Politics Government Books

This book is an excellent read for those political junkies who are following this election day by day.

Drew Westen draws on both basic neuropsych research and political research. He is not always clear which of the two he is using in his conclusions. This is a well written book by a committed Democrat. His analysis of why people vote for particular candidates is interesting and believable. Yep, this is why they made Socrates drink the hemlock. A must read for all who hope to vote in an informed way or who intend to run for office.

As a psychotherapist and author, I'm amazed at how Westen makes such a complex, well researched subject so compelling and fascinating. I am rarely a nonfiction reader out of my genre of psychology, but this book is a pleasure to read. Westen explains how the parts of the brain work together and helps us easily understand the role of emotion in deciding not just the fate of the nation but everything political. I have recommended this book to all my friends.

The Republican Party, to its credit, has exploited this fundamental principle of politics for decades, while many Democratic candidates have retreated into a "safe" strategy of not offending the electorate.

This has lead to an extremely unhealthy state of one-party dominance at many levels of government.

Westen utilizes brain science and research to prove that taking a clear stance on a controversial issue, even if it is the "wrong" stance in the view of the pollsters, will garner more votes that hiding behind a staid shield of non-offensive double-talk.

"The Political Brain" by Drew Westen is an important contribution to the political science literature in general and an inspiration for Democratic Party supporters in particular. Mr. Westen's knowledge of psychology and the cognitive sciences provides insight into how the individual develops a political consciousness. Showing how the Republican Party has gained advantage by developing an emotionally fear-laden narrative designed to exploit the electorate's psychic sensibilities, Mr. Westen argues that Democrats can and must develop a compelling counternarrative that appeals to the American public's better angels in order to inspire their supporters and win consistently at the polls.

The first section discusses the mind, brain and emotion in politics. Mr. Westen draws upon the latest scientific research to explain how emotion is integral to the brain's cognitive function. Mr. Westen recites passages delivered by Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Bill Clinton to illustrate how political messages are most effective when they tie issues to emotionally resonant themes and images. Importantly, Mr. Westen also deconstructs the neoliberal ideology of Ronald Reagan to help us better understand the importance of evolutionary psychology and crafting popular messages with curb appeal.

The second section provides a blueprint for executing emotionally compelling campaigns. Mr. Westen explores the multiple layers of voter intelligence to reveal how Republicans have successfully used subliminal messaging to activate the public's feelings of anxiety in order to get people to vote against their own material self-interests. The author stresses that when Democratics shy away from conflict, voters instinctively detect weakness; therefore he recommends that Democrats cede nothing and go after issues that many voters tend to perceive as Republican. To that end, Mr. Westen offers a series of principled narratives on contentious issues such as abortion, affirmative action, gay rights and gun control that he believes could easily help the Democrats gain majority support by activating the American voter's sense of fairness, freedom and equality of opportunity. While perhaps not fully convincing on all subjects, Mr. Westen amply demonstrates that a coherent and inspirational counternarrative is possible.

Unfortunately, this otherwise excellent book succumbs to a transparent attempt at self-promotion by forcing readers to go to the author's website to read the footnotes. Boo! Yet despite this minor deficiency, I highly recommend this timely and fascinating book to everyone.

The debate on the American Empire takes place on several levels simultaneously: on one axis is the question of whether America is an empire, and if so, what kind of empire is it? It is obviously different from past empires because it is hardly territorial; but it still exerts its influence in ways that Rome or Britain would have found unimaginable. On another other axis rests the issue of the impact of the American imperium: is it a force for peace and stability or upheaval and destruction? Then, there is an issue of strategy: how should American policymakers conduct their affairs? What should citizens do?

These are some of the questions addressed in "The Imperial Tense," a book edited by Andrew Bacevich, a professor of International Relations at Boston University. Mr. Bacevich is no stranger to empire. His book, American Empire, was widely acclaimed; its central argument was that, however in denial, America's commitment to empire is not only real but also a central component of its foreign policy. He now brings that expertise in collecting some of the finest perspectives on the problems and prospects of the American Empire.

