Book Description
General Smedley Butler's frank book shows how American war efforts were animated by big-business interests. This extraordinary argument against war by an unexpected proponent is relevant now more than ever.
Customer Reviews:
A truth bullet right in the forehead.......2007-09-03
The word "classic", like other words in the abused English language, is regularly misused. It is not misused in describing this book. And at the pittance required to buy this edition, it can also be described as the biggest bargain you will encounter all year. To call the book an "anti-war" classic is not as accurate as it might be, however, because Gen. Butler envisions the need for a standing army and navy to defend the nation. He is merely horrified at these forces being sent to fight other people's wars. Especially at the cost of all wars.
Gen. Butler writes between the two World Wars. Having earned an estimable reputation among the troops he led, he proceeded not to desert them after the war was over. He sided with the bonus marchers who built "Hooverville", and then he finished some thoughts he had been having about the role of the United States Marine Corps in a number of lesser American military adventures. He then wrote this pamphlet to explain why the country needed to rid itself of the conmen who keep taking it to foreign wars.
The work is divided into five sections:
1. War Is A Racket!
2. Who Makes the Profits?
3. Who Pays the Bills?
4. How to Smash This Racket!
5. To Hell with War!
As another reviewer has noted, Gen. Butler rendered even greater service to his country after leaving the Marines than while serving actively. In prose that is utterly direct and unadorned, he outlines the nature of war, the identities and profit margins of the criminals, the role of the propagandizing press, and the victims of the fiscal enterprise of war. He then suggests a practical method for removing the profit from the business of war: simply conscript every owner, manager and employee of the war-making industries into the war effort, 30 days before the troops are called up, at the same pay rate as the enlisted man. During WWI, that was $30.00 per month. It is an idea so simple and brilliant that it will never be tried, unless, of course, the entire population suddenly has the wool pulled from its eyes, and passes the requisite law. As a test of industrial patriotism, this idea has no peers.
(My idea for educating the masses would be to make every thirteen-year-old boy and girl read this book, pass an exam on it, and then administer the book and the exam to their parents. This would be an annual event, and a general election would be held as soon as the parents had passed their exams.)
It is depressing to read this book in 2007, note that it was written in 1935, and reflect that nothing has changed. It is also heartening to realize that the solution to the problem of war is to convey the meaning of one four-word sentence to the masses. That sentence is the title of this book. Even in a time of sinking literacy levels and short attention spans, I can imagine no more worthy project for our country.
A must read for American Citizens.......2007-07-25
While I don't agree with all of Butler's recommendations (among which is, never fight a war), many of his recommendations are great. His documentation of the Facist plot he exposed is very important. (BTW: Prescott Bush was a co-conspirator in these coup-plans, as documented by the BBC.)
Facism was a threat then, and given the growing corporatism in the USA, a threat now.
People never learn........2007-07-23
This small book is timeless in its message. Written before WW2, it applies to much of what has happened since. As Butler wrote, " Why don't those damned oil companies fly their own flags on their personal property - maybe a flag with a gas pump on it." Two Iraq wars prove Butler's prescience.
Read this now.......2007-05-14
One of the most important books ever written by an American military figure, General Butler explains why war is a crime fought for the financial gain of a tiny class of society. This is extremely relevant for all Americans trying struggling to end wars of conquest and profit.
What Seems Is Not Reality - Read This Pamphlet.......2007-04-24
I am torn in giving this small collection a rating. In terms of importance, I would give this booklet five stars. In terms of writing style, it would earn one star. Nevertheless, this is the kind of book you must read, for it will shatter your illusions, should you have them, about the nature of American military might. These words, from pen of the most decorated American general, Brigadier General Smedley Butler, form a well supported middle finger in the face of American hegemony and neo-colonialism.
From a literary standpoint, this is not a book. It is a collection of short essays, written as you would expect a brash general to write. "War is a Racket" is but one of a several essays in this short book. In addition to its namesake, the booklet also contains an arguments against American intervention in World War II, and a photo essay of the horrors of war.
