Politics Government Books

Thomas Paine's Common Sense did, in fact, make sense. It gave the reasoning as to why the colonies should revolt against the British Empire. Easily a favorite.

Common sense was at the right place at the right time, written by the right person. It created an inflection point that changed the world!

Most major changes in life are cause by events called inflection points. An inflection point is an event that changes how you view the world, who you are, or your life in general.

Think 9-11. People in the United States felt safer before that day. After 9-11 we realized our vulnerability to terrorists. There are many inflection points in our history.

Tomas Paine's Common Sense created a major inflection point in history!

In early 1776 Thomas Paine published a 46 page pamphlet called Common Sense. It helped inspire the writing of the Declaration of Independence and motivated a nation to start a revolution.

The book was written for the common man and was estimated to have sold 120,000 copies within three months of publication and 500,000 copies within a year. It is worth noting that this was in the United States when there were only 3 million people--and many couldn't read!

John Adams and others had been arguing for the United States to become an independent nation. The release of Paine's Common Sense was the inflection point that caused the nation to become independent.

Thomas Paine used his Critical Thinking skills to determine that the time was right to inspire the people to take action. He argued convincingly that the young nation had to make a choice for independence now--not later. Paine explained that within fifty years the personal interests of individuals who would acquire status and money by then would resist such a change. And, the colonies would be more established and would resist such a change.

"A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong gives it a superficial appearance of being right." ~Thomas Paine

The Re-Discovery of Common Sense: A Guide to: The Lost Art of Critical Thinking

This was an excellent point of view that is very straight to point when it came to how to deal with the british and some very practical advice on how a democracy should be run. It even goes as far to give an alternate view on how the constitution should be written, and some of faults of the draft at the time which ultimately went on to be ratified.

This book was originally written as a pamphlet in 1776. It was crucial in advancing the thought and spirit of the American Revolution to the masses. I found this book to be amazing in how forward thinking the author was. Declaring "The cause of America is in a great measure the cause of all mankind". He spends the first part of the book logically explaining that Monarchy is wrong and having heirs to a throne is ridiculous. He uses the bible as part of his argument that kings and kingdoms are man made and the origin is corrupt so they should be done away with. He goes on to explain how a fair practice of representation in government could take place in the colonies after independance. He writes that America had no logical need to submit to Great Britain's dominion any longer and that after the treatment America received, she had every right to independance. Paine predicts that America would emerge as a powerful nation with its natural resources and location. He says that the pride of kings results in wars. He states that in a monarchy the King is law, in a democracy Law is king. This book is a wonderful trip into logic and reason concerning Americas independance, I enjoyed it. Thomas Paine's vision of America came true, and you can read that vision in this book.

Larkin's treatment of Thomas Paine's COMMON SENSE is one of the finest I've ever read -- and I have virtually everything ever written about Paine on my shelves. Superlatives don't really measure up to the full usefulness of this text, ESPECIALLY for educators.

Examples of the extraordinary contents include:

A cogent and accurate introduction to Paine and COMMON SENSE.

The text of COMMON SENSE itself is profusely annotated by Dr. Larkin.

A timeline for Thomas Paine.

A solid Works Cited section

Appendices that include Jefferson's notated version of the DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE that shows which words and phrases were edited OUT of the declaration and what was put in place of them.

Important antecedents to COMMON SENSE by Jefferson, Adams, and John Dickinson.

Key replies to Paine's COMMON SENSE by Charles Inglis, James Chalmers, William Smith, and the redoubtable John Adams.

The full text of Paine's AMERICAN CRISIS No. 1.

In my opinion, Larkin's work is simply the best single treatment of Paine's COMMON SENSE in existence. He makes it look easy to bridge the gap between readability, accessibility, and scholarly excellence. Were I asked to teach a class on this topic or even on the Revolution itself, this would be a first choice for a text.

By the way, Larkin is just the most recent of a distinguished group of English literature scholars who have contributed some of the finest work in the field of history. Lit professor Alfred Owen Aldridge is another distinguished contributor to Thomas Paine historical studies.

If you're interested in the subject matter, this book is a MUST HAVE.

This is a great book on all the modern Presidents from FDR to George Walker Bush. It is organized by chapters on each President, and addresses subthemes such as the President's cognitive style, emotional intelligence, etc. It contains a lot of great anecdotal evidence, and offers great insight on the evolution of the Presidential Office, and how different factors (both intrinsic and extrinsic to the President) affect success and failure.

Some parts of the book felt inflated - like the author really didn't have much to say about the topic, but felt he had to write something anyway. Also, I don't agree with his assessments with some Presidents, namely JFK, but all in all I would recommend this book for its very straightforward diction, and informative content.