The selections are diverse just as they insightful; David Rieff carves out the problems of humanitarian intervention; Deepek Lal writes to defend Empires; Charles Krauthammer praises America's unipolar era; David North admonishes America's drive for world domination; Peter Bender, Andrew Bacevich, Jedediah Purdy, David Marquand, James Chance, Martin Walker, Victor Davis Hanson all explore America's position as a unique empire; Josh Milblank, Stanley Hoffman, G. John Ikenberry, Charles Maier, Stephen Peter Rosen debate America's imperial strategies; and Wendell Berry, Gabriel Ash and James Kurth speculate on America's future.

Not all the pieces are great; but they are widely representative of the breadth and depth of the debate taking place about America's role as a global empire. Although the authors are mostly American, this hardly diminishes those parts of the book which cast a skeptical eye on the imperial enterprise. In the end, "The Imperial Tense" is one of the best books to bring together some of the most thoughtful articles on the American imperium. For that, and for its reference value, it is sure to be widely read and used.

This collection of arguments on compelling problems of America provides a range of viewpoints, invites debates and consideration of all sides, and surveys issues important to humanitarian causes. From assessments of American global domination and imperialist purposes in the world to its quest for security and expanded world influence, this provides an essential source of particular recommendation to high school and college-level courses on social issues.

I read this book twice both in Persian & English and found lots of historical errors in the book such as claims that PM Mossadeq was democratically elected back in 1950s which is totally wrong. PM Mossadeq was APPOINTED as PM by the King of Iran, Shah Reza Pahlavi in 1950 and when ordered to quit, the Shah had to execute a UK-US backed coup against him.... Errors like that are enormous in this book.

Kapuscinski writes persceptively about Iran before and during the Iranian revolution, based on his extended stay there during the period it occured. He combines factual reporting and his own impressions based on notes, tapes and photographs. It is particularly strong on the psychology of various players. He is a wonderful, direct writer. The rewarding 152 page book goes by in no time.

The book is a montage of images from the Shah's reign and the revolution. A good little book for understanding why the Shah was who he was, and why he deserved his fate.

Iran under the Shah was a totalitarian society. It was marked by indiscriminate terror, a single political party with membership mandatory for job advancement, a massive informant network, quotas for finding dissidents, an inefficient command economy driven by the Shah's oil money, and a total disregard for human rights.

The only space the Shah didn't control was inside the Mosques. They became a refuge for people, and ultimately a base for revolution.

I wonder how the Shah's fate influenced Saddam Hussein?

Everyone interested in understanding what is going on in Iraq, Iran and the rest of the middle east should read this book. It provides a
succinct, informed history of rulers, dynasties, cultures, etc. that affect today's life in this area. A super read! The author literally immersed himself in these cultures at great risk in order to provide an accurate portrayal.

A documentary of the 27th regime collapse Kapuscinski has witnessed himself. This time it is the Shah of Iran in 1979.

K. writes of a fear that creates a boundary for thinking; a thinking that involves only terms of basic materials:

"The great thing about the concrete is that it has its own clearly demarcated armed frontiers with warning bells along them. When a mind immersed in the concrete begins to approach that border, the bells warn that just beyond lies the field of treacherous general ideas, undesirable reflections, and syntheses. At the sound of this signal the cautious mind recoils and drives back into the concrete" (Kapuscinski, 84).

K. writes of a conversation he has with a Persian rug dealer:

"It is all a question of taste, he tells me: The most inportant thing, sir, is to have taste. The world would look far different if a few more people had a drop more taste. In all horrors (for he does call them horrors), like lying, treachery, theft, and informing, he distinguishes a common denominator-such things are done by people with no taste" (Kapuscinski, 151).

Americans should not glance over this book because it was published in 1979. Its themes of fear and control on the one hand, and decency and taste on the other hand, are very relevent to Americans in 2006.

Having read parts of this textbook for a college American Gov class I can say that it is fascinating for those interested in the subject and the author is engaging enough to be read by all who are interested in learning more about the essentials of American Government. The author addresses many contemporary issues such as the upcoming 2008 presidential election and other pertinent issues, which was a very nice feature.

This book provides an important, comprehensive examination of the power of the presidency. The book examines the history of the presidency from conception to the present day, and features an in-depth look at all dimensions of the presidency: the statutory scope of the office, the relationship of the office to the other divisions of government, and most unsettling, the contemporary expectations of the American public.

