Book Description
Generally regarded as the definitive work on totalitarianism, this book is an essential component of any study of twentieth-century political movements. Arendt was one of the first to recognize that Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union were two sides of the same coin rather than opposing philosophies of Right and Left. “With the Origins of Totalitarianism Hannah Arendt emerges as the most original and profound-therefore the most valuable-political theoretician of our times” (New Leader). Index.
Customer Reviews:
Got Time?.......2007-03-08
There's no question Arendt is brilliant and inspired, but I should read the Arendt for Dummies or choose a shorter book. I began to read this volume, which covers Origins of Antisemetisim and Origins of Imperialism also, and got bogged down, so I began skimming. Definitely important stuff in there, and I did glean information that was new to me, but in the end I shelved the book because it is too long. Choose it if you are "studying", not just an inquiring person.
More relevant than ever.......2006-12-24
Though this book was written in the 1950s, there is much in it that is relevant to politics as we know it today. In the wake of the disinformation we now know to be the basis for the debacle of the current war, some of the statements made by Arendt regarding totalitarian regimes sound a very loud warning bell. A case in point:
"Totalitarian politics....use and abuse their own ideologies and political elements until the basis of factual reality, from which the ideologies derived their strength...have all but disappeared."
There is a disturbing similarity between the refusal of some of our government officials to admit their mistakes and the description of some of the methods used by totalitarian leaders to manipulate facts and discernible reality in order to produce outcomes they have previously predicted. Totalitarian leaders never admit to error. If the reader finds no other relevance in this book but that, it will have been time well spent.
A Book to be read now.......2006-08-08
I'll keep this simple: look at what is going on in the US, in the MId-East, in China. If that doesn't alarm you, you need to read this book even more carefully than the rest of us, as Histaory is about to repeat itself because our xenophobia knows no limits. This is as critical today as it was when Arendt wrote it.
A real classic.......2006-03-24
This is a must read for anyone interested in understanding popular history, values, and structures of modern western society, and how they relate to modern political power in the twentieth and twenty-first century. It challenges many values that are often taken for granted in national and international power play and politics. The Origins of Totalitarianism will remains relevant to current events, and a warning to those who advocate change without taking into account the mistakes committed by our forbearer. This book explains in detail the dangers to liberal democracy that the scourge of racism has been and could be again. On a darker note it could also be used as blueprint by those who wish to abuse power. A true classic.
At first glance one could be drawn into making close parallels between modern Pan Islamist movements and the Pan European movements of the twentieth century, but the analysis would be far from complete. The Pan European movements where primarily tribal in nature, where as the Osama's Pan Islamist movement forms a superset without full integration of racial components. The dangers and the cold bureaucratic cauculas are similar, however Islam spans many races and cultures. Race therefore cannot form the primary glue required to hold it together. Also Islamist movements are not progressive, they are reactionary in nature. On the other hand close parallels can be drawn to the Pan Slavic movement with regards to Saddam's Iraqi nationalistic movement. Osama's concept of Pan Islam differs in many ways from Stalin's or Hitler's base, the primarily glue is religious ideology and fear, not race or nationalism. Furthermore his ideology is not anywhere close to being shared by the masses within Islamic countries, and as a result terrorism is a requirement from start, not so much against the west, but against moderate elements or differing sects within the countries where this movement thrives. This is not to say that they do not use terrorism in all of it's traditional roles. Euro style nationalism is counter productive to the Pan Islamist movement, and one of it's objectives is to break down nationalism. In short if one must make parallels, they can be made to the books third section and Osama's Islamist movement operations, but only very weak correlation to sections one and two.
This book is written in a way that requires the reader to work hard, but it is worth the effort.
A Frightening Warning about Mass Man and "Virtue" of Thoughtlessness.......2006-01-16
Haannah Arendt's THE ORIGINS OF TOTAITARIANISM(TOT)is both a thoughtful book and a frightening view of both the background of totalitarianism as well as the practical application of this political phenomena. The reader should realize this book requires time and careful thought to appreciate the book's importance.
The first section of the book deals with antisemitism which Miss Arendt argues was a cornerstone of later totalitarianism. She argues that the gradual development of mass culture and mass politics resulted in targeting and scapegoating any target minority such as Jews. She explains that antisemitism was a gradual political movement that exploded in the late 19th and especially in the 20th century. A different thesis could have been presented, but thus far this is the best one this reviewer has read.
Part two of the book explains how imperialism and racism merged especailly during the Age of Nationalism. Religious discord was replaced by sociological and political theories that not only extolled nation but also race and blood. This section deals with these two concepts both in Western Europe and Eastern Europe. One must remember that persecution of Jews was particulary lethal in Eastern Europe between World War I and World War II and espeically during The Second World War.
Part three of the book is the best section of THE ORIGINS OF TOTALITARIANISM. If readers have difficutly with sections one and two of this book, they owe it to themselves to at least read section three.
Miss Arendt makes a frightening assessment that the liquidation (mass murder of people of race or class) was not so much personal vendetta as these mass murders were bureaucratic operations that were done as a matter of political policy and "normal" bureaucratic operations. She warns readers that totalitarian leaders changed enemies almost weekly. In other words, those who were innocent one time were "enemies of the state or people" later. In other words, totalitarian leaders never never exhausted their enemies' lists and kept the masses alert for supposed enemies regardless of the rapid changes in those designated for mass murder. One quote that should alert thoughtful readers is, "The aim of totalitarian education has never been to instill convictions but to destroy the capacity to form any." The serious implication is that totalitarian leaders suspect that thoughtlessness is a virtue which benefits the leaders of the mass political movements. The fact is that once innocent people were arrested, they were "non-persons" whose memories were altered and then forgotten.
This book is a serious warning to anyone who takes pride in individual liberties and appreciates individual achievement regardless of their religious convictions or ancestry. Miss Arendt is clear that totalitarian leaders do not recognize talent except as talented individuals may threaten their arrogant self importance.
