Book Description
In the early 1960s, American conservatives seemed to have fallen on hard times. McCarthyism was on the run, and movements on the political left were grabbing headlines. The media lampooned John Birchers's accusations that Dwight Eisenhower was a communist puppet. Mainstream America snickered at warnings by California Congressman James B. Utt that "barefooted Africans" were training in Georgia to help the United Nations take over the country. Yet, in Utt's home district of Orange County, thousands of middle-class suburbanites proceeded to organize a powerful conservative movement that would land Ronald Reagan in the White House and redefine the spectrum of acceptable politics into the next century.
Suburban Warriors introduces us to these people: women hosting coffee klatches for Barry Goldwater in their tract houses; members of anticommunist reading groups organizing against sex education; pro-life Democrats gradually drawn into conservative circles; and new arrivals finding work in defense companies and a sense of community in Orange County's mushrooming evangelical churches. We learn what motivated them and how they interpreted their political activity. Lisa McGirr shows that their movement was not one of marginal people suffering from status anxiety, but rather one formed by successful entrepreneurial types with modern lifestyles and bright futures. She describes how these suburban pioneers created new political and social philosophies anchored in a fusion of Christian fundamentalism, xenophobic nationalism, and western libertarianism.
While introducing these rank-and-file activists, McGirr chronicles Orange County's rise from "nut country" to political vanguard. Through this history, she traces the evolution of the New Right from a virulent anticommunist, anti-establishment fringe to a broad national movement nourished by evangelical Protestantism. Her original contribution to the social history of politics broadens--and often upsets--our understanding of the deep and tenacious roots of popular conservatism in America.
Customer Reviews:
Interesting Subject..........2006-03-09
I was assigned this book for class and therefore didn't have a huge interest in the subject before I read the book. I haven't finished it, but I also don't plan to finish it. The subject was interesting, but the book wasn't captivating.
I found that the author sometimes became overly concerned with statistical information and details which left me (as well as my classmates) confused and frustrated. When too many facts are thrown at you at once, you just want to skip it and move along.
If you actually know about the John Birch Society and are highly interested in the Conservative Right, I'm sure you will like the book, even in spite of those "factual" sections. Historically, it's very accurate and I know that those who were interested really enjoyed the author's style.
Analyzes the 'warrior' battle plan of the 1950's and 1960's.......2005-05-30
This book is neat precisely because it takes a scholarly approach to examining the new right. Instead of writing a frenzied treatise why the right is bad, Lisa McGirr lets readers draw conclusions from her fact-based historical analysis.
The suburban new right emerged in the 1950's and early 1960's out of a desire for self-preservation. People in these newly emergent suburbs were alternating between the 'self-reliant' model of conservative libertarianism and 'big-government' social conservatism which placed its premiums on social and political conformity as a tool for ensuring order in the community. The then cold war united the two periodically disparate strains of conservatism into a unified school of thought; conformity was good for national security.
Because it upheld the values which they supported (and felt were in the best benefit for America) the people who would become part of the New Right honestly did not mind when they and/or their companies received economic subsidies from the government. They had to defend the country against the reds after all. This was not mooching off the system, but ensuring the country would be able to produce the best resources and the brightest people to outmatch 'the reds'.
The 'red-baiting' and 'race-baiting' which I and other people have publicly and psychologically associated with the right only came into existence when the status quo was being threatened.
The same people who had not protested (and in fact welcomed) government benefits for themselves became genuinely anxious upon realizing that the civil rights movement was attempting to reconfigure the American state to offer more benefits to more groups of people. This exposed contradictions in the American state as it currently existed and hinted that a reconfigured American state would not provide exactly the same order of things as they had known it to exist.
Fearful of these 'other' people, some southern states undertook the-then shocking action of voting for Barry Goldwater in 1964, disrupting the solidly Democratic south. Prior to this time, a southerner voting Republican was unthinkable. The party of Lincoln after all was responsible for both emancipation and reconstruction.
Although Goldwater would loose to Johnson, his candidacy and campaign positions (including against the civil rights act) further laid the foundations for the present day situation. Voting shifts in the 1964 presidential election ultimately encouraged the Reagan revolution of the 1980's and George W. Bush's promotion of faith based initiatives today.
Good, but not great.......2004-05-05
McGirr's book traces the rise of what I would call the (white, middle-class) suburban right and the Christian right, beginning in the early 60s. The new right coalesced around anti-Communism, laissez faire capitalism, states' rights and local government, the "traditional" family, Christian values, individual economic responsibility, and low taxes.
It was the suburban Christian right that first brought these views together. Barry Goldwater, who ran for President in 1964 against Johnson, was an early exemplar of new right views. However, his strong opposition to the Civil Rights acts won him the lower South and, along with his virulent anti-Communism, helped him lose the rest of the country.
The suburban Christian right shed the virulent and conspiratorial anti-Communism that they initially directed at domestic enemies; south-eastern politics moved away from the New Deal order and shed legal segregation and overt biological racism; they all joined their Christian and conservative forces and formed a conservative coalition behind Ronald Reagan.
McGirr's is a "bottom up" analysis that begins with the grass roots social base of the suburban Christian right, using Orange County as a prototypical case study. She also examines the interplay of grass roots leaders, rank and file members, regional business elites, and national intellectual and political leaders.
The book doesn't delve into how the suburban right teamed up with south-eastern conservatives, but their shared Christianity, shared social conservatism, and shared opposition to civil rights, busing, and affirmative action makes it fairly easy to guess what that part of the story in general looks like. However, McGirr's would be a better book if she examined some of these connections, at least briefly. This is what makes the book good but not great.
Post-script: Today, the Cold War is over, terrorism has replaced communism as America's global enemy, and George W. Bush has combined the Christian right with the post-Cold War, neo-conservative, neo-imperialist right. Bush has tried to combine anti-terrorism, neo-imperialism, and Christian conservativism without provoking Christian-Islamic antagonisms--antagonisms already strained by Christian conseravtive and neo-conservative support for Israel. These topics would make an interesting post-script to McGirr's book.
Rhetorical, but ok.......2004-05-01
I had to read this book for a history class. It provides enough incite on the origin of conservatism in Orange County, but to me, she overemphasizes her status as a historian. Instead of telling one point just once, she repeats it again in another segment, which, as a reader, I already knew because she said it before. She is non-biased in her approach of the conservative uprooting, yet she does seem to make them out to look like the enemy rather than a large group of people that were encouraging enrollment for causes they believed in. I recommend it to anyone who likes to read the word "Knott" over and over again.