Greenstein's The Presidential Difference is short and sweet. It condenses the story of our Presidents from FDR to George W. Bush into an easy to read manner. Each chapter is dedicated to a President and gives six points upon which they are evaluated, which makes comparisons with other Presidents in the book easy. Even with only 223 pages nothing seems to be left out. The book is engaging from beginning to end and before you know it you have gone through twelve presidencies. To end it all Greenstein wraps 13 chapters up in a magnificent conclusion titled "Lessons from the Modern Presidency". There isn't any more one can ask for. I highly recommend this book as a good read, that is fun, short, and a great way to brush up on knowledge of our Presidents.

Greenstein does a great job in setting aside his bias and reporting on the facts from the people who knew. He reports on the "Modern Presidency" - all of the presidents who were elected from FDR to Clinton. He evaluates them based on a number of qualities including vision, cognitive ability and a few other qualities. Greenstein first gives a basic history of life before being elected president and then evaluates the qualities. At the end of the book, he sums up the qualities he has just evaluated and proceeds to explain that no president will ever be able to perfect all of these qualities because every man is flawed. Overall, this is a great read for everyone who wants to brush up on their knowledge of these presidents. It doesn't go into too much detail but what it does present is both useful and sufficient.

Fred Greenstein explores the leadership style of the presidents from FDR to Bill Clinton in his piece "The Presidential Difference." In the new edition, Greenstein includes an updated afterword on George W. Bush. The book is a great introduction to the modern day presidents and is recommended to the amateur historian to the most serious public policy students.

The organization of the book is wonderful. Greenstein spends a chapter on each president. The format is the same for each chapter. Each opens with interesting quotes from the respective president, and then goes into a brief biography. Greenstein then spends time describing the major events of the president's tenure, and closes the chapter with the significance of the president's leadership. In doing this last bit, Greenstein analyzes five areas of each chief: public communication, organizational capacity, political skill, cognitive style, and emotional intelligence.

There are other aspects of the book that are praiseworthy. Greenstein scatters wonderful pictures throughout; my favorite is of LBJ in the face of Senator Theodore Green. The appendix is also a wonderful tool, as it in effect shows the resume of each president. It outlines important life events and information, election results, the political composition of Congress, appointments, staff, and key events.

This book is recommended to all as a great introduction the the U.S. presidency.

This book by political scientist Fred Greenstein is the first I've read focusing, not on presidential achievement but on effective leadership. Using a series of criteria including vision, cognitive ability, management style and most importantly emotional intelligence, Greenstein looks briefly yet closely at each president from FDR through Clinton with a special afterword on George W. Bush. (pre 9/11) Greenstein chronicles the successes and failings of each president he profiles. Roosevelt receives the highest regards for his ability to translate his popularity into bold leadership. His secretive and manipulative management style is condemmed. Truman is praised for his management style but criticized for his inability at times to lead the nation along the lines of his vision. There is truth to this criticism but Greenstein doesn't look at external facotrs that effected Truman's ability to govern such as the Republican demagoguery of the Democrats as "soft on communism". Eisenhower is highly praised, and properly so, for his strong management style and his strong, quiet leadership. Kennedy gets deserved criticism for his early failings but not enough credit for his later growth. One thing Kennedy is properly criticized for, in my view, is his overreliance on intellectuals, something that would plague Clinton as well. After Kennedy we have a series of failed presidents, with Ford excepted. The common denominator between Johnson, Nixon and Carter are their weak emotional intelligence quotas. All are thin skinned, unable to work well with others, naturally suspicious of those outside their circle. Clinton too is regarded as weak emotionally. Greenstein's thesis is that persons of low emotional intelligence should not become president as it is a recipe for failure. Interestingly, in his brief comments on President Bush, written before Sept. 11, 2001, he predicts, based on his observations of Bush's steady emotional inner core, that he will be a strong and succesful leader. You don't have to agree with Greenstein's entire analysis to appreciate the achievement of this book. It is refreshing to read a book about the presidency that moves beyond Arthur Schlesinger's tired and outdated theory of active and passive presidents. A good read and I highly recommend it.

Another book that Dr. L had us read. During the 2008 presidential debate I see one party is trying to buy votes even though the failures of socialism have been proven time and time again throughout history. This is the singular short work on the failures of socialism.

Friedrich Hayek's The Road to Serfdom was written at a time when the Labour Party of Britain was openly socialist. Although modern social democrats renounce the 's' word, socialism is indeed the root of their thinking, and in this exposition, his magnus opus, Hayek unabashedly sends socialism to the gutter where it belongs. Hayek's thesis, that socialism and totalitarianism are two birds of the same feather, has stood the test of time, and it continues to show up today in the cases of Venezuela or Bolivia. Hayek was arguably responsible for Labour's (and the Democrats') turn to the right, set in stone by former PM Tony Blair (and former President Clinton). This book is, however, still very relevant, exemplified by the Democrats' plan to invade the health care sector, the countless bureaucracies located in Washington, and President Bush's reckless invasion of privacy (which is related to Hayek's arguments about war time and peace time). Although Hayek often comes off as soft on a number of issues, he could not be nearly as dedicated as Milton Friedman to absolute freedom because the intelligentsia was on the far-left in the 40's.