Readers would do well to also read Orwell's 1984 and Hoffer's THE TRUE BELIEVER to have a better grasp of THE ORIGINS OF TOTALITARIANISM. This reviewer highly recommends this book with the reservation that this book is not "light reading."
Customer Reviews:
Juicy.......2007-06-18
I bought this book in 1997, 10 years ago, and it was already 5 years old. It was enjoyable but a slog to get through and not all was retained in my head at the end of the read. I was left tired and I moved on. The true value of the book, however, became apparent as the years passed - every re-read of portions gave pleasure through forgotten information freshly revealed, or insights put forth in the book that have finally sunk in, or new color/nuance to previously remembered arguments. I also bought one other, more recent, book of his, "On Equilibrium", and it complements "Voltaire's Bastards" nicely. The intervening years continue to demonstrate the validity of many arguments in the book, thus getting closer to the definition of a 'classic'. One of my best book purchases.
Not quite as dense as some might insist..........2007-04-17
Few books that are truly worth reading make for an easy read, and this is certainly the case with Voltaire's Bastards. Other reviewers have complained of Saul's density and have even accused him of dull, poor writing. Don't be fooled by such baseless nonsense. Saul is actually an excellent writer. He beautifully elucidates the finer, invariably ignored philosophical points of our modern political culture (which seeps through into every stratum of our lives) with grace and ease. The "density" arises when he undertakes historical narratives which lend credence to the points he makes. I'll agree that this can often make for slow, dry reading. However, his astute commentary on the modern "theology" of reason, power, secrecy, language and bureacracy more than compensate for such shortcomings. If you've ever felt inexplicably frustrated by what seems to be an amputated, purely rationalist, beady-eyed approach to politics, culture and knowledge in general, then the ideas presented within this book will likely excite you as much as they excited me.
Mixed feelings.......2006-12-31
Much has been said amongst the other reviews about the seemingly incoherent, diatribal and drawn-out nature of Saul's book. And I agree. It's far from being a masterpiece in the larger sense of the world. What's brilliant about this book is not how right the author is but how wrong (often infuratingly so!) he is. Because I found that I've learnt more from this book, including the wrong parts than I have from many books that were more coherent or right. Unfortunately this does not seem to be Saul's aim.
He begins with section 1 called "Argument". However it read like a bunch of generalisations and sweeping statements without much argument. What he seems to be saying is this: that the concept of reason has been hijacked in the last century of public life in the west. That it has come to mean a bureaucratic, elitist, undemocratic, secretive, closed approach that also refuses to take into account the realities of life. That this style of reason is fanatical in that insisting that it is always right as a dogma. And finally, that it has been the result of untold amounts of suffering because it proclaims itself as a moral system, whereas it's only a system of management. Because of this, it can and is used to inhuman ends because it is itself devoid of any values.
All this I largely agree with. Especially in terms of the last point about reason being amoral you only need to read some Hume. However this exposition of his argument comes only from his second section, where he actually gives some concrete examples. The second section is largely a diatribe that attempts to apply these arguments to concrete historical examples. I think this is the strongest section of the book in that it is actually about something. The third section is some musings on art, individualism etc. much of which was entirely disagreeable.
What then are the strengths of the book? It is a hodge-podge that speaks of everything under the sun and often misses as a result. But by speaking about everything Saul successfully expresses the extent to which things are a problem. If he were more methodical one could claim that such-and-such and such-and-such institution is broken. However this book has convinced me that the world is much more broken than even I previously thought. He just could have done it in a third of the word count. I would definitely recommend the book but not as some incredible analysis but rather as something that will provoke and engage almost every reader. It seems paradoxical but in the chaos that is criticised by so many, Saul makes some surprising observations that would have been missed if he was more careful.
My new bible.......2006-09-24
Some books are to be read once. Others, like this one are to be read many times.
I could have given it 4 stars, because there are places that are dry and repetetive. In those places, I would turn the pages.
Places like the evolution of the purpose of art, beginning with religious motivation and moving into art, for art's sake. I didn't care though.
The fact is, the details JRS includes are things I have never heard before and they are what makes this book a MUST HAVE.
"Jefferson, founder and patron of the University of Virginia, never allowed his university to give degrees. He considered them pretentious, irrelevant to learning and unconnected to the preparation for responsiblity. This wasn't idealism. It was the opinion of the most successful practitioner of reason. The purpose of universities has now been inverted. Learning has become a goal-oriented process aimed at winning a degree."
"Modern wine tends to be filled with sulfur, chemical stabilizers, fungicides, beet sugar and alcohol additives. These elements, not grape alcohol, are the cause of most hangovers. Contemporary wine doesn't taste anything like Henry IV's Nuit St. Georges. It is forced, matures quicker and dies faster. Like nuclear reactors, modern wine is part of the secretive promise of our society.
truly "a hand grenade disguised as a book"!.......2006-05-02
If you want to understand the world we live, then read this book. It's message is liberating. It is totally on the mark. It was published in 1992, but it fully explains everything that has happened since then. The author is brilliant. It's a citizen's survival guide to the 21st century. The book is very dense so don't expect a lazy, breezy read.
Book Description
What forces lead to democracy's creation? Why does it sometimes consolidate only to collapse at other times? Written by two of the foremost authorities on this subject in the world, this volume develops a framework for analyzing the creation and consolidation of democracy. It revolutionizes scholarship on the factors underlying government and popular movements toward democracy or dictatorship. Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson argue that different social groups prefer different political institutions because of the way they allocate political power and resources. Their book, the subject of a four-day seminar at Harvard's Center for Basic Research in the Social Sciences, was also the basis for the Walras-Bowley lecture at the joint meetings of the European Economic Association and Econometric Society in 2003 and is the winner of the John Bates Clark Medal.
