Politics Government Books

I had read the Rolling Stone article, and I was positively stoked to begin this book. During the first half, I was fascinated, but then, I am neither a geologist nor an engineer.

I was even willing to overlook Kunstler, in the early pages, defending fellow prophets of doom Thomas Malthus and Paul Erlich, and claiming that they were right after all, despite the fact that the predictions of either man never came to pass.

Then, during the second half of the book, Kunstler started discussing things I actually know quite a bit about, to wit, human disease and history. Oh, Holy Cats, how incorrect his facts were. In the words of another reviewer, he gets it Just Plain Wrong.

For example, he says that historians don't really know what the cause of WWI was. Huh. I guess the Army War College and every 20th Century History department need to talk to Kunstler, so they can be properly informed of their ignorance. Yeah, WWI's causes are complex, but just because Kunstler doesn't know what they are doesn't mean that nobody else does either.

He also claims that global warming will accelerate the spread of diseases that were previously confined to a specific geopgraphic area, which is probably true. However, we have already seen diseases migrate a good deal because of the volume and speed with which humans jet around the globe on a daily basis. Kunstler ignores the profound upside to this, being that, for the vast majority of us who are not immunocompromised, this challenges and boosts our immune systems.

Or how 'bout when he says that the 1918 flu jumped directly from birds to humans, without the usual influenza pit stop in pigs. If that's the case, why was the 1918 flu first noticed on a Kansas pig farm? Or when he claims that we still don't know why the 1918 flu proved fatal to so many young adults- uh, yeah we do. Because of cytokine storms, which turn your own immune sysstem against you- the stronger the immune system, the worse you're affected.

The worst offender, however, is when he claims that HIV (which he incorrectly calls AIDS) is on it's way toward mutating from a blood born pathogen into one that's carried on air. Give me a break. I have had five years of schooling training me to be an HIV educator, and I have never heard or read anything remotely like this from an even somewhat reputable source. Why did he make this claim of HIV, and not, say, hepititis B (another sexually transmitted blood born pathogen), which infects 1.7 billion more people than HIV does? Because "AIDS" sounds scarier, that's why.

All this JPW stuff in the second half of the book makes me doubt the veracity of the first half, and that was only reinforced when I made it to the very end and read Kunstler's racist rant against Mexicans and African Americans. He had already skewered every subset of white people that were remotely different from him, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

I've checked "The End of Oil" out of the library, so we'll see how the first half of "The Long Emergency" holds up, fact wise. But if you're really interested in reading an Apocalypse Story, I'd suggest picking up Stephen King's "The Stand".

I bought this book so that I could relate to a friend who is using it like his bible and guide for his future. I found it to be poorly organized and a long and rambling discourse on the evils and eventual failure of fossil fuels, nuclear energy, the food supply, and an eventual return to living in the stone age in our lifetimes. He passes opinion off as fact to build his case.

Mine's for sale used!

An excellent argument that we are at or approaching the peak oil production plateau, and speculates on the drastic future we may expect. Well done. Provokes a lot of thought about how one should adapt to eventually intolerable circumstances!

This is an important book that every thinking person should read. It will never be a musical.

Kunstler offers much vallid research and seems to make sense about the immediate future. Unfortunately, his credibility drops to 50% when he gives an obviously pro-Israeli view of the Middle East and Israel's problems. His view of it makes it clear that he is a Jew (as am I) and he is clouded by bias. That bias undermines the validity of his book, in my opinion.

Definitely worth reading. This is in my top-five of all time. Well written. Great research. Easy to read. Compelling story. Read it.

Luis paints the scary picture of crossing the desert. He puts humans behind the names of the crossers, border protrol, and the cyotes. Based on true events that happen everyday. This is a must read for everyone in the United States.

Excellent story. Highly recommend to others. Great eye opener to be thankful for everything we have. Great book!!

I was assigned this book for a college English class. I was not looking forward to reading it, but found myself very glad I did.

It is a very interesting account of a true life happening told in a poetic(almost florid) way. The word pictures are amazing! I appreciate the way the author "shows" not "tells".

