigned France as a dictator for 20 more years.

Due to the new century and the militant foreign policy of the neo-cons, today's America is in this same position. (chillingly, super neo-con Harvey Mansfield is listed as an editor of this Political Theory Series). Following are passages in the "Dialogues" that run parallel to the political tactics of today:

Machiavelli: "I will start by having my coup against the state ratified by popular vote. In a carefully crafted message to the people, I will show that we were in a crisis situation". "On the very next day after my constitution takes effect, I will issue a series of decrees with force of law that will do away with these liberties and rights...". (PATRIOT ACT-2001).

Montesquieu: "Indeed, you've chosen your moment well. the country is still terrorized by your coup d'etat" (9/11). "As for your constitution, nothing will be denied you, since you could take everything".

Machiavelli: "But I hasten to assure you that the liberties I suppress I shall formally promise to restore after factional strife has been quieted". (THE PATRIOT ACT WAS LIMITED IN YEARS AND HAD TO BE RESTORED WITH THE PATRIOT ACT II).

Machiavelli: [Regarding the Press] "I could suppress all of you. I haven't yet done so but I can I'll let you live, on one condition, that you don't try to block my progress or descredit my power...I reserve to myself or my agents the right to judge when I am being attacked...the third time you will be suppressed". (WHY THE PRESS IS MUZZLED ON 9/11, IRAQ, AND SOON IRAN).

Machiavelli: "I shall count the number of newspapers that represent what you call the "opposition". If there are ten in this category, I shall have twenty pro-government". (MASS SUGGETION as explained in my review of the book, Propaganda. "I will put a certain number of newspapers that will adopt the official line of things in a straightforward way. They will defend my acts unreservedly. (TELEVISION TODAY-FOX NEWS).

Machiavelli: "Some malfeasance by a public official, I shall forbid the newspapers to speak of it. Silence about such things, rather than noising them about, is more respectful of public decency". (TODAY, OMMISSION OF KEY STORIES AND EVENTS).

Machiavelli: "...see how I will use statements in the press to prepare the ground for official political acts...For several months, each of my newspapers will play upon the public mind in their own fashion and then recommend a course of action. One fine morning, this course of action is officially adopted". (AGAIN, SEE "PROPAGANDA" AND THE INFLUENCE OF MASS SUGGESTION).

Machiavelli: "I would give a certain number of my newpapers the task of constantly exalting the glory of my reign while holding other governments responsible for the shortcomings of European politics". (CLINTON ALLOWED OSAMA BIN LADEN TO GET AWAY).

Machiavelli: "Do you know what SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY is? When individuals are wronged by government agents performing their duties and bring them before the courts, judges must answer them thus: "You have no legal recourse here". (BUSH INVOKES SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY ON THE 600+ LAWSUITS AGAINS HIM, ROVE STILL INVOKING THIS TO GET OUT OF TESTIFYING, ETC.)

Machiavelli: "...the source of lawsuits will dry up. Public opinion would become so tame that total reliance would be placed on the official opinions of the government for the meaning of the law. At certain moments, when there is a good reason to fear that some controversy may arise over some point of law, the government will declare as an advisory opinion that the law applies to this or that situation or that the law extends to this or that case". (NSA WIRETAPPING, TORTURE, ETC).

Machiavelli: "If this district has only a small population, I simply redraw it and put in into a neighboring district where opposition voices will be drowned out and...". (REPUBLICAN TOM DELAY'S REDISTRICTING SCHEME)

Machiavelli: "I will control 19 of 20 men, all of whom will follow my instructions. In the meantime, I would pull the strings of a sham opposition, clandestinely enlisted to my cause". (CONGRESS DEMOCRATS-ALL PAID FOR).

Machiavelli: "...there is a particular way of presenting the budget to disguise rising costs". (COST OF IRAQ WAR)

Montesquieu: "...whom you will ask of such capital and for what purpose?"

Machiavelli: "Foreign wars are a great help in providing a rationale". (SELF EXPLANATORY PARALLEL).

"These financial giants would be able to manipulate the markets at will".

Machiavelli: "The wars that will occur in my reign will be undertaken in the name of the liberty of men and the independence of nations". (IRAQ)

Machiavelli: "I have brought into being around me a formidable school of political men...in all branches of government there will be veritable miniature Machiavellis, who will trick, dissimulate, and lie with an imperturbable sangfroid. Truth will not be able to come to light anywhere".