I would recommend this booklet to anyone going off to fight yet another war based on lies and secretly intended for the profit of the ruling class. Parents, read this before considering allowing your child to join forces of evil.
Average customer rating:
- Award-Winner, Mind-Altering Information, Useful, Scholarly
- Why don't you own this book?!!
|
Faith-Based Diplomacy: Trumping Realpolitik
Manufacturer: Oxford University Press, USA
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
 War & Peace
| Current Events
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Relations
| International
| Politics
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Political Science
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Religion & Spirituality
| Subjects
| Books
Comparative Religion
| Religious Studies
| Religion & Spirituality
| Subjects
| Books
Sociology
| Religious Studies
| Religion & Spirituality
| Subjects
| Books
All Titles
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Nonfiction
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Religion & Spirituality
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Similar Items:
-
Religion, The Missing Dimension of Statecraft
-
Between Eden and Armageddon: The Future of World Religions, Violence, and Peacemaking
-
Holy War, Holy Peace: How Religion Can Bring Peace to the Middle East
-
Interfaith Dialogue and Peacebuilding
-
The Ambivalence of the Sacred: Religion, Violence, and Reconciliation (Carnegie Commission on Preventing Deadly Conflict)
ASIN: 0195160894 |
Book Description
For most of the twentieth century, the most critical concerns of national security have been balance of power politics and the global arms race. The attacks of September 11, 2001 and the motives behind them, however, demand a radical break with this tradition. If the United States is to prevail in its long-term contest with extremist Islam, it will need to re-examine old assumptions, expand the scope of its thinking to include religion and other "irrational" factors, and be willing to depart from past practice. A purely military response in reaction to such attacks will simply not suffice. What will be required is a long-term strategy of cultural engagement, backed by a deeper understanding of how others view the world and what is important to them. In non-Western cultures, religion is a primary motivation for political actions. Historically dismissed by Western policymakers as a divisive influence, religion in fact has significant potential for overcoming the obstacles that lead to paralysis and stalemate. The incorporation of religion as part of the solution to such problems is as simple as it is profound. It is long overdue. This book looks at five intractable conflicts and explores the possibility of drawing on religion as a force for peace. It builds upon the insights of Religion, the Missing Dimension of Statecraft (OUP,1994)--which examined the role that religious or spiritual factors can play in preventing or resolving conflict--while achieving social change based on justice and reconciliation. The world-class authors writing in this volume suggest how the peacemaking tenets of five major world religions can be strategically applied in ongoing conflicts in which those religions are involved. Finally, the commonalities and differences between these religions are examined with an eye toward further applications in peacemaking and conflict resolution.
Customer Reviews:
Award-Winner, Mind-Altering Information, Useful, Scholarly.......2004-04-30
Let's start with the award. I was so impressed with this book that it received one of the ten Golden Candle Awards for most constructive and innovative work in the Open Source Intelligence (OSINT) field. It represents the second book in a body of work that may eventually be worthy of a Nobel Peace Prize. The citation reads:
To Dr. Douglas M. Johnston, president and founder of the International Center for Religion and Diplomacy, for his path-finding efforts with regard to Preventive Diplomacy as well as Religion and Conflict Resolution. Among his many works, two stand out for defining a critical missing element in modern diplomacy: Religion, the Missing Dimension of Statecraft (Oxford University Press, 1994), and Faith-based Diplomacy: Trumping Realpolitik (Oxford University Press, 2003). He has restored the proper meaning of faith qua earnestness instead of faith qua zealotry, and this is a contribution of great importance.
With a foreword by no less than The Honorable Lee H. Hamilton, today a leader of the 9-11 Commission, the book drives a stake in the heart of secular "objective" negotiation and focuses on how faith (not zealotry, but earnest faith) can alter the spiral of violence in such places as Sudan, Kashmir, and the Middle East.
The editor and contributing author has assembled a multi-national and multi-religion cast of experts whose work in the aggregate completely supports the premise of the book: that the 21st Century will be about religion instead of ideology, and that what hopes we might have for reconciling "irreconcilable differences" lie in the balanced integration of religious dialog and conflict prevention, rather than in pre-emptive military action and unilateralist bullying.