Absorbing,Thorough Analysis Of Neoconservative Ascent !.......2002-04-27
This book represents both a fascinating study of the evolution of `60s politics as well as a historical attempt to document and explain the perplexing fact that a country flirting with the danger of a social and political revolution from the left suddenly veered so much farther to the right toward a broad-based popular conservatism. Herein Lisa McGirr, a gifted author and Harvard professor comes closer to making her prose swing than one would expect of a book of this type. Meanwhile, she also spins a convincing argument regarding the origins of the American neo-conservative revival in the late `60s and early `70s. At the time, domestic conservatism had been badly eclipsed by the burgeoning youth culture and their radical leftist notions. To her credit, the account rendered here is not only academically spirited, but is written in a way that makes this serious work of scholarship accessible to the general public.
She focuses meaningfully on the activities within a specific congressional district, in Orange County California, where, she argues quite persuasively, the seeds of the neo-conservative revival were most fruitfully planted and sown. Within this district, literally thousands of affluent and educated suburban "warriors" combined to launch a powerful movement destined less than a decade later to propel Ronald Reagan into the White House. In the process they also helped to chisel a new agenda into the granite pillars of the American pantheon, one that helped to define the very nature of domestic political battles for decades to come.
This book gives us a graphic and detail introduction to these hearty, healthy and enthusiastic warriors; housewives arguing political strategy over coffee and Danish, young and well-educated defense engineers arriving to live out the American dream, impressionable young religious workers convinced that the only way to save the country and themselves from Hellfire and brimstone was to work fervently against the designs of the "godless democrats". From this well-detailed work we begin to see how the movement came into being, how it organized itself, what motivated the individuals as well as what their evolving political agenda became and why.
McGirr demonstrates that this was far from being a movement of marginalized or isolated extremists; on the contrary, from the beginning it was more accurately characterized as an intensely enthusiastic enterprise, one formed and energized by the social, economic, and political elite, people with both means and motive for becoming involved to better control their own futures as well as those of the country at large. In what is perhaps her best set of insights, she demonstrates how these young and innovative neo-conservatives established a new set of political philosophies and precepts, forged in a alloy of Christian fundamentalism, misguided nationalism, and more traditional true conservatism (i.e. an old-style libertine attitude).
This is a seminal work, an effort at true scholarship which dares to look at Rosemary's baby in the face by searching through the afterbirth of the not so immaculate birthing of modern neo-conservatism. What she discovers and demonstrates along the way may often upset our traditional notions of what happened and why, but it never fails to inform or edify us as to what transpired or why. This is an interesting and worthwhile book, and one that I can heartily recommend. Enjoy!
Book Description
Controversies in politics arise from many sources, but the conflicts that endure for generations or centuries show a remarkably consistent pattern. In this classic work, Thomas Sowell analyzes the two competing visions that shape our debates about the nature of reason, justice, equality, and power: the "constrained" vision, which sees human nature as unchanging and selfish, and the "unconstrained" vision, in which human nature is malleable and perfectible. He describes how these two radically opposed views have manifested themselves in the political controversies of the past two centuries, including such contemporary issues as welfare reform, social justice, and crime. Updated to include sweeping political changes since its first publication in 1987, this revised edition of A Conflict of Visions offers a convincing case that ethical and policy disputes circle around the disparity between both outlooks.
Customer Reviews:
The Results and the Means.......2007-09-24
For those who will read little more - Great Book! Read it.
Thomas Sowell writes newspaper columns that are often characterized as "conservative" although he would probably characterize himself as a "pragmatist". This book cannot be characterized as being conservative or liberal. Dr. Sowell goes out of his way to not disclose his personal views. The book is an analysis of Western thought over the last 250 years regarding the proper roll of society, expressed principally through government, in achieving a successful society. I have read several of Dr. Sowell's books and have purchased several more to read. Here he truly achieves an objective restatement of the thoughts of prominent minds over the centuries and not his personal opinions on the same subject.
He writes clearly and in a manner that is easy to read and yet he documents his work with so many footnotes that it is like reading a legal brief. The first thirty or forty pages were a slight struggle because he uses terms that were not familiar to me in their context. In particular it takes a while to understand what he means by the "constrained vision" and the "unconstrained vision". That is really what the book is about.
He quotes Adam Smith, Jeremy Bentham, John Stewart Mill, William Blackstone, Edmund Burke, Condorcet, Charles Darwin, Ronald Dworkin, Milton Friedman, John Kenneth Galbraith, William Godwin, Karl Marks, Friedrich Hayek, Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Paine, Richard Posner and many other legal, economic and philosophical scholars all in an attempt to dissect their thinking. He explains how they often reach opposite conclusions from many undisputed premises.
The philosophical, legal and political answer to the question of when "the end justifies the means" is a difficult one. It is easy to dogmatically answer the question but a few scenarios will quickly convince most sane people that there is really no universal answer. In describing the "constrained vision" Dr. Sowell quotes the writers who have emphasized the strict rule of law in achieving social stability. They tend to believe that the same rules should apply equally to all regardless of the outcome.
Others have followed "an unconstrained vision" which he describes with their own words as being that the end result is more important than the route society takes to get there. They believe it is necessary to bend or modify rules to achieve what they view as a desirable outcome.
This dichotomy in English and American common law resulted in both "Law Courts" and "Equity Courts" which administered law following the "constrained" vision in "Law" and "unconstrained" vision in "Equity" operating in parallel for hundreds of years although Dr. Sowell does not discuss this portion of our legal history.
Although he uses the words of radicals like Karl Marks who clearly believed any means justified the end he sought for the world, Dr. Sowell tries to dwell more with prominent thinkers who were closer to the middle of political and economic thought and why they thought as they did.
This book helped me better understand my own ambivalence about certain actions of our government, but it also convinced me that there are no universal answers to all of the problems that face society.
It is unfortunate that Dr. Sowell's reputation as a conservative will probably keep many people who consider themselves liberals from reading this book. They would profit by understanding the perspective of those people with whom they are in an eternal debate. Similarly some conservatives will assume that they have little to learn from a book from someone they think they know and who could not surprise them. They might be quite surprised to find that Dr. Sowell is very non-judgmental in this book and does not side with either vision.