Gene Healy has displayed a passion for research of the presidency, and consequently offers the reader a rich presentation of specific examples and historical context surrounding the morphing of the presidency into what it is today. The telling of this story is both unsettling and poignant, as we are provided relentless examples of the results of individual ambition, complicity of the other branches of the government, and the growing, collective desire for an American hero. The results are tragic: unrealistic expectations, dashed hopes, and the trail of carnage and devastation that has been wreaked upon other nations in the pursuit of our own identity. This book is essential reading for every American voter . One of the most perspective-changing books I've read in a long time.

THE CULT OF THE PRESIDENCY: AMERICA'S DANGEROUS DEVOTION TO EXECUTIVE POWER emphasizes that just changing the presidency does not eliminate the concerns the Bush years have provoked over a resurgent Imperial Presidency. This book argues that the fault lies not in what leader is in office, but in our own expectations and definitions of the commander-in-chief, and chapters offer a blend of scholarly research, legal analysis, and cultural commentary suitable for any college-level library strong in American politics and government.

Diane C. Donovan
California Bookwatch

I have to admit it: I'm a presidential cultist. In 8th grade I memorized all the presidents with their years of service. In high school I read The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt by Edmund Morris, a book that inspired me during a particularly rough time in my life. To this day I follow politics like most men follow sports.

So it's not easy or natural for me to recommend a book that celebrates the likes of Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge and deconstructs Woodrow Wilson, FDR, or my beloved TR.

Yet if you're like me, you have this nagging sense that something has gone terribly wrong. In a country founded on the anti-monarchical principle that government is "of the people," we have come to lust after a king - a man who will heal our hurts, save us from our enemies, educate our children, protect us from the weather, and guarantee our material comforts.

In this book, you'll learn how we got here. After starting out with the Founders and the debate over whether the nation's chief executive should have a title, you'll be introduced to the concept of Unitary Executive theory and its chief proponent, Professor John Yoo, who as a young lawyer in the post-9/11 Office of Legal Counsel, provided the intellectual firepower for George W's expansive view of presidential prerogative. You'll also meet Clinton Rossiter, whose book, The American Presidency, published in the 1950s, documented how such an expansive view was palatable to the American people who had come to expect their president to be World Leader, Protector of the Peace, Chief Legislator, Manager of Prosperity, and Voice of the People, among other things.

Along the way, you will gain an appreciation for the Quiet Ones - John Adams to Calvin Coolidge - and why, out of commitment to republican principles, they kept their mouths shut (for the most part). You'll see how the Progressive movement's program to take power away from political bosses and give it to "the people" has ironically resulted in creating the greatest political Boss of all. That same movement also gave us our first models of modern Heroic Presidents - TR and Wilson. Interestingly, while TR may have been the Luther, it was Wilson who was the Calvin - the great intellectual systematizer and practical political implementer of the theology of presidential power. "The President is at liberty, both in law and conscience, to be as big a man as he can," Wilson declared.

Journalists and scholars, who are, by trade, usually in the Progressive camp, are indicted for aiding and abetting the creation of this un-republican Big Man.

The book falls short of a true classic (and a 5-star rating) due to the following.

The author spills a lot of ink over the imperialistic sins of George W. Bush (3 of 9 chapters), which will unfortunately limit the book's shelf life once the current occupant leaves office. He failed to engage at least one of the standard presidential biographies. Anyone evaluating LBJ is obliged to engage Robert Caro's penetrating 3-volume study, and yet I didn't see one reference to it. There is also a fair amount of dieseling of the author's main point in the book's nearly 300 pages.

His discussion of Lincoln is surprisingly short. He justifies this on the premise that the chief executives from 1865 to 1901 reverted to the antebellum model, and thus Lincoln didn't permanently change the game. And yet all the executive over-reaches of power which the author decries were dramatically displayed in Lincoln. While one may explain this away as a singular historical moment, I have also suspected that Lincoln, and specifically, his Emancipation Proclamation poses something of a dilemma for Libertarians. While emancipation from slavery is certainly libertarian, it took a very un-libertarian Executive Order and a bloody civil war to achieve it. Whether it's by design or oversight, the lack of a thorough discussion of Lincoln and the impact his deification in the post-war North must have had on the young Roosevelt cousins and Wilson was a missed opportunity.

