Politics Government Books

Donald Kettl's thin but rich book, "System under Stress," examines homeland security and American politics. He begins by observing that most of us tend to think that things will be in the future as they were in the past, that the political system behaves in predictable ways. However, he goes on, shocks to the system raise intriguing and powerful questions. Specifically, how have the events of 9/11 affected American politics and governance?

He raises a series of key questions, such as: "But what happens to that system when a major shock shakes its foundations? What can such a profound upheaval tell us about the system's ability to respond? How does it help define the core truths and enduring principles that lie at the heart of American government? And how can we evaluate the system's response to better understand how it can adapt to the diverse challenges we are likely to face in the future?"

This volume explores a number of issues emerging from a consideration of such questions. What systemic failures led to the successful and devastating attacks on 9/11? What kind of coordination problems across government agencies need to be addressed/ What about the roles of state and local governments? How does the political system address the policy challenge of protection against threats that can never be fully eliminated? What about the balance between security and civil rights and liberties? How does a system, in short, respond to strain? Kettl uses a medical analogy: attacks like 9/11 serve as a kind of political "stress test" to diagnose what works and what does not work in the American political system.

This book is a well crafted analysis of such questions. Worth reading and worth thinking about. . . .

Peter Singer, inspite of his poor usage of commas, tries to make the point that economics could out do and render politics small and mostly insignificant stave for adjustments of the Golden Straight Jacket.

I think that a point on how economics and trade policies also works as a psuedo-war or carrot and stick type of negotiation fodder. Sanctions have long been used as a form of political tactic of agression or revenge but Singer fails to point this out. Rather he tries to portray everyone on the planet as being a bunch of scared sheep who are unable to control anything in this ocean of chaos that he calls Capatalism with no heart.

Also, he explains the genisis of ethics as having congieled from mammal feelings and behaviors. He then goes on to explain how those mammal traits are disctint from our closest non-human relatives. How can he compare mammals to our closest non-human relatives? It is pure nonsense! Monkeys, pigs, dogs, horses and cattle are all mammals and are our closest non-human relatives! This guy is a MORON!

Improving on that statement I will attack his stance on his "new ethic" that has spawned from our new technology and globalization. I shudder at the very idea that one, or a few, nations should impose their new found ethics onto contradictory morals, laws and ethics of smaller and less developed nations. For heavens sakes!

I think that Singer is a poor poor man who is misguided and confused. I feel sympathy for him and for his readers.
One atmosphere? What is he talking about here? Are CFC's for real?

Well I guess there is no argument, scientifically, against Chlorofluorocarbons existing or being real. Peter Singer is talking about everyone shares the Atmosphere. What I disagree with him on is his comparison he used to point the blame of pollution at America. On page 20 he said that one of Britain's nuclear plants leaked waste into the north sea and ruined shellfish and lobsters (and probably regular fish TOO) for Ireland and Norway too. Norway got nuclear waste on its shores and when it took Britain to court for it, the "author" (like he could WRITE) tries to make the point that Kiribati could likewise sure America because its pollution caused global warming which then caused the ice caps to melt which then caused the sea levels to rise which THEN caused the sea to submerge Kiribati's mud homes and farms. Wow, I think that is a textbook example of the slippery slope fallacy and makes for one terrible comparison. Britain's nuclear pollution was preventable, an accident (?) and was directly traceable to Britain whereas America is NOT the world's sole producer of pollution and there for is NOT solely responsible like Britain was.
God, I literally cannot read one page in this book without being outraged. I read this book with a pen and I do not need a bookmark for all I need to do is start reading where my comments in the margin stop.

This book is the perfect example of how deluded left wing-intellectuals have become. With friends like this (and Chomsky, and Moore, and Gore) the left doesn't need any enemies.

I recommend Why Globalization Works (Yale Nota Bene) instead. A solid overview from someone who actually understands how the world works.