For classical liberals, modern leftists, and conservatives alike, The Road to Serfdom is extraordinarily eye-opening.

Friedrich Hayek, the Nobel prize winning economist, wrote this brilliant classic as a critique of government intervention and manipulation in markets. I am neither an economist nor a political scientist, but I was led to this book after watching with horror the recent outrages that are consciously being inflicted on us by our elected officials, most recently the bailout and socialization of the two giant mortgage lenders, Freddie and Fannie. I couldn't remember that I ever received any share of the loot when those companies were making huge profits and their CEOs were earning tens of millions per year, but now I find that our elected officials have written a blank check in my name, the taxpayer, to bail out these companies' losses and stupidity, and then handed the check to a group of unelected officials (and, surprise, surprise, those two companies spend hundreds of millions on congressional lobbying). Privatize the gains, socialize the losses: sounds like a win-win situation for somebody.

This kind of disastrous socialism is exactly what Hayek critiques in devastating form in this book, specifically government control of the economy. Apparently, they say, this book has been very influential, but a layman could certainly never tell by looking around. Hayek was writing from the perspective of a central European who had recently witnessed first-hand the unfolding development of National Socialism (Nazism) in Germany, and he is warning that the exact same attitudes and policies that had been followed in Germany were uncritically being followed by the Allies, merely at a few years distance.

He begins by recollecting the ideals of old, classic liberalism, "the forgotten road". Of course, in Hayek's context, "liberal" means the true, historic liberalism of limited government, free markets, and private property, not "liberal" in the bastardized sense somehow hijacked by Leftists to mean unlimited government, socialized markets and massive forced wealth redistribution. He looks at the rise of collectivist thinking versus individual (it's all for the greater good); the problems of central planning in a democracy (someone in power makes the economic decisions for everybody else); the downfall of the Rule of Law (government is no longer bound by fixed rules announced beforehand but instead possesses arbitrary power limited only by its own discretion); the inextricable link between centralized economic planning and totalitarian regimes (if we're going to follow a plan, someone's got to force everyone to follow it); the problem of deciding how the society's production will be distributed; a chapter showing that "nothing is more fatal than the present fashion among intellectual leaders of extolling security at the expense of freedom" (Republicans apparently didn't get the memo); how in a socialized economy the worst individuals inevitably rise to the top (Really? Can it be? Obama and McCain?); the necessity of manipulating truth in a socialized society; and the fact that Nazism was a direct outgrowth of socialism and socialist ideology.

The relevance of the points enumerated above does not require comment. We are running madly down the road to serfdom, which is the road of socialism. Unfortunately for those of us who are being dragged along against our will, history is not neutral, and we will suffer the consequences of other peoples' decisions, just as the Jews in Germany did and the Russians in the Soviet Union did. Socialism has always led to poverty and oppression, and freedom, on the rare occasions it has been tried, has produced unparalleled prosperity. Hayek shows in detail why. We've decided to give socialism another try. God help us.

The only, effective way to reject socialism is by attacking it's fundamental philosophical ideas. That collectivism is good and the individual must be sacrificed for the "good of the people". Attacking a philosophy such as communism or socialism, because it is not "practical" is a contradiction and undercuts any argument against such a corrupt philosophy. These ideas are not good in theory but bad in practice. They are evil in theory and therefore evil in practice.

I would like to also recommend Ayn Rand's, "The Virtue of Selfishness". This is THE work to understand Man's Individual Rights based on His Rational Nature. It is from these fundamental Truths that the ONLY proper function of a legitimate government is derived - The protection of Individual Rights.

Considering it my duty as an economics major, I took it upon myself to read this book, with little expectations as to its brilliance, and was completely swept away. Not only is Hayek extremely eloquent in articulating the case for free trade, he supports his arguments with facts (e.g. what was then going on in Nazi Germany) and with theory (e.g. why without even the historical evidence that we do have we must conclude that a centralized system cannot equally favor everyone).

Since it is my tendency to look at the 1 star reviews before making a 5 star one, I recognize that some people don't like Hayek because he doesn't recognize the great things about socialized medicine (like how a guy in Canada signed up for a CAT scan under his dog's name because animals are not covered under their highly efficient centralized health care...true story by the way) or the kind thoughts of socialist thinkers (please don't make me choose my selection of Marx quotes). But what Hayek does is present a prima facie case against socialism; before anyone can advocate socialism, they MUST address Hayek's arguments.