Despite his amassing the evidence of presidential abuses of power, the author's proposed remedies are surprisingly brief (5 pages) and timid - airing some thoughts about the proposed Separation of Powers Act and tinkering with the War Powers Resolution. The author prefaces his lack of solutions by noting that we are already too far gone: until we adjust our expectations of the presidency, no legislative solution will be sufficient to tame the creature we have created. Nevertheless, since we are dealing in the realm of ideas, the author could have taken the opportunity to be bolder.

These shortcomings are relatively minor given the depth with which the author has built his case and the importance and timeliness of his message. To those of you who are growing tired of your addiction to The Politico and RealClearPolitics.com, this book will be your first step toward sobriety.

Gene Healy presents a piquant blend of political history combined with the all-too-obvious idea that the "original meaning" or "Founder's Intent" notion of what the American presidency should and ought to be are long gone. Maybe it is just my cynicism but I don't really see this kind of work as even being relevant to American post-911 politics anymore. The perpetual condition of war that we are now ensnared in wherein every foreign affairs issue and/or societal problem or economic crisis that comes our way is now regarded as the "moral equivalent of war" and therefore needing a "wartime leader" to manage it, how could the presidency fail to not become imperial?

Healy's scholarship is impeccable and his observations though largely correct also seem to be to be largely beside the point. America is not going to go back to a Grover Cleveland style of strict constructionist/original intent form of presidency any time soon and likely never will either unless or until this whole rotten ship of sate that imperial America has become crashes into the shoals and so must of necessity be reformulated.

The modern American presidency is the principal metastatic agent for the cancerous growth that the U.S. government has become. Healy details the step by step process of how this has all come about, but except for unashamed statists, political science scholars, and historians, his book probably won't make for a very interesting read. It's like reading a mystery novel where you already know the denouement. So unless you fit into one of the above mentioned categories I'd recommend you save the 3-4 four hours it takes to read and the $22.95 it costs to buy and read something else.

Do yourself--and the country--a favor, and pick up a copy of Cato Institute scholar Gene Healy's new book, The Cult of the Presidency: America's Dangerous Devotion to Executive Power. This important book has the potential to start a much-needed national conversation about the monstrous amount of power we invest in the individual who occupies the White House at any given moment.

Every four years, we find ourselves in a national tizzy. Some of us have hopes that ________________ (insert your favorite power-hungry presidential candidate here) will somehow save the country. But most of us fret about the possibility that _________________ (insert your least favorite power-hungry presidential candidate here) may wreak economic or foreign-policy havoc.

And we have good reason to fret. Once he or she becomes a resident at 1600 Pennsylvania, the elected president has a finger on the nuclear button, the ability to start wars unilaterally, and the power to meddle forcefully in the US economy via executive orders and regulatory fiat.

On paper, there are checks and balances on the presidency, but those checks and balances are easily overridden by a national psychology in which the masses look to the president to solve their daily economic problems and combat every evil, whether domestic or foreign. We are repeatedly disappointed by the performance of our presidents, but we continue to give them greater and greater powers.

Healy's book examines the historical origins of our cultish devotion to the presidency, and explains the danger to America of placing too much power in the hands of one person--no matter who that person is, or what party he/she belongs to.

This is a book Americans need to read--especially this year.

(Lower-case p intended.)

Globalization, as a word, is not very specific. The world may be globalizing, but what specifically does that mean? Furthermore, there is no shortage of competing ideas about the role and effects of globalization on the world economy. Getting to the truth of the matter requires going back to the basics of economics and politics, which is what the author attempts to do. He gives a primer on neoclassical economic theory, new economic theories, the global financial markets, international trade, multi-national corporations, and the ideal role of the state in economic development. Gilpin is by no means a socialist. He believes in the importance of free trade and in the optimizing qualities of the market, but he also acknowledges that the state has an important role to play in economic matters, and that this role is often downplayed in classical economics. I highly recommend this book. I read it for a class, but I really enjoyed it. In terms of quality, it was head and shoulders above the other books we read for the class. I would highly recommend this to any of my friends as a great overview of how politics and economics interact on a global level.