This book has more of a political focus than an ethics focus. A serious shortcoming is the lack of appreciation for the Eastern perspective. There is no mention in the index of Buddha, Confucius, or Taoism. How can you consider globalization from a parochial perspective? I recommend this book by Canright: Achieve Lasting Happiness: Timeless Secrets to Transform Your Life. "Achieve Lasting Happiness" proposes Confucian philosophy as a basis for universal ethics. Globalization will crush humanity unless there is a system of universal ethics as a counter balance to greed on a world-wide scope.

While considered cutting edge at the time of publishing Singer's book "One World" simply doesn't go the distance a book should go in the dynamic world of today. Singer, basically, stops where essential liberal interests do which is a really bad thing for an ethicist to do. He doesn't get into a really nitty-gritty stuff such as seeing the consequences of leisurely, short-term benefits oriented political action as ultimately damaging for the system. By not going the distance Singer is cutting the branch on which he is sitting. Do not read.

I've read the pro's and con's of other reviews and would like to have a brief word with those considering this book as a future purchase.

Looking at the good reviews, one I could easily give becuase I find them very agreeable, one finds the essence of the book, a global utilitarian ethical viewpoint. After browsing the negative reviews I find useful criticism gone too far. There is good substance to their points, but more often they seem to be thinking aloud rather than providing a useful review.

My suggestion: If you have heard about this book or stumbled here by accident, buy this book. While there are always points of contention in the 'nitty-gritty' the essence of his thoughts are worth more than one read, and more than simple consideration. The world is a rapidly changing place and the four chapters presented in his book offer four distinct ways to view the globalization of mankind from an utilitarian ethical perspective. I admit my idealists leanings nevertheless if one doesn't agree with Singer's arguements, then there is no better place to start making counter-arguements. The book is easy to read in common vernacular and Singer gives a good overview of the backround to each chapter focus. You will be a better citizen of whichever state after reading this one.

I have liked several of Poundstone's books but this one is a loser. He makes much of Arrow's Impossibility theorem, but never explains a proof. And the underlying premise of the whole book is that the democrats are entitled to Nader votes, and the gop is entitled to Libertarian party votes, and the problem we need to solve is that they don't get them.

I've read a number of books on voting systems, most of which are very dry and technical. This book manages to explain a lot of things in a well-written, readable form, and I recommend it highly.

The book has two main sections: in one, several elections in the past history of the United States are discussed to show how our electoral mechanism can go awry. This could be very amusing if it weren't so tragic, and sets the stage for the second part. This part describes alternatives and homes in on a method, "range voting," which solves many of the difficulties associated with our electoral system.

Range voting is familiar to Amazon customers, because it is the way books are rated here: voters give a rating (1 to 5 stars on Amazon, it could be 1-10 or 1-100, for example, in another type of election) and the ratings are averaged, with the highest rating winning. It is a system where you can sincerely rate a number of candidates and be sure that your vote will not hurt one you favor against one you dislike or help someone you disfavor against one you prefer. It never has been used in political elections, but has been used in many other contexts, and not just on Amazon.

Unfortunately, as Poundstone mentions, there has come to be a controversy where two different electoral system reforms have been set against each other: range voting and "instant runoff voting" have their advocates, each cutting down the other. Each would have advantages over the present system, but range voting has in my eyes slightly more, as IRV does generate some odd paradoxes (discussed in the book under the term "nonmonotonicity") in some situations. Whether these situations would often arise is hard to determine, because IRV has only been used for any length of time in one place: Australia. Range voting seems to be harder to implement, but avoids these paradoxes.

It is true, as another reviewer mentions, that the book concentrates on single-winner elections and does not go into the possibility of electing legislatures by proportional methods. This only means that that is another issue to deal with, and does not detract from the fact that many offices, such as mayors, governors, and chief executives in general are inherently single-winner, and this book is oriented toward such offices.

