Politics Government Books

Very informative even though I did not always like what I was reading. It now makes sense why Ted Kennedy openly gave his support to Obama. It also reveals just how devious and manipultive George Soros really is and how he has his hand in many things (areas) in the world. A must read for any one voting this fall.

tells how the operatives on the left,the biased media, and big money are moving the country to the far left.

This is one of the most informative books I've read on the elites in our government and corporate world. Where they are directing our country without approval from voters or their representatives. A must read! I purchased 3 more copies to pass on to friends.

Though this is a timely book, it does not reveal as much as it should. Still, it rates a "5" because it is a brave attempt to warn America now, before it is too late, about what HILLARY and her crowd are up to. As an attempt to shed some light on what Hillary and her promoters are really like, it is highly laudable; but like other "tell all" books about Hillary, it fails to go far enough. The book fails to connect the dots and expose the ties between the Red Chinese and Hillary "Clinton" [real surname : still "Rodham"]. Because it fails to do so, it fails to tell the reader the whole truth; and the omission is a serious flaw. This book is a good one to read; but the reader needs to also read a book presented a "fiction" which in fact does connect the dots and tell the whole story. That book, which serves as a warning call to America, and to all freedom loving people, is entitled "The Empress Project".The Empress Project

If you want to connect all the dots, this book is a must-read. I often wondered why liberals promote such wacky causes, but now it all makes perfect sense. "Liberal" is really cloaked nomenclature for "Communist". Soros has millions behind his efforts to break down the United States. And Hillary Clinton is right in his back pocket. First will come economic pain and hardship as Bush is leaving office, then Hillary takes unprecedented power as president, with more governmental power than FDR. Socialists have been scheming to break down the financial foundation of the U.S. for decades, and now it's on the cusp of reality.

I like this text in that it sets historical and moral context for today's conflicts.
Chaliand and Blin, the editors, lay out the text in chapters on eras and specific conflicts. The text is notable in that it delves into the evolution of the moral debates concerning the targeting of civilians in times of warfare. Few today realize that much of today's terrorism evolved from the guerilla warfare in Occupied Europe of WWII, and the partisan civil conflicts that often followed after Nazi Germany was defeated. The editors draw these connections well, while maintaining a balanced academic-style approach. It is indeed difficult to discuss this field of study without taking sides or pontificating on the morality of "who is a legitimate target." Chailiand and Blin walk this line well.
-CLW

I finished reading the book a while ago, and I find it gives me food for thought during this political season--particularly when I see one or another of the profiled people quoted or interviewed. Though I work in Washington, I have little interaction with the world depicted in Pennsylvania Avenue--but, having read it, I now know a lot more. We all think of ourselves as jaded, but I was really startled by the sheer volume of money that Harwood and Seib describe as flowing through the political world. They may not be partisan, but they do describe a system that desperately needs change.

If you want a wonky read but your diet doesn't allow for red meat, this is for you. These are profiles of people who make things happen from across the ideological spectrum and all judgements are reserved, which is pretty rare in today's hyper-partisan media environment. Given it's quick pace, this book might be best suited to young people interested in D.C.

Pennsylvania Avenue: Profiles in Backroom Power by John Harwood and Gerald Seib is an excellent book. It gives an overview of what politicans are really like, while including big names( i.e. Rove and Dubinstein) and not so big names( Wasserstein-schultz, although she is becoming popular)and using a bi-partisian approach. Harwood and Seib showed their journalistic skills by providing this overview for the common man and for folks who are non-Washingtonians. But, it also is a good read for History/Political Science buffs who want to have an easy read and want to learn more about the political climate bipartisian style from Washington. This book is highly recommended for all readers who may be interested in Washington Politics. BUt, it also should be on the reading list for college poli sci majors. I think this book also shows what fine writers and Washington Pols John Harwood and Gerald Seib are, and hopefully will get them to recognition they both deserve.