I found two core concepts especially relevant to national security: the first is that we need an Office of Religious and Cultural Intelligence within the Central Intelligence Agency, and we need, as the authors suggest, to put religious attaches into every Embassy. The second, and this is a truly core concept, is "The price of freedom is cultural engagement--taking the time to learn how others view the world, to understand what is important to them, and to determine what can realistically be done to help them realize their legitimate aspirations."
This is a brilliant, scholarly, practical, world-changing book. It joins Max Manwaring's various books, but especially "The Search for Security," Joe Nye's earlier books on understanding the world and engaging the world with soft power, and George Soros as well as the several other books on my standard national security reading list. The conclusion of the book lists a number of means by which religion can impact on diplomacy and state-craft, and I for one have become a believer--this book completely altered my perspective on the role of religion as a peacemaker of substance and day-to-day practicality.
Why don't you own this book?!!.......2003-03-12
Faith-based Diplomacy, Trumping Realpolitik offers a fresh perspective on how to deal with religious militancy. It goes beyond traditional notions of power politics to get at the heart and soul of how to deal with religious terrorism, thus superseding in effectiveness Washington-centric notions of guns and missiles. The creativity of the authors offers much grist for policymakers to "think outside the box" of how traditional power politics are conducted and offers new insights into the process of conflict transformation. A very interesting, insightful, and helpful book for the politician, religious leader and educated layperson.
Book Description
War is now an important part of development discourse. Aid agencies have become involved in humanitarian assistance, conflict resolution and the social reconstruction of war-torn societies. This deeply thoughtful book explores the growing merger of development and security. Its author unravels the nature of the new wars - in Africa, the Balkans, Central Asia - and the response of the international community, in particular the new systems of global governance that are emerging as a result.
The breakdown of order is seen as symptomatic of long-term social processes: economic crisis, the social exclusion of wide strata of populations and internal conflict. Instead of the historic goals of modernity, development to reduce inequality, and a central role for the state, we have a neo-medieval situation in which overlapping and fragmented sovereignties confront an increasingly weakened central authority.
The consequences, as Duffield shows, are far-reaching. Development now focuses primarily on the shortcomings of structures within the South. Aid is privatized. A rising level of violence and misery are accepted as normal, and new forms of humanitarian aid intervention, far from solving the problem, accommodate and coexist with this instability and inequality. Pessimistic perhaps, but this book is profound in its insights and pregnant with policy implications.
Customer Reviews:
A Must for Serious Thinkers of International Affairs.......2007-01-08
Professor Mark Duffield has done the near impossible, he has given a detailed description and explanation of one of the most complex assemblages ever devised: the post-Cold War, free market/free trade-driven international order. In excruciating detail, professor Duffield explains how the WTO-structured global economic system - what we think of as "globalization" - works to: attenuate state power, deregulate and disrupt traditional economies, create ever-more "complex and opaque forms of transaction and ownership," and essentially restructures international governing bodies to fit into this new world system. Professor Duffield manages to do this with no discernible political "spin." His gaze is unremitting and clear-eyed whether it falls on corrupt third-world governments, U.N. and NGO developmental types, western donor nations, politicians of all stripes, or African and Afghani warlords.
If one wants to understand the underlying forces driving the conflicts extant in today's world and the global community's responses to these crises, there is no better place to start than with professor Duffield's "Global Governance and the New Wars."
Amazon.com
Whether fought for commercial or strategic concessions or even moral reasons, whether little-known or well-publicized, America's "small wars"--against, say, the Barbary pirates and the rebellious Boxers--played a large part in the development of what historian Max Boot does not hesitate to call an American empire. All arguments to the contrary, Boot insists, America has never been an isolationist power; it has "been involved in other countries' internal affairs since at least 1805," when American marines landed on the shores of Tripoli, and it has "never confined the use of force to those situations that meet the narrow definition of American interests preferred by realpolitikers and isolationists." Closely examining the record of those small wars, which far outnumber major conflicts, Boot argues that Americans have a historic duty to deliver foreign nations from aggression, even to intervene in civil wars abroad, especially if the product is greater freedom--for, he writes, "a world of liberal democracies would be a world much more amenable to American interests than any conceivable alternative." Readers may take issue with some of Boot's conclusions, but they merit wide discussion, especially in a time when small--and perhaps large--wars are looming. Boot's book is thus timely, and most instructive. --Gregory McNamee
Book Description
Reviewed and debated everywhere, this book has become a key volume in the case for a new policy of interventionism.
