Politics Government Books

My Professor told my honors section that this book was accessible and very easy to read...she wasn't kidding. The material is simplistic, to the point where I feel it omits far too much information even for a lower division college class. My high school government textbook was for more informative and useful. This book is clearly pushing an agenda, something immediately evident after reading just the first few pages of chapter 1. I know politics is an especially difficult subject with which to stay objective, but I am paying to learn; I do not care what Mr. Rourke thinks about global warming or MNC's. Harry Reid on the cover should have been a dead giveaway for me to expect very little of this text.

I read this book because I would like to add a Russian component to the masters thesis I am working on, and thought it would give me good background. Alas, while the book was an entertaining read, it is practically useless academically. Mr Lucas' prose drips with outrage and disdain toward Russia's leaders--and I sometimes got the feeling that his attitude extends toward all Russian people. Although I don't have a deep background in this field, it was pretty obvious that Mr Lucas glosses over very complicated events in order to substantiate his own rather simplistic argument. The book quotes very few sources and mostly regurgitates events that have already been widely reported on. The author's lack of nuance is the most troubling--everything boils down to Putin/Russia = power/control/corruption/bad--which left me with very little I could use in a serious paper. By the end of the book, I had the impression that I had read a polemic summary of everything bad the mainstream Western media has had to say about Russia over the past couple of years, which might explain why it appears to have gotten so many good reviews from major news outlets.

Mr Lucas may be right, and he certainly has a valid opinion on Russia's politics and the direction the country is going. However, I hope that anyone who would like to read this book understands what it is--the strongly written personal opinion of a journalist who has been covering Russia for a few years. It is certainly not an objective or meticulous study of any aspect of contemporary Russia.

This book is the best I have read to make one understand the current relationship with the New Russia. Americans need to understand and come up to date on the attitude of the Russian leadership at this point. As long as oil is priced high, Russia will have the money to feed their economy and will contend with the United States in that part of the world. They will continue to be an enemy in our relations with Iran and will do everything they can to undermind our efforts. Putin is still very much operating as an old KGB operative with that mind set.

Russia is heading in an ominous direction that poses a threat to its own citizens, neighboring states and the world as a whole. This book with its disturbing message takes a hard look at the Russian ruling elite which emerged almost entirely from the ranks of the old KGB. Harboring resentment and malice against the West, this elite's attitude is crude and unsophisticated compared to the hostility of the Brussels Eurocracy towards the USA and Israel. The Russian government now directly competes with the West on various fronts, both economical and political. Genuine freedom of expression and the rule of law are long gone and the state has grabbed all political and economic power that matters. Putin's term "managed" or "sovereign" democracy really means a particularly malignant form of Tsarism or Fascism. In her 2004 book Putin's Russia: Life in a Failing Democracy, Anna Politkovskaya correctly observed that the brutality in Chechnya was an omen of Russia's future cruelty to all its citizens.

For a long time the West refused to notice. It should have woken up during the second Chechen war but instead there was only isolated protest in Europe and the USA, primarily from private bodies like the Jamestown Foundation and Italy's Radical Party. When Putin seized all influential media the West opened one eye then shut it again. When Khodorkovsky was jailed the same thing happened, and when the murder of dissidents and journalists became commonplace more observers expressed alarm though government criticism in the Western Alliance remained rather muted. This license to kill spread beyond the borders of Russia with the murder of Alexander Litvinenko in the UK at a time when Tony Blair was almost embarrassingly amicable with Putin. More detailed information on the Litvinenko murder is available in Death of a Dissident: The Poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko and the Return of the KGB by Alex Goldfarb and Marina Litvinenko, and The Litvinenko File: The Life and Death of a Russian Spy by Martin Sixsmith.

The media now portrays Putin as a hero that rescued the country from the "chaos" of the 1990s since the political class has revived the Soviet habit of revisionism. And it uses the Orthodox Church for spreading the ideology of patriotism and Russian nationalism, a policy that inflames xenophobia resulting in violent racist attacks on non-Slav and non-Russian citizens. There have also been signs that this church is reverting to its infamous history of antisemitism. Militarism and imperialism are integral to the new nationalism although Lucas believes that the aim is the "Finlandisation" of Europe rather than territorial expansion. In the West Russia has plenty of paid propagandists plus the romantically deluded species known as Russophiles for whom this failed state with its history of genocide, sadism and misery can do no wrong.

Lucas charts the rise of Putin (explained in horrifying detail in Blowing Up Russia: The Secret Plot to Bring Back KGB Terror) and the course of the new cold war in a thorough and systematic manner, concluding with advice for the West on how to conduct and win it. Although he doesn't soon expect any military threat, Russia's nuclear stockpile must be reckoned with. The weapons employed in this multifaceted undeclared war are oil, gas and the revenues generated by their export. Instead of allocating it to real needs, the Kremlin uses the income to further its imperialist ambitions by acquiring strategic assets in Europe. Some of it flows straight to the elite for private investment abroad.

This war is pursued while Russia suffers from demographic collapse, massive corruption and widespread lawlessness. Ex-KGB operatives are in charge of all major companies and state enterprises, ensuring more inefficiency and corruption. On the international stage, not only has Russia behaved like a thug against Ukraine, Moldova, Estonia and Georgia, it is supplying weapons to rogue states Iran and Syria and their terrorist proxies Hamas and Hezbollah. There is no shortage of willing collaborators in the West, like previous German chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, although western investors have begun to realize that investment in Russia is not worth the risk. When foreign companies resist state interference they risk confiscation. A Russian Diary: A Journalist's Final Account of Life, Corruption, and Death in Putin's Russia exposes the mentality, power and incompetence of the ruling class.