This is why I think before any socialist and libertarian face each other in a squabble, both must have read The Road to Serfdom so that they can hit on the applicable issues instead of babbling on about poverty statistics. Are you a socialist and disagree with Hayek? Fine, but read the book so that you know where your opponents stand. I really think that socialists think lovers of capitalism are greedy and have no ethics. But if you read our spokesman Hayek, you'll see why we think that the free market is actually BETTER for society.

Let's change the scope of the argument. Socialists should stop arguing about how some people are poor...yes, some people are poor...and demonstrate how a centralized system can make people BETTER than they would be under the free market system. How planning the systems of production would be more efficient and prosperous than under the system of competition. How giving all our freedoms to one entity would guarantee them for all. If you can effectively address these issues and the many more that Hayek brings up, we will soon see a blessed change in the current headache of debates on socialism.

If you want to have an understanding of how the Bush Administration is pushing their ongoing agenda/policy for globalization and corporatization of our world (with the help of a handful of elitists) this is a must read. What frightens me about the future of our world is that this book illustrates that those in power have no interest in the protection of the average person or our planet, it's about controlling resources, i.e. oil, water and food, using any method necessary,including military to further their own agenda...greed and power.

"Once you've got Baghdad it's not clear what you do with it. It's not clear what kind of government you would put in place of the one that's currently there. How much credibility is that government going to have if it's set up by the US military.... I think to have American military engaged in a civil war inside Iraq would fit the definition of a quagmire, and we have absolutely no desire to get bogged down in that fashion."--(page 174) Dick Cheney, April 1991, explaining why Bush the First did not take Baghdad after Gulf War I

Antonia Juhasz has performed a major public service in exposing the history, players, and motivations behind the second Iraqi war and occupation. "It's about the oil, silly."

Actually, not totally about the oil but for the material benefit of several industries to which access to petroleum-based energy is a key contributor. She does not mention the Carlyle Group[1], instead focusing on four top bananas: Bechtel, Chevron, Halliburton, and Lockheed Martin. The individual histories and blatant aggression of these companies, each largest in its field, are truly eye-opening.

Agenda is primarily documentation of the relationships between the war and energy corporations and the Bush dynasty...

For my complete review of this book and for other book and movie
reviews, please visit my site [...]

Brian Wright
Copyright 2007

Juhasz zeal and fanaticism against anyone or anything that engages in oil exploration or consumption makes Ed Begley Jr look like the equivalent of a one man Exxon Valdeze.

The author is of course not a journalist, or a reporter, or even a fair minded observer, but rather a far left activist with many axes to grind. Her total disdain for oil, whether refined or crude, extends to her personal ownership of any transportation that uses the pernicious benzene. What is Juhasz's stated reason for this life long eschewing of the automobile? "I refuse to give money to evil gas companies," says this holder of Public Policy degrees. One has to wonder if Juhasz was frightened by a car backfire in her cradle.

I guess Juhasz's abhorrence of lining the pockets of oil company ceo's only extends to paying at the pump as she isn't as persnickety when it comes to flying to all her public speaking engagements around the country.

Juhasz is a member of International Forum on Globalization and Oil Change International whose ideology and purpose is conveyed in this synopsis:

"We focus on the oil industry because we understand and view the oil industry as a source of global warming, human rights abuses, war, national security concerns, corporate globalization, poverty, and addiction. We also see their interests behind every major political barrier to a clean energy transition."


This intransigent position seems at odds with the purpose of a public policy masters degree that is supposed provide the candidate with analysis of the political, economic, quantitative, organizational, and normative aspects of complex problems. Juhasz has distilled all historical and current complex geopolitical issues and events down to three grimy letters: oil. She is the Freud of the anti-industrial revolution set. Even though both are not mutually exclusive, Juhasz substitutes oil for sex as the motivation for all human endeavor.

Let's examine Juhasz's rational for Bush's continued secret ulterior motives for remaining in Iraq.

"The process of securing this access involves three steps. The first, put into motion with the December 15, 2005, election, is the formation a legitimate Iraqi government with the authority to, among other things, sign contracts with foreign oil companies. The second step is the completion and passage of a new national oil law that is set to conclude at the start of 2006. The third, having enough security on the ground for U.S. oil companies to get to work, is uncertain, and therefore the time line for full U.S. troop withdrawal remains unknown."

Well, this "secret" Bush master plan must have been kept a secret from Rumsfeld since Bush approved the number of troops used in the initial Iraq invasion and subsequent mop up. If securing the all the oil producing fields, as well as Baghdad, was the intended goal after taking out Saddam, why didn't Bush accept Gen. Eric K. Shinseki's estimate that several hundred thousand troops would be needed in postwar Iraq?

Surely Juhasz isn't advocating Iraq oil only for Iraqis? It would seem antithetical to Juhasez's extremist views on petroleum; that any country's petroleum should be taken out of the ground, refined, and used to power evil machines belching toxic fumes.

