Politics Government Books

I received this book in a timely manner, it is well written, and gave me the information I hoped.

This is a clearly written introduction to how the legislature works, right down to how to get around the different Congressional buildings. OK, so it's not exactly a graduate poli-sci text but Silverberg is the Editor of The Hill, so he's certainly got the credentials to put this book out. Sure wish we'd had this book *before* we'd done our first legislative visit!!

If there was ever a book for congress that you had to buy, this is it. In fact, if this was the only book you had to buy, buy this book before any other. It is the Bible of budgets, the Torah of truth, and the Koran of Congress.

This book has it all. It has information for the experienced legislator as well as useful information for any layman. It helpes me every time I have proposed any idea for a bill to my congressman, and has told me who my congressman even was (Tom Wolfe, a very withdrawn, yet supposedly experienced man).

It gives information vital for everyone to know, as well as extrememly interesting facts (there has been two extremely brutal fights in congress). There is also information for which I never had any idea about but am interested about now, such as information, as well as the origin, of jerrymandering.

There is just one thing that has the capacity, the brevity, the sum of the copious amount of words I put in this summary...
BUY THIS BOOK!

This was a Dummies book that didn't look down on me. It had a lot of info on it that was pretty cool. It sure helped me on my AP Government test. Also considering I'm interested in Government, it had a lot of useful ideas to help me write bill proposals and other things to Congress.

I also liked the foreward. Senator Daschle, we ned a lot more people in office like you.

Buy this book. It has good things that help you.

Refreshing! Like a cool summer breeze. It's not only fun to read but also informative. It's about Reid's journey to the East with his very western background and family. Be careful! One will experience bursts of laughter while reading this book. Its also about Confucius and its contagious - I could not stop reading it. So, grab a copy! And enjoy it with a cup of Coffee or Tea!

Many books on Japan or Asia deal in the military or the schools or the business point of view when dealing with that region of the world. The author decided to deal with the ethics, the ideals and codes of behavior passed down from Confucius. The ideals of respect, group unity and just plain manners. He uses it to try to explain why, for example, when there are problems with the economy there are no links to crime or unemployment. Why? In America and Europe one is always linked to the other.
This book is a must for anybody interested in Asian history, Japanese culture or how Confucius works on a daily level.

I haven't read the book yet, but it seems as though the author is making conclusions and assumptions about all East Asian countries based on living only in Japan. Yes, statistics will show that most Asian countries have low crime and divorce rates, etc. But, Confucian values haven't been as friendly in places such as South Korea. Sure, they have low crime rates, but strong conservative Confucian values there have cost people their freedom as well as their happiness. They do as they are told because they feel there is no other way. The schools are considered "great" because students do nothing but memorize to pass tests and get high scores. What they actually learn is a different story. Also, the education system in Korea is extremely controlled and they do not encourage free thinking. I know this is just a book that some guy wrote about his personal experience, and we're lucky to have the freedom to write as we choose in the West. But I believe if you are going to try to educate people about an entire area such as all of East Asia, I think one should be a little more "experienced" in each of the countries within that location.

This is one of the best books I have ever read. It taught me so much about the East Asian culture and how it differs from how I live in America. I would greatly recommend this book to anybody that simply loves to learn.

This book is a fabulous read for those of you that are hardcore Japanophiles or for people that enjoy taking things a cut deeper when learning about a culture.

It's refreshing and a quick read. I'd say it would be important to make notes in the book and possibly highlight. There are great points to which you can refer later.

Do yourself the favor and get this book.

iKnow

Referenced by William Lee Miller in Lincoln's Virtues: An Ethical Biography. Sometimes dry editorial review of the writing of the Declaration.

Most interesting aspect is the discussion of the state and local declarations before and after the real Declaration of Independence, and the history of the physical Declaration, which might have been expanded.