PROFILES is in the same vein as BLOOD SPORT and other political commentary and will be of interest to those wanting the specifics of dirt politics or who plan to compete on Jeopardy.

Both interesting and a bit scary, the book won't be a complete surprise to anyone who watches CNN. But while you might know the basic stories and names from Lou Dobbs, a few of the details and money amounts might be a shocker if you don't live in D.C.

Corruption is always interesting, and although not specifically referred to often as the subject matter, that is the main theme here. Enjoy, but take your Prilosec first.

I was looking forward to reading this book but was rather disappointed by the content and found it to be somewhat dull. It covers the likes of Debbie Wasserman Schultz to the founder of the Carlysle Group. It is basically a series of biographical short essays about Washington's power brokers.

Kudos to Mr. Garner. I have read all three books. I think the bedtime story book 1 and the Holiday story book are the best. I am employed in a large metro area, where we seem to be inundated with all this touchy-feely, politically correct stuff - I see it in memos and we have training to attend from time to time where we hear terms like those in the books. Garner does such an excellent job showing how ridiculous it can get and how ridiculous many of them are. Any time I need a good laugh I read one of his updated stories, and have a good "belly laugh". I absolutely love these books.

This book is hands down the best book in the world.It is extremely intelligent and is the most interesting book to our imagination.Brilliant humor in every paragraph or sentence for that matter.There was no book like it..of course,now others are expanding on Mr.Garners idea.I have the shorter version but it was disappointing as it didnt have all of his humorous stories..this book,Once Upon a More Enlightend Time etc..is the book i take everywhere.I do not get tired of reading the funny terms..definately takes away the realities of reality and grumpy people who have no sense of decent humor.Lighten up,have fun with this book.Mr.G,your a GENIUS.

This was very entertaining to me. Read the whole thing with a grin on my face. I really enjoyed the authors humour in telling the stories over only in a politically correct way. Great read for anyone needing a smile.

This book was funny, witty, and had a wry sense of humor. The author, James Finn Garner, has commented on our modern society in a politically correct manner that will have you howling with laughter. He satirizes traditional fairy tales and folk tales and yet they have a charm of their own!! I am sure you will love this book. My hobby is storytelling, and audiences really love these stories.

I first read some of these stories quite a while ago. I enjoyed the Snow White story quite a bit, and having spent some time in a trailer park, I can easily understand the people in Pied Piper of Hamelin. Although I am not a feminist and think personally that the old values are better than the new ones, I can still appreciate the humour in most of the stories. I can't say I enjoyed all of them though.

Mostly the reason I got this book was because of the Christmas collection, which is by far the best set of these stories that James Garner has done. This section gets three of my stars.

"The Night Before Solstice" is a very well-done parody. "The children were nestled all snug in their beds, dreaming of lentils and warm whole-grain breads..." He talks about how overfed Santa is and how bad smoking is for Santa's health.

"Frosty the Snowman" concerns two argumentative children who build a snowman and when he tells them he's going to melt, they march to Washington to protest about abuse of the ozone layer.

"Rudolf the Red-Nosed Reindeer" is the story of a disliked outsider who suddenly became OK to Santa when Santa could get some use out of him. But Rudolf won't have any of it. He says the deer are underprivileged and need a more flexible work schedule and a retirement plan.ù

"The Nutcracker" is in here too, but at the time I read it I didn't know the real story and therefore it didn't make any impression on me.

The there's "A Christmas Carol"... You know, the story that begins with that famous line: "Jacob Marley was non-viable." The ghosts try to teach him all he needs to know. The second one in particular I remember. He was a fat slob and went from house to house to raid the fridge. When all is said and done, Scrooge decides he's a victim of circumstance like Diminutive Timòn... It's all quite involved and you really have to read it for yourself. But it's very funny. I've read it many times. (I recommend that you read the real story by Dickens first - it's not that long - it will make you laugh more at the PC one.)

So if for nothing else, get this for the Christmas section.