I don't know about you but I sure am frustrated by the choices we have been presented with during the current Presidential election cycle. Over the years I have observed that regardless of political philosophy the first candidates to be eliminated during the primary season are the ones with ideas. In addition, the frequent appearance of so-called "spoiler" candidates in the both primaries and general elections very often frustrate the will of the people. Voters are frequently heard to mumble "there must be a better way." Well maybe, just maybe, there is. In "Gaming The Vote: Why Elections Aren't Fair (and What We Can Do About it) author William Poundstone considers these issues and presents for your consideration at least a half dozen possible alternatives to our current system of plurality voting. Some methods are clearly better than others but the ideas offered in "Gaming The Vote" will definitely get you thinking about the problems voters face in selecting their leaders.
The overwhelming majority of elections conducted in this nation utilize the method known as plurality voting. Plurality voting is not very complicated and works very well when there are only two candidates. For all intents and purposes, whoever gets the most votes wins. That is fine and dandy until a third or a fourth candidate enters the race. That is when a phenomenon known as "vote splitting" occurs. The end result can be what we all saw in Florida in the 2000 Presidential election. Independent candidate Ralph Nader siphoned off just enough votes from Al Gore to cost him a victory in Florida and denied him the Presidency. So just what are the alternatives? Is there really any method of voting out there that is fair and fool-proof?
William Poundstone examines several voting methods that have been developed over the years. Most of these have been deemed statistically "unacceptable" by the experts who study these things. There are simply too many ways to manipulate the results. Both "Borda Count' (introduced in France in 1784) and "Condorcet Voting" would fall into this category. You will also discover that the same appears to be true for something called "Cumulative Voting" and yet another system called "Approval Voting". It is interesting to note that there are a couple of voting alternatives that are being heavily promoted these days. "Instant Runoff Voting" ranks the candidates in order of preference while "Range Voting" offers voters the opportunity to rate all candidates based on a scale of 0 to 10. You may not even realize it but Amazon reviewers use "range voting" every time they choose to submit a review. What you will discover in "Gaming The Vote" is that reforming our elections is a very tricky proposition indeed. There are so many factors to consider and no one can be absolutely certain that any election system is fool-proof. And as another reviewer has aptly pointed out William Poundstone only discusses the election of executives in his book. Whether any of these methods could work at the state and local level in races for the legislature or city council is really unclear.
When all is said and done I really do think that "Gaming the Vote: Why Elections Aren't Fair (and What We Can Do About It)" is a book worth reading. However, if you are looking for definitive answers to the problem of conducting elections in this country then you will likely be disappointed. For most folks, "Gaming The Vote" will merely serve as an introduction to those methods that could one day make our elections fairer and the results more indicative of the voters wishes than they are today. People need to arm themselves with this kind of useful information if we are ever going to bring meaningful reform to our elections. "Gaming The Vote" is a well written book that should prove quite interesting to a wide range of readers. Recommended.

This is a fascinating and fun review of various voting systems and their failures. Mathematically, the core of the book can be summed up in one page (one page that happens to be in the book and says it all with a chart). But this book isn't just about math, it is about the history of voting, the various issues and debates surrounding it. It is thus a fun read on several levels.

I did wish the concluding chapter went a bit further. But it certainly had me convinced that we should switch to a rating system for political voting. I know personally I'd like to give ratings to the various folks who are running... wouldn't mind leaving them a review or two either.

Most books that attempt to propose new ways of carrying out elections are nothing more than sour grapes: "Since *my* guy didn't win the last election, the system is obviously flawed and should be overhauled." Therefore, most of these sort of books are a waste of time.

This one, however, is simply brilliant.

Instead of approaching the subject through party results, Poundstone instead takes a historical walk through many different voting schemes in terms of the mathematical theory behind them. Don't be scared by the word "mathematical", by the way...Poundstone not only steers clear of intense mathematics but also provides a simple glossary to help you remember something you may have forgotten from earlier pages. While I think I can determine his political leanings from a couple of different allusions, he makes such a good argument and has such an engaging style of writing that it doesn't matter. There were several times when I noticed a flaw in the argumentation and Poundstone responds to the particular question on the VERY NEXT page. Any author that can read the mind of an informed reader is doing a good job indeed. :)

In conclusion, anyone who's interested in the process of voting should read this one because it's the best of its kind.