America's "small wars," "imperial wars," or, as the Pentagon now terms them, "low-intensity conflicts," have played an essential but little-appreciated role in its growth as a world power. Beginning with Jefferson's expedition against the Barbary Pirates, Max Boot tells the exciting stories of our sometimes minor but often bloody landings in Samoa, the Philippines, China, Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, Mexico, Russia, and elsewhere. Along the way he sketches colorful portraits of little-known military heroes such as Stephen Decatur, "Fighting Fred" Funston, and Smedley Butler.
From 1800 to the present day, such undeclared wars have made up the vast majority of our military engagements. Yet the military has often resisted preparing itself for small wars, preferring instead to train for big conflicts that seldom come. Boot re-examines the tragedy of Vietnam through a "small war" prism. He concludes with a devastating critique of the Powell Doctrine and a convincing argument that the armed forces must reorient themselves to better handle small-war missions, because such clashes are an inevitable result of America's far-flung imperial responsibilities.
Customer Reviews:
a must read for these times.......2007-09-28
One of the best books I have read about our (USA) involvement in a surprising amount of insurections and affairs that required more than the State Departments attention.
A seductive message, and yet it is wrong..........2007-07-29
I first read this book several years back, as a young Sergeant. When I first read it, the book seemed to make a lot of good points, and its logic seemed almost ironclad. After having gotten a bit older and a bit wiser, and having been taught at least a few formal critical thinking techniques, I now believe that Mr. Boot's book is pretty much wrong from cover to cover. He basically tells us how great and wonderful our military interventions have been to the world (and to our security), but when you start to look more deeply at his examples (Philipines, Haiti, etcetera) you start to believe that the truth is a lot more complex than he makes it seem.
I am no pacifist, and in many cases our intervention may truely have been unavoidable or have improved things, but the case he makes is almost entirely one sided. Look no further than his analysis of Smedley Butler's change of heart. *sarcasm* Obviously the man simply didn't see "the big picture". After all, a General with decades of experience in the very campaigns Boot cheerleads couldn't possibly be at least somewhat right in his criticisms. */end sarcasm*
I give it two stars because Mr. Boot is a good writer, and he knows how to make his argument seem irrefutable, even when they are very debatable. Just my 2 cents.
The perfect mix of analysis, narrative and good writing.......2007-06-18
The more history I read, the more I admire historians. Writing good history is not easy. You can be overly academic and the book becomes dry and boring, or if one just strings together interesting stories the book lacks intellectual weight.
The Savage Wars of Peace hits the mark. It finds new ways to tell old stories in a new light. Most military history focuses on the big wars and big battles (think D-day and Gettysburg). Many prominent historians have made careers stating the American way of war is based on mass and attrition.
Max Boot takes a different angle. Those "small wars" that pop up in-between the big wars are just as vital to U.S. military history as the big wars. As America looks toward the future of warfare it is looking less like Battle of the Bulge and more like numerous occupations of Haiti. The book carefully moves though American's small wars and demonstrates how similar they are and how regular, irregular warfare really is. The book is very pro-Marine Corps, but they are the ones who fought most of America's small wars and published the now famous "Small Wars Manual" in the late 1930s.
The book was written before the U.S. intervention into Iraq, but it does predict many of its problems. The first half of the book is stronger than the last half, and the last chapter sort of rambles, but it is by far the best military history book I have read this year. Well worth your time.
War is the last stage of diplomacy but small wars come first.......2007-04-23
When I first grabbed Boot's book, I was dreading yet another look at conflicts and was stopped at the first page. Boot's knowledge and depth in the small intensity conflicts of the US from Tripoli to the Banana wars of the 80's, is quite astonishing. Having been an avid reader of military history literature, I was caught surprised to learn something new at nearly every page.