I must end this, the despair is immense...

I read this book while researching the "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion." Clearly "Protocols" was heavily plagiarized from this work and was a forgery to boot. In any event, this is a captivating tale of a conversation between Machiavelli (counselor to despots) and Montesquieu (philosophical and political father of the U.S. Constitution.) Machiavelli claims to be misunderstood but as the dialogue progresses it seems painfully evident that he is generally not.

While Machiavelli and Montesquieu both claim to be followers of Christ, it becomes clear to everyone but Machiavelli that he operates out of self-interest rather than the good of society. His self-delusion is phenomenal and is readily seen in politics today. The book is obscure, true, but I found it to be a page-turner. Do not pass judgment on this book because someone later used it for anti-Semitic purposes. There is nothing anti-Semitic in this original tale.

As noted in every book I've ever read about the infamous forgery, _The Protocols of the Elders of Zion_, this book was the source, edited beyond recogintion by the Czar's secret police.

_The Dialogue in Hell_ must not have done very well, or more people would have recognized the _Protocols_ as a forgery sooner.

Sadly, political forgeries continue today. Dan Rather and Mary Mapes lost their jobs at CBS over forged memos; how odd that today's American liberals haven't learned from the Czar's secret police's mistakes.

This book was pretext for Karl MARX idea of communism. Rousseau blamed inequality among people due to ownership of property.

I find Rousseau especially creative in the way he describes how inequality progressed from the time the first humans made contact. He makes a good case for the solitary life. I think Rousseau believes it is destructive whenever humans come together in groups. Governments were formed to protect the weaker from the stronger or as Rousseau thinks to actually protect the rich from the poor. This is an outstanding book. It will haunt you.

This is a wonderful example of the 18th century enlightenment. In this work, Rousseau states that inequalities of rank, wealth, and power are the inevitable result of the civilizing process, something most of us have found to be very true if unfair. This new translation also includes all of Rousseau's own notes.

I enjoyed this tremendously, and am always amazed that the thought pattern and process is oneof the few things that hasn't changed over the centuries.

Excellent discourse. This book discusses some of the rudiments of the history of inequality and how its self supporting and ever existing in human nature. I recommend this book for those readers who either want to increase their knowledge on Jean-Jacques Rousseau or historical development of inequality

(...)

This essay was Rousseaus's submission to the Academy of Dijon contest, entitled, "Has the progress of the arts and sciences contributed more to the corruption or purification of morals?".

This text is his story about Nature, and Society, and the scandal that happens when people come together, build, divide, dance, sing, and compare themselves with one another. In many ways, it is his answer to the problem of evil.

Natural man is, in many ways, good, because his needs are immediately felt and immediately fulfilled. Social man begins to compete, to hoard, and to use cunning to enslave his fellows, to gain their esteem, take their property, and sometimes their lives.

His picture of the natural man is half what we think of an "animal" and half the "human" that we recognize in ourselves. He shifts his description as the flow of arguement dictates. The habitual provocateur, Rousseau - watch him!

In a way, he is rewriting the Christian "Creation Myth". In his version, evil does not originate at that moment when man eats the fruit of the "Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil" --to "be like God"; it happens when Adam wants a better apple than Eve's got for herself. Before society develops as we know it, Adam would have been fine with just a pear.

I enjoyed Mr. Wilke's book, although the story of the liberal Southerner who is frustrated with the South, moves up north, a la Willie Morris, realizes the north isn't perfect and the South has become a better place and moves back, is one that has been told before. But he's sincere, and mostly honest, and I respect him for it. His book deserves a better sales rating that it currently has on Amazon.

Certainly I learned some things by reading the book, and anyone wanting to know a little of the back story of Mississippi in the 1960s would find this interesting.

The author is what would have been described in the 1960s as a "liberal" on civil rights. I do think he should have been more honest with his readers on the consequenses of that liberalism, for example, that Clarkddale and much of the Delta look only marginally better than Hiroshima in 1945. Perhaps if a little more consideration had been given to those awful white people in the Delta they would not have moved away in droves, leaving that region in the terrible condition that it is in today. Not that change didn't desperately need to come to the Delta and Mississippi, but in hindsight many of the fears of the white middle class have proven to have been justified. Perhaps they should have been given just a little more consideration, especially given the fact that the Delta needed their skills and services. But I suppose it's too much to expect the author to say "I was wrong," about anything, even though one look at Clarksdale or the rest of the Delta clearly shows that his brand of liberalism wasn't the answer.