I read this book after sending an email to Dr. Sowell to complement him on a newspaper article he had written about illegal immigration. His reply was that I had misunderstood his reasoning and that population was not the problem generating the migration of the poor from undeveloped areas. He suggested that I read portions of several of his books where he had elaborated on the issue. I have done so and still disagree with him on the population issue, but have found the writings on political philosophy of a writer whose work is woefully under appreciated. If you read "A conflict of Visions" or his book on the Economics and Politics of Race you will find it impossible to finish them without your opinions being forever altered in many respects.
Jim Fuqua
Well thought out, but nothing amazingly compelling........2007-08-15
It's hit or miss with Mr. Sowell, but that is the nature with most things. That aside, I think some of his books (such as Black Rednecks...) are compelling and useful debate-fuel, this one falls flat. Like anyone adhering to a specific political mindset (and he does - his brilliance is that he can conceal it well, though I would question his objectivity) he believes himself to be right - it's indicated in word usage whenever he touches on the "traditional" left/right debate, etc. The basic premise is, astoundingly, a reiteration of the title. Ideological Origins of Political Struggles? It sounds like a desperately pretentious college paper written by an undergrad looking for Political Science recognition. Imagine that politics - which, if you believe Hanna Arendt's thesis on the subject as outlined in On Revolution, is the process of human interaction and debate - has ideological origins? Astounding, truly. I could have never put that sort of logic together on my own. You'll have to pardon my sarcasm - the book is well written and thoughtful - but it told me something I already knew. I've seen a lot of Sowell's work in lists that are "vital" to every US citizen, but after reading this, my opinion of him is lessened somewhat.
Fantastic read, simple and thought-provoking.......2007-07-29
Some others have already commented on the basic premise of the book: the dichotomy between a constrained and unconstrained view of human nature and the logical conclusions and "visions" that arise based on that difference, so I will leave that summary aside.
This book is a fantastic read for many reasons: the writing style is incredibly clear and simple, and Sowell is adept at conveying his ideas in a manner that should be easily understandable to any reader. Sowell appears to show a commendable level of detachment in that there does not seem to be much of a personal value judgement placed on either of the two schools of vision (i.e. without reading other texts, the reader may not be able to distinguish whether Sowell places himself within the "constrained" or "unconstrained" vision).
Another reviewer commented that this dichotomy was rather simplistic, and I tend to agree. However, I see this as a strength rather than a weakness. Sowell gives a more general view of the derivation of certain viewpoints and the logical implications of a certain conception without getting distracted by every specific application. He does not explain every thought or viewpoint, but he provides an exceptionally clear framework through which you can view these thoughts and viewpoints on your own.
I found the quotes he used to be very illuminating, but I agree that they should be viewed in the proper light. The quotes are interesting as articulations of the "constrained" or "unconstrained" views in the particular context in which they are used, and should probably not be carried beyond that. For example, characterizing a particular decision of Holmes as arising from the constrained view is instructive and illustrative, though it could lead to the erroneous assumption that Holmes was a consitent examplar of the constrained vision. That said, the quotes were certainly not misleading if the reader confines them to their context and they tended to clarify and enhance illustrations of the application of these views.
I would highly recommend this book to anyone who has ever heard someone espouse a certain viewpoint and thought "How can they possibly believe that?" It provides a good basis for understanding how these differences arise.
This book should be required reading in any Western country.......2007-07-27
Why? Because it provides the clearest explanation I've ever read of the primal undercurrent that has driven Western thought along its binary path (collective vs individual) over the past 500 years.
My Book Review ..........2006-10-01
1. AUTHOR BACKGROUND & PROFILE
Before giving my personal perception and opinion about this book, I would like to start with get to know the profile and personality of Thomas Sowell. The reason being is to screen whether the author's use of language and evidence is more tend to reflect his individual's personal background OR is more tend to the fact than personal opinion that consists of no benefit of interpretation, inference, or value judgment (though I am aware that to some degree, bias or personal interpretations could not be avoided). Below is the information about Thomas Sowell's background and activity that taken from Wikipedia.
"Thomas Sowell was born in North Carolina on 30 June 1930, he is a prominent American economist, political writer, and conservative commentator. He is presently a senior fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution.
In North Carolina, where he was born, his encounters with white people were so limited that he didn't believe that "yellow" was a possible color for human hair (A Personal Odyssey), and later moved with his mother and siblings (his father died before he was born) to Harlem, New York City. There he attended the highly selective Stuyvesant High School, but dropped out when he moved out on his own at the age of 17 because of money problems and a deteriorating home environment. He soon after served in the US Marine Corps as a photographer and pistol instructor.
After his service, he earned an A.B. in Economics from Harvard College, an A.M. in Economics from Columbia University, and a Ph.D. in Economics from the University of Chicago, known for its Chicago school of economics.
Sowell is both a popular columnist and an academic economist. Sowell primarily writes on economic subjects, in which he generally advocates a free market approach tocapitalism. In addition to this Sowell opposes Marxism providing a critique that Marx never had a labor theory of value. Sowell also writes on racial topics and is a critic of affirmative action or positive discrimination" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Sowell)
From the information given above (see underline), he is more likely dominant on the side of constrained vision. For more detail about constrained and unconstrained vision will be discussed below.
2. ISSUES PRESENTED & OVERALL THESIS OF THE BOOK.
In overall, Sowell, as a deep thinker, is trying to represent his observations, study, research, and analysis regarding the deeper root cause of why two different big groups with its political opinions happen too often to be coincidence and it is too uncontrolled to be a plot. Explicitly, I would guess that he is talking about the conflict of vision between liberals and conservatives or socialists and libertarians.
The main keyword, as the root cause, to explain this fundamental political difference is about vision, that more likely also contains the aspect of fanaticism. The different vision among these two big groups is considered as the main resources of the conflict of logical consistency that Sowell identified in his preface that "we sacrifice for our visions and sometimes, if need be, face ruin rather than betray them". He also added that "Visions are very subjective, but well-constructed theories have clear implications, and facts can test and measure their objective validity" in the topic of the role of visions.
The discussions regarding vision will be grouped into two broad categories - the constrained vision and the unconstrained vision. Constrained vision based on theory of moral sentiments by Adam Smith that talk about moral limitations of man in general, and his egocentricity that can not be changed as inherent facts of life. This theory still leave any possibility to its extent into making the best moral and social benefits, BUT still within that constraint that unchangeable as Smith mentioned as both vain and pointless. As an economist, Smith's constrained vision is supplemented by Edmund Burke and Alexander Hamilton in political perspective about: "an infirmity inherent in the fundamental nature of things" or about "the imperfection of the institutor, Man". Another figures as Sowell's references for constrained vision are: Hayek, Hobbes, Milton Friedman, etc.