Download Description
This book develops a framework for analyzing the creation and consolidation of democracy. Different social groups prefer different political institutions because of the way they allocate political power and resources. Thus democracy is preferred by the majority of citizens, but opposed by elites. Dictatorship nevertheless is not stable when citizens can threaten social disorder and revolution. In response, when the costs of repression are sufficiently high and promises of concessions are not credible, elites may be forced to create democracy. By democratizing, elites credibly transfer political power to the citizens, ensuring social stability. Democracy consolidates when elites do not have strong incentives to overthrow it. These processes depend on the strength of civil society, the structure of political institutions, the nature of political and economic crises, the level of economic inequality, the structure of the economy, and the form and extent of globalization.
Customer Reviews:
A beginning.......2006-10-04
My opinion on this book lies some where between the two already presented. The application of economics and game theory to this problem is most definitely original and is the greatest achievement of the book. It is a tribute to the authors that such a simple model that so ruthless applies Occam's razor can explain so much, however the work is flawed it simply does not reflect reality. The reasons behind democratisations are more complex than this model, as powerful as it is, can reflect. This book and the model developed within should be viewed as beginning which other works can develop and expand upon. I have no doubt that economists will continue to contibute to this field with more advanced and better models. For this reason alone political scientists and historians should not ignore this text, but rather accept it for what it is a new way of looking at an old problem.
Wielding Occam's Razor.......2006-02-28
Economists are turning their focus of inquiry to subjects that were once the exclusive preserve of their colleagues in other social sciences--history, sociology, and political science. The title of this book, "Economic Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy," appears to have been deliberately, even provocatively, chosen for contrast with its famous predecessor, "Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy," by the sociologist Barrington Moore. It is as if the economists are saying, "You've had your go. It is now our turn."
One thing follows when economists have a go: Occam's razor is wielded ruthlessly. Occam's razor is the principle associated with a medieval Franciscan monk, William of Ockham, which extols simplicity over complexity: in his words, "plurality should not be posited without necessity." This has, over time, become an important principle in distinguishing good from less-good science, useful from less-useful descriptions of reality.
Acemoglu and Robinson take this cut-the-chaff exhortation to heart. A few simple and sharp answers are provided even for the complex and difficult questions that are at the heart of the book: why and how does democracy arise? Why and how does democracy take root in some places at some times, while making only cameo appearances in others?
Acemoglu and Robinson daringly reduce the determinants of democratization to three or perhaps four: the level of inequality in society; the structure of the economy (i.e. whether it is predominantly agrarian or otherwise); the kind of assets owned by the elites; and the extent of globalization.
It is remarkable how many historical experiences-in Latin America, Europe, and Africa-- can be explained by the simple theory put forward by the authors. For example, Argentina's frequent lurching between various forms democracy and autocracy follow neatly from the high levels of inequality, which made the elites very resistant to democratization and the consequent redistribution of wealth away from them that political change would entail.
To be sure, the fit between theory and the historical experience is not perfect, and the authors are candid about this. Some of the cases that the book does not discuss-India's ability to maintain democracy in the face of overwhelming odds, for example--have traditionally defied easy explanation, even for political scientists. And there are surely cases where non-economic factors such as ideology, individuals (leaders), randomness, and unintended consequence, have had a significant role in determining the path of political development. For example, if Sir Sewoosagur Ramgoolam, Mauritius' first Prime Minister, had responded to the referendum before independence by entrenching the majority Hindus rather than assuaging the minority by guaranteeing minimal political participation for the latter, Mauritius might well have been like the archetypal, strife-ridden, ethnically divided African country rather than a durable democracy.
A quibble about the book's structure. While there are considerable rewards to reading the book, patience and deft maneuvering through the thicket of mathematics, are required to reap them. The authors could have demarcated more clearly the Greek from the English to allow the mathematically challenged to obtain the benefits in one continuous flow. That way, the book could have been more accessible to the curious generalist in addition to being a required reference for the specialist.
But these minor shortcomings are ultimately swamped by, and are perhaps even the unavoidable consequence of, the sheer ambitiousness of the effort: nothing less than to provide a simple and unified explanation of democracy. And here's the additional bonus, the theory can be taken to the data, and even falsified. So, the skeptics and the naysayers can have their go, and refute or validate. Either way, inquiry will be furthered and the stock of knowledge enriched. The most memorable rendition of Occam's razor is due to Einstein: "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler." The book certainly meets that standard.
Interesting but ..........2006-01-24
This substantial work provides a useful review of the relevant literature, and outlines the simple but powerful idea that the political impact of different types of assets [land, labor or capital] and the costs of repression rather than democratization are key influences on the process of democratization or political repression. This approach has however already been spelt out more succinctly by Carles Boix.
But unfortunately much of the book's approach is fundamentally flawed when the authors then proceed to put their ideas into models based on game theory. They rapidly lose sight of the old reality check - 'garbage in, garbage out'. No model however neatly laid out will tell us much if the initial premise is flawed, and many of the theories here are too simplified to be anything beyond a classroom exercise. The whole book is based on Median Voter Theory [MVT} - but even many distinguished scholars in this field like Alberto Alesina have been pointing out for years that MVT has never been shown to hold true in real life complexities.
Some other key ideas are simply not addressed - the importance of fiscal bargaining, usually to fund foreign wars, as the origins of democracy is dismissed in one sentence, and yet is the best documented source of democratization - see major works by Charles Tilly and Robert Bates.
Other more specific technical detail - such as the ratio of voters to taxpayers, or the ratio of public employees to taxpayers, are not outlined let alone explained and yet clearly have great impact on the topic. Broad generalizations about elites are simply inadequate -- many elites are much more than the 'rich'; and even the authors admit they have no explanation for their argument on the likelihood of military coups that the military, presumably recruited from the broad mass of the population, would choose to side with either elites or taxpayers because of future tax rates. In real life complex bureaucratic incentive structures often turn the 'agents' into the 'principals' and they then doubly benefit from also being future pensioners of the state -- recent attention paid to intergenerational accounting implications of taxation do not figure here either.