Manifesto: Three Classic Essays On How To Change The World collects "The Communist Manifesto" by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, "Reform or Revolution" by Rosa Luxemburg, and "Socialism and Man in Cuba" by Ernesto Che Guevara. All three writings share in common a revolutionary spark; here are ideas that transformed the world, with repercussions resonating to the modern day and beyond. A preface, introduction, and brief notes on the contributors round out this vital collection concerning political power, social consciousness, and the need for societal transformation, especially recommended for library and educational reference shelves.

Manifesto: Three Classic Essays On How To Change The World collects "The Communist Manifesto" by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, "Reform or Revolution" by Rosa Luxemburg, and "Socialism and Man in Cuba" by Ernesto Che Guevara. All three writings share in common a revolutionary spark; here are ideas that transformed the world, with repercussions resonating to the modern day and beyond. A preface, introduction, and brief notes on the contributors round out this vital collection concerning political power, social consciousness, and the need for societal transformation, especially recommended for library and educational reference shelves.

Manifesto: Three Classic Essays On How To Change The World collects "The Communist Manifesto" by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, "Reform or Revolution" by Rosa Luxemburg, and "Socialism and Man in Cuba" by Ernesto Che Guevara. All three writings share in common a revolutionary spark; here are ideas that transformed the world, with repercussions resonating to the modern day and beyond. A preface, introduction, and brief notes on the contributors round out this vital collection concerning political power, social consciousness, and the need for societal transformation, especially recommended for library and educational reference shelves.

Three very insightful essays. You can certainly learn and gain valuable insight to the ideals that literally have changed the world in many ways. Marx and Engels, Communist Manifesto; Rosa Luxemburg's Reform or Revolution and Che Guevara's Socialism and Man in Cuba.

I really think this book is very enlightening and is a highly valuable read. And with that, I would like to comment on the second essay, the essay by the Polish Jew and political activist who attended Zurich University, Rosa Luxemburg. This essay was published in 1898, nineteen years before the 1917 Bolshevik revolution.

Rosa Luxemburg's essay consists of an attack on Eduard Bernstein's book entitled "Problems of Socialism," Seen from today's lenses reveals her erroneous absolute and dogmatic views, lacking in comparison to the logic of Bernstein. It's so obvious from the scientific Marxist views. Marx's and Engels views were based on rational science, Hegelian dialectics and like science, an exact blueprint of rational analysis. Today they call this "vulgar Marxism" and few follow it.(You can find a good analysis in Allan Bloom's, Closing the American Mind). Marxism today is not based on an exact science. That is the old view, the original view. And the obvious result of her attack on Bernstein is that everything she has attacked has come true, her defense for Absolutism, for exact science in economic history through Hegelian dialectics has proven false and inaccurate. Bernstein, on the other hand, has proven the greater prophet. And the answer lies in Luxemburg's very words of attack. In this she attacks him for his integral approach of aperspectivism in integrating multiple paradigms which allow the relative nature and uncertainty of the various shades and levels of both Liberal Democracy and Socialism. Bernstein's sees the differing aspects and refutes absolutism in Marxist science and dogmatism in its Hegelian nature. History, nor economic history, is not an exact science. And If I may take this a step further there are levels of subjectivity, objectivity, cultural and social aspects or the I, We and It (&Its) (the big three or the 4 Quadrants of Ken Wilber's Integral Psychology).

Bernstein sees the problems of socialism and the need for liberal democracy to reform slowly, even rejecting both (vulgar or original scientific, Hegelian) Marxism and Socialism and choosing to remain a liberal democracy but with socialist-liberal facets of nature (Roosevelt's domestic policies for instance), while Luxemburg seeing Marxism as an exact science sees revolution the only real way to bring forth Socialism. And although both thinkers are basically reduction in inter-objective social systems or political system theories, there still exists a major difference between both and that 150 years of time has vindicated (relativlty speaking: the low wages, poor and homeless in the U.S. are in large numbers) Bernstein's flexible and integral insight with greater value than Luxemburg's "flatland," which in Integral Psychology means interpreting realty or in this case, economic political history, as only in objective terms, failing to understand its relativity in dealing with the individual and collective human subjective nature.