The geopolitical implications are staggering, as the Putin gang eagerly befriends all enemies of the West. Russia is pursuing an energy policy aimed at strangling the liberal democracies by e.g. establishing a gas cartel. Lucas warns the West to get its house in order by inter alia cleaning up financial markets and reconsidering Russia's G8 membership. Should a criminal state be allowed to remain in a club of civilized nations? Whatever other evils result from Russia's abandonment of Western values, it is sure to become a more barbaric place for its citizens and a considerably more dangerous international player. One may confidently expect it to supply Iran with nuclear weapons technology and to cooperate with every loathsome thugocracy that defiles the planet.

Evidence is accumulating that Russia seeks an alliance with the Islamic world and a partial restoration of the Soviet Empire through the Shanghai Cooperation Organization of which China is a member. The Kremlin ignores the real threat from China despite the particularly dire demographic and infrastructural implosion in Russia's far east. However, the Shanghai arrangement will bring the Turkic speaking states of Central Asia (plus Persian Tajikistan) back into the bear's embrace. Turkey's future role will be crucial; it remains to be seen where its recent Islamist trend will take it and how its foreign policy might change in case of almost certain exclusion from the inner core of the EU. Of course economic ties to Europe are assured but the country might establish closer relations with the aforementioned Central Asian states.

Should Israel be forced to act against Syria, Iran and Hezbollah an intensified Russian engagement in the Middle East conflict cannot be excluded. It might reluctantly be drawn into direct military intervention by its humiliated and devastated allies in the region. For those interested in prophetic speculation, I recommend Epicenter by Joel Rosenberg, an engrossing book based on the prophecies of Ezekiel about an anti-Israel confederacy which increasingly resembles an expanded axis of evil, an anti-western alliance that Russia is so vigorously pursuing.

After reading such reviews no wonder West is on alarm on what is going on in Russia.
Russia is a country which has power.
It is understandable US feels threaten, because weak "partner" is always better than a strong partner, in a politic which just declare DEMOCRACY as a true value. There is nothing democratic in US position in jumping all other the world including IRAQ, and showing "them" who has the power.
So, Mister Lucas, before you start writing you book, explore the facts.
Sure, Russians consider Estonians fascists, they act like ones. They give their country to Nascists (is it OK now? Is it Adolf Hitler an American Hero now? Are you rewriting the history to make Hitler look good?) They worship fascists and built memorial in their honor (how democratic was Hitler?) Do you want one? They destroy the memorial built in the honor of Russian Soldier. The soldier, who freed this country from Hitler and his regime, and POOR Estonians lived better than any other republics in FSU. They start begging for Western help when Russia stopped providing for them.
Russians lost 27 millions of soldiers fighting Hitler.
How many American soldiers were lost?
How many houses and businesses in America were destroyed because of Hitler?
How many people suffer from hunger because Hitler's soldiers took food from them?
You, Americans, don't have memory of this war in your country.
Russians have plenty. Think about it. Every family was affected.
If Latvian leader come to Russia and join Mister Bush to celebrate Victory Day, it is not Estonian's, Latvian's or Lithuanian business to criticise Russian politic on this day. It was beyond comprehension watching Bush and President Vaira Vike-Freiberga of Latvia, talking about things which don't belong to this celebration.
Do you think if on 4th of July Mister Putin will come to US and start talking politic, how unfair history was done to natives in this country, how does this would sound? Would it sound supportive of national celebration?
WW2 was not won by Americans. They did not fight on their territory, what year Americans join the rest of the world? Americans were fighting in Pacific, not in Europe, not in Russia. They join others in Berlin and dump the nuke on Japan.
So, please, Mister Lucas, look at that rate poor population and not so poor population reproduce itself here, in America. In Russia people have 1-2 children, in America the number is around 3. Think about it. Every country thinking about future want their citizins to produce offspring. What is wrong with that?
What is wrong with cotton undergarments? American environmentalists seems to enjoy it too.
America is constantly talking about forbidding abortion. This is true democracy on AMERICA's part. Especially in regard to women's rights.
You book belong to humour section (if the facts were not as screwd as you present them), the masses don't need it.

The author describes step by step how freedom was curtailed. How Russia is moving backward. How they have in the end not looked to the West but to their Soviet and Tsarist past for a model. How the Kremlin has created a system of "authoritarian bureaucratic capitalism" in which economic stability is valued more than freedom. Mr. Lucas then describes the new threat from Russia. They are using their, new weapon, billions and billions of dollars from vast natural resources to attack our weakness: money.
But the Edward Lucas does not leave us hanging. He outlines a winning foreign policy. The US and EU must unite to win this new war by securing supplies of gas and breaking Russia's growing monopoly and we must stand behind small ex-Soviet states like such as Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Georgia.
If we don't we will lose the New Cold War and a new Soviet Union could well be resurrected. And voters this November, beware, this Kremlin has endorsed Mr. Obama for President.

I enjoyed it very much. I particulary liked the comparisons between the US and France. That made it a more interesting read than just a run down of all the crooked politicians, greedy wholesalers, and colorful criminals that inhabit the wine world.

After working in the wine industry for 7 years I found this book to be a refresher at best. If you don't know much about how the industry works its a great primer, but if you have a good idea of what's going on the book is a bit lacking. I would have like to seen more depth in many chapters.

It is said that to really appreciate wine, one must understand its context. When some talk of "context", they often focus on what is in the bottle, such as a wine's varietal makeup, the vineyard from which its fruit was sourced, and/or the vintage which serves to describe the growing season. Even still, there are some who extend context further to include the historical and cultural influences shaping a wine, specifically those factors that have served to guide viticulturists and enologists in a singular fashion within a particular region.

Tyler Colman has now broadened this notion of context with Wine Politics: How Governments, Environmentalists, Mobsters and Critics Influence the Wines We Drink, a book that should appeal to anyone seeking a deeper understanding of wine.