What is Juhasz's position on nuclear energy? Never mind. I'm sure there are dastardly robber barons who also enjoy a monopoly over the power of the atom. But how would Antonia achieve martyr status if she merely eschewed atomic submarines and nuclear powered aircraft carriers as modes of transportation?

Antonia Juhasz has assembled expertly the pieces of the puzzle. Readers of "The Bush Agenda: Invading the World One Economy at a Time" will have it all put together by the time they finish reading this well-documented expose. It is so important that I have given copies to three brothers and five children I love.

Bush agenda is absolutely essential to understanding the unfolding story in the Middle East. Turning each page was like opening a new door of insight.

Piven and Cloward's work will always be useful in the study of social movements. I enjoyed this book and think others will as well. I don't believe this book should ONLY be read by students and academics but ALSO anyone that is trying to organize and motivate individuals to take political action. The authors explain why some movements fail and how movements change over time which is interesting for both activists and academics. Although, a great deal of the theoretical discussion has been advanced since this book was written, the book still offers relevant agruements and incites. A similar book would include Tarrow's - Power in Movement. Yet, Piven and Cloward offer more historical background that would compliment Tarrow's newer theoretical work. Last, the topics in this book vary from chapters on social unrest during the Depression to the Civil Rights Movement. The book can be read by anyone because the authors give historical background on all topics.

As both a heady intellectual and a pragmatic field organizer, I have throughly enjoyed this book. Don't be thrown off by the dry (yet incisive) introduction on the cycles of social movements. The chapters that follow provide journalistic historical narrative on the civil rights, labor, welfare rights movements and illustrate their theory. I would highly recommend it.

Most people cannot remember when their childhood ended. I, on the other hand, have a crystal-clear memory of that moment. It happened one night, in the summer of 1966 when my elementary school headmaster hanged himself. I was twelve years old."

Moying Li's headmaster is the first casualty of the Cultural Revolution in her memoir, SNOW FALLING IN SPRING. Written with clarity and eloquence, Li's story is about the difficulty of being separated from the people and places she loves. It is also about the solace she finds in banned books and forbidden education during those years of darkness.

SNOW FALLING IN SPRING begins with a brief overview of the events leading up to the Cultural Revolution. After a struggle to repel Japanese invaders, China was divided by civil war. The fighting finally ended with the founding of The People's Republic of China. Some of Li's earliest memories involve melting down household goods for the Great Leap Forward, which was a plan for China to catch up and compete with the industrialized world. It was not a success. The failure of industrial and agricultural policies led to widespread famine. Her father's struggle to understand what happened introduces one of the overarching themes of the book: the redemptive power of education. "'Ignorance,'" her father tells her as he stays up late reading each night, "'that's our enemy. In the future we need to educate ourselves.'"

Li is sent to a special school for learning foreign languages. But her education is repeatedly interrupted by the political turmoil, including the Chinese Cultural Revolution, "a political movement initiated by Mao Zedong.... characterized by political zealotry, purges of intellectuals, and social and economic chaos."

Li's teachers are denounced by zealous students who dress in army uniforms and swear their loyalty to Chairman Mao, the architect of the cultural purge. One of the central features of the Cultural Revolution was "reeducation," in which people were sent to labor camps to help purify the pollution of Western influences and a bourgeois (privileged, middle-class) lifestyle. Li's father, previously a writer of film scripts, spent most of the Cultural Revolution in a labor camp cleaning out pig stys. Like many teenagers during this time period, Li's cousin is also a candidate for reeducation. She is sent to live in a mountain village in Mongolia, subsistence farming with peasants.

During this time it became dangerous to criticize the government. The offense that leads to Li's father's imprisonment is a stray comment made while having difficulty cutting out a picture of Chairman Mao. "'It's like cutting meat with a dull knife,'" he jokes. But any comment or opinion can easily be taken out of context to denounce co-workers and neighbors. SNOW FALLING IN SPRING is filled with scenes of people being denounced for equally minor offenses. Schoolmates turn on each other, friends become enemies, and people are forced to denounce their own family members in the hopes of protecting themselves.

The relationships that remain sustaining in this environment of suspicion become all the more poignant. Li's Lao Lao (grandmother) is a foundation of strength and generosity throughout the book. Li also has a remarkable number of dedicated teachers, many of whom form the membership for her secret reading club. Li's father sends her a reading list from labor camp with instructions on where to find the banned books on the list. "'Even though school is not teaching you much, and all our books were taken away,'" her father writes, "'I want you to try to educate yourselves.'"

It is through this reading list that Li finds a renewed sense of hope. Her engagement with books and her commitment to educating herself, in an environment in which both of those activities are dangerous, is the most moving aspect of the memoir. She speaks to reading not just as an escape, but as a place of survival, solace and possibility. It is a profoundly positive, creative approach to reading, an activity that is often regarded as passive.