I especially enjoyed the way each person's point of view is explained. Immigration is a very complicated problems with no easy solutions. This book did a good job of making me empathize with and understand the various characters whose lives are very removed and different from my own.
(In that way it reminded me of "The Spirit Catches You and You Fall Down" by Anne Fadiman.)

The conflict of the story is there are 26 Mexicans from different parts of Mexico that cross the boarder illegally. They cross the boarder into a desert they call hell. The desert is the Sonoran desert and is part of southern Arizona. In this desert there is no water also there are deadly animals and spirits. Some are left behind waiting for the return of others.


I liked the book because its real and I could never picture myself going threw the desert with no food or water. I also liked the book because it described the surrounding and face to face things in that Arizona desert. I didn't like it because it made me think about people starving in the desert. I would recommend this book to people that like reading long stories. I also recommend this to people that like the setting of a harsh place.

I've taught Introduction to American Politics a lot over time, and I've tried many textbooks. Some have bombed, some have resonated with students, and many get just a so-so reception. But here is one that is genuinely intriguing. How will students--and others interested in studying American politics--respond? I don't know, but I think that this has a chance of generating more interest among readers than most texts would.

It's printed almost in a magazine format, making it less forbidding than the standard hard cover, hundreds upon hundreds of pages textbook. That may provide more of a sense of accessibility and break down some initial barriers. The authors explicitly set out to create a different kind of text. As they say on the inside cover: "You convinced us that there had to be a better way to get across the fundamental concepts of American democracy and what it means to be an American citizen."

The content is pretty standard--chapters on citizenship, the Constitution, federalism, civil rights and liberties, public opinion, and so on. Chapter by chapter coverage hits the normal subjects. However, chapters feature some extras that might well make this book more attractive to students (and any others who want to learn more about American politics): there are little vignettes about real people and how politics interacts with them, to personalize the subject; hints on how to get involved in politics; comparisons with other countries; hot pepper questions to get readers to think about issues; lots of colorful photos; graphs and tables presenting information in a compelling manner.

So, this is a different kind of textbook in American politics. But it is fascinating. I'm going to be interested in seeing how well this "sells." I suspect that many students will find this a refreshing change of pace.

Zakaria is a brilliant mind. I was first introduced to him by some of his writings in Newsweek. His one page articles are often insightful and offer readers new perspectives. I didn't like everything about this book but yet I cannot resist giving it a perfect 5 stars. Zakaria offers readers a new model of looking at societies. His book reminded me of Jarred Diamond's "Guns, Germs, and Steel". Both these books tackle the topic of why certain countries and regions are more prosperous. For example, why are governments in Europe and USA so much more effective than those in the Middle East? Unlike Diamond's book, Zakaria acknowledges many factors including luck. His analysis incorporates many disciplines such as history, religion, philosophy and of course geography. Diamond's emphasis was mainly on geography. Zakaria does not pretend that he knows all the answers and most importantly offers readers issues to consider and think about. Zakaria acknowledges that increased democracy is a work in progress and may not necessarily be all bad.

Domestically, he delves into the new trends in "democratization and marketization". He cleverly expands this theme beyond politics to other topics such as law, medicine, and journalism. As a physician, I witness democratization in medicine constantly. We spend over 15% of our GDP on healthcare and yet our outcomes as judged by the country's morbidity and mortality is worse than Chile and Greece where they spend less than 7%. Democratization in medicine plays a big role in these poor numbers. The public "votes" in a sense how healthcare dollars get spent. Patients (ie: consumers) often dictate what studies and procedures should be performed.

I highly recommend this book for anyone interested in looking at the world in a new way.

21 June 2008 - In this remarkable guide to the major challenges, both foreign and domestic, that face America. Zakaria claims too much democratization and decentralization, two notions that are often hailed as universally good, can be disastrous. This argument is not new, as he readily admits. What is new is the contextualization of these problems to the modern world. Zakaria brilliantly analyzes both foreign and domestic policy through the prism of what he calls "Illiberal Democracy." I read this several years after it was written but the analysis is surprisingly proving correct. I love being a libertarian...we must return to our constitutional roots.