Most American should, by this point, be experiencing a great level of cognitive dissonance. As they read and watch the rhetoric sold to them by their government, and the equally complicitous corporate media, they should intuitively feel that reality is a far cry from what is being represented. In the last eight years especially, what we are being told is taking place is the exact opposite of what is really transpiring: protecting freedom by abolishing the 4th Amendment; war for peace; fighting for our way of life as a euphemism for fighting for private corporate interests; protecting free markets by providing corporate welfare and bailouts of corporate practitioners of maleficence; fighting for the human rights of our fellow man, but only those that reside over oil reserves. The list goes on ad nauseam.

What Chalmers Johnson does in The Sorrows of Empire is break through the disinformation campaign being perpetrated on the world and expose our practices for what they really are: maintenance and expansion of empire.

The word "empire" is taken by many as a pejorative, and they recoil from any serious consideration of the possibility that America may actually be one. When they think of an empire, they think about the Romans, Alexander, or Khan, and then they contrast their understanding of those ancient empires with their own contemporary lifestyle. They subsequently discount the notion that America has become an empire and continue to support the politicians who depend on their ignorance.

This book allows such a reader to see beyond the world he perceives through the blinders of corporate media obfuscation and government propaganda. It permits him to look beyond the smoke and mirrors and to see the world as it actually is.

From his recounting of the historical events that have brought us to empire, to his reporting of contemporary events that compel us to maintain empire, Chalmers Johnson is able to provide valuable insight to the American citizen who clings to the false notion that we remain the constitutional republic intended by our founders.

Nutshell review - Another very interesting (and frightening) book by Chalmers Johnson, the same author of Blowback. War is big business and no one runs that business better than America. A very good read regardless of whether one agrees with the conclusions and forecasts made.

Empires are expensive, this book details much of how our money is spent. Johnson is well informed but I can't resist expressing surprise at my interpretation of a couple important viewpoints:

1) The John Birch group is mentioned as possibly being involved with Kennedy's demise? I've seen a lot of suspects but that makes one rub their eyes.

2) How can you write about globalism without even mentioning the #1 globalists, the Rockefellers?

This books shares turf with 'Confessions of an Economic Hit Man' and 'The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism' Both of these latter books are more effective at telling the consequences of the globalism of the past few decades. This book is best at detailing the level of our military empire and our global surveillance network.

Easy to read and informative but not hard hitting.

Chalmers Johnson's book "Blowback" got exposure during the 2008 presidential race,mostly from the Ron Paul campaign. This book is a newer release.

Mr. Johnson contrasts the differences between "military" and "militarism".
Militarism is a companion to imperialism which is the domination and exploitation of weaker states.
"War is the parent of armies;from these proceed debts and taxes;and armies,and debts,and taxes,are the known instruments for bringing the many under the control of the few."-page 45 James Madison quoted.
That quote is eerily relevant when I think about current American foreign policy.

Chalmers Johnson takes the reader on a history lesson from Woodrow Wilson's idealism about American imperialism-to Clinton's idea of corporate military welfare-to the privatization of the military and profiteering by more than a few members of the current administration.
Troubling also is the revolving door between the military-industrial complex and offices in the Pentagon.
The American middle-east foreign policy has been related to oil for the most part. That leads us to the introduction of the influence that petroleum has on military actions throughout our history.

Mr.Johnson discussed secret foreign bases and also the behemoth base known as Camp Bondsteel and the monumental expenses related to logistics and the military budget in general.

This is one of a number of books that discusses the planning for an Iraq war well before George W's inauguration,as well as the controversial use of "depleted uranium tipped" weapons in Iraq and Kosovo. It's ironic that the U.N. classifies those weapons as WMD's!