If you have ever wondered why certain wines show up on some store shelves but not others, or why specific wines appear on certain restaurant menus while others do not, then you should read Wine Politics. The book not only explains how politics influence the distribution of wine here in the U.S., but also reveals how these same forces direct each bottle's production and eventual consumption. The best description of this book is offered by the author in Chapter 1::

"In this book I follow the travels that a bottle of wine takes from the vineyard to the dining-room table. Along the way it may encounter flying winemakers, humble vignerons, dull regulators, passionate activists, and powerful critics. I tell the neglected backstory of wine, which, as with Hollywood movies, can often be more interesting than the finished product."

Tyler Colman, a.k.a. Dr. Vino, approaches this topic by following the wine histories of France and the U.S., with a focus on winemaking in each country's respective, and most venerable, region, Bordeaux and Napa. This comparative treatment offers the reader a variety of useful insights and revelations throughout the book. Tyler extends his geographic coverage to include other regions of the world, including mentions of specific politics, policies, and practices in the Pacific Northwest.

I enjoyed the second half of the book the most, which includes chapters such as, "Who Controls Your Palate?", and, "Greens, Gripes, and Grapes". What Michael Pollan did in such great detail for food in "The Omnivore's Dilemma", Tyler Colman has now provided for wine, albeit at a cursory level, in these two chapters. For it is in chapters five and six that Tyler exposes the downside of the industrialization of wine, while contrasting this approach with the upside of "natural" winemaking practices.

After reading Tyler's book, I now have a deeper understanding of the public policies that influence the wines I am able to buy and ultimately enjoy at my table. As a result, I am a much more informed consumer, citizen, and most importantly, voter. I highly recommend Wine Politics as required reading for anyone seeking to enlarge their understanding of wine.

If Wine Politics is any indication of the path Tyler Colman is on with future books, then I am confident he will continue to increase my appreciation for wine in the years ahead.

There are so many wine books out there this summer, many of them by retailers who have veiled advertorials in the fabric of "passion." It's truly refreshing to see a book like Dr. Coleman's, written with serious thought, using original research, and addressing one of the most important -- and often overlooked -- issues facing the contemporary wine drinker: how do the powers-that-be affect the market and our palates? Where most "wine writers" are erstwhile marketers who treat wine with undue snobbery and elitism, Coleman has delivered a genuinely useful piece of journalism that dispels many of the superfluous mythologies surrounding the world of wine today with empirical data.

As one reviewer put it, this book is sure to become "required reading for any serious wine education program."

Coleman's spare, economic writing style evokes an era when writers (think Hemingway) were not afraid to use words as instruments of thought rather than the other way around. An A+ for readability...

I finally had a chance to give serious face time to Tyler (Dr. Vino) Colman's newest book: WINE POLITICS: How Governments, Environmentalists, Mobsters, and Critics Influence the Wines We Drink. A book of this sort is so long overdue and I had been looking forward to it with such great anticipation that I nearly wet my pants when it finally arrived at my door.

I cracked it open somewhere over Nevada on my way to the National Conference of State Legislatures where a panel of industry folks moderated by Senator Sanchez from New Mexico was gong to discuss the impact of the Supreme Court decision, Granholm v. Heald. Apropos, no?

Here's the thing: If you write about wine and don't know the political history of the drink, you owe it to yourself and your readers to read this. If you are a lawmaker at the state level and deal with alcohol issues, you owe it to yourself and your constituents to read this book. If you are a wine lover and find yourself frustrated by the various laws that seem contrived to keep you from enjoying wine then you need to read this book.

What I was most interested in discovering was how an even handed treatment of the subject of wine politics would look and read like. I don't deal in evenhandedness when I approach and work in this area. I've seen enough to know that it accomplishes nothing to give those who work the system the benefit of the doubt. But Colman, in tackling this subject, is obligated to be evenhanded. And he pulls it off quite nicely.

The very first chapter asks, "What is Wine Politics". The answer Tyler provides is telling and explains the need for such a book:

"battles over the politics of wine are more often fought on the ground--sometimes literally. Where are the lines of the best growing zones drawn? Will society stigmatize wine or praise it? How can consumers buy their favorite wines or discover new ones? Is wine 'made in the vineyard,' as the industry likes to claim, or is it made in the lab and tested on focus groups for its consumer appeal? At stake in these battles are not only the livelihood of those in the industry but also the prestige and the profits of an industry whose sales reach $25 billion in the United States alone."

After offering a brief history of wine in France and the United States in Chapter two we move on to the meat of the book, an examination of critical issues in the wine industry that play out in a political framework: Appellations & Quality, American coalitions for and against wine, who dictates tastes and styles of wine, and the politics of environmentalism and wine and where they meet.

Naturally, I was most interested in how Colman dealt with the issue of direct shipment of wine, an issue that has been among the most public of political wine battles in America for the past 20 years. This discussion falls into the chapter appropriately named, "Baptists and Bootleggers". The term is a reference on the one hand to the odd coalition that supported Prohibition and on the other hand to the more recent coalition of social conservatives often driven by religious imperatives and alcohol wholesalers that demand economic protection, both of whom have no interest in, and are willing to work furiously against, allowing consumers alternative channels to access the diverse and growing number of wines available in the country beyond the sacred three-tier system.

It would have been all to easy for a lesser writer to indulge in demonization in this chapter. It would have been very easy to write unflattering things about the nasty, disingenuous and heavy handed actions of American alcohol wholesalers' attempts to screw wine consumers and game the political system for their own economic benefit. Tyler will have none of this.

Rather, he simply lets the story of direct shipping and its political battles play out in his pages in a fairly matter of fact way. Tyler's reporting on how the direct shipping battles progress goes just deep enough so that we are told how and when giant wholesaler Southern Wine & Spirits first asked in response to direct shipment of wine, "Is there any way to stop this". On the other hand, his explanations of the politics of direct shipping do not descend into esoterica, a real possibility where this subject is concerned.