Unconstrained vision based on theory of Godwin's Enquiry Concerning Political Justice, a work as remarkable for its fate as its contents. He believed that the intention to benefit others as being "of the essence of virtue," and virtue in turn as being the road to human happiness. For Godwin, the real goal of incentive was the long-run development of a higher sense of social duty. In the issue of trade-offs VS solutions, in contrast with constrained vision's belief, the unconstrained vision believed that where moral improvement has no fixed limit, prudence is of a lower order of importance. Man is, in short, "perfectible"- meaning continually improvable rather than capable of actually reaching absolute perfection. In the issue of Social morality and social causation, human actions were dichotomized by Godwin into the beneficial and the harmful, and each of these in turn was dichotomized into the intentional and the unintentional. Another authors citing other than Godwin, are: Rousseau, Veblen, Galbraith, etc
3. WHAT IMPRESSED ME AND MADE ME HAPPY
* Sowell's statement of facts is more dominant than his own opinion that the accuracy can be verified by objective observation and wide usage of reference from both sides of the group of constrained vision and unconstrained vision
* The language style is more denotative than connotative. I like the way Sowell in his honesty respect the difference between this two political group with each of its own strengths and weaknesses. He mentioned that: "Virtually no one believes that man is 100 percent unconstrained and virtually no one believes that man is 100 percent constrained"
* His personality, background, or training or even political preference as a conservative prominently does not affect his intellectual reasoning and statement in this book. I am impressed with Sowell's statement regarding realization about these two fundamentally different assumptions about knowledge and reason with its applications into social process. He does not attack one of them, but instead, suggested on building two things on these two different foundations such as: 1). More awareness of the diversity of visions and their dynamics, and 2). Special attention to visions of equality, visions of justice which are central to the ideological conflicts of the age. (p. 98)
* He does not show any excessive critical tone or any bias of his statement to either one of the two different groups through his words. He is basically free of value of judgment, careless comparisons, and of propaganda in his analysis reasoning.
4. WHAT MADE ME UPSET
* Following Hayek, Sowell maintains that the constrained vision offers little scope for the application of moral theory.
* The constrained vision is more likely to give more pessimistic atmosphere regarding man's potentiality. They are rarely guided by morality, usually prejudiced and irrational, even usually takes every opportunity to take advantage of other people for personal gain. But perhaps more fundamentally, the constrained vision views these negative characteristics as nearly unalterable. As Sowell puts it, "The constrained vision is a tragic vision of the human condition." Mankind's problems flow necessarily from the irremovable flaws of the human character itself.
* I do not really agree about the statement made by Sowell regarding the gap between the actual and the potential is much smaller in constrained vision than in unconstrained vision.
Average customer rating:
- Calculations are only as good as your numbers
- Pants on fire?
- Accepted History & Chronology Must Be Changed.
- Very Interesting
- History as Science Fiction
|
History: Fiction or Science? (Chronology, No. 1)
Anatoly Fomenko
Manufacturer: Mithec
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
 Chinese
| Ethnic & National
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
Irish
| Ethnic & National
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
Japanese
| Ethnic & National
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
Women
| Specific Groups
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
Augustine, Saint
| ( A )
| People, A-Z
| Biographies & Memoirs
| Subjects
| Books
Doctors & Medicine
| Humor
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
Lawyers & Criminals
| Humor
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
Love, Sex & Marriage
| Humor
| Entertainment
| Subjects
| Books
Assyria, Babylonia & Sumer
| Ancient
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Early Civilization
| Ancient
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Ancient
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Historiography
| Historical Study
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| World
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Asian American
| United States
| World Literature
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
Asian American
| Poetry
| United States
| World Literature
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
French
| Erotica
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
Victorian
| Erotica
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
Epic
| Poetry
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
German
| Poetry
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
Russian
| Poetry
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
Spanish
| Poetry
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
Chinese
| Classics
| Literature & Fiction
| Subjects
| Books
Conspiracy Theories
| Current Events
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
War on Drugs
| Crime & Criminals
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
English (All)
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Arabic
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Armenian
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Czech
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Greek
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Hungarian
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Japanese
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Korean
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Norwegian
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Persian & Farsi
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Polish
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Portuguese
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Romanian
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Russian
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Swedish
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Turkish
| Foreign Language
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Science
| Dictionaries & Thesauruses
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Online Research
| Genealogy
| Reference
| Subjects
| Books
Native American
| Earth-Based Religions
| Religion & Spirituality
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
General
| History & Philosophy
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
History of Science
| History & Philosophy
| Science
| Subjects
| Books
Magic & Wizards
| Fantasy
| Science Fiction & Fantasy
| Subjects
| Books
Sailor Moon
| Popular Characters
| Children's Books
| Subjects
| Books
Pilates
| Exercise & Fitness
| Health, Mind & Body
| Subjects
| Books
History
| Fashion
| Arts & Photography
| Subjects
| Books
All Titles
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Similar Items:
-
History: Fiction or Science? Chronology 2 (Chronology)
-
History: Fiction or Science? Astronomical methods as applied to chronology. Ptolemy's Almagest. Chronology III
-
Discovering the Mysteries of Ancient America: Lost History And Legends, Unearthed And Explored
-
Before the Pharaohs: Egypt's Mysterious Prehistory
-
They Cast No Shadows: A Collection of Essays on the Illuminati, Revisionist History, and Suppressed Technologies
ASIN: 2913621058 |
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.
Book Description
Why did the United States develop political parties? How and why do party alignments change? Are the party-centered elections of the past better for democratic politics than the candidate-centered elections of the present? In this landmark book, John Aldrich goes beyond the clamor of arguments over whether American political parties are in resurgence or decline and undertakes a wholesale reexamination of the foundations of the American party system.
Surveying three critical episodes in the development of American political parties—from their formation in the 1790s to the Civil War—Aldrich shows how parties serve to combat three fundamental problems of democracy: how to regulate the number of people seeking public office; how to mobilize voters; and how to achieve and maintain the majorities needed to accomplish goals once in office. Overcoming these obstacles, argues Aldrich, is possible only with political parties.