Two very accurate quotes from this book give the potential reader a glimpse of what you will find in the pages of "The Sorrow of Empire."
"When the agents of globalization,the corporations themselves,are revealed as criminal conspiracies to defraud both their customers,their own employees,and their governments,not just the practice but the whole idea of globalization becomes farcical."-page 277.

"Official lying increases exponentially as imperialism and militarism take over."-page 298.

On the subject of empire builiding and the industrial complexes,both military and petroleum, this book is the best that I have read to this point! Chalmers Johnson communicates his points most effectively.

While Blowback, primarily examined the covert intervention, American style pre and during the Cold War, and its varied unintended consequences (abroad as well as at home), The Sorrows of Empire is focused on the years after fall of the Berlin Wall and at a time that the Soviet Union began to fracture into current configuration with breakaway states (Johnson, Sorrows 7, 18-20, 34, and 69). It was a time of risk and promise. It was a time when the US was the self described "lone superpower" (Johnson, Sorrows 4, 44, 67, and 72). Reagan and subsequent administrations would hold the mantle and designation of "reluctant sheriff" (Johnson, Sorrows 274, 284, and 307). We would slide into current scenario were a cowboy administration sees itself as an essential nation (Johnson, Sorrows 284) Chalmers Johnson sees it differently, this massive buildup that continues to move with such momentum, he argues in light of the war on terror, has made the US the New Rome (Johnson, Sorrow 3, 5, 257, and 284). In The Sorrows of Empire, Johnson brings to presence a sense of neo-militarism that is changing America, in drastic ways, and forcing on its citizenry the yoke of empire (Johnson, Sorrows 285). This is actually where Johnson reminds us of the classic utterances of Dwight Eisenhower forewarning us of and reproving what he saw as the "military-industrial complex" (Johnson, Sorrows 26, 32-33, 39, 57-58, 142-143, 152, 214, 277, and 309). Johnson, in this reportage uncovers the deep roots of the same.
In light of the present, Johnson writes about the extent of America's Leviathan and ever growing empire of military bases as well as the enormous web of support services provided to the bases by civilian contractors (Johnson, Sorrows 140, 143-146, 184, and 308) . Johnson offers an extensive look at the a new set of civilian warriors who have been able to work themselves into several branches of government - either through a series of old boy links or a direct hire as well as ownership into enterprises that supply the government (Johnson, Sorrows 70-71, 80, 81, and 84). At the same time, these activities, under the mantle of national security, continue to function under a cloud of secrecy and continue to influence and subsequently drain the military budget away from much needed social and economic spaces (Johnson, Sorrows 1, 10-12, 57, 60, 68, and 117-120). As we will see with Nemesis, where Johnson will bring to fruition, one of his more confrontational conclusions is that American the end of nuclear stockpiling has resulted in a new militarism in the bases construction that will end the era of globalization and will eventually render us impecunious. Coming back full circle, the double edges sword is also sharpened on the other side as we build more and more bases we continue to plant the seeds for new and more violent possibilities for blowback (Johnson, Sorrow 8-9, 121, 227, 288, and 300). Johnson, in The Sorrows of Empire argues that the American republic as we knew it has seen its dying days or is effectively dead - with the Pentagon as the grim reaper. This melancholy will not be appeased with Blowback and now Nemesis as the bookends. Johnson will argue in Nemesis that we march into the American 21st not with the soft touch of understanding and a sense of reconciliation but rather with the heavy soles of hubris crossing our Rubicon with the Pentagon at the helm.

Miguel Llora

This text is the finest I have come across for a basic understanding of American government.

MMMurphy

Wilson's book is a very solid foundation for begining political science clases. It delivers the information in a to the point way that is easy to understand. The charts and graphs barely reach the '90's and need to be updated. The headlines are very useful when skiming and reviewing. The end of the chapter summaries and bold typed vocabulary words are very convieninet for studying. . .A well written book that shows all sides of controversial issues!

American Government covered everything and anything on politics. I could not have asked for a better introduction on politics! It covered everything from the US Constitution to interest groups and the bureaucracy. If you are interested in politics, but need a simple, solid introduction, this book is for you! However, I found the book was difficult to read, as it was poorly written and tedious at times. Although this book is probably the best intro to Government around, do not buy it if you have a short attention span.

