Governments

John Mermin turns the old saw -- "we lost Vietnam because the liberal press turned against the effort" -- on its head in "Debating War and Peace." Instead, Mermin suggests that the modern media fails to fulfill the important role of a free and independent press in a democratic society. Taking recent conflicts as his starting point, Mermin concludes that the modern media, rather than critically examining government policies and providing a crucial independent source of information to an informed public, frequently parrots the conventional wisdom inside the Washington Beltway. For those who are troubled by consolidation in the media industry, the trivialization of major issues, and the potential sway of a "liberal" press, this may not be such a bad result. Nevertheless, Mermin's book warns us to read the news from Washington, D.C. with a critical eye, especially in a time when the rapid-fire news-cycle prevents reporters from pursuing more than a sound-bite about the issues of the day.

This book lays out in precise detail how media coverage of recent American military interventions has been determined by the spectrum of debate within the government itself. As a result, the press has reported only a very limited set of positions vis-a-vis these wars. Consensus within the government about them has led to the appearance of national consensus, and informed dissent has in such cases gone largely unreported. For citizens whose political ideas fall to the right or left of the mainstream, and who are therefore suspicious of the government's agendas, this should be unsettling news indeed. Though Mermin's account is measured and aims at ideological neutrality, the implications might well be grounds for outrage on the part of anyone who cares about the twin ideal of democratic process and informed citizenry.

This is the best available general resource about the Declaration of Independence written for young people. It contains a great deal of detail about how the declaration came about, where its ideas originated, who signed it and when, and its impact on later generations. The book is extremely well-documented with footnotes and also has a useful bibliography. The book should be avaialble at most libraries and will be an excellent resource for junior high school and high school students writing reports.

I never knew there was so much to know about the Declaration of Independence until I read this book. Nardo does a great job of telling how the document came about and gives a lot of information about Jefferson and where he got the ideas for writing the Declaration. Also included are numerous small but interesting facts and tidbits, like that not all the founding fathers signed the document at the same time, like they show so often in the movies and TV. My son brought this home to do a report and I picked it up and to take a quick look at it and then I couldn't put it down.

Professor Rosenthal specializes in writing clearly about state legislatures. He understands the dynamics of the system and yet writes with a strong attention to detail. While he communicates the problems he is neither a muckraker nor a shill. One wishes that more academics would take the care he does in writing about their subjects. You should also check out his earlier book on the third house.

This work is one that must be read by all people interested in the reasons behind why our governmental system is in shambles. I live in our nation's capital and I cannot understand how people can take for granted the wonders that the US has to offer. The freedoms that we currnetly enjoy are unparalelled to any other time in History. Despite this, people in our society spit on the bill of rights and say 'that is how it has always been.' It must be warned that when a society of ideal people moves to a society of ignorance (presently ours) our society will not be able to sustain itself. This is the essence of this book. People must learn why our democracy is falling apart if they wish to remedy the situation. This situation is one that certainly must be remedied if we are to contonue into the next millenium.

I find myself wondering how we went from a patriotic society of John Adams, George Washington and others to a society of selfishness. We are presently a society that looks foolish in so many regards. The pamphlet, Common Sense was written to energize people to fight for the basic rights of man. It is a sad day when novels like this must be written. However, note the word must. I hope that this book does not need to be read in the future, but presently it is necessary to remedy the problem. This book illustrates they ways in which our society has gone wrong and with enough hard long thought the answers to fixing those problems can be deduced. NOTE: This is not a civics book, nor does it show how government operates but for higher level thinkers, interested in making America the robust leaaderin liberty that she once was, this book must be read.

Not only is this book an important contribution to the deliberative democracry debate, it is essential reading for anyone concerned with the future of American democracy. Coming at a time when political discourse has been reduced to television soundbites, the inane commentary of media "pundits," cynical, poll-driven stump speeches, and barely coherent, question-dodging press conferences, Leib's call for a fourth, "popular," branch of government couldn't be more timely.
This book will appeal to specialists and amateurs alike. I highly recommend it.

Not only is this book an important contribution to the deliberative democracry debate, it is essential reading for anyone concerned with the future of American democracy. Coming at a time when political discourse has been reduced to television soundbites, the inane commentary of media "pundits," cynical, poll-driven stump speeches, and barely coherent, question-dodging press conferences, Leib's ideas about a fourth, "popular," branch of government couldn't be more timely.

This book will appeal to specialists and amateurs alike. I highly recommend it.

This book exlores in depth two main contending views of democracy. The authour shows them to be radically different and ultimately incompatible. The book relates the two forms to different notions of man and society. It defends American constitutionalism as an example of constitutional democracy and rejects "plebiscitary" democracy as destructive of the civilized society. Agree or disagree with the author's conclusion, this is a penetrating work with broad philosophical relevance--really makes yoy think!

This is an excellent work of scholarship and is highly recommended to anyone interested in political philosophy. Professor Ryn draws on many sources, but most specifically ideas about the ethical life of the individual in relation to the community embodied in Aristotle's "Nichomachaen Ethics", Judeo-Christian morality, Edmund Burke's "Reflections on the French Revolution", the "Federalist Papers", and the moral, esthetic, and political philosophy found in the "New Humanism" of Irving Babbitt and Paul Elmer More. Ryn contrasts the egostical idealistic(i.e. unrealistic), and ethically distorted imagination of a Rousseau with the ethical and realistic imagination of a Burke, and shows how these differing worldviews lead to the contrasting and conflicting political visions of the utopian socialist(e.g.Robespierre, Lenin, et. al.) and the constitutional republican (e.g. Madison, Lincoln, et. al). To paraphase Madison, men are neither beasts nor angels. Beasts are incapable of government, and angels don't need government. Rousseau foolishly idealized a non-existent "natural man", while equally foolishly sanctioning bestial behavior by wrongly concluding that human evil was the result of social and economic oppression.