This is an outstanding update of the author's earlier book, The Political Economy of International Relations (1987). It is meant to complement Gilpin's more recent work, The Challenge of Global Capitalism (2000). In Global Political Economy, Gilpin discusses a wide range of theories in the field combining careful textual analysis with advocacy of his own views. The author's own theoretical stance is one of "state-centric realism." He identifies with authors like Thucydides, Machiavelli, and Hans Morgenthau, but not with what he calls the "systemic realism" of authors like Kenneth Waltz. While he admires and uses the work of contemporary economists, he also carefully differentiates his approach from theirs (in Chapter 3). Except for a brief acknowledgement of the difficulty of explaining European integration in state-centric realist terms (in Chapter 13) and a bit of defensiveness on the continued value of theories of hegemonial stability (in Chapter 4), Gilpin does a good job of defending his views.

The author does an excellent job of surveying recent work in economics without resorting to jargon. There are outstanding treatments of topics like the continued relevance of Heckscher-Ohlin trade theory, strategic trade, endogenous growth theory, and the new economic geography. The discussion of the globalization of international finance in Chapter 10 emphasizes the need to take into account the "increased interdependence of trade, monetary, and other aspects of the international economy" that results from "[m]ovement toward a single, globally integrated market for corporation ownership" (277). Chapter 11 provides a state-of-the-art discussion of the role of multinational corporations in the world economy. Chapter 12 does a fine job of discussing the likely future of theories of the developmental state in light of the Asian Crises of the late 1990s. The final chapter lays out three major scenarios for governance of the world economy, informed as always by the author's realist views.

This book is long and dense. There are few wasted or unnecessary words. It is not easy to read. However, it could be used for graduate seminars or upper-division undergraduate courses in international political economy in conjunction with texts that are more empirical or descriptive in their treatment of international political economy.

Global Political Economy is an excellent book. It represents a major and successful updating of The Political Economy of International Relations. Any person interested in international political economy can profit from reading it.

Gilpin'book is a quite complex survey on the functioning of the global economy. However, taking such a broad issue in the limitid scope of the book allows him not to analyze the topic in the broader detail. What I find interesting is that the author asserts the world economy is dominated by the United States and they are maintaining their dominance by certain privileges: dominance of US dollar in the international monetary system, creating the international financial architecture with controling its institutions and making the rules of the international trading system. He employs for this setting the international regime, whose main attribute is the presence of the hegemon in the background of the system. He realistically analyzes the position of nation-state in contemporary world economy. He originally finds the new roles for the nation-state as growth promoter of high-tech industries, constructer of the international trade and financial regime. He puts evidence of the continuing differences between three models of capitaism: that of Germany, USA and Japan. In the analysis of the relationship between MNCs and the nation-states he asserts the depence of the former on latter and not conversely as frequently claimed. In every chapter he provides the range of opinions on each particular segment of GPE and combines it with his own view, trying to pick up the best from each of the political economy branches. However, in the chapters about international trading, financial and monatary system I miss a more deep and sophisticated perspective about future development.

Gilpin's survey offers undergrads an introduction to globalization by discussing the substance and the theoretical debates on "What is political economy," international trade and finance, MNCs, and the role of the state and international institutions. I found its chapters worked great with students when combined with a relevant current events article from the Economist or FT, for example. For graduate students and other professionals new to i.p.e., it provides a summary or introduction to several important debates, with direction to the original texts and critics - useful that way as a primer or a reference book. (February 2002)

Robert Gilpin's Global Political Economy: Understanding the International Economic Order delivers what it promises by giving readers an understanding of economic relations among nations. Essentially, it is an introduction to the discipline of political economy, a survey of economic developments since World War II, and an analysis of the theories that compete to explain these developments. As an introduction to the field, it is both accessible and comprehensive, but extensive footnotes and a select bibliography provide resources for advanced students.