This book offers a foundation for political concepts and historic background about the U.S. Using standard survey course format, the author skims the broad topics of government from the core documents, including the Declaration and the Constitution, to the general structures and processes of governing. While I must conclude with a prior reviewer that the writing is unexciting, I have yet to find THE basic government text equivalent of "Democracy - Not 4 Dummies"

A trully remarkable text book! This text strives where many fail, in communicating with students from AP level high school to Doctoral studies. Includded are full color diagrams on the political process, governmental structure dating back to the 1600s. Also, philisophical viewpoints from Plato to John Locke. The benefit of the text, is its current up-to-date information on the 'insides' of political views and parties. This text would assist anyone in learning about our nations history and government.

Nutshell review - A fascinating look at the build up and consequence of American military power and presence across the globe. Interesting, well written, and very worth reading whether one agrees with the conclusions or not.

`Blowback' is the term the CIA uses to refer to the unintended consequences of American actions abroad. The author makes the reader aware of the dangers faced by the US Empire, which he feels has been overextended, with about 19 military bases worldwide. The US insists on projecting its military power to every corner of the earth and to force global economic integration on its own terms. I remember once a Chinese leader commenting, "Why should we live by the standards set by the US?" In other words, who says the US way of life is the best there is and we should all follow it? This method of dictating what's right and what is not to the rest of the world angers a lot of people according to the author, and will one day cause a blowback against US interests.

The author asks, "Why are there still US bases in Japan?" He then asks if the American people would like it if other nations had military bases on US soil.

The US is not liked in Japan for many reasons. The US dropped two atomic bombs on them, one on Hiroshima and another on Nagasaki, killing many innocent women, children, and the elderly. The blowback from this atrocious act is still to come. Today such an act would be condemned worldwide. Could you imagine if India decided to nuke Pakistan, or North Korea nuked a neighboring country, what would the world's response be? Yet the US got away with it during World War II, even though Japan was on the verge of surrender before the atomic bombs were dropped. Killing civilians is unacceptable. If Russia had won the cold war, the US would today have been paying compensation to the Japanese, much like how Germany is still paying the state of Israel compensation for the atrocities it inflicted on the Jewish people under Hitler.

The author mentions rape cases on Okinawa committed by US soldiers based there. In one case, a 12 year old Japanese schoolgirl was gang raped by US soldiers. Japanese Families are upset because these soldiers are trialed in the US under US military laws which tend to be lenient with the soldiers. Furthermore, in many cases, by the time a lawsuit is brought against a US soldier, he or she no longer is on Okinawa. The US soldiers' duty time on Okinawa is only 6 months! Once a soldier leaves Japan, it is impossible for the Japanese families to bring him or her to justice. US soldiers based on Okinawa therefore get away with crimes.

Bases were also built on land owned by Japanese farmers without giving them compensation. Military maneuvers and artillery fire are constantly being performed on protected reefs around Okinawa. Furthermore, bullets made of depleted uranium at one point littered Okinawa's coast, but the Navy eventually cleaned up the shores after international pressure and outrage. How would American citizens feel if China or Russia had military bases on American soil, raped young American girls, took land from farmers without compensation, and polluted the US coast with UN prohibited depleted uranium bullets? How would the American people feel if crimes committed against them could not be trialed under US laws? For example, why didn't the soldiers involved in Abu Ghuraib prison in Iraq stand trial in an Iraqi court under Iraqi law? Similarly, the US fighter pilots involved in the cable car accident in Italy stood trial in the US and were found innocent! Why didn't they stand trial in Italy? This angered the Italians.

The author discusses Afghanistan and how the CIA started helping the Mujahedeen before the Russian invasion of Afghanistan, not after as is often believed. The CIA therefore used the Mujahedeen to fight the US war against the Soviets. Once the Soviets were defeated, the CIA dropped support for the Mujahedeen. The blowback was that the Mujahedeen turned against the US.