SNOW FALLING IN SPRING also has the advantage of being a memoir, which means it provides the immediacy of first-person experience but also a human face to historical events. This makes it easier to separate the horrors and excesses of a totalitarian regime from the people living under it. As the author says herself at the end of the book, as she leaves China to come study in the United States, "China was the land that had given me birth, love, and friendship. It was also the place of my darkest nightmares. People would judge it in different ways. Some would appraise it kindly; others would be harsh. To me, however, China was simply home --- breath and life of my childhood and of my youth."

--- Reviewed by Sarah A. Wood

"Snow Falling in Spring" is a very smooth and pleasant read from the beginning to the end, despite of the dark period that the story was set in. I have read several books about the Cultural Revolution in China, and Li's book is one of my favorite because it is really a story about ourselves, a story when everyone in the book was trying to define and redefine themselves during the most chaotic and tragic period of time. Li not only told the story about struggling and suffering, but also told the story of hope, of how to keep hope alive in a seemingly hopeless time. I really enjoyed the book and would like to recommend to readers of all age.

"Snow Falling in Spring" is a wonderful book, telling stories about a difficult period of Chinese history and making the reader feel a part of that experience. The story from a child's point of view opens up the reader's experience and allows the reader to step into the child's shoes and feel and see the author's experiences. This is a book about human experience. "Snow Falling in Spring" is definitely a book to be shared with the whole family. I gave this book to my parents and my son who loved it. They all insisted that I give this book to my nieces and nephews as well. I recommend this book as something that the whole family, can read and talk about.

A beautiful,inspiring story. This wonderfully written book tells of a young girl's growing up during the Chinese Cultural Revolution. Li's spare but powerful prose paints a portrait of a turbulent period in modern China. She also reveals the power of and indomitable human spirit. Li's recall is truly remarkable and she has the ability to bring her characters to life for the reader. A special find - don't miss this one.

Moying Li's memoir serves as a balance to traditional Chinese literature. The women in her story are strong, self-directed, and anything but subservient! Moying's grandmother was especially inspirational.

Good introductory info. Love the dated summary of events at the very beginning of the book.

This book has it all. Great stories, great information, and a great layout. Good for grad school and undergrads the same.

If you are interested in the broad spectrum of public administration, this is a great book to start with. It covers what public administration is, politics and public policy, government management and reinvention, intergovernmental relations, ethics, org theory and OB, leadership, finance and HR, and program evaluation, among others. It also has case studies and review questions for each chapter and other helful resources. Yet, probably the best thing is that it is written in a very readable way. This text would be good for Bachelors or Masters students, especially with its key concepts, bibliography, recommended books and related websites. I enjoyed it in a Masters class,and can recommend it.

I have never really give enough thought to my political affilation as a liberal or democarat. However, after reading this book, Bracey has made me take an introspectiive look at some of my political thoughts, or maybe even fantasies. Bracey thoroughly traces the history and evolution of African-American political idealogies. He gives his readers plenty of information about individuals in Black history whom might not always get the most attention, but are earnestly deserving. In fact, Bracey spends so much time detailing what and whom prominent Neo-conservative figures are concurrently, that he seems to drop the question his title poses. You really only get an answer in the 3-4 page conclusion. But, understadning the history of black conservatism is just as importnat as any answer you might want this scholar to put forth. If you want a staunch critique of black conservative and neo-conservative values, then I am afraid this book does not really deliver. Instead, it gives somehting more tangible, a look into the minds of some of Black Americas most influential thinkers and why thier views are gaining attention in the Black populas. I believe this book is a must read for anyone interested in the fate of Black America.

Although I haven't finished this book yet it has given me a whole new outlook on conservatism. Why so many black people are embracing this ideology as of late. Let's face it. Liberal politics has failed in black america! Integration is a joke. That we abandoned any attempt to create out own institutions in the past has resulted in a total take over in our own neighborhoods. Economic's, education, politics, you name it. All for not embracing conservative effort's of developement in our own communities. From Booker T. Washington to Malcolm X it has been preached but not practiced enough. Laws and social programs have been a failure. The distinction between "organic conservatism" and today's "neo-conservatism" should open the eye's of many. I haven't finished so I may revise this review. I loved this book so much that I ordered two more for my co-workers. A great read.

I had an original post WWII copy of this book and gave it away when I moved from W.Va..... Boy, was that ever a mistake!!!! I needed a copy for an event here honoring the Veterans, and so I was very pleased to see this one in print..... Bill looks at war from the dogface's perspective, and I'm quite sure there's a Bill Mauldin in Iraq somewhere.... but he's tied to the Internet and I'm not sure if we'll get good pen and ink sketches outta him now..... Bill had the way of seeing the ironic, the humerous, and the just plain sorry, in the average G.I.'s battle to survive....... I'd recommend it to school teachers for a look at WWII (AND I'd hustle up some of the last survivors... that first hand look isn't going to be with us much longer).............the Students would actuall LEARN something useful!!!

