History: Fiction or Science? (Chronology, No. 1)

Book Description

Recorded history is a finely-woven magic fabric of intricate lies about events predating the sixteenth century. There is not a single piece of evidence that can be reliably and independently traced back earlier than the eleventh century. This book details events that are substantiated by hard facts and logic, and validated by new astronomical research and statistical analysis of ancient sources.

Customer Reviews:

Calculations are only as good as your numbers.......2007-08-03

Yes, we can all agree that mainstream history is nearly 100% BS due to politics, economics, ego, problems with dating techniques, and various conspiracies. Agreed. But, I've been researching the distinct possibility that human history (in terms of civilizations) are much more ancient than we've been told, so coming across this book was very interesting to me. I wondered how Fomenko could be wrong (if at all) because he is very persuasive in his presentations. Then it dawned on me. If at previous times in prehistory, due to the various catastrophies that are well documented (comets, asteroids, planetary disruptions, plasma discharge, pole reversals, etc) the Earth was in a different position in relation to the sun, different tilt on its axis, different orbit, different rotation (in terms of velocity and DIRECTION), and the continents were in different positions, then would this not cause the ancients to see the sky (constellations) differently? In other words, is Fomenko making erronious assumptions about the physics of the Earth in pre-history, which then corrupt his data with regards to dating the relevant astrology? The last event to seriously disrupt our planet occured roughly 3500 years ago, according to other good researchers, so is it possible Fomenko has been confused by this? The vastly different physics of our planet in the not so distant past may explain this confusion, which is not to say the "mainstream" version of history is correct; on the contrary. I am not an expert in these fields, but wanted to see if this idea could spark discussion.

Pants on fire?.......2007-07-19

Will people ever read before spamming? Yes, Jesuits could not rewrite world history alone, they had help. Anyway, Dr Prof Acad A.Fomenko does not point to jesuits as the driving force of world wide history manipulation in published volumes 1,2,3;, actually he barely mentions the poor devils. Check it with 'Search inside' feature, please. China is rarely mentioned either, in fact, Dr Fomenko is completely eurocentric. Right, his theory contradicts all mainstream schools of history, because in their actual state they are all built on blatantly erroneus chronology. You don't need a mysterious cabal (conspiracy) to falsify history, the falsification is its modus operandi. It is inherent to history(ians) to falsify (distort) events, as it is inherent to humans to boast as it is inherent to power (authority) to legimize itself by referrring to glorious past made to its own order. Dr Prof Fomenko and team have identified scores of instances of such manipulation in Russian, European, etc.. history, and delivered valid statistical proof thereof. His own 'reconstruction' is completely another story. Forget c14 as a valid method of dating. W.Libby has initially discovered a brilliant method of INDEPENDENT dating. Too bad, c14 method has become a joke after a forced marrige with dendrochronology with consensual chronological scale inbuilt. Radiocarbon method can't stand blind tests, but is so very productive as a rubberstamp.

Accepted History & Chronology Must Be Changed. .......2007-04-09

There is no doubt that history as most know it is a sham, & institution's version of History both University & Church is fradulent & inaccurate. Everything was established with an agenda, The real "Dark Ages" are now when we have access to incredible amounts of information past authorities & more important 'common folk' didn't have but our institutions & educators are slow to evolve because of what has ignorantly & arrogantly been taught for too long. This is on many subjects not just Chronology.

For anyone to question "Why would a Mathematician have anything credible to say of History?" The answer is from Dr. Fomenko's preface in the book: "It would be worthwhile to remind the reader that in the XVI-XVII century Chronology was considered to be a subdivision of Mathematics." These volumes could possibly be some of the most important works to date & should be read by everyone with an interest in History, especially professors & educators who have a duty to the public. I have read both books & must say that 'Chronology 1' has some very eye opening & revolutionary information. Even if these volumes are part true the implications are profound & opens the doors to further investigations & questions which must be done. I speak several different lanquages & must say the logic Dr. Fomenko uses with "inflection" of words & words being read from left to right in one region & right to left in another then written backwards, the removal of vowels & get down to basics of words, or different cities & locations having the same name etc. is correct. Vowel usage has always been optional & varied, actually complicating linquistics & study. The first thing one has to understand is that words never had a fixed spelling in history like we do now, the spelling of words was mutable & regional, as well as names & titles of people were vast, varied & changed, NOTHING WAS FIXED or understood linear. Matters of Life & Death as well as financial profiteering yesterday & today were & are made with ignorant, illogical & conspiratorial views of history & reality, it's time people get closer to the Truth & society collectively grow up.