Every state politician in America should at least be made to read the "Baptists and Bootleggers" chapter in this book. It Tyler_colmanprovides a simple and straightforward answer to the question I think too many of them have, but don't know the answer to, when confronted with alcohol-related legislation: "Why is this a big deal and why are consumers jamming my phone lines over a bottle of wine?"

Tyler's book is foundational in the sense that it provides an excellent though not overwrought introduction to the critical issues that surround wine politics and the business of wine. Anyone in the business who does not know this stuff now has a resource where it is all laid out. Those wine lovers who have delved so deeply into the world of wine that they need context to satisfy their mind will also find great value in "Wine Politics".

On Tyler Colman, let me say this: If he chooses to, Tyler could make a very long career out of reporting on wine, educating both wine lovers and the industry, and writing more books on all manner of subjects revolving around wine. This is not an easy thing to do, which is my round about way of saying Tyler Coleman is among the leading pens of a new, younger generation of wine writers who will, hopefully, take those of us who grew into wine with the old guard of writers into our old age happily satisfied with the state of American wine writing and reporting.

I had to read this book for summer reading for an AP Gov course. It was a dreadful experience. It was very difficult to force myself to read more than one chapter per sitting because of the book's repetitiveness and dullness. If you actually want to read it, let me save you the time while I summarize it:

-Spend more time hiking than working.
-Don't get a well paying job, because it will make you miserable and you will undoubtedly go into dept.
-take a low paying job, because life will be great. As long as you dont want to buy anything.
-Don't buy material goods that make you happy.
-Only nature and people make you happy.
-Rich people, 90% of the time are littering, stuck-up, scumbags.

pack that into 250 pages, and there you go.

I read a first edition (2001) from the library and while the book is good it is very dated. Newer edition may improve the suggestions part as that was where i feel the book was weakest. Excellent history of consumption in the US.

I bought this book after deciding it had a cool cover and reading a couple reviews promising to provide me insight. Maybe it would have, but I simply cannot read this because within the first few paragraphs I've noticed the following:

1. The common video rental store Blockbuster has been called "Blockbuster's" by the author. Not only is this just incorrect, but it doesn't even make sense.

2. A reference to a "Nintendo Play Station" has been made.

This perturbs me in all manner of ways because I feel like if I'm to submit myself to a few authors' collective views on our culture and society, they should AT LEAST know more about it than me. That is, they should know how to use apostrophes, what the name of Blockbuster is, and what a Sony PlayStation is.

Additionally, as I flipped through the book to decide if I wanted to read any more, I noticed that the writing is overtly pretentious and not really interesting, and also that the book is filled with these "witty" little cartoons reminiscent of the political garbage you see in newspapers.

Not recommended.

Odds are you're infected with affluenza but, don't worry, there is a cure. You'll just need to take the medicine. This book is both entertaining and thought provoking.

Take an honest look at the degree of your illness, make some changes to how you think and the results could amaze you. They say the best things in life are free but some of us had to buy this book (the book's not free) to really appreciate that.

This book quite literally changed my life in a great way. Upon reading the introductory chapters, it was clear to me that I surely had Affluenza. Continuing through the book, I realized how dire it was that our whole country was "infected" and how deeply. Finally, it offered real solutions to combating the disease.

I know the analogy of Affluenza as a disease seems a little cheesy, but it was effective in getting the point across. After reading the book, it became so clear to me that my time is so valuable and that careers that don't allow you to have your personal time (to explore your hobbies) in lieu of a fat paycheck just aren't worth it. I have made so many adjustments in my life to create less waste. But more than anything learning to "want less" is such an important lesson that so very many people in our materialistic culture just will never understand. And they aren't fully to blame because our culture promotes it and its essentially brainwashed into us.

If you're already thinking that you you spend too much, that you always want more and new things, that you're in a job that you don't feel in any way is your calling, that you waste too much, and ultimately that you want to be a better person, READ THIS BOOK. It will inspire you in ways you never imagined....

As I mention in the title, this book offers a great wealth of information on many different topics in American government. The pieces are condensed so that one can understand the authors most important arguments. This anthology has proved an invaluble resource when composing countless papers. While this review sounds like an ad for the book, it is not. This book will aid many poli sci students in their understanding of the subject.

The value of Ann Serow and Everett Ladd's work rests in the value of lofty ideas versus specific evidence. The editors have taken these extensive works and broken them down to the bare bones of the arguement, a formidable task for political figures such as V.O. Key, Alexis de Toqueville, and Jesse Ventura. The editors have done a fine job, not only in giving the authors' arguments concisely, but also in maintaining a rational flow to their arguements. The editors masterfully leave the background research to the political science student. The only problem with the book is that it the selections focus little on environmental politics, which is a field unjustly neglected by political science as a discipline, and in politics today. So in the realm of environmental awareness, unfortunately, editors make no strides forward.

Thorough, chilling and compelling read. I want to read other titles by the author now.

Each work in this author's trilogy (`Blowback' 2000, `'The Sorrows of Empire' 2004, and `Nemesis' 2006) raises questions about the wisdom of post WWII American policy, with abundant examples that include counterproductive military base leases (leading to routine local outrages) to the not-so-public black operations that very often misfire and result in the opposite effect of the original intentions.

Each of these books is well written and well worth reading. The subject is vital to anyone concerned with our status, and (more importantly) with the ideals that founded, sustained, and made the United States a great nation.

Highly recommended -you decide.

Nemesis (2006) is the final book in Johnson's trilogy, following Blowback in 2000, and The Sorrows of Empire in 2004. It is a warning call to Americans in our interdependent world that our foreign policy actions have consequences, and that we cannot continue to guide our destiny through aggressive use of military power. Nemesis is well researched with scores of citations. It poses alarming questions, such as: 1) is our political system capable of saving the US in the face of the DOD and unaccountable government spending? and 2) What are the effects of having the US maintain so many bases in foreign lands? and 3) Is "military Keynesianism" a sustainable policy?