If you're looking for a great book on the writing of the Declaration of Independence, the clear choice is Pauline Maier's American Scripture. Maier begins with a travel narrative of sorts, explaining what an early American historian sees when she visits the National Archives, and observes hundreds of tourists waiting to view the document. No other significant document in the history of the United States, she notices, seems to create as much reverence, excitement, and patriotism as the Declaration. While the viewers don't necessarily have all of the history under exact command, they have great respect for the document. How the document came to be, and how it developed such popular acclaim become the subjects of the rest of Maier's book. This book truly is a history of the writing of the Declaration. Maier examines the documents that preceded that of July 4, 1776. She finds that in the months preceding July 1776 localities drafted their own declarations, mini-declarations, declaring the cessation of their allegiance to George III and Parliament. These mini-declarations formed the linguistic and stylistic basis for the national declaration. Producing the American Declaration of Independence was a task that fell to a committee of five, which included Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, and John Adams. The lion's share of the credit for drafting the Declaration is usually accorded to Jefferson, but Maier finds that the committee of five, particularly Adams, was far more influential than previously thought. Ultimately Maier's book is carefully researched and well-crafted. It is beautifully written, and a joy to read. For those who teach American history, as I do, it is an excellent resource to use in an advanced undergraduate class to discuss how to do research and how to write history. I read this book my first year of graduate school and have relied on it heavily ever since.

I learned much about the construction of the Declaration of Independence, its meaning, the intents behind it, and some of the uses. This is a must read for anyone who wants to know the real story behind the Declaration of Independence. Much of what we are taught about it is too simplistic.

The main drawback is that she jumps around a bit in breaking down the Declaration of Independence. It will be boring for those who only have a cursory interest in the Declaration of Independence.

I teach a class on American civics and history, and if only this book had written for middle-schoolers (i.e. a bit shorter, since I only have a week to teach the material, review and test). It has excellent research and sources, and it (usually) captures the chaos, excitement and some of the danger of the time. It's a little long, probably by about two chapters. Aside from that, it's an excellent resource. It has made its way, I know, onto two university history and poli-sci department reading lists in North Carolina and Virginia, and I've heard that it's required reading in a few other places. It's a good read, a good telling of a fascinating story. For history buffs and students, this book is a must.

This was a required reading for a graduate humanities class. Pauline Maier expertly researched the events leading up to the birth of the Declaration. The First Continental Congress convened in Philadelphia in May of 1775, and included delegates from all of the thirteen colonies. Not all of the delegates to the Congress were in favor of separating from Great Britain, even though several of the colonies' militias were involved in military actions against the British forces in places like Ft. Ticonderoga. Politically forceful men, such as Robert R. Livingstone of New York, led the majority of delegates. They were primarily interested in the Congress petitioning King George III to hear the colonies grievances and amicably settle their differences. In June, Thomas Jefferson, a delegate from Virginia was chosen to serve on a committee to draft a declaration delineating the colonies grievances to the king. This would be Jefferson's first of many writing assignments while a member of the congress. As is so often the case in history, a great catalyst would have to move the delegates of the congress to overcome their fears and finally break with the Mother country. That catalyst came from Great Britain to the colonies in 1775; and in January 1776, the name Thomas Paine, was virtually on the lips of every adult colonist.

Tom Paine (1737-1809) was the consummate revolutionary and a daring adventurer. Not only was he an important figure in the American Revolution, but he also traveled to France in 1791 to give that revolution a push. Paine traveled from England, just in time to stoke the flames of the revolution with his pamphlet Common Sense, in January 1776. To call Common Sense a sensation in the colonies is actually a bit of an understatement. It was an unparallel sensation and monumental work of Enlightenment rhetoric that quickly fanned the flames of rebellion throughout the colonies. In four months, over 120,000 copies were printed in the colonies--over 500,000 copies by years end. No other pamphlet printed in seventeenth century America came close to its success. Most importantly, Common Sense served to get the colonial patriots to drop their fear of open rebellion, and also emboldened those delegates who favored declaring independence from Britain. The delegates now had the confidence that a large segment of the colonists would support rebellion. The most moving quote from the pamphlet became quite prophetic, when one considers the impact it ultimately had on the delegates in the congress, the drafting of the Declaration of Independence, and on the world. "We have it in our power to begin the world over again."

By June 7, 1776, events had progressed to a point that Richard Henry Lee, a delegate from Virginia, made a motion to dissolve all ties to Great Britain and declare independence.
After the motion passed, the Continental Congress appointed a committee comprised of five men John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Robert R. Livingston, and Roger Sherman, to draft a Declaration of Independence. The members of the committee left it to John Adams and Thomas Jefferson to write a draft for the rest of the committee members to edit. Adams relayed in his autobiography, that when the two men were left alone, he asked Jefferson to draw up the draft by himself, for several reasons. First, Jefferson was a Southerner and Adams a New Englander, and Adams knew it was important to gain the support of the Southern delegates to pass the resolution in congress. Second, Jefferson had not been vociferous for independence during the past months, and Adams had been the most zealous delegate for independence; thus, Adams thought that a draft from him would get undue scrutiny. Lastly, Adams thought that Jefferson was a more eloquent writer then he was. These historical events would make The Declaration of Independence and Thomas Jefferson icons of Enlightenment philosophy.