Very Interesting.......2007-03-07

It is a good proposal and I believe it will mature into something even better in the future. I think it deserves to be read.

History as Science Fiction.......2007-01-10

Anatoly Fomenko has written a very intriguing book, full of pictures, charts, and computer 'proof' of his thesis: backwards of AD900 we don't really know what happened or when. Between AD900 and AD1600 there is more certainty, but there is still a lot of fuzzy ground, and things don't get reliable until we get past the 1600's where the printing press made it very difficult for the perpetrators of this timeline manipulation to change anything that had been committed to print. The Dark Ages did not happen. Books were burned for a reason. One organization has doubled the actual length of its existence by expanding the real chronology. Read why.

I had always wondered why Christ died about AD33 and yet men waited until the 11th century to form the Knights Templar, the Cathars, etc and go after the Holy Land by force. Why the 1000 year gap? Turns out there wasn't more than a 10-12 year gap and he proves it using astronomy. This also implies that the planet is not as old as we have been told, and current Christian and other creationist scientists are already championing that idea without being aware of Fomenko's book. The two groups, creationist scientists and the Russian mathematical analysts corroborate each other. Fascinating.

Of course, all this flies in the face of what we have been told traditionally is the 'proper' chronology of western civilization, and most readers will experience 'cognitive dissonance' in reading this book. It means that our history going backwards from AD1600 becomes progressively more incorrect and unreliable until it cannot be trusted at all... in the space of 700-800 years.

Naturally, the curious, open-minded reader will want to know WHO did this, WHY, and did any of the events we think of as really ancient ever happen?
Dr. Fomenko is a respected scientist/mathematician at Moscow State University who has already answered these questions to the satisfaction of his initially skeptical colleagues. Most of them are now believers, a few still refuse to believe (the usual diehards), and of course the western press has ignored Fomenko's work -- for obvious reasons when you read the book. The ones who perpetrated this chronology ruse have a lot to answer for. They are still with us. That's why this book is a well-kept secret.

I gave the book a 4-star rating because I was unable to check out some of his claims; those I checked were as he said. But if even 1/3 of his claims are true, this punches a big hole in what we think is our history, the meaning of western civilization, our educational process (for repeating the ruse as gospel), and the trustworthiness of the organization that perpetrated this ruse, well-intentioned or not.

This book relates to current research into a Young Earth paradigm, to John Keel's discoveries about our planet, and Fr Malachi Martin's insights (in his now out-of-print books). We are indeed sheep who are manipulated and kept ignorant -- for a reason. While knowing what these men have to say may be the "booby prize" (as in: 'what can you do with this knowledge?'), it will provide interesting reading. Didn't someone say: "...and the Truth will set you free."?? For you to judge if this book contains the truth.

Understanding American Government (with InfoTrac)

Average customer rating:

Understanding American Government (with InfoTrac)
Susan Welch , John Gruhl , John Comer , and Susan M. Rigdon
Manufacturer: Wadsworth Publishing
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

Civics | Government | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

All Titles | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books

Nonfiction | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 0534596436

Book Description

UNDERSTANDING AMERICAN GOVERNMENT is highly respected and trusted for its attention to research and issues of diversity, its award-winning team of authors, and its brief length, made so by not covering policy. While covering the basic foundations and features of American Government, this text also moves beyond the nuts and bolts, to explain why and how important features of government have evolved, their impact on government and individuals, and why these features are controversial (if they are) and worth learning. More than just narrating facts and current issues, UNDERSTANDING AMERICAN GOVERNMENT attempts to leave the students with an understanding of the "why", so their knowledge can be applied long after the course is completed. AMERICAN GOVERNMENT (with policy chapters) is a three-time winner of the American Government Textbook Award for the Best Treatment of Women in Politics, by the Women's Caucus for Political Science.

Customer Reviews:

=(.......2006-04-01

I bought this at Amazon.com from an Awesome Deal I found on DailyTool.com. I don't like this book too much because it dropped its value too much. I bought this at $50 and now it goes to two cents.