Good analysis. But just touched (it was democracy that produced Hitler) and dropped extremely serious issue of social, ethnic, religious, intellectual, knowledge, etc. diversity and its role in democracy functioning. This analysis and ways to make democracy more efficient and more "dictator resistent" must be continued without any political correctness.

This book is an excellent look at the promotion of democratic and economic reforms abroad. The main question in the book which Zakaria seeks to provide an answer to is whether economic reforms (and market reforms) should come first or democratic and governance reforms should come first over the other.

It is about the sequencing between economic and governance reforms. Which should be liberlized first? Which type of liberlization should the U.S. and international financial institutions promote? Should the U.S. promote economic market reforms in other nations or require nations to first liberalize their governance and institute democracy first. Zakaria argues in favor of economic and market liberalization and states that this has usually come first and then governance liberalization and then the creation of democratic institutions usually follow. He argues this by showing examples.

One of the main theses is that once a nations GDP rises above a certain level, the political institutions usually develop and liberilize into democratic ones with more wide-spread participation by a middle class.

This is an excellent book at the intersection of economics and international trade and the promotion of democratic political institutions. Having said that, I do not like the subtitle of the book - but that is a question of marketing for the publisher. We'll watch nations like Singapore and China to see whether liberalization of their governance follows their economic liberalization and thus confirm or deny his hypothesis.

Here is a critical (but not flawless) book. In it, Fareed Zakaria reminds Americans of an idea that was obvious and fundamental to the founders of our nation, but is now anathema to most: That Democracy and freedom are not one and the same, and that too much Democracy can quickly become the enemy of freedom.

That probably sounds strange to most Americans, which is why Zakaria wrote this book. We've been raised to believe that Democracy is unquestionably good and that more of it is always better. In reality, that's a pretty new attitude. At the time of this country's founding, Democracy was viewed very skeptically. The Founders knew that left unchecked, the majority could be an even worse tyrant than an individual because it would have the illusion of morality on its side. For that reason, our nation's government was set up as Republic, not a Democracy (think of the Pledge of Allegiance). A Republic allows the people to choose from pre-screened applicants for leadership roles and then delegates leadership to them.

Zakaria argues that the gradual breakdown of the protections against the Tyranny of the Majority as we've moved further and further towards democratization has had a vast negative effect. Politicians most focus increasingly on the short-term approval of voters in order to get re-elected and are kept from using their judgment and long-term outlook.

The book is filled with eye-opening insights and makes you aware of problems you may never have considered before. It is one of those books that has the power to change your outlook on major issues. That said, it isn't perfect. Zakaria needs to fully form his ideas just a little more. He obviously is a fan of the free market in most cases, but then says that too much of the free market can act in the same way as too much democratization (he uses the downfall as the Book of the Month Club as an a example of cultural diminution brought about by too much free market.) It's an interesting point, but the reader is left wondering where Zakaria thinks the free market is good, and where he thinks it should be cut back. He needs a clear rule to say, "Use more until "X", then stop." There are a couple cases where Zakaria seems to want to have his cake and eat it too, and that rarely works out.

None of that stops this book from being a very important read for modern Americans. I believe Zakaria is striking at the central issue that will determine whether America can retain (or maybe even reclaim) its current and former glory, or whether it will slip off into history. Zakaria doesn't sound an optimistic note, but at least he's done his part to sound the alarm. I applaud his efforts. Read this book and give it to your friends as well.

As an Arab-Canadian, I'm pretty much at the forefront of this so-called "clash of civilizations", and the way I see things as it stands, it seems as though there is indeed a 'clash' materializing. However, that is only a superficial gut feeling, the same feeling the respect Dr. Sam Huntington subscribed to when writing this book.