Even more distrurbing, the authors have nothing to say on the conflicts of interests between the 'elite sub-groups' of taxpayers and bondholders -- yet scholars such as Dornbusch & Draghi {Public Debt Management: Cambridge 1990] have shown that taxation to pay government debts to bondholders was profoundly regressive throughout the 19th century -- the very period of democratization outlined in this book: so how did that happen?
Furthermore some of the history is also wrong - widening of the franchise in 1832 in Britain was intended as a way to give the vote to existing taxpayers, not vice versa.
The authors have overlooked many stimulating classics in this field - e.g. Sydney Buxton's major work 'Finance and Politics' from 1888.
Most irritatingly the book is littered with reference to the authors' claims to originality for their work in various 'important findings' -- but when did such conclusions cease to be the prerogative of the reader?
Book Description
For hundreds of years, dictators have ruled Russia. Do they still? In the late 1980s, Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev launched a series of political reforms that eventually allowed for competitive elections, the emergence of an independent press, the formation of political parties, and the sprouting of civil society. After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, these proto-democratic institutions endured in an independent Russia. But did the processes unleashed by Gorbachev and continued under Russian President Boris Yeltsin lead eventually to liberal democracy in Russia? If not, what kind of political regime did take hold in post-Soviet Russia? And how has Vladimir Putin's rise to power influenced the course of democratic consolidation or the lack thereof? Between Dictatorship and Democracy seeks to give a comprehensive answer to these fundamental questions about the nature of Russian politics.
Customer Reviews:
A close scrutiny of the democratic reforms .......2005-06-05
Three expert scholars and associate professors combine their knowledge of modern-day Russian politics in Between Dictatorship And Democracy: Russian Post-Communist Political Reform, a close scrutiny of the democratic reforms that have been launched to change Russia's political workings in the past two decades. From a comprehensive evaluation of how Vladimir Putin's ascension has changed the course of the nation, to extensive charts and references packed with hard data, to diagrams and detailed walkthroughs of the transformations Russian government has undergone, Between Dictatorship and Democracy offers a crystal-clear picture of Russia's turbulent recent past, their changing present, and the possibilities of the future. Highly recommended for academic and political studies collections.
Book Description
This book shows how Africa's former colonial powers--including Great Britain, France, Portugal, and Spain--trained members and leaders of colonial Armed Forces to be politically nonpartisan. Yet, the modern-day Armed Forces have become so politicized that many countries are today ruled or have already been ruled by military dictators through coups d'etat, occasionally for good reasons as the book points out. This book traces the historical and political evolution of these events and what bodes for Africa, where the unending military incursions into partisan politics are concerned.
Customer Reviews:
Unique Volume!.......2006-07-20
African Military History and Politics: Coups and Ideological Incursions,1900-Present is an examination of the intersection of the military and politics on the African continent during the 20th Century. The authors focus their attention on sub-Saharan Africa and attempt to discern the root cause of the political instability of this region in the post-colonial period. The book's authors, A.B. Assensoh and Yvette M. Alex-Assensoh, are both professors at Indiana University, in Afro-American Studies and Political Science respectively.
The eight chapters of this volume begin with a chapter concerning the end of the colonial period in African history. The authors rightly assert that European colonialism imposed artificial borders on the continent which exacerbated tensions between African ethnic groups. They also examine how religion, slavery (within the continent), and indigenous traditions and customs were affected by colonialism and the end of colonialism. In Chapter 2, the authors discuss the evolution of armed forces (including national police forces) in Africa. The authors believe that a very similar pattern of evolution took place in regards to African armed forces. The national police forces took on a "militarized" pattern, because they were principally organized to maintain internal order rather than to deal with legitimate crime. In addition, the remainder of the armed forces enjoyed a favored status within the colonial government and have, therefore, been seen in the post-colonial period as "status symbols" of the national leaders.
In Chapter 3, the authors explore the corrupt and dictatorial tendencies in much of sub-Saharan Africa that creates situations ripe for military intervention. As the authors point out, circumstances have often been so deplorable within the civilian governments that even the general populace has supported military coups. In Chapter 4, the authors present an overview of military (or police) leaders who have become civilian leaders in retirement or merely as a result of shedding their military garb. In Chapter 5, the authors present a generally negative portrait of military involvement in African politics. In Chapter 6, the authors deal with the thorny issue of the proliferation of coups throughout Africa.
While many of there coups were fomented by the international struggle of the Cold War, most found their basis in the internal conditions of the individual African nations. In Chapter 7, the authors continue the discussion of coups by examining them within their political and theoretical contexts. Finally, in Chapter 8, the authors endeavor bring together all of the events and conditions that have led to the political instability of sub-Saharan Africa.
The authors must be credited for presenting an accurate, "warts and all" picture of sub-Saharan Africa in the post-colonial period. While they do lay some of the blame for the problems of post-colonial Africa on the doorstep of the former colonial powers, the authors state clearly near the end of the book that, "It is, therefore, time for Africans and their leaders to `clean up' their political and economic acts." Despite being a well-written and researched book, I believe that readers who have no background in African history may well become lost in the minutiae of military and political events in sub-Saharan Africa.
Average customer rating:
- To dictate or not to dictate
- How To Rule The World
- Must Have for Dictators in Training
- Dangerous Information For Anyone But Me To Know
- Lame
|
How to Rule the World: A Handbook for the Aspiring Dictator
Andre de Guillaume
Manufacturer: Chicago Review Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
 Comic
| General
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Humor
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
Parodies
| Humor
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
Political
| Humor
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
Satire, General
| Humor
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
Leadership
| By Topic
| Psychology & Counseling
| Health, Mind & Body
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Humor
| Entertainment
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
Parodies
| Humor
| Entertainment
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
Political
| Humor
| Entertainment
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
Satire, General
| Humor
| Entertainment
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
By Topic
| Psychology & Counseling
| Health, Mind & Body
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
Comic
| General
| Literature & Fiction
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
All 4-for-3 Deals
| 4-for-3 Books Store
| Stores
| Books
Similar Items:
-
How to Be a Villain: Evil Laughs, Secret Lairs, Master Plans, and More!!!