Understanding Contemporary Latin America (Understanding)

Average customer rating:

It could be better

Understanding Contemporary Latin America (Understanding)

Manufacturer: L. Rienner Publishers
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Americas | History | Subjects | Books

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 158826341X

Customer Reviews:

It could be better.......2006-11-01

I am using this text in a class on Contemporary Latin American societies. The book is easy to read and has great strenghts such as Price's Geographic Preface. Unfortunately, two key chapters such as the Economies of Latin America and Patterns of Race, Ethnicity, Class and Nationalism are superficial and weak to the point that I find myself making up these shorcomings with a bundle of extra readings.
1. It does not take a bleeding heart Liberal to agree with the importance of the Lost Decade and the decline of ISI. These themes are developed in three pages, filled with economic gargon and lacking a clear theoretical framework. In the end, the authors seem to suggest that governments' mismanagement of the economy is the main (if not the only) factor explaining the collapse of major Latin American economies. It took the wisdom of the IMF to get us in track and get our finances in order, thanks God! If the authors' viewpoint sounds logical is because they never develop a sound section on the debt crisis and its meaning in the context of the oil crisis, petrodollars and globalization. To be fair, the debt crisis is briefly discussed by Fraser but in the chapter on International Relations (!), which by the way failed to expand on the active role of the US government invading Central American countries and training military officers who later became authoritarian leaders--two themes which in my modest opinion have marked the destinies of Latin America.
2. Race and ethnicity is a tough topic when it comes to teaching American students about Latin America. In Yelvington's essay Guatemala, Mexico, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Chile and Bolivia become side comments. Because his essay explores race and ethnicity from a Black and White traditional American approach. The African presence in Latin America is very important but it is not the only one. A more even approach is needed to explain to young Americans the complexity of Latin America's multicultural/multiracial nature.
3. Finally, there is not a chapter or at least a solid section within a chapter addressing Revolutions in Latin America. Can a Latinamericanist underestimate the impact of revolutions to the extend of excluding it from a book on contemporary Latin America? Have you been in Latin America lately? Aren't government policies in countries with revolutionary tradition aiming at preventing the spread of revolutions? Isn't that in itself significant?
There is a substantial body of research both in Spanish and English that could help American students understand Latin America. Unfortunately, this book does not take full advantage of these resources.

Understanding the Founding: The Crucial Questions (American Political Thought)

Average customer rating:

A very fine summation of the current knowledge.

Understanding the Founding: The Crucial Questions (American Political Thought)
Alan Gibson
Manufacturer: University Press of Kansas
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Historiography | Historical Study | History | Subjects | Books

General | Americas | History | Subjects | Books

Constitutions | Government | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

History & Theory | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 0700615199

Book Description

Over the course of the last century, scholars have furiously debated four questions concerning the Founders and their act of creation. Were the Framers motivated by their economic interests? How democratic was the Framers' Constitution? Should we interpret the Founding using philosophical or strictly historical approaches? What traditions of political thought were most important to the Framers?

In Understanding the Founding: The Crucial Questions, Alan Gibson examines the preconceptions that scholars bring to these questions, explores the deepest sources of scholars' disagreements over them, and suggests new and thoughtful lines of interpretation and inquiry. Building on his previous work, Interpreting the Founding, which offers a synoptic overview of the competing perspectives that have informed modern scholarship on the Founders, Gibson now examines this same century of scholarship from the standpoint of the most important debates that it has generated.

In evaluating the economic interpretation of the Constitution, Gibson establishes what has and has not been proven about the economic and social characteristics of the Federalists and Anti-Federalists and makes suggestions for future research. Gibson's analysis of the character of the original Constitution sets forth a complex and judicious view of the Framers' intentions regarding democracy, arguing that scholars have often disagreed, not because they have vastly different understandings of the Framers' aims, but because they differ among them-selves about how to define democracy. In examining the controversy over interpretive approaches, Gibson suggests a new synthesis of the insights of linguistic contextualists and philosophical rationalists; and in revisiting the liberalism-versus-republicanism debate, he analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of alternative accounts of the interactions of multiple traditions in the political thought of the Founders.