AND now I will contradict myself: Luxemburg was right, Bernstein was not. After reading Howard Zinn's Peoples History of the United States, it is evident; the only reforms come from revolution. Socialism is always adamantly fought by the wealthy, compromises are extremely rare.

Now the essay by Che Geverra is the only without such a materialistic, Hegelian science and Marxist exactitude of empirical societal observation on economic meaning. It is much less dogmatic and in that sense less scientific, being much more utilitarian in practical means to achieve a socialist revolution and common sharing good of the Cuban society.

What I especially liked about D. Lampton's approach to this very popular subject is how he structured the book and the terminology that he used because it is done in a way that reflects Chinese thought and vocabulary on these issues. Moreover, his analysis and understanding of the issue is top-notch!

KW

I haven't finished this book yet, but I am enjoying it. It is a difficult read, smaller print and a very interesting choice of words. I often find myself re-reading a sentance to make sure I understood the authors intent. I think the material is relevant to those who are interested in the ever growing China and how the US will be challenged by them in the future. Reads very much like a text book, which was OK because I bought this book to learn something.

It's a very interesting book that the author uses a unique argument to discuss current Asian affair and related issues. I like it because it provides a framework to decribe US-China relation, but not writting a micor-history along the time lines. Great book and reasonable assumptions of powers, "Might", "Money" and "Mind."

I gave this book to a friend, Henry Sailer, who was raised in China and very knowledgeable. This is his review.

This is a remarable book.It will enlighten the most advanced specialist and, at the same time, teach the new beginner.

There are new facts to be absorbed in virtually every sentence and Mr. Lampton's writing and organizational skills are such that the reader approachs each chapter with mounting fascination.

Mr. Lampton obviously has entree to leaders of most of the Asian states of which he writes - an entree which he has employed with commendable discretion and which brings to light facts and ideas which would otherwise not be available to the most zealot scholar, student or layman.

I have never said of any book of this kind that I intended to read it again. I do now.

This is an interesting,but incomplete,set of essays written by Jean-Charles Rochet and a number of co-authors which are based on the standard views of analyzing the banking industry's interest rate risk problems -asymmetric(incomplete or partial) information,adverse selection,moral hazard,and income gap(duration gap),value at risk models that seek to maintain bank capitalization levels in the face of banking industry attempts to minimize interest rate risk.Thus,"..improperly chosen risk weights induce banks to select inefficient portfolios and to undertake regulatory arbitrage activities that might paradoxically result in increased risk"(p.6).The alleged " solution " appears on p.250-"...adoption of "market-based" risk weights,i.e.,weights proportional to the systematic risks of these assets measured by their market betas..."(p.250).THe problem is that all of the essays are written on the misbelief that the normal probability distribution can be used to model risk.There is no attempt to deal with the equally important problem of uncertainty,in the sense of Keynes,Ellsberg and Knight,or the " wild " risk that Mandelbrot has shown is of paramount importance.The VAR models all assume normality,as do the beta results calculated from the CAPM .
The major objection is that,while the authors are aware that the commercial banks are continually attempting to sidestep the regulatory apparatus by " securitization",they don't draw the fundamental conclusion that was already arrived at by Adam Smith over 230 years ago-commercial banks can not be allowed to make loans to projectors(Keynes's stock and financial market speculators and rentiers),imprudent risk takers,and prodigals.If loans are extended to these categories of borrower,the result will be the destruction and waste of the aggregate savings of a nation.The depositors' money must only be loaned out to those individuals who will use the money loans to produce actual goods,services,and create jobs.Otherwise,the necessary investment needed intertemporally to maintain full employment and economic growth will not be forthcoming and the country will be subjected to severe economic problems-inflation,deflation,or stagflation.None of the essays reach this fundamental conclusion that follows from the ancient wisdom of Adam Smith.