Aldrich brings this innovative account up to date by looking at the profound changes in the character of political parties since World War II. In the 1960s, he shows, parties started to become candidate-centered organizations that are servants to their office seekers and officeholders. Aldrich argues that this development has revitalized parties, making them stronger, and more vital, with well-defined cleavages and highly effective governing ability.
Customer Reviews:
An Essential for Political Scientists.......2001-03-22
This book represents some of the best work on American political parties that political science has to offer. The empirical work covers the majority of party history, has impressive depth as well as breadth, and shows a remarkable sensitivity to historical and political context for a study based in rational choice theory. The theory is a bit lacking, however. Aldrich tries to explain parties as solutions to various collective action and cycling problems, but he does not explain how these solutions come about in the first place nor even how they really overcome the problems in any theoretically rigorous way. Still, it is a standard, and should be on any poli sci graduate student's shelf.
An Essential for Political Scientists.......2001-03-22
This book represents some of the best work on American political parties that political science has to offer. The empirical work covers the majority of party history, has impressive depth as well as breadth, and shows a remarkable sensitivity to historical and political context for a study based in rational choice theory. The theory is a bit lacking, however. Aldrich tries to explain parties as solutions to various collective action and cycling problems, but he does not explain how these solutions come about in the first place nor even how they really overcome the problems in any theoretically rigorous way. Still, it is a standard, and should be on any poli sci graduate student's shelf.
Average customer rating:
|
Between Revolution and the Ballot Box: The Origins of the Argentine Radical Party in the 1890s (Cambridge Latin American Studies)
Paula Alonso
Manufacturer: Cambridge University Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
Renaissance
| Schools, Periods & Styles
| Arts & Photography
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Central America
| Americas
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Argentina
| South America
| Americas
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| South America
| Americas
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Renaissance
| World
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Politics
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Political Parties
| Politics
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Practical Politics
| Politics
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Political Science
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Central & South America
| History
| Humanities
| New & Used Textbooks
| Stores
| Books
United States
| History
| Humanities
| New & Used Textbooks
| Stores
| Books
American Government
| Political Science
| Social Sciences
| New & Used Textbooks
| Stores
| Books
ASIN: 0521771854 |
Book Description
Founded in 1891, the Unión Cívica Radical, generally known as the Radical Party, is the oldest national political party in Argentina. As the strongest opposition party during the 1890s, a pivotal decade in the birth of Argentina's party system, the Radical Party effected a critical development in Argentine politics: it created a system of open confrontation and political competition. This study offers not merely a revised version of the party's story but also a new perspective on the politics of the nation as a whole.
Book Description
Once America's "arsenal of democracy," Detroit over the last fifty years has become the symbol of the American urban crisis. In this reappraisal of racial and economic inequality in modern America, Thomas Sugrue explains how Detroit and many other once prosperous industrial cities have become the sites of persistent racialized poverty. He challenges the conventional wisdom that urban decline is the product of the social programs and racial fissures of the 1960s. Probing beneath the veneer of 1950s prosperity and social consensus, Sugrue traces the rise of a new ghetto, solidified by changes in the urban economy and labor market and by racial and class segregation.
In this provocative revision of postwar American history, Sugrue finds cities already fiercely divided by race and devastated by the exodus of industries. He focuses on urban neighborhoods, where white working-class homeowners mobilized to prevent integration as blacks tried to move out of the crumbling and overcrowded inner city. Weaving together the history of workplaces, unions, civil rights groups, political organizations, and real estate agencies, Sugrue finds the roots of today's urban poverty in a hidden history of racial violence, discrimination, and deindustrialization that reshaped the American urban landscape after World War II.
In a new preface, Sugrue discusses the ongoing legacies of the postwar transformation of urban America and engages recent scholars who have joined in the reassessment of postwar urban, political, social, and African American history.
Customer Reviews:
Excellent history of urban decline.......2007-07-18
This was required reading for a graduate course in American history.
Thomas J. Sugrue attempts to prove that resistance to the civil rights movement had much deeper roots than the white backlash of the 1960s and 1970s. The author contends that resistance to the civil rights actually emerged as opposition to the New Deal coalition. Urban, anti-liberal, northern whites, as well as corporate leaders, unionists and politicians limited the possibilities of reform. Sugure maintains that northern urban white workers initially were the "backbone" of the New Deal coalition. And they found a common cause as the New Deal unified varied constituents in America. Yet, Sugure argues that underneath the seeming unity of the new coalition, were unresolved questions of racial identities. These unresolved issues began to fester, and were then exacerbated by liberal policies, specifically, public housing. And it is here that Sugure places the ''white rebellion" against the New Deal and liberalism, in the urban north.
From the 1940s until the 1960s, Detroit's racial geography changed dramatically. Sugure refers to Detroit as a "magnet' for African Americans after World War II, due to the lure of the defense and
automobile industries. When increasing numbers of African Americans began to search for housing in the predominantly white sections of the Detroit, racial tensions began to increase. Post World War II was described at "dark ages of Detroit." Riots and white flight occurred, coupled with a decline in the Detroit's post war economy. As layoffs mounted, and a national housing shortage, white homeowners feared foreclosure on their homes, as the economic ability to own home became increasingly precarious.
Sugure claims that race and housing became inseparable in the minds of white Detroiters. Basically, he contends that white homeowners feared that the influx of blacks would ruin their fragile economic security. Familiar racial fears and myths emerged; blacks were associated with crime and vice. White Detroiters even cited Jim Crow as a model for "successful race relations." In response to the "black invasion" and their increased economic stability, working class whites began to form neighborhood associations. Essentially, these associations were political organizations aimed at stymieing black constituents from moving into white neighborhoods. Sugure contends that these associations espoused the notions of values, protection, achievement and tradition, and were aimed at paternalistically protecting the neighborhood from vice-ridden blacks. They also served to foster a sense of "whiteness" among members (silent majority etc). These organizations corresponded with public officials and real estate agents (who played to both black and whites) to block African Americans from certain neighborhoods in various ways, including violence and intimidation.
By examining this, I believe the author uncovered a very prominent theme in American history and politics. What should be the level of government assistance in a capitalistic society? In this specific case, should the government have supplied urban housing for its poorer constituents, or should it have upheld the rights of privacy and association of its more affluent constituents? The affluent white constituents criticized the government when it tried to "force people" (blacks) down their throats," they cried for their freedoms of privacy and association, yet they called on that same "tyrannical" government to aid them in blocking the settlement of African Americans in their neighborhoods. Sugrue hits on this contradiction but does not pursue it. Which constituents should the government help and when should it help them? When is the government infringing on the rights on its citizens, and when is it fighting to uphold their rights? A fine line is drawn and illustrated by the struggle in post war Detroit.