Gibson's incisive analysis brings clarity to these complex and sprawling debates and sheds new light on the institutional and intellectual foundations of the American political system. Urging us to move forward from a puerile affection for the Founders to a deeper understanding of their place in the history of political thought and a more balanced assessment of the strengths and limitations of the system that they founded, he also provides a provocative view of the proper role of the Founders' ideas today.

This book is part of the American Political Thought series.

Customer Reviews:

A very fine summation of the current knowledge........2007-05-21

This slender and very concise (194 pages of text, 75+ pages of notes) is a follow-up to Prof. Gibson's fine first book, Interpreting the Founding. In that volume (see my review), Gibson outlined the historigraphical debates about the founding American period (which I define as late 1760s to 1800).
In this book, he goes more to the heart of the subject itself. Gibson's project in these two books is two-fold: What is the best analytical framework to use in examining the founding generation? What can we say that we now know of them after the last fifty years of (often brilliant) historical work? Another way to state this is to say that his project is to point out future directions for research to answer the questions that past work has defined.
Before I discuss his work, I want to baldly state his main conclusion:
Gibson believes that the founders were deontological liberals. They believed that the protection of rights was the central role of government.
They did not believe that government should try to change or form the character of the people.
He centers his discussion around four basic questions or debates. Each of these controversies is covered in his chapters 1 thru 4.
The first is the validity of Beard's thesis of the economic interpretation of the Constitution. In many ways this is the least interesting chapter simply because the necessary data is so incomplete or so seems to point every which way. Let me give you one of my own examples of the latter. Gibson discusses Robert McGuire's fine statistical work on what we know about the delegates to the Constitutional Convention. Gibson states that "McGuire's most important claim...is his proposition that slave-holding made a delegate much less likely to favor a national negative on state laws..."(p. 40). The irony of course is that that national negative was proposed in Resolution 6 of the Virginia Plan, written by one slaveowner and proposed to the Convention by another.
But Gibson's main point is how little we know about the financial holdings not only of the delegates to the Federal Convention, but about the financial holdings of the 1648 delegates to the state ratifying conventions, let alone of the ~160,000 voters who voted in the elections that produced the delegates to the state conventions (p.42) The kind of data required is unlikely to be ever found because it is simply unlikely to ever had existed. Nevertheless, Gibson's summation of the debate leads him to several conclusions. I will quote just one:
"Beard's proposition that the movement for the Constitution was begun by an elite group of men who were disproportionately wealthy, urban, and commercial in their interests, and that they were responding to threats to their economic interests from within the states...is no longer a source of controversy"(p.45)
The second chapter looks at recent debates about how democratic is the Constitution. I loved this chapter because it illustrates the difficulties with a contemporary tendency to place the Founders in the middle of current debates.
The Founders did not regard democracy as a paramount value. In Gibson's words, they "...did not assume that democratic government was good government"(p. 88). Thus we should not be surprised that what they created was not very inclusive nor democratic.
Secondly, there is a tendency to confuse the effects of federalism with anti-democracy. Consider the Senate. Each state has two senators. At the 2000 census, California had ~33,800,000 people. Wyoming has just under 500,000. So you could argue that each Californian senator represents some 15,000,000 people while each Wyoming senator represents 250,000. The difference is a 60-1 ratio. Seems pretty undemocratic depending on how you define "democracy". But the whole point of the Senate was to represents the states qua states; as a corporate political entity. Senators represent their state, not its people.
The final three chapters of Gibson's books I see as being of a piece. In chapter 3 he looks as the historical methodologies of the linguistic contextualists (Pocock, Woods, Skinner) and critiques that methodology from the point of view of those who advocate an "enduring question" approach (some examples of the latter would be Rahe or Zuckert). In chapter 4, Gibson is looking at the compromise that eventually came out of these debates- the multi-tradtion approach. The questions explored by this chapter are what traditions should be included? Is there a core tradition to which the others are adapted?
Gibson's conclusion in these two chapters form the analytical framework that he is suggesting for several future areas of research.
He comes down mostly on the side of those who propose the enduring question approach. Gibson feels that we are to some degree linguistically or culturally constructed but nowhere near to the degree suggested by Skinner, Woods, and Pocock. For these writers even explaining cultural innovation becomes a theoretical difficulty. Gibson (and Rahe and many others) point out that we have no evidence that individuals are that imprisioned by their cultural and linguistic heritage.
Gibson then argues for a multi-tradtion approach that takes the core work of Michael Zuckert and confronts it with the challenge of Rogers Smith work. Zuckert believes that Lockean liberalism is the core tradition of our political founding and that adapted to that core were ideas or means taken from the Portestant tradtion, the English Whig tradition and civic republicanism. But Locke is the key. But Rogers Smith's work can be seen as a challange to that conclusion. Smith believes there are actual intellectual traditions of ascriptive inequality (towards foreigners, women, Black-, Hispanic- and Asian-Americans) that have been used throughout our history to justify the exclusion of those groups from civil and political rights. Can we really say with Zuckert that the core of our political founding is a natural rights philosophy if Smith is right?
Gibson is very impressed by both of these authors (as am I) and wants to work toward exploring the tensions in their interpretations as well as to answer conundrums like the following: The Founders "...did not believe that it was the function of government to promote virtue among the citizens or to foster a particular conception of the good life" (p.157) Yet they believed that such virtue was necessary for the republican government to survive. So how was this virtue to be promoted by the civil society? By church? By schools? By the economic structure of society (Jefferson's nation of yeoman farmers)?
I could go on about this book far longer than I already have. Gibson states the issues so well in so many debates that it really is a spur to further research and reflection even for us amateur readers in the period.
I will leave the summary of chapter five (the lessons of the period for contemporary politics) to your own reading and reflection. I hope I have given you some idea of how impressive both of Prof. Gibson's books are. I recommend them to anyone interested in the period. Anybody who wants to discuss them with me, please feel free to email me or to make comments.