This book is a clear indication of the problems with modern historians: the tendency toward presumption and the discovery of common sense as if it were a new planet. Scott claims to understand the REAL story beneath ordinary daily discourses, going so far as to state that young inner city black men play a game that involves trading insults in order to "practice" reacting to racism in non-violent ways. How ridiculous!
Scott also attempts to prove his thesis by stating that alcohol sometimes plays a role in hidden transcripts becoming public. I suppose he hasn't had much experience with alcohol or those who have partaken of alcohol, else he would realize this is painfully obvious and not a groundbreaking revelation.
I give the book 2 stars because of its readability and the obvious effort put into the research. However, I cannot recommend it, for it is a perfect example of historians who spend too much time in the office, and not enough time in the real world.

"When the great lord passes the wise peasant bows deeply and silently farts." This book marks one of those moments for me when rethink just about everything...from elusidating certain truisms to hammering out theories and ideas that ring remarkably true, Scott's book is challenging, powerful, and engaging. Reading this book is like sitting in his office conversing...I find myself exclaiming and agreeing aloud. I really enjoy his comments on gender; a concept I have felt comfortable with for years, and suddenly I feel as though he has just clarified it for me. I have been doing double-takes as random comments about women in my primary sources (about fickleness of emotion) which I thought I could chalk up to typical misogyny begin to catagorize themselves in my mind as the effects of attempting to live within hidden and public transcripts. Very readable, interesting, engaging...in a word, fabulous.

I was recommended this book when I was at an academic conference recently. The first thing I want to note is this is not a book by a historian but by a professor of political science and anthropology but my view and critique will be from a historian view. The topic of the book is that everyone in a society maintains the social, legal and political hierarchies even when they believe they are challenging those inequalities. This is a relatively unarguable statement since we know that societies change very slowly in general and even violent uprising are not always successful. While Scott claims early on that he will cite ample evidence I was deeply disappointed by the lack of specific evidence in any large quantity. He'll cite a particular culture or event or period and go into some detail though he needs more primary evidence here. However from this particulars he jumps to generalizations. Generalizations may indeed be there but they require far more evidence from a wider range of cultures. I'm also not convinced that fictional sources should ever be preferred over other sources such as diaries or letters or speeches -- yes, those with less power will leave less behind but still I think there is enough material world wide to make a stronger case. Still the ideas were very well explained and I looked at some ancient and gender evidence anew in my own field.

Spanning the entire globe and covering over 1000 years of human history, James C. Scott's Domination and the Arts of Resistance is an intellectual odyssey into the relatively new field of subaltern studies. It is also an intellectual oasis for historians and general readers of history who have become disillusioned with the traditional historiography of power relations and resistance among dominate groups and subordinate groups. Indeed, Scott's use of folklore, speeches, ballads, literary theory,linguistics, and public ceremonies, e.g., parades and political rallies, greatly adds to the works of other innovative historians of culture, domination, and resistance, e.g., Scott gives the works of Michel Focault, Hayden White, Dominick LaCapra, and Natalie Zemon Davis, to name a few, new perspectives for cultural analysis. Perhaps of greater importance is Scott's examination of what he describes as "public" and "private" transcripts,i.e., dialogue among and between the dominate and subordinate groups. Furthermore, Scott puts great emphasis on the "infrastructure" of power relationships among the respective inner "communities" of theweak and the strong. In short, what goes on behind the scenes, away from the public eye, reveals the true nature of what Scott labels as "masks of power", which are, in effect, merely public performances designed to placate both dominate and subordinate groups. This absorbing work will certainly be influential for future generations of historians, anthroplogists, political scientists, and sociologists.

I got "domination" for a class, which does not tend to bias me in favor of liking a book. However, I have tentatively enjoyed reading it. It is a serious, scholarly book, but the topic is engaging and the case studies and historical examples cited are always interesting. I think that the author supports his complex thesis very well, and I would recommend this book to people who want to read something serious about race and culture.