I think the author is extremely misleading when he discusses the "black invasion" of Detroit. He presents blacks as a stifling, crime-ridden, vice infested monolith. I understand the aim of the article was to examine the position of the urban white class, but nonetheless, the quotes the author uses to describe migrating blacks is extremely derogatory, and in some cases, the author makes the white backlash almost seem justified. The black race is not a monolithic entity, no race is. I believe Sugrue should have at least written a few sentences dispelling the notion of the "black invasion" as a monolithic entity.
In summation, Sugure challenges the historian to probe deeper when trying to locate the backlash to the civil rights movement and liberalism. Instead of just viewing it narrowly as southern whites, Sugure contends that resistance developed among a very unlikely group, a group which initially formed the "backbone" of the New Deal coalition. Yet, as the housing shortage pressed, old racial tensions flared up and urban, working class whites banned together to resist liberalism and the "black invasion" in the 1940s and 1950s, a generation prior to the civil rights movement.
Recommended reading for anyone interested in American history, civil rights history.
Bad thesis but a story that still needs to be looked at.......2006-12-17
Sugrue takes a look at one of the crisis to hit not only Detroit but the rest of the country in his book on race and inequality. While there have been a lot of disturbing factors that have occurred during urban renewal Sugrue takes his text a little far. His flagrant bashing of urban planning gets old after the first two chapters and the book tends to drag on. This is an important issue that bears further studying but hopefully it will be done in a more academic way. This book does have all the information you need to start studying the subject and is a good way to begin looking at urban renewal.
How a Frightening Economic Powerhouse Became Just Plain Frightening.......2006-08-29
In 2005, Detroit looks more like a city awaiting reconstruction after a series of aerial bomber raids than the dynamo of manufacturing it was at the close of the Second World War. The combinations of white flight, race riots, massive deindustrialization by the automotive industry and the industries attached to it coupled with chronic unemployment and discrimination and racism in nearly every facet of life did a great a deal to make Detroit the wasteland it is today.
Thomas J. Sugrue's short study of Detroit, from the late 1930's through the 1970's is an attempt to understand the structure of Detroit's decline in racial, political, economic, and sometimes spatial terms. Through analysis of all these factors, Sugrue creates a cogent explanation of why so many formerly industrial cities of the United States are increasingly poorer, blacker, and more hopeless about their future with every passing year.
Sugrue sees the problems of Detroit stemming from a multiplicity of conscious and unconscious decisions made on the part of local and national government officials, corporate boards, union leadership, neighborhood associations, and self-interested individuals in day to day life. This is nothing new in the study of post-war urban and industrial decline. What is new, and rather eye opening, is that Sugrue traces the beginnings of Detroit's economic woes to be nearly co-terminus with the war and not after the disastrous riot of 1967. This analysis is incredibly important for understanding how a massive black underclass with only minimal connections to the job market came into existence, and expanded, in the 1950's.
By a combination of discrimination and bad luck, a large number of black workers missed out on the relatively high paying automotive jobs that allowed huge numbers of white blue collar workers to aspire to home ownership and middle class respectability. For a small number of black workers who were able to find auto jobs immediately before or during the war some measure of job security and the upward mobility. This was not the situation of most black workers though. Without the benefits of seniority, most often confined to jobs that were made redundant by automation or plant movements and closure, black workers were most likely to be the victims of the vagaries of Detroit's labor market. The vast body of black workers most often found themselves getting the hot end of the economic poker.
Sugrue's analysis of race and the meaning of postwar liberalism is the most succinct and cogent portion of the work. One of the great conundrums post-war Detroit politics with overwhelming presence of the militant and fighting union UAW-CIO could not prevent housing segregation from becoming so thoroughly entrenched. In recounting the wartime and post war fights over public housing, Sugrue points to the dual identities that white male union members had as rank and filers and bread winning home owners tenuously holding onto newly won middle class status and their own whiteness.
The part of Roman Catholic identity is something Sugrue finds to be very important to the territorial fights that occurred in residential Detroit, as well as the grass roots neighborhood organizing which occurred in white neighborhoods--both factors he identifies as being woefully under analyzed. Through Sugrue's descriptions of neighborhood attempts to stop racial turn over, or the pernicious practice of "block busting" by opportunistic real estate agents, the reader is privy to seeing grass roots mass mobilization which would have most likely have formally adopted segregation if there had been legal means to do so. The housing battles of the forties and fifties were a grim precursor of white working class abandonment of the city proper and savage and complicated forms of inequalities that plague the rust belt today.
One of the most interesting portions of Sugrue's work is his analysis of how the automotive industry, in line with a great many other industries the country over, left the cities in the Northeast, Middle Atlantic and Midwest portions of the country--cities whose advantages laid in their location vis-à-vis lakes, rivers, or railway hubs. In line with Cold War planning which expected major metropolitan areas to be first strike targets by the Soviets, and because of the massive highway system built during the Eisenhower administration, it became possible for industry to disperse over greater distances than ever before. Facing the prospect of negotiating with militant unions in urban areas with powerful allies in public offices at every, much of the auto industry was more than happy to relocate to areas where unions were either weak or simply not organized--after 1947 the Taft-Hartley act made this much simpler as even Southern states with strong union presence enacted "right to work" legislation.
Mixing national security rationales with a great deal of pecuniary interest, Sugrue recounts how huge sections of the automotive industry simply left Detroit without the slightest concern for what their departure would mean for the future of the city. Sugure shows how the UAW and other Detroit area unions were possibly lost a golden opportunity to redefine corporate responsibility when they did not oppose shareholder and corporate prerogatives about the free movement of property anywhere they pleased. Although any union would have had a difficult time attempting to halt the movement of corporate property from one area of the country, no international union gave their support to stopping what the militant members of Detroit's UAW Local 600 called the "Runaway Shop," and we call deindustrialization. Some restrictions on the free flow of corporate property may have insured that Detroit's colossal unemployment of the late twentieth century would not be so colossal and seemingly intractable.