My interest in this issue started when I read John Esposito's book, Political Islam - truly a masterpiece - which picked stripped the religion of Islam bare, down to its origins, and described its evolution over time, spanning the Muhammedian era up till 9/11. He also dedicated chapters to specific issues such as the Jamaat-e-Islami group in Pakistan, the Iranian revolution and the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt - all these were discussed in a political and religious context. In the afterword, he mentioned how there is almost no overlap between these movements, that these were truly independent movements spawned by the circumstantial political and socioeconomic currents in the region in question. From there, he concluded that the idea of a 'clash of civilizations' is preposterous. Indeed, it's a figment of Dr. Huntington's imagination.

There are almost 1.5 billion Muslims on this planet. The Islamic world stretches from West Africa all the way down to Southeast Asia. There is absolutely no common political denominator between the Muslims in, say, Morocco and the Muslims in China, because there is a massive cultural cleft within the Islamic world (and even within the Western bloc - something Tom Freidman also missed).

I won't go into the details, refuting every claim this book makes, but my impression of this book is that it's trash. I was even slightly offended by how much generalizing and statistical abuse this Harvard graduate has managed to cram in his book. The very fact that he didn't go through the trouble of trying to analyze the Muslim World in a greater depth left me uneasy going through the last couple of pages of the book.

In the end, this is just racist propaganda by a Xenophobe, not more. It shouldn't deserve that much attention, and indeed should be pulled of the shelves of all libraries for being more of a hate speech inciter than even the holy books!

This book gives a decent picture of the current political situation of the world.

Especially w.r.t 9/11 and the ongoing clash between the west and Islam the books seems like prophecy. The author is also right on the money when he claims and explains the bloody borders of Islam and I wonder why there is any dispute about this. More analysis of how Christianity and Islam spread after conception would have been insightful. Yugoslav wars are analyzed quite well and I would like to find a refutation of this analysis by any of his political/academic rivals.

The author however does not provide an alternative to the western dependence on mid-east oil. Limited interference is fine but how to run the limping US economy?

The author seems to have a subtle sense of western cultural superiority but hides it well behind cultural relativism.


The author however laments that the west is losing its edge and that religion is fading away. Towards the end he says that to find truth is part of morality. Does he want people to find the truth but not live by it? He also gloats about the west's rule of law, secularism and individualism, some of which are frowned upon by the religious right. It seems like he is contradicting himself unless he appeals for religiousity purely for uniting the society. He claims that Christianity is one of the defining aspects of the current west while ceding that Sweden/Europe is quite non-religious. Being aware of totalitarianism of Islam he should have been careful while treading this line.

I would like to end the review with a few quotes from the book that are (sometimes painfully) true:

"The underlying problem for the west is not Islamic fundamentalism. It is Islam, a different civilization whose people are convinced of the superiority of their culture and are obsessed with the inferiority of their power."

"In civilizational conflicts, unlike idealogical ones, kin stand by their kin "(Comparing responses of EU governments to US actions against USSR and Muslims)

"Powerful societies are universalistic; weak societies are particularistic."

"In Islam god is Caesar, in China and Japan Caesar is god, in Orthodoxy god is Caesar's junior partner"

The author delivers a great future cast rarely found in the historian world. This made the book great. While there is plenty to find out about the past, I always wondered what would the greatest historians of the world think of the future. Due their meticulous attitude few of them venture to speculate on facts that are not checked and double checked. Well, Samuel Huntington, is not that kind of historian. He develops on the future of the two main civilizations and the possible results. While I found him a bit too skeptical on the US future, I admire how well he's documenting his suppositions.
The most important think I got from the book is the fact that we all belong culturally somewhere and that is not necessarily the place where we were born. The early impressions in life mark us with tremendous prejudices, bound to clash with the world outside.
While looking for this book, I stumbled on "The World Without US" - a documentary similar in topic. After checking out the trailer at the film website, I got the DVD and it was quite good. It takes the premise of "America Alone" a step farther by asking, what would happen should the US withdraw its military completely from the world? Answering a hypothetical question is hard, for any author and filmmaker, however this movie did provide an answer. Weather you agree with or not I applaud the filmmakers for going on 5 continents in their quest. Check it out also.