The Central Intelligence Agency: Security under Scrutiny (Understanding Our Government)

Average customer rating:

Provides college-level readers with a primer on the CIA's history, purposes, and activities

The Central Intelligence Agency: Security under Scrutiny (Understanding Our Government)
Richard Immerman , Loch Johnson , Kathryn Olmsted , and John Prados
Manufacturer: Greenwood Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Intelligence & Espionage | Military | History | Subjects | Books

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Espionage | True Accounts | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Federal Government | Government | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

All Titles | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 0313332827

Book Description

Created in 1947, the Central Intelligence Agency plays an important part in the nation's intelligence activities, and is currently playing a vital role in the "war on terrorism." While the agency is often in the news and portrayed in television shows and films, it remains one of the most secretive and misunderstood organizations in the United States. This work provides an in-depth look into the Central Intelligence Agency and how its responsibilities affect American life. After a brief history of the agency, chapters describe its organization, intelligence/counterintelligence, covert operations, controversies, key events, and notable people.

Customer Reviews:

Provides college-level readers with a primer on the CIA's history, purposes, and activities.......2006-04-28

THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY: SECURITY UNDER SCRUTINY edited by Athan Theoharis and others joins others in the 'Understanding Our Government' series to provide college-level readers with a primer on the CIA's history, purposes, and activities. Chapters describe its organization, intelligence operations, controversies and events, considering the changing role and perception of secrets and intelligence work over the decades and spying and interception projects fostered by the CIA.

Democracy in Translation: Understanding Politics in an Unfamiliar Culture (Wilder House Series in Politics, History, and Culture)

Average customer rating:

Democracy in Translation: Understanding Politics in an Unfamiliar Culture (Wilder House Series in Politics, History, and Culture)
Frederic Charles Schaffer
Manufacturer: Cornell University Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

Senegal | Africa | History | Subjects | Books

Democracy | Government | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

History & Theory | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Non-US Legal Systems | Perspectives on Law | Law | Subjects | Books

All Titles | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books

Nonfiction | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 0801486912

Book Description

Frederic C. Schaffer challenges the assumption often made by American scholars that democracy has been achieved in foreign countries when criteria such as free elections are met. Elections, he argues, often have cultural underpinnings that are invisible to outsiders. To examine grassroots understandings of democratic institutions and political concepts, Schaffer conducted fieldwork in Senegal, a mostly Islamic and agrarian country with a long history of electoral politics. Schaffer discovered that ideas of "demokaraasi" held by Wolof-speakers often reflect concerns about collective security. Many Senegalese see voting as less a matter of choosing leaders than of reinforcing community ties that may be called upon in times of crisis.