The other important quality that Jefferson possessed was that he could write quickly. It is even a more remarkable act of genius, when one realizes that Jefferson had his draft in front of the committee to edit in two days. To gain a better understanding of the philosophical principles in the Declaration, it is important to note what historical and philosophical works influenced Jefferson's thinking which found their way into the Declaration. He did not have access to a library and he only had two documents in his room. One was a draft of the preamble of the Virginia constitution that he had just completed, and the other was a draft version of The Virginia Declaration of Rights that George Mason, its author, had recently sent him. As soon as one compares the Declaration of Independence with Mason's Virginia Declaration of Rights, one finds many similarities in language and ideas. To illustrate the point, one famous example is as follows. "The original draft of the Declaration says: `All men are created equal and independent.' The original draft of the Virginia Declaration says: `All men are created equally free and independent." It is detailed facts that makes Maier's book a must read for those interested in the history of the Declaration of Independence.

As a graduate student in philosophy and history, I heartily recommend this timeless classic to anyone who is interested in political philosophy, and history.

I bought this book for a polital science class and had to stop during my study session to write this review. Was the editor on crack? Don't get me wrong, it's well written, but the paragraphs jump around haphazardly. I'll be reading about 9-11 in one paragraph and the next paragraph will be about the Bush-Gore election followed by a passage about Clinton's performance in office. Editors please put this stuff in chronological order!

I was surprised at how interesting this book made government. It's not boring like so many other college text books are. There are lots of examples that explain concepts in an interesting way, and there are little side stories about our country's history.

Although this book is interesting the chapters are soooo long. I used this book for a 3 week summer government course and the long chapters nearly killed me. I found that I could skip the introduction to each chapter which saved me a whole page of reading. Also, I could sometimes read the first and last paragraph of a section and get the point of the section without having to read all the examples of an issue. The end of the chapter summaries are good, and very usefull to studying for exams.

I used this text as a course textbook for a college class last semester. One of the good things about this book is that it contains a LOT of examples about every topic concerning government that is discussed in the book. One of the bad things that I've found however, is that these examples make the book very tedious - if you are just trying to get straight information (ie: to learn from), and you want to do it quickly, I would not recommend this book; however, if you are seeking to learn, and you learn best by seeing real-life examples, then this is the book for you, for it has plenty of those! Personally, I found it a little too much, but I realize that this is just my opinion, so I don't knock the book at all.

was a good book, a very interesting college course. This book was easy to read and follow.

The format of this book is straight forward, and easy to comprehend. Unfortunately, the beginning of many chapters proved to be long and tedious before actually getting into the workings of government. Although the examples were necessary to illustrate daily workings of government, they could have been cut back.

My bias: I AM a charter member of "the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy", and I have read Mark Smith's previous tome. While some of this up-dated book is replowing old ground, that's probably necessary as liberal arguments tend to be like Whack-A-Mole; knock it down and it bobs back up.

If you are a conservative who's kept up with the issues as they've developed, there probably isn't much here they you don't already know. It is, however, a handy compendium and includes all the references you might need. The "Action Kit" listing of influential conservatives and organizations is worth the price of the book by itself.

This book has a lot of useful information and is a fun and easy read. It is a must for anyone looking to join the ever expanding right wing conspiracy lol. As a conservative I wish such a conspiracy exsisted. R. Reagon for 2008

The book is pretty similar to the 2006 and 2007 editions. The author provides some pretty solid refutation of the most common liberal arguments. But it is nowhere near as in depth and comprehensive as Gregg Jackson's "Conservative Comebacks to Liberal Lies." Smith's answers are more tongue and cheek than Jackson's more thoroughly researched and documented responses. It's not a bad read though.

Have you ever had an epiphany and realized it was about how nasty the Democratic party is???? Well, this book will bring that realization to the front of your cranium, and give you a lot to think about!!! GET IT NOW!!!!