Anyway, the book is a good read regardless of one's political leanings.

Having been born in Mississippi and having defected to the West at the age of 23, I picked up Wilke's book to get in touch with my "Southern roots". Wilke's account of his roots and his involvement with the civil rights movement is more than any of my high school and college history books could ever explain.

Progressive Curtis Wilke made me realize I should be proud of my heritage but also aghast at what caused all of these atrocities and racist views. The South's dirty laundry is something that needs to be acknowledged in order to overcome the past.

For anyone searching for indepth studies of the postwar American South, this is absolutely it. Wilkie brings the keen eye of a child of the South to the descriptions of life in his home town, county, state and region, and uses his journalist's skills to make it all vibrant and immediate to readers of any geographic locale. He does not pull punches in his frank descriptions of what was true in the South's postwar decades, nor does he excuse his own participations and prejudices as he passes through his own changes on a long journey to understanding the nation's necessary reassessments of civil rights and collective wrongs. While it helps to have a prior knowledge of the Civil Rights movement in this country, and a sense of how the Dixiecrats became Republicans, this book is accessible to any reader of American history and social change.

Having been born in Mississippi and having defected to the West at the age of 23, I picked up Wilke's book to get in touch with my "Southern roots". Wilke's account of his roots and his involvement with the civil rights movement is more than any of my high school and college history books could ever explain.

Progressive Curtis Wilke made me realize I should be proud of my heritage but also aghast at what caused all of these atrocities and racist views. The South's dirty laundry is something that needs to be acknowledged in order to overcome the past.

Curtis Wilkie's Dixie is described as a "personal odyssey"--that it is. It is a terrific account of growing up in the Old South and being a part of the making of the New South. It is howlingly funny in parts and chillingly thoughtful and full of insight. Any person northerner or southerner will find this book rewazrding.

This is a great book to read if you are planning to visit China, It is easy to read with beatiful pictures, a review about modern Chinese society, the good side and the dark side when the Dragon is rising.

Dragon Rising: An Inside Look at China Today comes from a Beijing-based journalist who examines the major issues around China's transition to a global power. His experiences with a wide range of Chinese residents, from urban to rural - and his observations of the different paths the Chinese are choosing on the road to modernity - lends to a blend of powerful images and social observation key to any understanding of Chinese culture. Both general-interest libraries and high school to college-level holdings strong in intercultural understanding will want to consider this introductory review.

Diane C. Donovan
California Bookwatch

My father will be traveling to China in May for a 3-week trip, to learn more about this fascinating country. I can think of no better book, to prepare him for his travel to Beijing, Shanghai, and the Yangtze River. So, I will be sending him this book immediately.

Following up his well-researched and detailed 600-page "The Chinese" with "Dragon Rising," Becker has given the "China" shelf in the bookstore a book, which it dearly needed. Instead of reading about the Ming Dynasty or Chairman Mao, business travelers and adventure travelers needed a book, which could be easily read in a day, covering the different regions of China (Beijing, Shanghai, Guangdong, Yunnan Province, etc.), an explanation of Deng's reforms which were responsible for the China economic miracle, and some hard-hitting truth-telling about the human and environmental impact of China's rush to modernism.

On this point, anyone who has read Becker's "The Chinese" will not be surprised by his honest assessment of this human impact on the Chinese. In the chapter on Beijing, he recounts the developments that led to the Tiananmen Square protests; in the Shanghai chapter, he documents the misery of construction workers building this city of the future and the prostitutes who inhabit it; and in the Pearl River Delta, he puts a face to the cheap labor and goods being sent from China to the rest of the world: the young and petite factory girls recruited from the countryside who live their regulated lives in factory dormitories.

Becker's reportage combines a sense of wonderment and awe about China's rise with a Dickensian sensibility. Becker is terrific at distilling confusing political developments into a language the average reader can understand. But, he is at best when his journalistic instinct kicks in: traveling the country to interview farmers, entrepreneurs, beggars, prostitutes, local party leaders, labor activists, and prostitutes. In a way, the book is a series of fascinating anecdotes strung from one chapter to another.