-
The Villain's Guide to Better Living
-
How To Survive a Robot Uprising: Tips on Defending Yourself Against the Coming Rebellion
-
Don't Try This at Home: How to Win a Sumo Match, Catch a Great White Shark, Start an Independent Nation and Other Extraordinary Feats (For Ordinary People)
-
How to Be a Superhero: Your Complete Guide to Finding a Secret Headquarters, Hiring a Sidekick, Thwarting the Forces of Evil, and Much More!!
ASIN: 1556525877 |
Book Description
Everyone wants to rule the world, but only a precious few have the skills to create an ironclad plan of attack. Simple, direct, and delightfully unprincipled, this guide contains tales of global power mongering from every age and endeavors to show dilettante dictators and tyrants-to-be just how it's done. Tips are provided on creating a personal flag, what type of puppet government to establish, how to squelch free speech, and, most important, how to handle enemies. Also included are humorous full-color illustrations, sidebars on admirable despots, and self-quizzes that allow readers to see if they have what it takes to conquer the world.
Customer Reviews:
To dictate or not to dictate.......2007-05-11
How to Rule the World... sounds simple enough, and with this guide, it makes it all the easier. You'll learn the tell tale signs of whether you should rule the world, set yourself in position so as to takeover and what to do once you are there. You'll learn how to dress extravagantly, where to hide your money, what earthly objects you will need to show off your wealth, and even what to do when you are ready to retire and put the next person of your choosing into power.
All this and snappy little history lessons based on past world rulers and their mistakes and proper procedures. While most book along this line tend to throw in alot of humor, this one cuts back on it, providing just enough tongue-in-cheek to make it a light-hearted affair while getting a history lesson on world rulers. It's not Machiavelli but if you wanted that then you should read that.
Overall, it's imaginative, light hearted, and informative. Well worth buying, Only down part is the artwork really put me off to begin with as it is seemingly done by a child, however, it grows on you and then I think it becomes more appropriate with these caricatures rather than more realistic portraits.
How To Rule The World.......2006-10-27
How to rule the world is about well how to rule the world and different people who have tryed to rule the world. They talk about people who tryed to rule the world so that you can see where they went wrong and what you can do to improve it.
My favorite part of the book was the chapter that told you how to run a country. I like this chapter because it tell you how to make a flag, how to change a countries name,and how to dress like a ruler. I thought that these were very important concepts to ruling the world because I want to run a country some day and I need to know how to name it.
I would recomened this book to anyone who wants to rule the world, to someone who wants a quick read, and to anyone who can under stand big words like qualification. I would recemened this book to anyoneone who wants to rule the world because this book has some pretty good ideas to do this. it is not a long book so if anyone wants to read something raelly fast this is the book for you. they use alot of really big words in the book that half the time you can't even understand what they mean. But the big words don't really matter that much if you really want to rule the world.
Must Have for Dictators in Training.......2005-12-20
Though this book offers little practical advice you couldn't figure out yourself, it's an interesting read. I enjoyed the profiles of famous Dictators and rulers and witty humor of Guillaume. He offers advice on how to get your own political coup and which advisors you should eliminate to avoid conspiracies. This is a neat book to have, if not simply for the novelty of it.
Dangerous Information For Anyone But Me To Know.......2005-10-03
Cute. Good for laughs. When The Great Revolution comes, Mr. Guillaume will either become People's Minister of Truth or be among the first they'll stand against the wall.
Lame.......2005-08-30
Not funny and not interesting. Don't bother with it! Your better off watching the history chanel.
Book Description
With Mussolini Â's Italy, R.J.B. Bosworth—the foremost scholar on the subject writing in English—vividly brings to life the period in which Italians participated in one of the twentieth centuryÂ's most notorious political experiments. Il DuceÂ's Fascists were the original totalitarians, espousing a cult of violence and obedience that inspired many other dictatorships, HitlerÂ's first among them. But as Bosworth reveals, many Italians resisted its ideology, finding ways, ingenious and varied, to keep Fascism from taking hold as deeply as it did in Germany. A sweeping chronicle of struggle in terrible times, this is the definitive account of ItalyÂ's darkest hour.
Customer Reviews:
Well researched and analyzed work.......2007-08-26
Bosworth covers a broad topical spectrum, including the historic, social, and political conditions that fostered fascism in Italy; insights into its political doctrine vs. actual application; character studies on its principal figures; and contrasts of it to both Italian Liberalism and German Nazism.
Overall, this book provides a great critical analysis of one 20th century Italy's more enigmatic political movements.
Well-written, except for political commentary.......2007-07-29
Professor Bosworth puts together a well-balanced look at the development of Italy's Fascist Party and its subsequent takeover of Italy. While arguing that Mussolini was far from innocent, Bosworth does show that he was considerably less malignant than either Hitler or Stalin. For instance, Mussolini did not create anything approaching the horrors of Auschwitz. Moreover, he shows how, unlike those other 2 dictators, Mussolini never established a truly totalitarian state (despite his boasting to the contrary). For instance, the Catholic Church remained as a leading institution within Italian society, and did not always toe the Fascist line. The same thing applies to the Italian monarchy (although Bosworth does not present King Victor Emmanuel III in a positive light). Moreover, he makes a convincing case that the Rome-Berlin Axis was clearly a marriage of unequals, with Italy playing the role of a very junior partner (apparently, Italians did not figure highly in the Nazi racial hierarchy). Even though "national characteristics" are no longer en vogue among historians, I got the impression from this book that Italians were somehow culturally incapable of establishing a genuinely totalitarian state, not to mention one that would seek to create any sort of "new world order." Bosworth also peppers the book with references to Italian Jews who were somewhat active in the Fascist Party. This is obviously a striking contrast to the situation in Nazi Germany. On a more critical note, I wish that Bosworth would have given more attention to the issue of "Italia Irredentia" as a function of Mussolini's foreign policy. After all, the Paris Peace Conference did not resolve this issue in Italy's favor (as it had created Yugoslavia out of much of that territory). Why didn't Mussolini attempt to grab this territory before undertaking a far more costly invasion of Ethiopia? After all, Yugoslavia during this period was a rather unstable nation, in jeopardy of coming apart due to increased ethnic tensions. This would have been interesting to read about. In addition, I found Bosworth's random references to contemporary politics unnecessary. He should have focused all of his energy on his title subject.