As always, The Official Handbook of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy undeniably lives up to its title. Now in an updated 2008 Presidential Election Edition, The Official Handbook of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy remains a solid block of strategies for debating with the extreme liberal left. Chapters attack and destroy the arguments supporting such left-wing causes as amnesty for illegal immigrants, giving constitutional rights to terrorism suspects, hysteria over global warming, unilaterally giving up in Iraq, using the Fairness Doctrine to censor conservative talk radio, "inside job" 9/11 conspiracy theories, same-sex marriage, and more. Liberals will also want to read The Official Handbook of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy, the better to understand and anticipate the counter-arguments that are coming, and moderates are sure to chuckle at Smith's tongue-in-cheek take on the issues regardless of personal political preference! "...welfare hurts the exact people it is meant to help. By paying people to remain unemployed and giving extra subsidies to non-working parents who had additional children, between the 1960s and the 1990s welfare policies perpetuated poverty by removing the incentive to work while adding to exploding rates of illegitimacy. Since Congress approved comprehensive welfare reform in 1996, however, we've seen dramatic improvements in child poverty and illegitimacy rates. What a surprise - when the government stops paying people to be unemployed and to have kids out of wedlock, people find more jobs and have less out-of-wedlock children. Who could have predicted that?"

As we watch the Democrats and Republicans "square-off" again, Professor Boller has done a Yeoman's job with this classic of American politics, reminding us what this "National crazy season" is all about. Here in one volume, Boller summarizes all but the last four of America's Presidential campaigns: from the first, George Washington's in 1789, to the fortieth, Ronald Reagan's in 1980.

My favorite campaign is the 1876 disputed and brokered election, reminiscent of the "Supreme Court decided" 2000 election. The 1876 election took place in Philadelphia during the Nation's Centennial Year, between two Governors: Rutherford B. Hayes of Ohio and Samuel J. Tilden of New York. Arguably this was the most controversial as well as the most defining campaign of all of American History. Hayes a Republican, known for his honesty and integrity and Tilden known as a reformer, squared off over how to deal with the remnants of the Civil War, the primary issue of which was how to end Reconstruction.

Tilden, the Northerner, and a pro-slavery proponent, sympathies lay with the South and with ending Reconstruction and removing Federal troops from occupying the South, thus leaving the South to manage its own affairs -- meaning of course leaving the problem of what to do with the freed slaves up to the white southerners. Under Tilden's formula the slaves were thus to be left to their own devices in a sea of hostile "foaming at the mouth" Southerners still licking their wounds from the lost of the Civil War. Hayes, though a Republican, was not a Radical "pro-freedom" Republican, and thus was only slightly less accommodating to maintaining the Reconstruction status quo than was Tilden.

When the dust settled, both were short of the necessary electoral college votes, with the 20 votes of SC, La., Fa., and Ore. still in doubt -- even though Tilden had garnered a quarter million more votes than Hayes. Tilden needed only one of the outstanding 20 Electoral College votes, while Hayes needed all 20. Yet after the back room haggling ended, a compromise was struck with Hayes declared the winner. Hayes may have won the battle but Tilden won the war: Reconstruction was ended; the ex-slaves were sacrificed in the process; and the "Jim Crow curtain" descended on the U.S. for the next one hundred years.

The book is well-research, written with the flair of a journalist and full of interesting anecdotes and colorful stories.

Five Stars

I own a previous edition of this book. Facinating information about each campaign. You think 2000 was bad? Take a look at 1876 or 1824. I'd offer more in this review, but it's 4 am and I need to get back to sleep.

This book reminds me again just how much fun the study of history can be. The basic facts of Presidential elections from the beginning to today are solid historical accounts. But they also include the tidbits of electoral trivia that go on in each election, but that are often obscure or unnoticed. This book is both informative and entertaining. I plan to give it as a gift to my opthomologist who is also a history buff. As a retired history professor I look forward to chatting with him during my annual examinations.

Presidential Campaigns: From George Washington To George W. Bush by Paul F. Boller, Jr. is a lively, informative, and often surprising history of American presidential election campaigns. This is a complete chronological history of from the unanimously concented ascent of General george Washionhton, to the divisively contested Gore vs. Bush recall scandal. Presidental Campaigns is a superbly written and presented political history that, in these politically divise days of presential electioneering, deserves as wide a readership as possible among the electorate.