The World Without US - With Niall Ferguson

First published in 1996, this scholarly discussion of future international relations has been a classic from the beginning and will remain so for decades to come. From among the seven most important civilizations the author selected three, which may collide in conflict. Thus, in Moslem eyes Western culture is decadent in various ways and therefore utterly unacceptable. The current resurgence of the Islamic civilization is seen as an evolution no less significant than the Reformation or Marxism, demanding society's complete overhaul, renewal and purification, a movement whose impact on history will grow as the Moslem population will soon represent thirty percent of humanity. At the same time, Islam is seen as the least tolerant of religions, as it promotes peace inside their ranks but hostility toward the infidels outside.
Similarly, in East Asia, the Confucian civilization adheres to commandments like order, discipline, hard work and abstemiousness, where the individual subordinates to the needs of the community. Alien to them is what they call the West's sanctifying of human rights. Whereas we in the West expect our value system soon to become universal, the Confucian world is convinced that "the Anglo-Saxon module is not working" and that their own standards must of necessity apply to the rest of humanity. Here, again, the impact of such convictions will be immense as the center of gravity of economic power is rapidly shifting from the West to the East.
Out of such discordance, there arise economic and political contentions and military ones cannot be ruled out. Huntington believes possible conflicts could arise from a contest between Western arrogance, Islamic intolerance and Sinic assertiveness. The spark igniting material strife, however, will most likely be generated by more prosaic crises such as the youth bulge among the unemployed, terrorism, rivalry in the search of resources such as oil, and the pervasiveness of weapons of mass destruction among those who suffer and rebel.
The main message carried forth from this study is that any military clash in the future will most likely oppose not nations but rather civilizations in what he aptly calls fault-line wars. He points to the danger that such inter-civilizational feuds will be uncompromising and almost impossible to halt.
Huntington advises the reader that cultural universalism, so engrained in the mind of the West, is ill advised and that especially includes the American tendency to be "a nanny if not even a bully" in other civilizations. We must, he says, renounce universalism of values, and instead accept diversity and seek commonalities.
Since these thoughts were first published, much has been confirmed. The power shift toward East Asia is rapidly progressing. Fault-line conflicts in Afghanistan, the Middle East, Chechnya and the Balkans have resisted or defied peacemaking efforts. Our promotion of democracy, civil rights, and individualism has been rejected elsewhere in favor of soft authoritarianism. Most importantly, perhaps, is the West's failure to observe the "abstention rule", that is, for one civilization to abstain from invading the lands of another.
Every prospective world leader should read this book at least once.

This excellent book provides the reader with a view of the world based on civilizations - past, present and future. If you cannot find time to read the entire book, read the last chapter. It describes creditable circumstances under with a third world war could ignite.

The book was in great shape as it was described! Shipping was fast! Transaction was smooth and great!

I had to purchase this book for a U.S. government class that I took. I found this book well organized with memorable examples. Moreover, it has key words and concepts printed on the edges, which makes it easy to study and helps to focus on the main points. The authors also took advantage of graphic organizers. Furthermore, they picked up current events and created "to-think-about boxes." I love history, but always thought that politics is a bit tedious. Yet, with the exception of one or two topics I found this book very engaging.

Professors Joan Granucci Lesser and Marlene Cooper have shown themselves to be the newest dynamic duo of clinical social work. This text, one of the most refreshing and comprehensive in the field, will surely become a standard read for all social work students in the years to come.

Refreshing, consice, yet exceptionally detailed and well presented, "Clinical Social Work Practice" may very well define an entire generation of Social Work students. A must read for any student interested in the clinical social work field. Drs. Lesser and Cooper have shown themselves to be masters in the art of therapy, and their genius is apparent in their first textbook.

This is easily the most powerful book I have ever read. Gandhi does a great job of telling the story in his life in such a way that not only tells a story, but teaches lessons that go along with it. The title explains a lot, considering that Gandhi considered his entire life to be an expirement with the truth.