I am very satisfied with my purchase.The book itself is a pleasure to look at.The drawings are just as funny as I found them as a kid.The writing itself is new to me,but superb.It will allways be among my favourit books.Again marvellous

Indispensable depiction of the face of the Second World War. War and the pity of war. The humour is in the pity.

It's a gift, the ability to draw, to have perspective, to create, to be able to portray human misery as humor, for a reader to see the image and words and turn to laughter. Bill Mauldin had this gift that gained prominence in a time of war where talents rise to their greatest heights or sink to their lowest depths.

Truth is portrayed in humor or the humor isn't funny. Sergeant Bill Mauldin, an infantryman, barely twenty, and serving in Italy picks up a pencil and anything he can draw on, and begins to sketch two characters named Willy and Joe, two, brave, disheveled, irreverent, likeable and crusty infantry soldiers that give meaning to the names infantrymen were referred to as: ground-pounders, dogfaces, legs, and grunts. Mauldin portrays their grim and grimy existence with fatalistic pictures and captions--or grunts. One called "Breakfast in Bed" finds one of them waking up under a cow's utters, or the one where both are in a rain-filled foxhole and Willie touches Joe's shoulder saying, "Joe, yesterday ya saved my life an' I swore I'd pay ya back. Here's my last pair o' dry socks," or with rain pelting down on a scrawny dog facing the opening of their make-shift shelter, one of them says: "Let'im in. I wanna see a critter I kin feel sorry fer." My all-time favorite is a drunk German staggering toward a hidden Willie and Joe, holding a bottle of schnapps, unaware that he is wandering into American lines: "Don't startle `im, Joe. It's almost full."

These cartoons show the comradeship that soldiers developed for each other that would last a lifetime. Each man knew each other better than his own family or spouse ever would, and they could see the good and the bad in everything. They would carry a wounded lieutenant back to safety because he wasn't a "salutin' demon," or curse the Germans as vile, evil Nazis for scuttling a large keg of cognac before their retreat. These soldiers were miserable without being despondent. They were scared without being cowardly. They complained about their predicaments, but carried out their mission as American soldiers always do--attacking silently. The viewer cannot help but feeling empathy and admiration for soldiers who sometimes spent thirty months "in the line."

Mauldin goes further than just making us laugh at the miserable existence of two men trying to stay alive. His real success is that his humor defines the very best and most humane in the human character when it is engaged in its most destructive behavior. It is also timeless. Seventy years later, civilians and servicemen can still see the gallows humor in Willie and Joe's death-defying predicaments.

"Up Front" is Mauldin's account, of what he was doing when he created a particular drawing, why he made sure to include medics, engineers, chaplains, and even Tommies. The writing is matter of fact, well-written, and interesting, but without fascination. That was saved for the cartoons. The author is explaining each one in his text. It's the drawings and the captions that make this book a winner and a conversation piece.

Bill Mauldin died January 22, 2003. Willie and Joe occupying a foxhole filled with water and several cubic feet of complaints, live on.

Think about this the next time you put on a pair of dry socks, and marvel at the simple pleasure of just how good they feel.



May 26, 2008 Memorial Day (observed)

In Memory of the Fallen and all our Gold Star Mothers--especially today.

Of course, this is not a novel. It's a collection of cartoons as they appeared in the Armed Services newspaper Stars and Stripes. The cartoon began to appear in 1944 as the invasion of Europe was underway and millions of Allied troops were fighting their way through Italy and France and into the heart of the third reich.
After a few false starts, Mauldin settled on two characters, Willie and Joe-infantry men. Willie and Joe (who were barely distinguishable from each other) were concerned with all the things that veterans said concerned them during the war. Lousy food was as much of a concern as enemy artillery, fear of cold, wet feet as annoying as the fear of death.
The cartoons, and Mauldin's self-effacing recollections together form a kind of narrative that is at once immensely personal and deeply historical. Mauldin was a pioneer. It was ten years before Cornelius Ryan The Longest Day: The Classic Epic of D-Dayturned personal narratives into history and almost forty before Ken Burns came along.The War - A Film By Ken Burns and Lynn Novick
Mauldin was, in effect, the only war reporter who was relatively uncensored. Since his cartoons carried no strategic information, his only worry was the military's possible perception that he might be lowering troop morale with his swipes at the brass and the rear-echelon. Fortunately, some American sensibility that 'it's good to laugh at the boss even if the boss is us' prevailed.

Up Front was one of the few books that my parents kept by their bedside. This is the book that helped the post-war generation remember the war as it was fought by the men who did the hard work. A quiet masterpiece.