I would offer that most readers need to have a good understanding of the main (or popular) opinion of the times the various events Boot refers to occur. This will help to expand the understanding gained by the reader. However, anyone with an interest in the lesser known acts of "diplomacy" engaged by the US government is well advised to add this book to thier collection.
I did find a certain sense of bias toward the Marine Corps (given that the USMC's focus has been predominantly centered on low-intensity conflicts, this is almost unavoidable). Still, being a former Marine, the read was quite motivational as well.
Given the topics of todays counterinsurgency (COIN) activites, this book will add depth and clarity to small unit leaders as well as policy-makers into the challenges the US faces in the near future. Like it has been said time and again, a firm understanding in the past will shed enlightenment of the future.
A must read.
While not supporting or defending the tactics of guerrilla forces of the past, to gain a first-hand dimension of COIN, consider reading Moshe Dayan: Story of my life. Its a bit older and obviously bias toward what may be considered unpopular (or even deploarable) actions of a nation in engaging in diplommatic conflict, but worth the read nontheless.
A good overview..........2007-02-07
Max Boot's book does a service in covering some lesser known aspects of US military history. The general history of small scale landings/naval activity to protect American citizens and trade is well known to many but some of the more obscure events like unofficial American attempts to control some western Pacific islands make interesting reading. This book covers events from the time of national birth to post Gulf War I.
Mr. Boot's writing style does not bore a reader but gives sufficent detail to elevate the book above a popular history. Especially enlightening are the chapters on the history of US military presense in China, the successful(during the actual occupations)efforts in the Caribbean and Central America and the Philipines.
The ending chapter on the lasting effects of these efforts and the likelihood of future efforts is maybe even more interesting. Agree or not with him, Mr Boot lays out some good arguments for most of these efforts to have been beneficial to both the Americans and the localities concerned. His points on Vietnam while not new, are concise and quite valid. The chapter dealing with the myths concerning US military incursions such as "need for exit strategies", "need for declarations of war", etc are excellent. His points on the current emphasis on force protection/casuality minimization are thought provoking also.
My problems with the book were actually minor. This book is unabashedly pro USMC, given the fact that a majority of the small actions were Marine not Army, this makes sense but to a retired Army infantryman...well its annoying (sorry)
One excellent and overriding point he makes however is this. The Armed Forces have overwhelmingly succeeded in their missions if allowed to do so, generally only homefront political interference, not their erstwhile enemies caused failure. With Iraq raging and an almost as hot a war being waged on the home front on the issue, history might be worth looking at.
Book Description
The United States has been engaged in what the great historian Charles A. Beard called "perpetual war for perpetual peace." The Federation of American Scientists has cataloged nearly 200 military incursions since 1945 in which the United States has been the aggressor. In a series of penetrating and alarming essays, whose centerpiece is a commentary on the events of September 11, 2001 (deemed too controversial to publish in this country until now) Gore Vidal challenges the comforting consensus following September 11th and goes back and draws connections to Timothy McVeigh's bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City. He asks were these simply the acts of "evil-doers?" “Gore Vidal is the master essayist of our age.” — Washington Post ”Our greatest living man of letters.”—Boston Globe “Vidal’s imagination of American politics is so powerful as to compel awe.”—Harold Bloom, The New York Review of Books
Customer Reviews:
lawless government invites citizen anarchy.......2007-07-12
Is there a connection between Timothy McVeigh's 1995 bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, which killed 168 people and is still the deadliest terrorist act in America except for 9/11; the FBI's ambush of the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas, that killed eighty-two people (1993); and the Iraq war? Well, maybe. In this slender volume of occasional essays the controversial writer Gore Vidal tries to connect the dots.