The Origin of the Urban Crisis is possibly the most solid book on why so many areas of the United States sit in utter ruin today. The analysis of Detroit he gives can be extended de-industrialized cities in every region of the country with their largely black and poor inner cities and their outlying more prosperous suburbs.
a grad student.......2005-11-30
Sugrue's thesis in this book is that endemic racism (along with economic decline) is responsible for Detroit being largely Black, poor and greatly in decline. He's a revisionist historian who wants to refute older narratives that Detroit is corrupt (because all the city governments after 1967 have been run by Democrats and Blacks). Instead he attempts to refute that by showing the deeply ingrained racism in the community.
Sugrue's attempt at political polemics is bad history. He fails to mention the obvious: Detroit is over-taxed and run by incompetent, corrupt politicians. It's public unions have caused government workers to be some of the highest paid in the country with little to show for it. This is thanks to former-Mayor Young who instituted an arbitration law. To pay for this, the city's taxes are exorbitant which pushes businesses further out. Because of this, Detroit never found other businesses to take the place of the declining auto-industry which has inflated pay for its jobs in the first place.
Of the past three mayors, two have been highly corrupt. Archer who was mayor in the '90s, after a distinguished career in the state Supreme Court, tried to reform the city but was kicked out of office. Young and the current mayor, Kilpatrick, are very corrupt. Just do a google news search of "Kwame Kilpatrick" and "corrupt" and you'll see the various scandals that have plagued him. Other than stealing city funds for himself and his family he turned down a $200,000,000 private gift to the city for charter schools because the teacher's unions were against it. Young, mayor in the '70s and '80s, made room for a GM plant by confiscating private land through eminent domain. Few could understand why he buldozed tax producing land when he could have given over acres of abandoned property, except that the residents of that neighborhood voted overwhelmingly against him.
Yes, white people with means fled Detroit for the suburbs. But Sugrue glosses over that fact that middle class Black residents left as soon as the could too. Southfield, a surburb township, is overwhelming Black and middle class, populated by those who couldn't stand the crime and corruption of Detroit.
Far from being an example of a typical post-industrial American City, Detroit is the exception. It should be held up as a prime example of how not to run a city. That being said, unless you've been assigned this book, don't read it. Sugrue gives excuses and vague general reasons (aka racism) for Detroit's decline when the real problems are staring him in the face
Well researched, well written.......2004-01-03
The Detroit metropolitan area today is arguably the most racially segregated region in the United States, with a primarily African-American, largely abandoned and dilapidated urban center surrounded by layers of primarily white, affluent suburbs. This book is essential reading for anyone who lives in southeast Michigan as well as other cities that have similar histories of industrialization, urban decline and concentrated poverty such as Cleveland, Gary, Philadelphia, and South Chicago.
Thomas Sugrue provides a thoughtful, well-researched, and fascinating analysis of systematic racial inequality in Detroit during the post World War II automotive industry boom of the 1940s through deindustrialization and "white flight", and ending with the catastrophic race riots of 1967. Sugrue avoids the current, common oversimplifications of blaming Detroit's urban crisis on the '67 riots or Mayor Colman Young by weaving together a complex story of human behaviors, fears, and incentive structures backed by data, references, and personal accounts: "By the time Young was inaugurated, the forces of economic decay and racial animosity were far too powerful for a single elected official to stem."
Sugrue's analysis provides insight to understand major groups of stakeholders and their interactions: Workers flocked from the southern states to Detroit seeking relatively high-paying automotive jobs. In the free market, resulting housing shortages allowed landlords to divide properties into tiny apartments and charge premium prices, protecting their investments by being selective in their choice of "low risk" white tenants. Bankers also preferred "low risk" clients, resulting in unequal access to funds. White home owners, wanting to protect their families and financial investment, resisted neighborhood integration to avoid declining property values and perceived dangers. Real estate agents capitalized on fears of mixed neighborhoods by buying property from fleeing whites at junk prices and selling immediately to blacks at premium prices. Labor unions protected seniority, which unequally benefited whites, and tended to compromise on racial issues in order to gain bargaining ground. Store owners avoided hiring black workers, wishing to avoid offending or frightening mostly white, mostly female, customers. Suburban tax incentives and new technology made large, flat assembly plants more efficient than the old multi-story plants. This drove automakers away from Detroit, where the rail and riverside real estate was largely developed, and contributed to unemployment and race and class polarization.
Racial inequality in Detroit stems from complex social systems of incentives and categorical isolation caused by systematic inequality in access to employment, housing, networking and other resources. Recognizing the complexity of this social system helps the reader understand how individuals who fail to actively oppose racism actually support it, and why official "race-blind" policies fail to stop the polarization caused by chain-reactions of systematic, historic, self-reinforcing racial inequalities and the ruthless self-interest of capitalist culture.
Book Description
The American Disease is a classic study of the development of drug laws in the United States. Supporting the theory that Americans' attitudes toward drugs have followed a cyclic pattern of tolerance and restraint, author David F. Musto examines the relationz between public outcry and the creation of prohibitive drug laws from the end of the Civil War up to the present. Originally published in 1973, and then in an expanded edition in 1987, this third edition contains a new chapter and preface that both address the renewed debate on policy and drug legislation from the end of the Reagan administration to the current Clinton administration. Here, Musto thoroughly investigates how our nation has dealt with such issues as the controversies over prevention programs and mandatory minimum sentencing, the catastrophe of the crack epidemic, the fear of a heroin revival, and the continued debate over the legalization of marijuana.
Customer Reviews:
Musto is the man.......2003-12-02
This book is incredible. Musto is the man. I would know. He's my professor. The book is incredibly interesting, especially if you are unfamiliar with the history of drugs, and it is absolutely packed with info. I can't say enough about how insanely intelligent this man is and that he is by far the top expert in the field.