Johnson draws some historical lessons from the empires of Rome, which tried to maintain a far flung empire but eventually lost its government, and Britain, which gave up its distributed empire for the benefit of more robustly sustaining England. He devotes a chapter examining the CIA as an agency of foreign policy and the effects of US military bases in foreign countries. He has many surprising facts, such as there are more people of Lebanese descent in Brazil than in Lebanon, and that post WWII Japanese pacifism is a fiction.

Johnson considers space the next battleground and describes the currently deployed ground-based missile defense as a `dual use' system with the potential offensive purpose of shooting down satellites. Johnson's description of the future battleground of space is quite thought provoking and alarming, whatever your attitudes about the efficacy of military preparedness and the use of force. He points out the collateral damage likely during earth orbit warfare will have detrimental consequences for everyone, as the debris clouds will affect all communication satellites. Johnson states that our government operating in shadows of secrecy is not what the Constitutional framers intended, and the public should have access to information about the activities of our government.

This book is depressing in its hard-edged assessments of the future of the US, and is a signal alarm to that it may already be too late influence a more secure and sustainable nation for successive generations.

"Nemesis" is the last book in Chalmers Johnson's inadvertent trilogy.

It is a critical examination of U.S. foreign policy and particularly the G.W. Bush mistakes. Mr. Johnson exposes the starkly unsuccessful record of our interventionist forays into foreign countries. The result is usually not a democracy, but a dictatorship.

The concept of Command Responsibility-the doctrine that a military commander is legally liable for all abuses and atrocities by his troops whether he knows about them or not is interesting considering recent U.S. history. The author provides a history of the application of the concept and how far up the chain of command that it can go.

There is a lesson on the Roman Empire and it's transformation over time form a democracy to a military dictatorship contrasted with the British Empire and how their democracy survived because of decreasing their military size and reach.

The costly, clandestine, illegal ventures of Charlie Wilson are used as an example of "off the books" CIA activities. The author describes some of Clinton's experiences with the CIA and his mistrust of their intelligence information.

The Council of Europe's report on illegal CIA "renditions" as an international violation of human rights was sobering. How many citizens are aware of these operations?

Another subject that was enlightening is the critical view of Status of Forces Agreements (SOFA) from the host country's vantage point. The alarming rate of increase in the 90's of these agreements further validates the author's point of American imperialism/empire building.

Chalmers Johnson detailed the military-industrial complex's profit at taxpayers' expense on SDI(Star Wars space defense shield) and how it all too predictably evolved into an equally wasteful space weapons plan. The ridiculous idea that the United States "is an attractive candidate for a 'space Pearl Harbor'" is further evidence of the use of the fear-mongering
to precipitate funding for another absurd weapons program.

"Nemesis" spotlights the battle for secrecy that is all too obvious with Bush II. The actions regarding the FOIA by Cheney and Rumsfeld in the Ford Admninistration are not surprising.
"In theory, given our Constitution, we should not need a Freedom of Information Action."-page 245.

The Bush "signing statements" are aptly described as illegal line-item vetoes.

"Nemesis" drives home the point that all empires eventually over-extend themselves and face a harsh choice for survival. Remain a military dictatorship like Rome and pass from the world scene or sacrifice military global dominance for survival as a democracy. Right now U.S. foreign policy emphasizes global dominance rather than national defense.

Chalmers Johnson is the best author on foreign policy I have read to date. I highly recommend his books.

Chalmers Johnson is one of America's greatest heroes for writing INFORMATIVE books that display his critical thinking. We must know what is going on with our American country and we must understand that the mainstream media is part of the empire umbrella. (For example, if you saw the movie, Charlie Wilson's War, you'll be intrigued to learn of the REAL Charlie Wilson in Chalmers' book). What struck me first and foremost as I was reading this book is the insight and intelligence Chalmers has about his subject. He informs us of some incredible facts, such as: The U S spends more on its armed forces than all other nations on earth combined, and that the U S has military bases in more than 130 countries! A critical thinker must ask him/herself why this is so. These are very important facts when reading political books about our United States of America because they help us to understand what is really going on, as explained in the book, Don't Weep for Me, America: How Democracy in America Became the Prince (While We Slept) Chalmers explains the relationship between big American corporations, such as ITT and the U S Government, and how the President's private army the CIA factors in. Chalmers discusses the 9/11 Commission and says, "...the fix was in..." And then in gutsy investigative detail, he says, "The Senate Intelligence Committee, the 9/11 Commission, and the CIA's Iraq Survey Group, under Charles Duelfer, all reported that the CIA's intelligence on Iraqi WMD was largely fictitious. Even more dangerous for the White House, these reports suggested that much of this intelligence had been manufactured by neoconservative officials in the Pentagon long eager to invade Iraq." But Chalmers doesn't stop there. He gives a very brief historical context for such governmental subversion by writing, "at the apex of those who profited from British-style "free trade" at the end of the nineteenth century was the Rothschild Bank, then by far the world's largest financial institution with total assets of around forty-one million pounds sterling. It profited enormously from the wars-some seventy-two of them-during Queen Vicotria's reign and financied such exploiters of Africa as Cecil Rhodes"-see my review: Rhodes: Race for Africa. It can't be easy to inform the American public of such an evil government without crossing the line of "unacceptability". Chalmers Johnson is brilliant in his scope and his scholarship. Read him and you'll understand why Tocqueville wrote in his "Democracy in America" in 1835 that civilization has perfected despotism. And then you'll understand Chalmers subtitle: "The Last Days of the American Republic".

When I heard that Morley had co-authored a new book I wondered what he was up to. I was part of the reinventing government team that Morley headed and respect him for his political insight and as a decent human being.