Vidal borrows the phrase "perpetual war for perpetual peace" from the American historian Charles Beard (1874-1948), famous for his outspoken criticisms of American interventionism abroad. To punctuate his point Vidal includes a list from the Federation of American Scientists that identifies 201 instances of American military intervention between Pearl Harbor and September 11, 2001 (pp. 22-41). In fact, this grossly underestimates American military incursions if Cullen Murphy of Vanity Fair is right that in any given year American forces conduct 170 "operations" abroad (Are We Rome?). At any rate, the Iraq war that began in March 2003 was, sadly, only one more instance of pre-emptive and unilateral state violence by America, some of it against its own citizens.
Whereas the press demonized McVeigh, Vidal tries to understand him. Based upon his three-year correspondence with McVeigh, who invited him to be one of the five witnesses of his execution (Vidal couldn't attend), Vidal concludes that Oklahoma City was McVeigh's revenge for Waco. Without the latter the former never would have happened. McVeigh clearly explained his motives in a letter to Vidal in which he quoted Justice Louis Brandeis in the Olmstead case of 1928, where the Supreme Court upheld the right of the federal government to wiretap private telephone conversations and use them as evidence: "Our government," wrote Brandeis in the dissenting opinion, "is the potent, the omnipotent teacher. For good or ill, it teaches the whole people by its example." Thus did McVeigh "declare war on a government [at Oklahoma City] that he felt had declared war on its own people" at Waco. Later Vidal continues the Brandeis quote where McVeigh had left off: "Crime is contagious. If the government becomes the law breaker, it breeds contempt for laws; it invites every man to become a law unto himself." Lawless government invites anarchy; it will reap what it sows.
In Vidal's scenario, pre-emptive war in Iraq is of the same piece as the FBI slaughtering Branch Davidian cultists. "Now, with the revolt of the Praetorian Guard at the Pentagon, we are entering a new and dangerous phase," he writes. "Although we regularly stigmatize other societies as rogue states, we ourselves have become the largest rogue of all. We honor no treaties. We spurn international courts. We strike unilaterally wherever we choose. We give orders to the United Nations but do not pay our dues. We complain of terrorism, yet our empire is now the greatest terrorist of all. We bomb, invade, subvert other states. Although We the People of the United States are the sole source of legitimate authority in this land, we are no longer represented in Congress Assembled" (158-159). And so private citizens like McVeigh follow the example of government atrocities in Waco and Baghdad.
Wake up, America!.......2007-06-08
Vidal's job has always been to act as a Cassandra during the final days of the American republic: like her, he always speaks the truth but no-one believes it. This book is really just a collection of magazine articles and it's a shame that at 82 he probably doesn't have the stamina for a comprehensive analysis. Having said that, it's still worth reading if only for the essay on Timothy McVeigh.
And if you think I'm exaggerating about the American collapse, consider the obvious parallels between the fall of Rome and the present American decline - the destruction of the currency; defeat in war; and the invasion of the homeland by foreigners.
A major disappointment by a major writer..........2007-01-22
Gore Vidal is one of my favorite novelists, essayists, and pundits. BURR is one of my all-time favorite novels. And the editorial review of this book sounded very much like it covered not dissimilar territory to one of the best films of last year, the documentary WHY WE FIGHT, which outlines the disturbing evolution of the military/industrial/congressional complex. But this book turns out to be an off-kilter screed, an opinion piece peppered with facts but largely rant and rave with an uncharacteristic lack of satisfying insight. He even gets at least one fact wrong: in listing all the treaties we've broken he mentions Kyoto as one of them; in truth congress never ratified that treaty, hence there was never one to break.
Every great writer is allowed an off day. This book, though, was such a major disappointment because Vidal's novels have such a keen grasp of historical context and Vidal himself has such a learned and insightful overview. For me, a major disappointment.
Witty, bitchy, and impassioned, Vidal is on target critiquing unchecked state power.......2006-11-07
Gore Vidal is not my favorite writer, political or otherwise, because his tendencies to name drop and to remind the reader of his patrician heritage grate on my nerves. That said, this slender volume of collected essays is required reading for anyone, liberal or conservative, who thinks that the train of the United States has jumped its Constitutional tracks and is headed for catastrophe, both domestically and internationally. It is also nice to hear someone so eloquently remind Americans that our Constitutional heritage is primarily one of mistrust of government, our own first and foremost, and to challenge the received opinion that this mistrust is now tantamount to treason.