Fascinating, yet heavily flawed, and somewhat dishonest........2007-07-02
I have had considerable interest in fascist Italy for about six years now, so finding this book was absolutely thrilling to me. I thought it would provide a balanced and unflinching look at fascist Italy, relying on factual reporting that was not influenced by opinions. In fact, there is some extent to which this is the case; massive amounts of fantastic research that demonstrates tremendous experience and knowledge, and the number of personal stories is simply staggering. Great gaps remain, however. In reading other books and sources, one comes across many of the same things Bosworth discusses, such as shoddy economic planning, meaningless projects, corruption, and shallow propaganda. On the other hand, one also encounters the fourth largest navy in the world, recreational camps that considerably bolstered national fitness and inspired Hitlers phenomenal Strength Through Joy program, armored corps that were innovative and, in fact, quite effective, and an air force that made unrecognized but significant contributions to the axis war effort. Other elements of Bosworth's book seem under emphasized. Progress against malaria, economic expansion into Libya and Ethiopia, and the extent to which Fascist Italy exhausted itself fighting in Spain are all mentioned, but, despite comprising a huge amount of attention for the regime, are not given more than a bit of documentation. Instead, we are treated to a book full of proofs that fascism was only skin deep, a fact that becomes evident in any ideology or government once the odds are clearly against it. That the odds would be against Italy is, of course, a foregone conclusion. Italy was a country that was, by comparison, little effected by the great depression , yet still had an eighth the radios and cars of great Britain, and no radar and other crucial technologies. Of course, Bosworth's comparisons to Liberal Italy are appreciated, but he still discusses Italy's inherent weaknesses far too little. Of course, Bosworth was not attempting to explain why Italy lost the Second World War so badly, but many of Fascist Italy's weaknesses were made manifest in those years, and simply would not have been had, for example, Italy's investment in Franco paid off with a Spanish ally, cutting off Egypt, Greece, and Yugoslavia thanks to Gibraltar and probably winning the Axis the war.
It is Bosworth's ignorance of and lack of attention to warfare that is the most serious flaw in my mind, especially given that this was by far the most emphasized point of the state that Bosworth studies. Bosworth simply briefly mentions that the Italian navy (which constituted a huge emphasis in fascist Italy) was shamefully defeated in several battles, his only comments about the Italian navy in the book, which of course go to suggest that Italy was outdated and a paper thin state. Perhaps Bosworth, the faithful student of Italian history, has not heard of the battles of First and Second Sirte, in which Italian naval forces and mine fields savaged their British opposition? Perhaps Bosworth has not heard of British operations Harpoon, Vigorous, Pedestal, and Agreement, all of which were allied supply or offensive attempts thwarted by either Italian or a combination of Italian and German forces, with Italians composing the entire fight at sea (with a handful of U-Boat exceptions) and a significant part of the aerial forces involved? It seems more likely that Bosworth has heard of them, and chose to omit them because they did not support his point. Considering the nature of the book as overwhelmingly disposed to personal stories, and the overwhelming majority of those being anti-fascist in nature, as well as other examples of pick-and-choose reporting (the Italian air force, Italian commercial interests, Italian international relations, Italy's economy) it is difficult for me to accept that Bosworth is in fact providing solid evidence for any solid argument at all. Of course, I would not question the accuracy of his reporting, simply it's bias and probable selectivity. I enjoyed the read, and am glad that it is being written on and remembered, because we should never forget the crimes of Mussolini and the horrors and lies of authoritarianism, but what I already know of Mussolini's Italy leads me to bring serious doubts to any analysis of this book. I would, nevertheless, encourage any interested reader to purchase this; it is enlightening on a number of things, and is a meaty tome, but I find it sad that in refuting the fascist state, an author feels compelled to skew the facts against it, when they should do it themselves.
A good start but needs some more.......2007-03-31
Bosworth in his novel on Mussolini's Italy makes an effort to show how the fascist regime grew within the state and the extent to which it dominated the state. Fascism was not synonymous with Italian nationalism and Bosworth's explanations of the fascist growth lend credence to the idea that it was slow to take on. He categorizes fascism in various states and his most prevalent is the idea of a northern and southern fascism. This book also does an excellent job of showing how Mussolini's regime permeated the Italian state. The fascist ideals did meet significant resistance with the traditional liberals. The tough stance on labor and the opportunities for the church however drew many allies and allowed Mussolini to take power. One of the points lacking here is that the monarchy played a large role in his rise to power. I feel that Bosworth does not address that issue and I would like to have seen it done more.
Overall this is the best attempt we have on fascist Italy however this book could have been done better. It is incredibly ambitious and either should have been broken into two books or made one book longer. There is a lot of information that is glazed over very quickly leaving some holes in the analysis. If you want an introduction to fascist Italy this is a great place to start but I would not stop here. There are many rich ways to explore the topic and looks at Ray Mosley's Mussolini's Shadow or Dennis Mack Smith's biography of Mussolini are great additions. Understanding how the fascist regime impacted the state and the world make for interesting questions and is something anyone studying World War II should not miss.