The individual who governs himself by attention to his "inner check" freely consents to constitutional government, with its checks and balances and concepts of ordered liberty, free market economy,federalism, and representative government as the best regime practicable for our diverse and pluralistic community.

To those who like this book I would also highly recommend Babbitt's "Rousseau and Romanticism", Thomas Sowell's "Conflict of Visions", Harry V. Jaffa's "Crisis of the House Divided", Pierre Manent's "City of Man", Nicholas Wolterstorff's "Thomas Reid and the Story of Epistemology" and Prof. Ralph Ketchum's excellent one volume biography of James Madison.

Adam Przeworski is one of the top five political scientists of the world. "Democracy and the Market" is amazing and should be read by everybody that wants to know why democracies last (or don't). Przeworski is probably one of the few writers that compare the situation in East Europe with the situation in Latin America. And he does it perfectly. A bit technical at times but a very contemporary work of Political Science. A must buy.

Przeworski's writing is always penetrating. This is the best work that I've ever read in the literature of political economy and comparative politics. Although his approach is too much immersed in rational-choice, he knows the history of political philosophy. Although he is basically a Marx-oriented scholar, he correctly understand what neo-classical theories are lacking. Adam Przeworki is a rare intellectual who combine science with philosophy. is worth buying and worth reading although somehow technical.

"Democracy Delayed" is an excellent comparative study of the political forces that influence transitions in totalitarian societies and a comparison of present day Cuba under Castro and similar scenarios in Eastern Europe. It is a well researched document that is required reading for political science students interested in Cuban politics or transitional forces and their effect on totalitarian systems. Dr. Juan J. Lopez is one of the most intelligent political analists on Cuban affairs, going beyond the "cliche" to well thought out and researched conclusions.

Details of Value, Overview Clear and Cogent, Understanding Complete

This book (Juan Lopez 2002 Democracy Delayed John Hopkins University Press) is a "must read" for one trying understanding the complexities of Cuba.

Too often in books on Cuba, one sees errors of fact, misunderstandings and omissions of history, and above all blindness to what is really happens on that sad island.

You will find none of these illusions and errors in this book. This volume's wealth of details of value, its coherent, cogent and clear overview will lead the careful and discerning reader to a far more complete and greater understanding of Cuba's present and past circumstance than any other academic book I have ever read.

Larry Daley (Garcia-Iñiguez Enamorado)
Corvallis, Oregon
Formerly of Column One (Assault) Company Six M-7-26 (1958)

The author puts forth a carefully detailed study into a region greatly misunderstood. Deftly weilding a vast knowledge of the Middle East, Kamrava has crafted his viewpoint to be accessible to today's students of Middle Eastern politics. Unlike many other writers, Kamrava refuses to fall into blind speculation about the region's near future. Instead, the author has brought to the reader a well grounded synthesis of theory and practice that can be used to filter the Middle East's morass of misunderstanding.

Kamrava's analysis of the Middle East makes this book a must have for every student and scholar of the Middle East. His insights about the culture and society in the Middle East, is explained very clearly, making it easy to understand about such a controversial and volatile region.

Based exclusively on original research of the American Populist movement, Goodwyn's book is a masterpiece of historical scholarship. Goodwyn traces the origins of the People's Party to the Farmer's Alliance and shows that the most compelling American challenge to Capitalism came from the conservative agrarian segments of American society. The cooperative principles of the Alliance and the subsequent People's Party formed a uniquely American platform that was neither capitalist nor socialist in nature. This is a powerful account of a great American political movement. Read this book and your understanding of American politics in the 20th Century will be forever changed.

This book is a stunning revisionist look at the received wisdom about the history of populism in the late 19th century. Rooting through old trunks in attics and forgotten county library newspaper archives, Goodwyn discovers the true radicalism of the populist movement, and why so much of what we were taught about the populists is wrong, distorted to cover up their fundamental challenge to the consolidation of industrial capitalism that was sweeping the world. A great book, a tragic story

We often here about the 1960s as a time of radicalization for students and mystical urban heroes. Rarely is the working-class and trade union struggle ever revealed. Partly that is because working-class struggle was not at the heart of the civil rights movement and the anti-war movement. But Detroit: I Do Mind Dying tells a different story; one of a core of revolutionaries in the industrial heart of America within a union with a radical past. These black revolutionaries take on the racism of the bosses, as well as the racism of the union beauracracy, in a daring and valliant attempt to bring about real social change. Some lessons for activists, trade unionists, and socialists today are included by the authors. Questions of organizing white workers; the need for a national party; wildcat strikes to take on both the company and the union beauracracy; and the need to have an international perspective. All of theses lessons are brought forth from the struggles of the League of Revolutionary Black Workers and all of the Revolutionary Union Movements in the Detroit area. A must read for activists today.

This is simply the best book written on the radicalization of the Black (and white/arab/latino) industrial working class in the late 1960's and early 1970's. It is also rich in lessons for radical unionists and socialists today. With all the academic presses churning out tome after tome on "race relations" why doesn't one of them pick up this fascinating book