He is very open about the mistakes that were made (such as his marraige and bigotry at an incredibly young age) and details how he took those mistakes to make his life as consistently honest as possible. The way he organized people to non-violence in two terrible situations in Africa and India are legendary, but the way he brings it home to the individual is under-rated, to say the least.

Gandhi teaches that it doesn't take an army to learn the truth, nor does it take an army to become a part of that truth. His story explains that an individual dedicated to the empowerment of honesty and love can overcome any violence or hatred that can exist. It is within this context that one can use this book to change themselves.

These ideas used in an individual's every day life will lead to the understanding that love is more powerful than hatred, and honesty more powerful than lies. His examples of these ideas and proof that they are true is the most inspiring part of this book.

Even for those of us not religious (like myself) his use of religion is also motivating. He teaches lessons from religions and explains how to use this understanding as a way to love people of opposite religions rather than fighting them.

I will leave the indivudal stories to Gandhi himself, but his life is something everyone in the world would benefit from knowing.

Gandhi An Autobiography: The Story of my Experiments with Truth, is a culmination of the life of one of the most famous peaceful revolutionaries and supporters of non-violence. The book is basically an entire list of the life experiences of Gandhi, all of which prove to contribute to his spiritual growth, and in turn, each go to influence his way of thinking. Gandhi's autobiography reveals a vast array of experiments he performed throughout his life, leading to his praise of truth as the ultimate underlying principal, contributing to his adaptation of celibacy (brahmacharya), adherence to fasting, and development of Satyagraha: his concept of non-violent firmness.
Gandhi's autobiography stretches back to his youth in exploring all of his life experiences. Gandhi's inclusion of all aspects of his life in his autobiography illustrates the idea that each and every experience becomes an influence; which, in Gandhi's case, means influences leading to the development of a concept of non-violence to spear-head the Indian journey for Independence.
The strength in Gandhi's autobiography lies in his adherence to truth even as he tells his life story. Gandhi hides nothing, allowing this display of raw truth to help readers examine Gandhi's uncensored ideas and thoughts, making it possible to understand what Gandhi was thinking in even some of the most significant moments in his life.
The main weakness in Gandhi's autobiography, however, is his obvious omission of information where the information is most definitely needed. In order to fully understand a large number of chapters, an understanding of India and its culture is necessary, but not provided. Gandhi also seems to assume that readers have knowledge of the political situation in India, so if you lack any historical knowledge, you will find yourself somewhat confused. Because Gandhi's autobiography radiates the idea that every experience is an influence for the person he eventual becomes, it obviously is a challenge to include every experience and spend an adequate amount of time discussing them. But his choice to omit quite a few particularly significant experiences will not go unnoticed. He does not, for example, spend any time describing his experiments in South Africa, and instead instructs readers to consult other works. Lack of background information regarding people who Gandhi introduces and lack of historical information on the movements he involves himself in, may lead to an incomplete illustration of Gandhi's life.
At the conclusion of Gandhi An Autobiography: The Story of my Experiments with Truth, you are left with the desire to take a trip to the library, because you have surely reached the conclusion that there is much more to know about the teacher and leader who made the world aware of India's struggle for independence. The autobiography gives you an in-depth look into the mind of one of the most influential non-violent role models that the world has seen, with a detailed understanding of the steps necessary to try to follow in Gandhi's footsteps if you so desire. Gandhi's autobiography leaves a lot out, but it also leaves you with a strong desire to find out more.

After hearing Mahatma Gandhi's grandson speak at University of Florida, this book was especially meaningful. If only all our world leaders would employ his wisdom!

This book, the autobiography of Mohandas k. Gandhi, the father of modern India, is a must read. if you have any interest in Gandhi, non violence or just want a glimpse into the life of a spiritually guided person, then this book if a must read.

I enjoyed this book. I wish this book was written sometime after India's independence as more important events unfolded later. I also think that the reader needs background on India and its culture to understand some chapters. Overall, a good one!