You wouldn't have recognized the election of 1789. There were no primaries, nominating convention, rival candidates, campaign speeches, or debates on public issues." (All quotes are direct from the book.) Yet the will of the people was perfectly expressed. Everyone simply agreed that Washington had to be the President. Four years later they had political parties, but both of them picked Washington. That was the end of the smooth sailing.

In 1796 Adams and Jefferson remained on friendly terms with each other, but had their supporters do a lot of name calling (sound familiar?). By 1800 Adams was calling Jefferson ... well, read the book. Suffice to say, the American way of politics was in full swing, has continued unabated until now and shows no sign of making significant changes in the future.

I must say that I do miss the rum. When Washington was running for the Virginia House of Burgesses in 1758, there were 391 elgible voters. Washington gave them 160 gallons of rum. It's kind of a wonder just how they could vote.

This is a delightful book. I remember taking American History in college, and that was pretty dull. This reads like a novel, full of interesting anecdotes while conveying the facts as well.

I just LOVED listening to Goldberg's choices ! ? Hearing the author read his own book helps YOU understand his choices.
Quite an INTERESTING, "uplifting", extremely INFORMATIVE piece of literature!
A MUST READ FOR EVERY LIBERAL !!!

This is my kind of book. A brief look at a few of the idiots that make life in the great USA burdensome. It will provide plenty of ammo for discussion with your liberal friends. You will need it because every time you provide them with the facts, if they are like my liberal friends, they will quickly change the point of reference and try to get you on something else, much like the person who finds Jesus and quickly becomes a religious know-it-all. Buy the book and savor the humor and insight. This is not what you would consider a scholarly work but it adds to the ongoing political discussion. Who knows, if you read it with an open mind, you may even become more conservative!

Another piece of rubbish generated by the huge conservative computer buried in an underground vault somewhere in the heart of the country. Totally predictable. Yawn.

...it fulfilled my expectations. I enjoyed what I perceived to be lots of "tongue-in-cheek" humor.

I think some of you dudes oughtta lighten up a bit. Political discussions, especially the ad hominum variety, seem a s/w petty concern to get into a big twist about.

This is one guy's (entertaining) opinions. Dig it for that alone.

I bought this book "sight unseen" based on the strength of seeing some of Bernie Goldberg's journalistic work on CBS, thinking that since he was a serious journalist this would probably be a serious piece. Boy was I ever wrong! If this is his idea of a joke, then it's a $26 joke on me and other readers like me who paid full price for this piece of literary embarrassment.

So far as I could tell, there is nothing remotely serious in the book. The summaries of even those people included must have been pulled from some airhead's brain, on the fly. This whole production is a pandering and groveling salute of the worse kind to Rush Limbaugh's brigade of ditto heads. I hope Bernie does not get the "guilties" as he laughs all the way to the bank, because this piece of trash is going to come back to haunt his career. He can count on it.

Since G.W. Bush, Dick Chaney and Condoleeza Rice are nowhere to be found on the author's list one must also assume that he has no idea of what it takes to either improve or screw up America. And given this production, he clearly does not even care.

Another possibility is that the America he is trying to keep from being screwed and the one I am trying to save are two entirely different places. In either case, there should be some overlap in what one considers dangerous to the nation. The only overlap I see is Al Sharpton, who since he is so high on Goldberg's otherwise embarrassing list, I suppose Sharpton cannot be as bad as my prejudices have led me to believe him to be. Based on his rank on Goldberg's list alone, means it is time to reassess my prejudices against the oily looking Reverend. Al? Get ready to be promoted!

[...]? One Star

I first read this book 5 years ago. Since then I've purchased and given away over a dozen copies. When I give the book away, I challenge the reader to "don't get mad, do something about it". The examples that Howard uses illustrates how bureaucratic our society has become and with that how scarce "common sense" has become. It's a great illustration that the balance between "free will of the people" and unchecked bureaucracy continues to tip in the bureaucrats favor.

This book says the things we all have thought when we have heard of nonsensical law suits and the lack of common sense in our society. An easy read, this book intends to put a fire under people.