Interestingly, the author says that the US should withdraw all of its troops from the Middle East. If this is done, the author says, there would no longer be the hatred that Arab people feel today against the US. Imagine China had military bases in Canada, Mexico, and Cuba. How would the US people feel? Threatened? Unsafe? This is exactly how Arabs feel today.

The book also discusses the IMF and how it has destroyed the Indonesian economy. I thought that chapter on the IMF and globalization extremely interesting and thought provoking.

This is really a great book, and if you like reading Noam Chomsky, you will like this book. This book was originally published before 9/11, but has a new introduction on blowback in the post-9/11 world.

One thing to keep in mind: All empires throughout history have collapsed. The question to ask is `Why?' If the US can answer this question, it might just defeat the cycle of history.

This book is quite well researched and somewhat academic. I would not call it dry nor would I call it spellbinding. It presents a plethora of facts prior to making predictions that have been proving to be true.

Chalmers is an expert on China, Japan, Korea, and Taiwan. You will find considerable recent history of these countries, history with a bias in economics.

A very minor complaint is that Chalmers refers to the US Treasury when he should be referring to the Federal Reserve which essentially privatized the US Treasury...in 1913 as I recall. But he likely has a good reason for his chosen vernacular.

As the title indicates, this book focuses on a prediction that our militaristic hubris and imperialism would be likely to both earn enemies and eventually undermine our economy.....to think that it was written before the Bushbarians galloped into town and made Chalmers look like the prophet of the century.

Chalmers divides his time ripping into the military history of Japan, the USSR, and of course Cold War America..especially post Cold War America. With the exception of Tibet, China receives comparatively light treatment.

This is a great book for those who feel comfortable with slightly academic leaning books.

Before reading this book I would of considered myself a "neocon" but after reading this book and even researching beyond the fact have moved to a Liberian point of view. Dr. Johnson is a true patriot and I just hope that America will pick this book up.

-William Roberts
Student at the College of William and Mary

"Blowback" is CIA nomenclature, initially conjured up in March 1954 to refer to the unforeseen reaction to CIA covert operations in the 1953 attempt to dislodge Mohammed Mossadegh in Iran to quiet his troublesome critique of the Shahs (Johnson, Blowback 8-10, 13, 17). Blowback has become the metaphor in use for all unintended consequences relating to US Government covert operations through primarily the Central Intelligence Agency and has to date been kept undisclosed from the American public (Johnson, Blowback 17). Arguably, the events of September 11 (in the new version of Blowback, Johnson explores the issue of blowback in conjunction with September 11 as it was not part of the original book (Johnson, Blowback x-xxii)). As a backgrounder, Osama bin Ladin and Al Qaeda in conjunction with the Wahabi sect in Saudi Arabia has strong criticisms of U.S. intervention in the country, its bases on Arab soil, US involvement in Israel, and its continuing relationship with the Saudi Royal family (Johnson, Blowback 10-11). The result, it is argued, is not a result of what Samuel Huntington, Francis Fukuyama, and Bernard Lewis would argue is an assault on modernity (Johnson, Blowback 207). Rather, the events of September 11 are the result of the CIA's and US nefarious interference into the affairs of Saudi Arabia (Johnson, Blowback 11, 36, 92-93).
Coming back, for an instant, to Iran (which we might see more of in the near future), the setting up the Shah in power brought more than twenty-five years of despotism and authoritarianism to the Iranian people and resulted in the fundamentalist regime of the Ayatollah Khomeini (Johnson, Blowback 13, 84). Hearkening back to the events previous to September 11, we should remember the then ultimate blowback scenario with the storming of the American embassy in Teheran and the holding of the hostages for more than a year (Johnson, Blowback 13, 27, 68, 84, 92, 97, and 125). Leaving aside the military handling of the failed rescue attempt as well as the State Department's almost amateur handling of the diplomatic side, this ill-advised "covert operation" by the US government helped set the stage for the perception of many in the middle east that the United States was going to be there for the long haul and firmly entrenched in many analysts mind that the intervention by the US in the middle east was going to be nothing less than adversarial (Johnson, Blowback 68). The same went for Cold War Russia, Indochinese Southeast Asia, Africa, as well as Central and South America (Johnson, Blowback 20-22). The stage was set for the military buildup to make the world safe for democracy, to fight that war via proxy, and to begin what would be the largest bases buildup in modern history (Johnson, Blowback 223-224). The previous covert and overt operations as well as other events formed genesis of the American Empire and Chalmers Johnson's lamentation of the same (Johnson, Blowback 11-12).