Not only is this sense of distrust our obligation as American citizens, but it is also healthy, Vidal argues. He supports this argument by discussing the violent and murderous contempt our government has had for those in the world, both abroad and at home, who would challenge its claims to ideological and actual dominance. The first essay in this collection endeavors to explain why those abroad hate the American government by making reference to the hundreds of military ventures our nation has engaged in (with almost absolute impunity it must be noted) over the last half-century. Democratically elect a leader whose policies don't completely gibe with American national (read "commercial") interests? Then Uncle Sam will help depose him. Since the end of WWII, the US has intervened in so many other nations' internal affairs, often with disastrous consequences for the everyday people in those nations, that the mind reels. The question becomes not "why do they hate us" but "why have they waited so long to show it?"
The essays which follow the introduction deal with issues of domestic un-tranquility and, in particular, the violent response of one Timothy McVeigh to a federal government that rages unchecked. If that last phrase seems extreme, imagine seeing your wife get shot through the head (as she clutched an infant) hours after watching your 14-year old son shot in the back by the same "law officers," all because you were entrapped into committing the "crime" of sawing off two shotguns. That's what happened to Randy Weaver at his Ruby Ridge, ID, home. He, and not the murdering authorities, was the one accused of crimes in that situation, and the media, complicit with the federal authorities, did its best to cover-up the true criminals. Later, a group of non-traditional religious folks were murdered, with their 27 children, by the same lawless authorities, and again, the media and government manipulated the story so that it was the citizen, and not the government, who was to blame. These incidents, argues Vidal, are indicative of a rogue American government, one that blames its victims and exonerates itself at every opportunity. Vidal also inveighs against the puritanical, prudish prurience of those Americans who so desperately want to see their neighbors controlled that they'll excuse their government of any crimes committed to that end, no matter how heinous. As he notes when discussing Timothy McVeigh's murder of innocents in the Murrah building in OKC, "every pancake has two sides." Ignoring the larger side of that pancake, an unchecked government run rampant against the freedoms of "we the people" and our fellow human beings in other nations, is to our detriment.
One minor drawback to this book is that Vidal rarely provides a citation to back him up in his diatribe, but this is easily rectified by seeking out denser corroborative works on the various subjects Vidal discusses (the writings of Noam Chomsky come to mind, for example). Please don't let that complaint keep you from reading this book; its witty, bitchy, and impassioned defense of the US Constitution and of the Republic it supports is much needed in these dark days of omnipresent surveillance and endless wars on inchoate terror.
Gore Vidal is Not a Mainstream Wimpy Historian: He is Honest and Makes Readers Think.......2006-07-24
Gore Vidal's major assets in writing political books are his wit, knowledge, and ability to write. Mr. Vidal clearly shows what political problems exist and uses precision in diagnosing these problems. His PERPETUAL WAR FOR PERPETUAL PEACE, a phrase used by the great historian Charles Austin Beard, is apt title for this book. Readers should note that Vidal gives Beard credit for this phrase.
Vidal wrote one of the best assessments of the tragedy in Oklahoma for which Timothy McVeigh was executed. This tragedy which took place in 1995 is carefully discussed by Vidal. Vidal indicates that the way the feds explained the explosion is impossible to believe. One should note that the feds cleared the debris from this explosion as quickly as possible removing forensic evidence that could have implicated others or revealed that the force of the explosion was not due to the explanations offered by government "experts."
Another interesting facet of Vidal's assessment of Timothy McVeigh view of the U.S. government. McVeigh expressed anger and frustration and anger at government corruption and lying regarding both domestic and diplomatic issues. Vidal's evaluation of McVeigh is thought provoking. One should clearly note that Vidal does not condone McVeigh's actions, but one should at least be aware of why events, as tragic as they may be, do occur.