Excellent.......2006-09-24
This is an ambitious and successful attempt to write the social history of Fascism. Italian Fascism, Bosworth reminds us, controlled Italy for almost a generation, a considerably longer period than the disastrous experiment of Nazi rule of Germany. How was Fascism experienced by Italians? To what extent did Fascism change Italy? What were the essential features of Fascist rule? What were the well springs of Fascism? Bosworth treats all these issues and more in this carefully documented and well written volume. Rather than pursuing these issues topically, Bosworth has organized this book chronologically. He begins with the nature of Liberal Italy and the experience of WWI, moves through the interwar period and the grim events of WWII, concluding with a concise but revealing chapter on postwar fascist movements. He weaves his topical themes into the narrative very well, providing considerable analysis and showing the historically dynamic nature of the Fascist experience. This combination of narrative and analysis is excellent.
Bosworth is particularly concerned with providing a balanced view of Fascist Italy. The Fascist state is often viewed popularly as a comic opera dicatorship. Bosworth shows well that Fascist Italy appears to be relatively benign only by comparison with Nazi Germany or the Stalinist Soviet Union. This oppressive dictatorship destroyed democracy and human rights in Italy, and by Bosworth's reckoning, was ultimately responsible for about 1 million deaths in Italy, the Balkans, and Africa. It was a police state in which millions of Italians were informing on each other, corrupting the quality of public life. At the same time, Bosworth addresses the "totalitarian" nature of the regime, a claim made by the Fascists themselves that they were remaking the Italian people. Due in large part to the actions of Fascist leaders themselves, this claim is shown to be a fraud. Fascist government itself exemplified the reliance on chains of patronage and clientage with its associated corruption typical of Italian society. Mussolini was quite content to compromise with powerful existing institutions like the Monarchy, the Papacy, and the Army. Bosworth shows very well the continuity the Fascist state had with the Liberal state it replaced and indeed, many of the crucial features of Italian Fascism appear to be extensions of some of the worst features of pre-WWI Italy.
Bosworth's work is careful, thoughtful, and presented extremely well.
Book Description
This final work by a world-renowned economist will take its place among the classics of political economy Why do some economies do better than others? How does society encourage the kind of market economy that generates continually increasing incomes? How do particular styles of government affect economic performance? World-renowned economist Mancur Olson tackles these questions and others in what will surely be regarded as his magnum opus. Olson contends that governments can play an essential role in the development of markets. Reliable enforcement of private contracts and protection of individual rights to property depend on governments strong enough not to undermine them. His exploration of "market-augmenting governments" will stand as a cutting-edge work on economic growth and provide a useful framework in which to consider the Asian financial crisis and its aftermath. As Susan Lee noted in Forbes, "his pioneering insights might have won a Nobel Prize for Olson had he lived a bit longer."
"Power and Prosperity is an important book, written with clarity and verve. It is a great misfortune that Mancur Olson is not here to respond to the debates that it will surely provoke." -The Wall Street Journal
Customer Reviews:
Needed.......2006-08-30
This book covers aspects of Economics that are only too often neglected. These aspects include how power arrangements affect market efficiency and the effectiveness of markets in meeting consumer demand and providing for propserity. The book also provides accounts of different types of market arangements. In one type of market there is no guarantee other than the honor of the buyer and seller concerning the quality of the product and the terms of payment. Thus the market tends toward basic short term transactions. In the market for which property rights are guaranteed by the social structure, however, market arrangements can be much more complex and much better serve the needs of the people in society.
Power arrangements should be studied in Economics.
And this book should be read by all persons interested in Economics.
Lucid, direct and yet subtle. Quite excellent........2005-12-26
In the "Rise and Decline of Nations" Mancur Olson revealed the teacher in himself with a lucid readable account that left the mathematics in the footnotes. It was one of those books that Samuel Britten would give to his bright nephew who wants to know what it is all about without doing the difficult math (with the exception of some graphs in a later chapter, not difficult to interpret, but which the reader can skim over if they are so inclined, for the argument is clearly stated in the text). The "Rise and Decline of Nations", Mancur Olson's prior book for the greater public, is a hard act to follow, but that he does with this sequel, "Power and Prosperity." And how.
"Power and Prosperity" brings the compelling reasoning of Olson's theories of collective action forward with a lucidity and ease unmatched by any other book I have encountered. And yet he still breaks new ground; the prompting was Olson's observations of the former Soviet Russian Federation's failure to rise above anarchy and to harness the power for free markets for the good of her people. In this book Olson answers the question: Why has Russia failed where the West has succeeded?
Olson's use of language is quite outstanding. He uses no big words where simple words will do. He defines the terms of his essay as he goes. He refers the reader to academic publications for those interested in formal proofs. He does not repeat himself except to remind the reader of the main line of argument, which keeps the whole tight and disciplined, yet easy to read.
This book is very strongly recommended for anyone seeking the synthesis of the big picture and a disciplined logical analysis. self with a lucid readable account that left the mathematics in the footnotes. It was one of those books that Samuel Britten would give to his bright nephew who wants to know what it is all about without doing the difficult bits. The "Rise and Decline of Nations" is a hard act to follow, but that Mancur Olson does with "Power and Prosperity." And how.
Only for economists but not enough.......2005-08-22
Olson's book is good but only understandable for those with an economics background. If you are not an economist you are going to have trouble understanding what he is trying to say and the concepts he uses across the pages.
For those who have an econ background it is a good book and it provides interesting examples on how economic theory applies to real life, and some of the reasons as to why some economic systems and models do or do not work in reality. However, he seriously lacks some other sociological, demographical, and local aspects of power, prosperity and development; therefore you should not stick only to his theories and keep reading other books to understand why some countries achieve prosperity while others do not.