The book is a mile stone that shows where we are now. where we came from and where we are going. Not to often do you find a book on society and politics that is as informative and easy to read.

The the final chapters Rebuilding America's Civic Infrastructure and
Public Policy in a Millennial Era are jnspiring and are a great addition to public dialog. The comparison to our time and 1860 and 1932 is on the mark.

Now living in northern Arizona after 47 years in the DC area I can see a factor that I could not find in the book the relationship with the rapidly expanding world of nonprofits partcularly in the area of natural resource sustainability

Just as newspapers have shifted their primary emphasis from print to the Internet, so too has politics. The bottom-up dynamic, emblemized by user-generated content, is taking over in many spheres, and those who cling to old authoritarian top-down structures will become irrelevant.

There's more power in a user-generated video on youtube, produced at almost zero cost and gone viral, than in any traditional prepackaged million dollar TV ad campaign. Indeed, often the packaged claims are mercilessly pulled apart to great detriment to their makers by online hordes (witness Hillary's "3 AM" ad, or her claims of sniper fire) - and increasingly, the online hordes are the ones who are having the final word. (This also raises the specter of the digital divide, where only the plugged-in will recognize and understand the various waves of public opinion.)

A great move of democratization is well under way, and its pace is almost frightening. Print media can't keep up with the new newsflow. Even online news sites that do not encourage reader interactivity will wither. (These Amazon reviews were a trailblazer in creating the new interactive environment.)

This book argues two main points: that the upcoming generation has more in common with Democratic Party ideals than Republican, and that on top of that the Republicans have been late to recognize the seismic generationally- and technologically-driven shift beneath our feet.

This book will by no means be the final word on the subject. Both authors are committed Democrats, and though they strive to write without bias, it's a sure bet their theses will be answered by those on the other side of the fence. In the answering will develop a more circumspect, accurate picture - in a process mimicking the online refinement of opinion that the authors write about. Nonetheless this work lays an important foundation that the politically- and civic-minded of all persuasions would do very well to digest.

Unlike most books, this one more than lives up to the hype on its jacket. Morley Winograd and Michael Hais go well beyond generational theory to help us understand not only past critical turning points in American history, but also the crucial one we're about to live through.

This is not the political punditry of "talking heads" who merely spout trendy theories without analytical substance. Rather, it is a well researched and well written review of the factors that have helped shape the Millennial Generation (1983-2003) now coming of age, together with some insightful commentary on the impact this generation is likely to have on our country and our world. In its pages the authors present both the "whys" and the "hows" in a well organized and easy-to-read discourse.

"Millennial Makeover" is not just for political junkies. If you are a concerned citizen trying to wade through the political and social cross-currents of our country, particularly in this important presidential election year, you should read this book. It left this aging Baby Boomer surprised, enlightened, fearful, smiling and cautiously optimistic about our future.

"A republic, if you can keep it." That's what Benjamin Franklin reportedly said when asked at the close of the Constitutional Convention what type of government the Framers had fashioned. "Millennial Makeover" offers a fascinating look at how this emerging tech-savvy "civic" generation might do just that.

Winograd and Hais theorize that American political constituencies cycle and recycle every 40-years with each cycle fueled by new technologies that empower new constituencies. Ostensibly, the millennial "civic purpose" generation, by some astrological virtue, is poised to assume a mantle of power. If the authors are correct, then the Greatest Generation was great because of its place in a 40-year cycle and not because of the harsh reality of having to fight Adolph Hitler or die.

To support their theory, the authors would have us believe that "long periods of great stability in electoral outcomes" can be deduced from a pattern like Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush (D, R, D, D, R, R, D, R, R, D, R).

Often, in place of real historical events, the authors cite contemporary fiction -- video philosophy from Star Wars' Yoda or fictional facts from J. K. Rowling's "Harry Potter" that match their worldview. Potter may demonstrate fictional millennial virtues, but the authors avoid Dolores Umbrage, the teacher whose politically correct teaching ignores actual useful defenses against the dark arts. A champion of central authority, as the authors suggest millennials are, she and the Ministry of Magic avoid at all costs facing the "reality" of evil. Life seems so much easier when history begins at dawn.

The authors presume that Democrats alone can pull this generation's technological sword from the stone. Never mind that technology is a tool for whoever cares to learn enough to use it -- not just Democrats or Republicans, but fundamentalists, radicals, and reactionaries of all persuasions. The authors overlook the 60-year-old ideas of Marshall McLuhan, who warned of the importance of a medium's cognitive effects. Lose your content and you lose your bearings.

The book promotes now-ness, technological infatuation, and me-ness to suggest millennials deserve power because they are who they are -- which makes them ripe for picking by any chameleon-like leader. Look elsewhere for help understanding the past or planning a future because this book is a honey-pot of buzzwords for the convinced.

"Millennial Makeover" presents a very interesting but not wholly convincing analysis of how politics may be shaped by the rise of the Millennials, or those born between 1982 and 2003. Relying far too much on a questionable cyclical reading of American history, Morley Winograd and Michael D. Hais nonetheless demonstrate how the Millennial's embrace of new cultural attitudes and technologies will impact the political dialogue for decades to come. While the author's selective presentation of data tends to prompt far more questions than answers, the book succeeds in providing an interesting introduction to a subject that no doubt will be discussed and debated now and well into the future.

Mr. Winograd and Mr. Hais contend that American politics cycle through change about every forty years and experience a profound realignment about once every eighty years. The authors believe that these changes are typically spurred by the ideological exhaustion of prior generations and the introduction of new technologies that enable new political constituencies to form. In my view, this is problematic: critics such as David R Mayhew have pointed out that cyclical theorists are more often wrong than right; worse, as a theoretical construct, the methodology tends to close off lines of inquiry into the underlying reasons why voter preferences may be realigning, such as changes in economic or social conditions of the kind that one might suspect may be operative at the present time.