Miguel Llora

For the price of this book there should be no mistakes. There was constant grammatical errors, and there were multiple errors where the author made a statement and then contradicted it later, sometimes this would happen multiple times concerning the same statement. The book is a very simple look at International law more for the highschool level. The author left out many important subjects and treaties like Kyoto. For the money this poorly written book was a complete dissappointment.

The author has achieved a feat of Herculean proportions by his extremely lucid and perspicacious analysis of the very difficult and inaccessible subject of International law. International law is next only to Qunatum Field Theory in its profundity and deep conceptual underpinnings. The very fact that an ignoramus like me can understand and appreciate this work of genius goes to show that everyone even remotely interested in the field should read this book.

This book is amazing. I've read all but the last 3 or so chapters, which appear to be the most interesting. Fiorina et al manage to explain pretty much everything from madison to civil liberties to the constitution to important supreme court decisions. If you ever thought American history was boring, then you haven't read this book.
It's fairly objective although through wording its clear that preferences exist. Nonetheless, all information is TRUE and accurate, and it's written almost as a novel. Definitely an easy read. The only reason it didn't get 5 stars is because it's a little.. long-winded in some places where it doesn't need to be w/ minor organizational glitches.

In response to the review posted above, this book was actually primarily written by Morris P. Fiorina, a Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution. The Hoover Institution based at Stanford University is the predominate conservative academic thinktank in the United States, so to claim that the book was written by "ivory tower liberals" is a completely unfounded assumption.

The online portion of this book actually urges students to join a political advocacy organization, Common Cause. While I have nothing against that particular organization, I do have a problem with the authors/publishers urging our kids to join it as part of a required textbook for courses taught in a public universities.

As an example of bias, the authors make the claim, in the textbook, that no one can support the logic of being against abortion and for the death penalty. Nevermind the logic of protecting the innocent. Also, the authors make the claim that there are less "undocumented immigrants" in this country today than there were before the 1987 amnesty.

This book was clearly written by ivory tower liberals who have no idea what objectivity or accuracy mean. This book represents everything that is wrong in today's American universities.

Parents, a word of advice, pay attention to the indoctrination your children are getting in school! This book is the worst I have seen.

This book contrasts and studies King, Keohane, and Verba's Designing Social Inquiry. I'd read it first; you may never need KKV/DSI though I think that book is also a worthwhile read as well for a social science graduate student or researcher. But you get the essence of KKV in this book. If you are strongly oriented toward KKV, you'll know it soon enough by seeing how they position themselves here and how others criticize them.

There are thoughtful essays throughout, but in my view the best ones are summations by the editors--methodology profs will want to look into using one of the last two essays at minimum in any class. They do a nice job of blunting some of the more theory-laden criticisms of DSI even while being sympathetic to the notion that DSI didn't end qualitative methods as we know them.

The punchline is that rigor is good--no matter what you are doing. The other punchline is that there is no simple path to inference and understanding in the social sciences--it takes a mesh of methods and even then there are issues. We live in a multimethod world and versatile scholars wield quant and qual approaches at different times and often together. The case study isn't dead, and large N is going to have more and more prestige in certain quarters.

Case study and theory oriented readers will want to look at Alexander George's new book written with Andrew Bennett (MIT 2005). It's good stuff--the dissertation meat of any theory-oriented case study method section.