The anecdotes are indeed maddening; of course the law and bureaucratic process can be described as "inefficient". However, over and again, Howard says, "Anyone can accuse anyone of anything," which is true, but he acts like the ability to accuse someone is the same as rendering judgment, and therefore our right to call someone to task in a court of law should be abridged. He neglects the fact that, once in the court of law, it is up to the lawyers and judges, and juries when appropriate, to dismiss cases that have no merit. If that is not being done, it is not the problem of us American citizens "having too many rights" but that his slimy profession is without any moral compass. And his book, while thought-provoking and entertaining, is at heart a call for less oversight of those in power, because those without power are slowing them down. I expect he's very happy with Bush and Cheney and their dismantling of so many of our inconvenient "rights". Read it, but with a pile of salt.

Not bad, but just too obvious. I suppose as an introduction to someone recovering from a desire for Government regulation it mayh be helpful.

Well-written and well-researched book that presents the frightening picture of the beast that law in America has become. The author provides good historical background for the reader to appreciate the insidious development of what has become our current laws, how these laws have actually become impediments for progress and justice, and good discussions regarding the challenges facing any rational correction of this quagmire.

Very worthwhile and insightful reading.

In this short book (174 pages of text; 139 if you skip the quantitative appendix), Bates argues that state failure stems from predation on the part of the central government. His model, to put it briefly (and inadequately), is that governments can either take revenues from the people (1) in the form of taxes while providing services (such as security) or (2) in the form of predation. As long as the benefits of the former outweigh the latter (for example, when a government is assured of staying in power for a long time), the government will maintain security. However, if the long run is less certain, the government may sacrifice steady long-term gains in favor of larger short-term gains from predation.

Bates starts with an extended, insightful exposition of this metaphor (Chapter Two). Then he characterizes the conditions that prevailed prior to collapse in many African countries in chapters three (political trends), four (bad economic policies), and five (tensions between groups in the countries). In Chapter Six he describes the state failures. The conclusion sums it up, and the appendix gives some statistical evidence (the rest of the evidence is anecdotal or - Bates's preferred term - narrative).

Overall I found the book slow reading (despite its brevity) and not as coherent as I'd have liked. The basic model is useful but I often found it unclear in the succeeding chapters how the many pieces of narrative evidence fit into the model. The clearest example of this was in Chapter Five, where three models of subnational tensions were presented followed by several examples that did not clearly fit the models.

Further, the form of narrative evidence (lots of different examples from various countries) felt less effective to me than either a detailed case study of one example or systematic statistical evidence. (If I had pre-existing intimate familiarity with the national histories, this would have been less of an issue) The statistical annex provides the latter but deserved more space: some integration of statistical findings with narrative evidence might have worked better. (As it was, the statistical annex left me with a number of clarifying questions.) Bates argues that he distinguishes himself from other work in the area by deriving his hypothesis from a theory rather than highlighting empirical "findings" (p8-9).* And yet Bates - in his empirical appendix - reports atheoretical findings such as the increasing likelihood of disorder over time (despite controlling for changes that should drive the changing likelihood) - p171-173. Finally, Bates doesn't devote any time to states that didn't experience state failure and why or how they differed, nor to rival theories and how they fare in light of the national narratives.

As a novice considering whether to read a book like this, the ideal would be to read at least two reviews: one from an expert (who can opine as to how this fits - or doesn't - with existing knowledge) and one from a novice (who can tell how this may read to another novice). I fall in the latter category. In the former, Chris Blattman (an economics professor in Yale's political science department) blogged, "It's short, it's readable, and it's intelligent. Normally if I get just two of the three, I'm thrilled" [1]. A political scientist I know called it an "excellent primer." And Nicholas Van De Walle (author of the highly esteemed African Economies and the Politics of Permanent Crisis, 1979-1999) wrote a brief review for Foreign Affairs, summarizing and concluding that "Bates paints in broad brushes and ignores the states in the region, such as Botswana, Cape Verde, and Mauritius, that have not followed this script but actually enjoyed stability, economic growth, and reasonably democratic politics" [2].

Perhaps this volume is most readable to the already initiated. But it is short and imparts a significant amount of valuable information; I recommend Chapters 2 and 6.

[1] Chris Blattman's blog [easily searchable on-line], "When things fell apart," 19 July 2008.

[2] Nicholas Van De Walle, "Africa," Foreign Affairs, May/June 2008.

* I assume by this he means an explicit, chapter-long theory. Other work I've read in this area, by Collier or by Miguel, clearly has a theoretical basis even if not as formally stated as Bates's.