Finally, I should mention that this is a National Geographic book, so the pictures are tremendously beautiful, even when they focus on the poverty or environmental disasters of the countryside. More of the China books would be much better, if they contained more contemporary pictures!

All in all, this is a well-rounded, very readable book.

China's future impact on world affairs, economies, and raw-material/energy demand is frequently pondered, but with little detail. Becker's "Dragon Rising" brings clear detail and reality to recent accomplishments by China. In addition, the reader also learns interesting tidbits such as China lost Taiwan to Japan in 1895, Tiananmen Square was modeled after Moscow's Red Square, and Deng Xiaoping was the de facto Chinese leader who led China out of Mao's mess and into the modern world (despite being deposed twice, and sentenced to death once for non-conformist actions).

Example of Chinese Urban Renovation: China spent $30 billion from '92 to '99 to rebuild Shanghai's infrastructure. This supported construction of 8,000 high-rises in 15 years (each taller than any building in the area prior to 1980), new steel and car plants, an automated stock exchange, a new airport, and a Maglev train to/from the airport (top speed 269 mph). The bad news is that Shanghai has sunk 8 feet since '21, its population density now exceeds 5,800/square mile (much greater than New York, London, or Paris), many of the new buildings are of poor quality and will require significant repairs in ten years, prices have skyrocketed to as high as $1,250/square foot, many of the buildings are vacant, and the disparity between rich and poor has never been greater.

China has also build underground cities and factories in preparation for nuclear war.

Transitioning the Economy: China had about 300,000 state-owned enterprises (SOEs) with jobs and food originally guaranteed for life; however, with their overheads (about one administrator for every three workers) they were slow-moving, and productivity was poor. Deng began transitioning by changing their focus from military products to civilian, and by the late 1990s, two-thirds were operating in the red.

Glove Company Example: The firm began as a part-time husband/wife activity aimed at adding to their farm income. Success led to adding onto their house, buying a few Japanese machines, and hiring some workers. More success and reinvestment brought new machines made in China (some with computers), and a capacity of a million/year. Large orders were shared with others in the area.

Sales activities took place not only via mobile phones, but at a local market (in this case about a mile long with five floors and 40,000 vendors) - buyers liked it because of the ease in filling a shipping container, even with small purchases from individual vendors. Dongyang focuses on socks (about 9 billion pair/year), and attracts 100,000 buyers at its sock fair.

MBAs are not needed - the average number of employees is 18, and 70% of owners have at best a middle-school education. Profits are reinvested, or put into real-estate or even purchasing jet planes; China has private savings of over $1.4 trillion. Employees work 10-12 hours/day, often for less than minimum wage (many workers are illegal migrants from rural areas - China severely restricts movement to avoid peasants overwhelming cities). The government is trying to crack down on pay violations; other problems include a damaged environment, high-cost healthcare that often is of poor quality, and lack of worker safety standards.

How does this all add up? A Mattel Barbie doll retails for $10 in the U.S., with $1 going for management and shippers in Hong Kong, 65 cents for raw materials, and 35 cents for other factory costs (including labor and equipment). Sophisticated parts are often made outside China and simply assembled; look for this to change soon.

Why do peasants want to move to the cities? Their income has stagnated at low levels (average land farmed is 1.5 acres; title to the land still resides with the government). Regardless, this creates considerable pressure for the government to further increase trade so that they can move off the farm and the land can be consolidated for production efficiencies.

Bottom Line: Becker does not hide the fact that China has a long way to go as far as human rights are concerned. However, it is also clear that the Chinese government is maneuvering carefully, trying to avoid unmeetable expectations and the problems caused by instant transition (eg. Russia, East Germany). Regardless, China's future military, political, economic, and resource impact on the world will be very significant and occur much faster than we probably would have imagined.

Dragon Rising is a very well written book giving the reader an excellent overview of modern China. Its clear from the very beginning (via the introduction) that the author is not a "China cheerleader" and can ask the difficult questions. I think this book balances all the China hype we see and read about it in the economic media with the reality of the the many pressing economic and social problems that are becoming more acute.

This book is very interesting and easy to read and intersperses anecdotes, with history, and facts, as well as colorful photos -all without getting bogged down in minutiae. Probably the best book available for anyone interested in an overview of modern China. I would recommend it for anyone doing business with China or traveling to China, and interested in an overview of modern Chinese society. Not for academic types or someone interested in Chinese history.