Lynn Hoffman, author of bang BANG: A Novel

This is an extremely simple notion - perhaps a Mussolini could make the trains run on time! - masquerading as a testable mathematical theory, then padded out to make a book. It's not mathematics, it's not science, if it can't be used to make quantitative predictions. The occasional graphs and references to the curve moving up or down or left or right merely annoyed me - it's vague speculation parading around in the clothes of rigorous thinking.

I was hoping that the chapters, the qualitative case studies of specific countries, would make up for what the main premise was lacking, but there really wasn't anything original there. It's all information with which you will probably be familiar if you've been reading news articles.

Bremmer's J Curve is clever and provides a large amount of perspective on several countries. I was happy with his brief but in-depth look at many nations that are in the news today.

He does a lot of assuming though. He assumes that virtually all dictators in authoritarian countries want to keep their populations under control so they retain their power. He chooses not to discuss US interference like funding ominous political and military groups and CIA interventions. Indepence is hard to keep, and I don't think Castro wants a trade embargo as the author assumes.

Bremmer also fails to discuss US and other Western country financing of tyrannical regimes that prevent movement to the right of the curve and more democracy. Billions in military aide have been given to Columbia to quell rebellion and action for more democratic government since 2000 that has led to international condemnation of client-military human rights abuses.

Through out the book Bremmer clearly believes and advocates foreign investment in countries leads to democracy, stability and prosperity but Third Worlds following "free trade" agreements are some of the most impoverished and are only worsening. He denounces protectionism in markets and countries but fails to acknowledge that virtually every First World country has significant protectionist policies or government intervention (tariffs, public schools, modes of universal health care, social security, etc.) It seems that he advocates neoliberal policies, not theoretical free trade.

I think there's much to learn from his nation histories and perspective, but his proposals and assumptions contradict themselves and fall short, even if they are largely achieved, in furthering the principle of democracy.

The book has shortcomings in that it is tough to grasp. Perhaps the writing style could be more readable.

I bought this book on a whim during a recent trip to Thailand. I had finished another book more quickly than I planned, so I browsed the small English section of a bookstore and came across The J Curve.

From the moment I began to read it, I couldn't put it down. As someone with great interest in world history as well as world politics, I found this book to be fascinating. The theory behind the concept of the J curve is explained in detail and illuminated through the use of nation case studies. I found it to be quite convincing; and, though I generally consider myself to be rather worldly, I definitely learned quite a bit from the author and the book.

I have recommended The J Curve to friends, and they've all shared my opinion. Highly recommended!

This book sets forth a novel framework that attempts to answer the following questions: (1) how can we better understand the processes that erode the power of authoritarian regimes and nourish open governance? (2) How can we forecast the moment when isolated states descend into chaos? (3) How can the international community help these nations manage their transitions towards greater harmony with the rest of the world? And, finally, (4) how can U.S. policymakers create a more effective foreign policy, regarding them?

The author examines in detail twelve counties that span the spectrum of authoritarianism -- that is, countries that have varying degrees of openness to outside influences and accountability to its citizens. All, in varying degrees, are important to U.S. interests and foreign policy. The circumstances of these nations are compared and contrasted in terms of how their stability might affect U.S. interests and policy concerns. Past U.S. policy decisions towards them are also contrasted with how they could be improved by taking into account the framework and theories introduced in the book.

The theory of the J Curve is simple: Most Authoritarian states are stable because they are closed. Conversely, most thriving democracies are stable because they are open. The world itself is more stable the more it is made up of open societies, so there is a global incentive to move as many nations from a closed to an open status. However, in order to do this, requires moving through a dangerously unstable transition period. This book is about how the tools and techniques of diplomacy need to evolve in order to help bridge this J Curve transition. Thus the J Curve measures the relationship between stability abd openness. It is not a measure of democracy.

Close societies (which the author labels as left-side states) generally depend on rule by individuals, while open societies (labeled left-side states) depend on institutions. A key assumption of the book is that there is no easy way to move from one form of government to the other because the development of institutions, require time to gain both experience and legitimacy. Thus openness is not only a measure of how many institutions have evolved within a given society, but also a measure of how much those within the nation interact with each other -- as well as how much the nation itself interacts with the rest of the world. The former is indexed by the number of NGOs, the number of independent governmental entities, labor unions, and citizens groups a nation has. The latter, by the processes of international exchange, such as the number of books written in a foreign language, number of international telephone calls, the number of independent media outlets, including the internet, direct contact with foreigners, etc.

The author concludes that all states are in constant movement along the J Curve, most fluctuating within narrow bands. However those near the bottom of the curve experience wider more destabilizing swings. It is in the interest of the right-side states to assist those on the left side. Not only to increase international stability, but also to expand world markets and to combine efforts to address global problems. The author's more important prescription for dealing with left-sided states is the selective and more effective use of sanctions.

Although certainly an interesting and novel idea, I was expecting more in the policy prescriptions area. Five Stars for its creativity.