Book Description

In recent decades the Ninth Amendment, a provision designed to clarify that the federal government was to be one of enumerated and limited powers, has been turned into an unenumerated rights clause that effectively grants unlimited power to the judiciary. Was this the intent of the framers of the Constitution? McAffee argues that the founders had a rather different set of priorities than ours, and that the goal of enforcing fundamental human rights was not why they drafted any of the first ten amendments. They did not intend to grant to the courts the power to generate fundamental rights, whether by reference to custom or history, reason or natural law, or societal values or consensus. It has become increasingly popular to identify our constitutional order as an experiment in the protection of fundamental human rights and to forget that it is also an experiment in self-government. As fundamental as the founding generation believed basic rights to be, they saw popular authority to make decisions about government as being even more central to the project in which they were engaged. They supported natural law and rights, but they felt strongly that those rights did not bind the people or their government unless they were inserted in the written Constitution. They did not contemplate that there would be unwritten limitations on the powers granted to government.

Understanding American Government and Politics (Understanding Politics)

Average customer rating:

Understanding American Government and Politics (Understanding Politics)
Duncan Watts
Manufacturer: Manchester University Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

Democracy | Government | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

History & Theory | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

U.S. | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

The Road to the White House 2004: The Politics of Presidential Elections With Infotrac

ASIN: 0719060745

Book Description

Understanding American Government and Politics covers the subject in a clear, accessible, and easy-to-understand style. After setting American politics in its social and economic context, the book provides an introduction to and analysis of the American Constitution and the distribution of power within the federal system. It considers the Executive Branch, the legislature, and the judiciary. It evaluates the role of American political parties and lobbyist groups, and the nature of elections, electioneering, and voting behavior. Coverage is given to the Clinton presidency, the 2000 election and its complicated aftermath, the early days of the Bush administration and the terrorist attacks of 9/11/01.

Understanding the Chiapas Rebellion: Modernist Visions and the Invisible Indian

Average customer rating:

Understanding the Chiapas Rebellion: Modernist Visions and the Invisible Indian
Nicholas P. Higgins
Manufacturer: University of Texas Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Arts & Photography | Subjects | Books

General | Performing Arts | Arts & Photography | Subjects | Books

General | Movies | Entertainment | Subjects | Books

History & Criticism | Movies | Entertainment | Subjects | Books

Mexico | Americas | History | Subjects | Books

General | Americas | History | Subjects | Books

Mayan | Ancient | History | Subjects | Books

Revolutionary | Historical Study | History | Subjects | Books

All Titles | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books

Arts & Photography | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books

Entertainment | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books
Similar Items:

ASIN: 0292705654

Book Description

"This is a deftly-written, insightful and thought-provoking text which seeks to illuminate key features of the Zapatista rebellion."

— Development and Change

"This book, like none other that I know, will move the dialogue about the Zapatista movement into the arena of serious political and social thought, where its critique of modernity and globalization constitutes a major case study."

— Gary H. Gossen, Julian Steward Professor of Social Science and Dean of Academic Affairs, Deep Springs College

To many observers in the late 1980s and early 1990s, Mexico appeared to be a modern nation-state at last assuming an international role through its participation in NAFTA and the OECD (Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development). Then came the Zapatista revolt on New Year's Day 1994. Wearing ski masks and demanding not power but a new understanding of the indigenous peoples of Mexico, Subcomandante Marcos and his followers launched what may be the first "post" or "counter" modern revolution, one that challenges the very concept of the modern nation-state and its vision of a fully assimilated citizenry.

This book offers a new way of understanding the Zapatista conflict as a counteraction to the forces of modernity and globalization that have rendered indigenous peoples virtually invisible throughout the world. Placing the conflict within a broad sociopolitical and historical context, Nicholas Higgins traces the relations between Maya Indians and the Mexican state from the conquest to the present—which reveals a centuries-long contest over the Maya people's identity and place within Mexico. His incisive analysis of this contest clearly explains how the notions of "modernity" and even of "the state" require the assimilation of indigenous peoples. With this understanding, Higgins argues, the Zapatista uprising becomes neither surprising nor unpredictable, but rather the inevitable outcome of a modernizing program that suppressed the identity and aspirations of the Maya peoples.

Books:

Books Index

Books Home

Recommended Books