Fortunately, Mr. Winograd and Mr. Hais serve up plenty of raw meat and provide insight into the Millennials that might help us form our own opinions about what the future might hold. The authors explain how blogging and peer-to-peer technologies are empowering "netroots" activism and providing alternatives to broadcast media; they go on to argue that political parties must shift from prevailing money-and-media models to decentralized organizational structures. We are shown some interesting case studies where individuals have used YouTube and MySpace to win local contests against great odds and upset the conventional wisdom. These sections of the book succeed brilliantly as they draw upon the author's decades of experience in the political arena to shed new light on how profoundly the process is changing and how American democracy might be reinvigorated.

Yet somehow, the light that Mr. Winograd and Mr. Hais shines on the Millennial generation itself appears to be diffused. For example, one must wonder if the large numbers of Millennials who currently suffer from deficient healthcare and educational services might be represented disproportionately among those who favor greater government spending; might not this constitute a cry of desperation rather than one of enlightened civility, as the authors of this book seem to suggest? Unfortunately, the author's insistence on rolling up the Millennials into a single, undifferentiated mass makes it impossible for us to know. On this point, readers might do well to consider The Dumbest Generation by Mark Bauerlein who presents the Millennials as a generation whose critical thinking skills have been stupefied by an unprecedented abundance of mind-distracting media and technological gadgetry; contrary to Mr. Winograd and Mr. Hais, Mr. Bauerlein demonstrates that the Millennials possess a diminished knowledge of civics compared to prior generations and worse, generally lack the cognitive skills needed to distinguish between true and false claims of information.

Compounding the problem is that the authors seem determined to write a palliative for the Democratic Party faithful that proposes to show how its policy positions will align neatly with Millennial concerns. Although a reasonable person might well agree with the authors on the wisdom of their proposals, is it not also quite plausible that a repackaging of Republican Party-style 'ownership society' proposals might serve as a marketable (if not credible) response to our current social, economic and environmental crises? Indeed, the survey data presented about the Millennial's overly optimistic material expectations suggests that this generation has been conditioned by unprecedented levels of corporate messaging; presumably this could make Millennials susceptible to corporate greenwashing campaigns, corporate welfare state solutions, and the like. Indeed, to the extent that the Obama and McCain campaigns have championed national health care policies that feature prominent roles for private insurance companies, we may well be witnessing a realignment of voter preferences that merely determines the methods by which the corporate control of our democracy is intensified. Put another way, the evidence presented suggests that the pending realignment, if it materializes, will be political but far from radical.

In any case, the authors are to be congratulated for writing a stimulating book that helps us consider how major changes might well be in the offing. I recommend the book for everyone interested in political science and contemporary events.

It is understandably difficult to write a one-volume history of a continent as diverse as Africa. Nonetheless, I think Mr. Meredith has written a fine example. In the process, he avoids the pitfalls commited by many Third Worldist ideologists who paternalize Africa and place the majority of the blame for its current state on external actors. Although Cold War rivalries certainly played a part, the reality, as Mr. Meredith ably documents, is that the continent's problems since independence have been first and foremost an indigenous leadership class often displaying stunning incompetence, greed, and bloodthirstyness.

This is by far one of the best books I have ever read on African politics. It is the perfect book for someone who is starting to learn about African politics, wants to improve their knowledge, or just wants to learn about African history. This is a passionate, well-written book that I strongly recommend reading-you will not be sorry you did.

A compendium of African history from the partition to present day. If you are interested in knowing about African leadership and economic issues - this is the book.

In only 688 pages Martin Meredith succeeds in capturing the recent history of more or less the whole of (sub-Saharan) Africa, throwing in a few countries above the Sahara for good measure. After a brief introduction, he starts off at independence of most countries, and what you read does not make you happy. With only very few exception new rulers with initially good intentions turn within no-time into greedy, ruthless killers that divide the loot (read "the treasury"and "the natural resources of their countries") among themselves, their close familiy, their tribe and their cronies. When things get too obvious, a military coup follows, after which the new leaders do exactly the same. And in the meantime the common people suffer, be it from the lawlessness of Somalia, the genocide in Rwanda, the economic ruins in Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe, or the denial of Mbeki in South Africa that HIV causes AIDS. And these are only a few of the countless examples that make you feel quite depressed. Despite all the foreign aid that is being poured into a continent that has such rich resources (gold, diamonds, oil and a host of minerals), the economic situation of most people has only deteriorated since independence. and this is also in stark contrast to for example Southeast Asia that has gone through an economic explosion.

I regularly work in Africa in collaborative scientific research projects on infectious diseases and I see abysmal hospital facilities, people (including colleagues) dying from diseases that can easily be cured and hot-shots whose only attitude is "what is in it for me?" (and they are so shameless that they actually ask you that question). But I also see tons of very dedicated people -mainly in the lower echelons-, trying to make the best of the meagre resources they have available, people who thoroughly know how to enjoy life and are as hospitable as can be. I always tell them that they are too friendly and slightly naive in believing the promises made. If in the west we would have a ruler like Mugabe, we would have kicked him out years (and put him in prison for good measure).

In my opinion education is key to solving the problems of Africa: educated people are people who can make their own decisions, are able to critically evaluate their options and ultimately can decide together what is best for their country. And yes, maybe in some instances it will be necessary to re-consider borders so that they coincide better with historical delineations between tribes and religions. But it will ask for vision, courage and patience and the question is whether there will be sufficient time available...