Balanced, Insightful, and relevant.......2004-12-09
Power and Prosperity is an example of economics at its best. First of all, it takes a balanced or neutral approach to its subject matter. The author is not out to prove the superiority of either markets or government. Governmental power is a double edged sword to Olson. Government power promotes prosperity by restraining 'roving bandits' or special interests. Government power is also susceptible to the influence of special interests. Olson also discusses the merits and faults of markets. Markets are ubiquitous and can lead to prosperity, but often do not. Government has a role in this. That is, he finds blame for this in the most negative aspects of government. Olson does not assume market efficiency either. He explains it, as well as some possible limitations to markets.
This is also a highly insightful book. Much of his analysis derives from his earlier work on "the logic of collective action'. He also uses some transaction costs and basic supply and demand/substitution effect reasoning to explain historical events. Students in my comparative classes had more trouble with this book than any other, but it is still manageable. Reading it might be difficult for those who lack an education in economics. But I am not sure if there is an easier way to say what it says, and what it says is most interesting. The concepts the author employs makes a greater understanding of different economic systems and historical periods possible. This is penetrating analysis.
It is also highly relevant. Much of this book focuses on the Soviet Union. One could say that the USSR is a done deal- it failed so forget about it. It is, however, important to understand why it failed so as to avoid repeating such errors in the future. This is what the Author is driving at with in his use of the Soviet example. There were reasons for the failure of the Soviet system that also apply to problems in other nations- not to mention Russia today. The misuse of power has the potential to prevent prosperity as much now as it did under Stalin and Khrushchev.
Does this book have faults? Certainly. Olson takes too positive a view of Stalin's industrialization program (not that he praises Stalin). Olson dismisses complete privatization, or anarchy, too easily. There is nothing wrong with arguing against anarchy. But, his arguments against privatizing the state (i.e private police and courts) are little more than an unsupported dismissal of such arrangements. If he did not want to debate that issue, he should not have taken such a strong stand. He also might have mentioned a few things about FA Hayek- especially on p136 where he wrote "a bureaucracy cannot process all the information needed to calculate an optimal allocation or put it into practice".
While there are a few faults to this book, it is still excellent. It is a must read for anyone interested in either comparative economics and politics, Globalization, or the economic history of the Soviet Union.
Excellent description of what went wrong in the Soviet Union.......2004-06-26
Parts of this book are a bit slow and more theoretical than I want, but the chapter on the Soviet Union is one of the best economic essays I've ever read.
It convincingly discredits the idea that a misguided ideology led Soviet planners astray, by describing how the policies appear shrewdly designed to maximize Stalin's wealth.
It also provides a compelling explanation of the more recent Soviet and post-Soviet economic problems by documenting the extent to which special interests have made their industry unproductive by adopting work rules/habits designed maximize job security.
I wish I could believe these problems were unique to countries afflicted with communism, but the book's reasoning suggests that many parts of our economy where bureaucracies aren't shut down if they fail to produce valuable results (much of government, businesses in industries with little competition, and I don't know what fraction of nonprofits) are equally wasteful.
Book Description
For generations, influential thinkers--often citing the tragic polarization that took place during Germany's Great Depression--have suspected that people's loyalty to democratic institutions erodes under pressure and that citizens gravitate toward antidemocratic extremes in times of political and economic crisis. But do people really defect from democracy when times get tough? Do ordinary people play a leading role in the collapse of popular government?
Based on extensive research, this book overturns the common wisdom. It shows that the German experience was exceptional, that people's affinity for particular political positions are surprisingly stable, and that what is often labeled polarization is the result not of vote switching but of such factors as expansion of the franchise, elite defections, and the mobilization of new voters. Democratic collapses are caused less by changes in popular preferences than by the actions of political elites who polarize themselves and mistake the actions of a few for the preferences of the many. These conclusions are drawn from the study of twenty cases, including every democracy that collapsed in the aftermath of the Russian Revolution in interwar Europe, every South American democracy that fell to the Right after the Cuban Revolution, and three democracies that avoided breakdown despite serious economic and political challenges.
Unique in its historical and regional scope, this book offers unsettling but important lessons about civil society and regime change--and about the paths to democratic consolidation today.
Book Description
Examining the role of the Deutsche Bank, Germany's largest commercial bank, in the Nazi dictatorship, Harold James asks how the bank accommodated itself to a transition from democracy and a market economy to dictatorship and a planned economy. How did the new Zeitgeist influence the bank? What opportunities for profit did it see in the National Socialist route out of the Great Depression? What role did anti-Semitism play in the bank's business relations and its dealing with employees? How was the bank connected to Auschwitz?
Books:
- The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers
- The Rise of Western Christendom: Triumph and Diversity Ad 200-1000 (Making of Europe)
- The Scalpel and the Silver Bear: The First Navajo Woman Surgeon Combines Western Medicine and Traditional Healing
- The Shi'is of Iraq
- The Story of the World Volume 2: History for the Classical Child (Story of the World: History for the Classical Child (Audio))
- The Things They Carried
- The Twilight of the Intellectuals: Culture and Politics in the Era of the Cold War
- The Wages of Destruction: The Making and Breaking of the Nazi Economy
- The Wall (Reading Rainbow Book)
- The War of the World: Twentieth-Century Conflict and the Descent of the West
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- America's Financial Apocalypse: How to Profit from the Next Great Depression
- The American Pit Bull Terrier Handbook
- Res Maritimae: Cyprus and the Eastern Mediterranean from Prehistory to Late Antiquity : Proceedings
- Supreme Conflict: The Inside Story of the Struggle for Control of the United States Supreme Court
- Silence: Lectures and Writings
- The Periodic Table
- The enchanted wilderness: A red rock odyssey
- The Little Book of Cases in Hospitality Management: Stories From Industry Practitioners
- Net Entrepreneurs Only: 10 Entrepreneurs Tell the Stories of Their Success
- Korea South: Country Study Guide
The Human Condition (2nd Edition)
Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil
On Revolution (Penguin Classics)
On Violence (Harvest Book)
Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil (Penguin Classics)