Gilpin begins with a rather pessimistic assessment of his colleagues: economists, he says, have a suite of highly developed analytical methods and theoretical models that are seldom applicable. Political scientists, on the other hand, rely essentially on intuition that is seldom informed by theory. Political economy, of course, is an attempt to move past these limitations. Political economists tend to study powerful economic actors who can influence prices. Realists, like Gilpin, focus especially on state actors while recognizing the increasing influence of global investors, multinational corporations, and NGOs. Political economists would take particular note that economies are embedded in social and political systems where the purposes of economic activity are decided. One society may use its wealth to build a fairly egalitarian welfare state; another might use it to develop military might, and a third might concentrate wealth in the hands of a small elite.

One of the striking features of the international economy is that "free trade has historically been the exception and protection the rule," even though the benefits of free trade have persuasive theoretical and empirical support. Trade liberalization increases domestic competition, thus increasing efficiency and consumer choice. It increases both domestic and global wealth through the gains from specialization, and it encourages the diffusion of new technology throughout the world. Gilpin cites several reasons why, in the light of these benefits, protectionist ideologies usually hold sway. First, while the principle of comparative advantage tells us that both parties to an exchange will benefit, one party may benefit more than the other, and nations can and do worry about relative benefits. Second, economists support the use of protection for infant industries that can later become competitive. Unfortunately, there is no way other than trial and error to identify these future winners, and temporary protection often becomes permanent. Third, trade benefits do not accrue to all members of a society equally. Fourth, trade creates interdependencies between nations, while nations try to preserve their autonomy and freedom of action.

Gilpin examines the problem of uneven development and, in particular, asks what role the state might play in accelerating development. After an extended discussion of the debate over the "development state," Gilpin concludes that states have an important role to play. Development requires a transformation of society, and states can facilitate that transformation by investing in the health and education of their citizens, socializing them, and providing public goods like physical infrastructure and economic institutions. There is also evidence that government investment in research and development has positive effects for domestic industry.

Gilpin also describes the "machinery" of the international monetary and finance system in detail. All but the most expert of readers will find some new information here.

I have to say that I enjoyed this book tremendously. Gilpin has an exciting story to tell, and he writes clearly, with a degree of elegance of expression and restraint.

This book is a must for any American Government class. Excellent source materials add depth to any textbook or class structure.

This book is a great book full of cases to help you learn how some of our nation's laws came into effect.

Government text, and writings, and so on, can be very difficult to understand, but this book clearly explains what the text means, it also is organized greatly, I would recommend this book to anybody wanting a little extra knowledge about US Government

The book is fine. Not amazing but not amazingly dull either. It's a text book, what did you expect?

The book was in good condition and was received in less than a week. For price and shipping time I would recommend.

I was very pleased with my purchase of California Politics & Govt. The book was in great shape and was just like new. The shipping time was wonderful.

This book will never stand on its own. It attempts to introduce far too many ideas in too few pages. It's a lot like Cliffnotes. Used alone, the reader will be left with a skeleton of concepts and ideas...

The book is a muddied introduction to the organization, history, and sociology of the state. Ideas are dumped, not explained. Half of the names appear in only one sentence. It left me unable to remember or care about some of the 50+ names. Sections are seldom coherent.

I ended up using the TOC to draw up my own organized outline. I filled in the pertinent details using wikipedia and ca.gov. And I paid attention to the newspaper. It worked much better.

I've got the latest, sixth edition of this book, and I am very impressed. Relevant, well-organized, and very-well written, this book is a firt-rate primer for those interested in California politics. The book is written in the style I appreciate the most: to the point and matter-of-fact, without needless theorizing and editorializing.

This is not an ordinary textbook. It is not boring or pedantic. Gerston and Christensen present a fascinating panorama of California politics. The book has ten chapters, each of which contains valuable insights and interesting details. The authors completely succeeded in presenting factual information, including tables and graphs, in a way that does not overwhelm the reader or make him want to skip over these things. This masterful integration of factual information into the flow of the narrative makes the book truly enjoyable.

I have a Ph.D. in Political Science; and I rely on information from this book when I get ready to lecture on California politics in my American Government and Politics course in the college I teach. I highly recommend this book to anyone who wants to get acquainted with California politics. And even advanced students of the subject, will find the up-to-date information in this book a valuable tool for understanding California's politics and society. Pick up this awesome resource today.