=== Summary ===
"This book follows the fortunes of Africa in modern times, opening in the years that it sped towards independence and encompassing the half-century that has since passed. It focuses in particular on the role of a number of African leaders whose characters and careers had a decisive impact on the fate of their countries." (13)
"Although Africa is a continent of incredible diversity, African states have much in common, not only their origins as colonial territories, but the similar hazards and difficulties they have faced. Indeed, what is so striking about the fifty-year period since independence is the extent to which African states have suffered so many of the same misfortunes."
"In reality, fifty years after the beginning of the independence era, Africa's prospects are bleaker than ever before." (681)
"Half of Africa's 880 million people live on less than US$1 per day. Its entire economic output is no more than $420 billion, just 1.3 per cent of world GDP, less than a country like Mexico." (682)
"Sub-Saharan Africa is home to just 10 per cent of the world's population but bears more than 70 per cent of the world's HIV/Aids cases... Teachers die at a faster rate than replacements can be trained. the skill shortage grows worse." (682)
"When Abdou Diouf of Senegal accepted defeat in an election in March 2000, he was only the fourth African president to do so in four decades." (679)
"After decades of mismanagement and corruption, most African states have become hollowed out. They are no longer instruments capable of serving the public good. Indeed, far from being able to provide aid and protection to their citizens, African governments and the vampire-like politicians who run them are regarded by the populations they rule as yet another burden they have to bear in the struggle for survival." (688)

=== Main Argument ===
Meredith only ventures to make one claim: the failure in Africa is due to a failure in leadership (inexperience/incompetence, stubbornness/personality, corruption/greed, even downright tyranny.) He is more concerned with providing a morass of personalities, events, and statistics and letting the reading wade through it themselves. "It suffers from a tendency to emphasize the lurid details rather than examine why such patterns of behavior persisted."

== Contentions (Agreements/Disagreements) ==
Meredith's argument begs the question why leadership failed on such a spectacularly wide level in the first place. It is implausible to attribute this failure to individual personalities (it cannot be that every African statesman was of lower quality than their Western counterparts.) So what environmental factors were there? He briefly touches on many of them, but gives no idea as to their relative importance:
* Contemporary factors: idea of nationalism quickly snowballs.
* Historical factors: ethnic tensions, lack of national identity, types of colonial management.
* Foreign policy factors: meddling by former colonial masters, Cold War tensions.
* Cultural factors: use of military power to settle scores (?), steal from government for factional gain.
* Economic factors: poverty, wide-spread discontent, uneducated masses. (Newly capitalist countries are likely to create the conditions for first generation greed. See China.)
* Political factors: no frameworks to limit corruption (free media, checks and balances, political experience/history, good civil servants).

=== Contentions (Part II) ===
He also talks about the mass movement towards democratization, but is incoherent in explaining how/why it materialized and unconvincing in labeling it as the new lodestar. "During the 1990s, at least 25 countries established 'multi-party democracies.'" (677) Part of this, I am sure, is because we are in the middle of this new phase. Here are some of the factors regarding democratization:
* Contemporary factors: first batch of dictators die of old age, resign, coup'd, find more pleasure in telling stories, etc.
* Foreign policy factors: regional powers emerging, regional policing, increased usage of (surprisingly effective!) international sanctions.
* Cultural factors: people are tired of dictators and war, groundswell of movement.
* Economic factors: nothing left to plunder.
* Political factors: ...

=== Insights Raised (wrt present-day Africa) ===
Meredith mostly does not offer solutions. But, one can examine the past to see what commercial failures existed:
* Corruption and contractual "fees" create operational difficulties/slowness.
* History of "nationalizing" commercial/Western property to fund corrupt governments.
* Even good governments become corrupt or have the constant threat of being overthrown.
* Groundswell of discontent against all signs of Western capitalism is a cultural theme and continental paranoia (justified or not).

=== Raised Questions ===
* Why did Africa fail? What are the relative importance of factors behind the decline of African states between freedom and present-day? And where does colonial history, indigenous society, trade barriers, etc. come into play?
* Given how shared the fate of the continent is, are these factors shared between all the nations on the continent? Or did the factors only impact a handful of nations and cause a snowball effect (see: land-lock hypothesis)?
* What about the countries that did do well (eg. Botswana, Senegal)? These are glossed over. What caused their exceptional performance?
* Why didn't South Africa decline like its neighbors? Did the white rule there help? All the whites clamoring for "no majority rule" or claiming Africans weren't equipped to govern themselves are painted as ignorant. But it is true that there was no institutional knowledge of political systems upon freedom; knowledge takes time to transfer over.
* Where do we go from here? What time period are we currently in and what can we learn from the past to move forwards in the present?

This book explains how public policy is made, the types of models which could be used to make/evaluate a public policy, and an overview of how public policymaking fits into the American government process.

Since most people have only learned about the three branches of government, they may not be certain how passed laws are enacted. Lacking the time and expertise needed to implement these laws, legislators at the federal, state, and local levels delegate authority to agencies to make the policy which will implement these laws.

The chief benefit of this text is the qualitative approach which Birkland personally prefers (although he does warn that other approaches use an economics-based approach) and clear explanations. It also contains an annotated bibliography of influential works and a dictionary of key terms used in the public policymaking process.

Birkland's text is written so that it can be used either by students or public policy practitioners. Instead of bogging down the reader in minutiae and personal liberty, he wanted to emphasize how important public policy is.

There are a number of books "out there" on the nature of the public policy process. This is one of the better textbooks on the subject.

The book begins with a solid chapter on the nature of public policy and how we study the phenomenon. This flows into the second chapter, which focuses on the history of public policy (going back to Constitutional design) and culminates with a discussion (albeit brief) of the fragmentation of the policy process.

The next two chapters explore key actors--official governmental actors like the President and Congress and unofficial actors such as media and think tanks.

Thereafter, the text focuses on the various "stages" of the policy process--from agenda setting to policy types to policy design and the toolbox of policies to implementation.

The volume concludes with an examination of several theories of the policy process.

This book isn't the best of the lot; however, it is a good, serviceable introduction to the policy process.