Basic for Understanding Drug Problems in the USA.......2001-07-31
This is the book on the history of drug policy in the USA. Musto details the whole history of the regulation of addictive from the beginning of the 20th century to the years of the Clinton administration. There is particular emphasis on Federal drug policy. Musto shows well how drug policy has oscillated between relative tolerance and stringent efforts to crackdown on the use of potentially addictive drugs. Musto is particularly good at demonstrating how apparently extrinsic factors influenced strongly Federal response to narcotic regulation. Fears of Federal regulation by physicians, aspects of Progressive era reformist zeal, even foreign policy considerations are shown to be important influences on Federal drug policy. While this is not a social history of drug use, Musto is careful to show how attempts at regulation were often influenced by misperceptions of the extent of drug abuse. There are some surprising aspects to Musto's story. Federal regulation of narcotics, backed by important Supreme Court decisions, was an early example of expansive Federal power superceding state and local regulation. One of Musto's most interesting observations is the considerable extent to which racist fears of Chinese immigrants, Mexican migrants, and African-Americans influenced early efforts to control narcotics tightly. Readers will find this book very informative with a strong sense of deja vu; contemporary debates about drug policy are similar in many ways to debates occurring early in the 20th century. This fact illustrates the difficuly developing sensible and effective policies towards drugs with addictive potential.
him.......2000-01-18
i didn't actually read the book, but david musto is a cool dud
Book Description
Origins of the Cold War, Third Edition covers the formative years of the extraordinary struggle between the Soviet Union and the United States, explaining how the cold war originated and developed. It sets out the various different explanations for the Cold War and unravels some of the complex issues which gave rise to it. Explores several questions, including, who was responsible for the Cold War, was it inevitable or could the whole episode have been avoided, and was Stalin genuinely interested in a post-war agreement? Revised, updated and expanded, this new edition in the Seminar Studies in History Series incorporates the most recent scholarship, theories and newly released information to provide an invaluable introduction. For readers interested in the World since 1945 and International relations during the Cold War period.
Book Description
This first book of the sixth volume centers on the Revolutionary and Constitutional eras in early American history, while also carrying the story ahead into the early 19th century. How did the American founders adapt and utilize European thought in their political and legal ideas on sovereignty, state, and legislation? Because of the seismic impact of European thought (and classical traditions) on America's foremost founders, it should come as no surprise that some of the most basic documents in the emergent new Republic were significantly influenced by European writings. Subsequent studies will take up the same basic themes in American thought and events from the mid-19th century to the present period. The common denominator of legislation is seen to underlie their concepts of sovereignty and the state across a diverse range of "isms" such as utilitarianism, positivism, idealism, socialism, and nationalism, in the 19th century and in related "neo" and "anti-neo" forms in the 20th century. The organization and classification of these and other issues is on the whole novel and comprehensive. As various reviewers have indicated, nothing of this magnitude on the subjects at hand has ever before been attempted.
Book Description
This is a group biography of the founders of the CIA. It deals with their Wall-Street origins and points up their methods and results.
Customer Reviews:
Masterful stuff.......2007-05-03
I first consulted THE OLD BOYS some years ago, in connection with some tricky wartime research for the investigative unit of the CBC. Since then, I've re-read it---twice. THE OLD BOYS is a book that rewards rereading, in no small way because it's authoritative, painstakingly researched, and---no mean thing in history as potentially arcane as this---richly amusing. Not only can Hersh engrave Aubreyesque portraits of players major and minor with a novelist's eye but his depth of psychological insight into such complex characters as the Dulles brothers, not to mention the men who carry the OSS into the CIA of more modern times, like Helms and Casey, is, bluntly, masterful. Those who knock this book clearly haven't heard what a freshly retired Director of Operations at the CIA has said on the record about THE OLD BOYS: it's a masterpiece he gives copies of to the uninitiated every Christmas. Buy it. Pass it on. And, while you're at it, get a copy of BOBBY AND EDGAR, Hersh's new book on the long war between Bobby Kennedy and J Edgar Hoover, with Joe Kennedy Sr lurking behind the arras...
Bitterness & hatred........2007-04-17
While Burton Hersh's work does contain some interesting facts, as a history it is little more than the author's opinions. Because of his constant vitriolic assault on the character of the people he writes about, the read is tedious at best. This book reveals more about Mr. Hersh's bitterness and hatred toward the early American intelligence community than it does about the history of the CIA. No joy.
point of view.......2006-11-30
This work by Mr. Hersh is a mind boggeling attempt at history. Unfortunately, I think the reader should do some follow up research. His "facts", by and large are opinionated, skewed and, therefore, in error. He seems to suffer from the typical Harvard elitism and does an injustice to the times about which he writes. His conclusions, for instance those concerning "A Man Called Intrepid", are only those of a few self annointed intellectuals who try to rewrite history. I know, I was there. I'm 86 years old.
The Old Boys.......2002-07-01
The trouble with Burton Hersh is that he never bothered to read what he wrote. If he had he'd have realized that it is uncomprehensible. This is partly due to the fact that he is a functional illiterate. He doesn't have a basic understanding of what a sentence is.He also has a very poor choice of words. He uses words that he obviously does not know what they mean.
Secondly I am old enough to know that most of his "information" is sheer hogwash. It's either badly distorted or false. It's a figment of his imagination. I am 76 and fought in World War II and knew some of those he writes about. They are mostly bland liveless bureaucrats. Not the bizarre creatures he depicts. I have suffered through 83 pages and can sight any number of lies and distortions.
essential for anyone interested in US intell history.......2001-12-05
This is a remarkable book by a remarkable writer. It caused howls of protest from the CIA and US media elite when first published, but there is no doubt that Hersh has the goods: the book is now on the CIA reading list!
Hersh himself clearly did vast independent primary research and interview work for the book. His anatomy of the Dulles brothers, Frank Wisner, Wild Bill Donovan, Bill Casey,and the creepy but omnipresent Carmel Offie is superb. Wall Street staffed the US intelligence elite, in 1941 as in 2001---and oil and high finance were and still are that world's elixir. Lastly, the index and notes are a boon to future researchers. [Interestingly, none of the Dulles-adoring biographies published of late cites any of Hersh's work. Hmmmm.]
Hersh has a novelist's skill in bringing this cast of real characters to life: the descriptions are unforgettable, but the research, especially to me, a fellow digger in contemporary intelligence history, is awe-inspiring. Hersh has not written a book predicated on others' books: there is a treasure trove here of original research, especially in relation to the Wall Street connections to Nazi business and, critically, to the SAFEHAVEN investigation, rediscovery of which of course broke the Holocaust gold story some years back.
But most of all, this book is hugely entertaining and not a little amusing, told in a confidingly baroque language, it's tru
Making a New Deal: Industrial Workers in Chicago, 1919-1939
A Consumers' Republic: The Politics of Mass Consumption in Postwar America
Homeward Bound: American Families in the Cold War Era
A Fierce Discontent: The Rise and Fall of the Progressive Movement in America, 1870-1920
Cold War Civil Rights: Race and the Image of American Democracy (Politics and Society in Twentieth Century America)