Vidal also gives some of the best explanations of U.S. foreign policy blunders that benefit no one except defense contractors, Pentagon bureaucrats, and some members of the U.S. House and Senate. These corrupt cronies faced a severe problem when the Soviets conceded that the U.S. could outspend them on arms races and comitted the crime of refusing to play the game any longer. Defense contractors, Pentagon flunkies, U.S. political figures, etc., had to invent new enemies to justify their bloated budgets and criminality. Vidal cites examples from Latin America (espeically Columbia), Asia, and Africa where U.S. political and military intervention has made life miserable and unbearable. What has been the result? Vidal carefully explains that Americans have become hated. In other words, the pious platitudes and obnoxious lies do not stand when the political realities and tragedies affect other peoples.
Those who have branded this book as "Bush bashing" have apparently not read it. Vidal does not spare anyone in this book, and he demonstrates keen criticism of those who are prominent Democrats and Republicans. Vidal had serious clashes with the Kennedys.
This reviewer doubts if Gore Vidal's books will change the world. However, his book titled PERPETUAL WAR FOR PERPETUAL PEACE is there for the record. One should carefully examine pages 22-41 to see just how extensive U.S. military and political intervention is.
Readers should refer to Theodore Rushton's previous review of this book to get a more concise view. This reviewer agrees with Mr. Rushton that this book is important. Gore Vidal is not a "trained historian" which is why the book is worth reading. Mr. Vidal does not cater to politically correct nonsense and political agendas. He is more concerned with truth which is a lesson current historians have long abandoned.
Customer Reviews:
Overrated.......2002-10-31
Section of Realism is extraordinary, but the chapters Socialism and Liberalism are somewhat weak.
Excellent Foundation for Understanding International Rel........2000-05-19
I recommend this book to any student of International Relations or Political Philosophy. Doyle does an excellent job of describing the foundations of the main theories in the discipline of International Relations. By starting with the philosophers behind each school of thought, he reveals the often misunderstood assumptions made by scholars in each school. Thus, he shows us why scholars in International Relations frequently talk past each other when discussing a topic.
great synthesis of philosophy and international relations.......2000-02-12
Before reading Doyle, I had never really come across a good survey of political philosophy which logically relates the classical political theories to their practical corollaries in international relations. I must say I am very much impresssed with Doyle's effort and am delighted to find how well he is able to put all theories (he deals with realism, liberalism and socialism) in an illuminating perspective, and how he is able to ingeniously distinguish the different strands within the respective political theories. What I like in particular is how he associates certain strands of thinking with certain philosophers, and how he then combines and compares these different views within a larger theoretical perpective, thus providing a clear overview on the theories at large. I must admit only having read parts of it, most of the section about realism, all of it on liberalism and some of it on socialism, but still think I have a good enough idea to be able to comment on this book. I initiallty felt inclined to give this book only four stars, since it only deals with a small number of thinkers and theories, but realising the vastness of the subject, I felt I could not withhold Doyle's book the 5th star. So for those seeking the broader view of international relations, going beyond the confines of conventional IR theory, Doyle's book is an absolute eye-opener.
A Splendid Survey of International Relations.......2000-02-06
This extraordinary book by Dr. Doyle is a must read for those Christians that wish to understand the international system of the relations among nations. This book helps to clarify the fundamental perpspectives that policymakers hold about the nature of the relations among nations and the policies that follow as a result of such perspectives. For Christians to be effective peacemakers such information is critical for understanding the international system and planning for effective pastoral strategies that can help to move the world toward greater justice and peace. Clearly this book is not a substitute for Christian moral reflection and action, but it can help one to understand some of the forces and ideological frameworks within the international arena that motivates people and nations to take actions that lead to war or peace.
Book Description
When Gore Vidal's recent New York Times bestseller Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace was published, the Los Angeles Times described Vidal as the last defender of the American republic. In Dreaming War, Vidal continues this defense by confronting the Cheney-Bush junta head on in a series of devastating essays that demolish the lies American Empire lives by, unveiling a counter-history that traces the origins of America's current imperial ambitions to the experience of World War Two and the post-war Truman doctrine. And now, with the Cheney-Bush leading us into permanent war, Vidal asks whose interests are served by this doctrine of pre-emptive war? Was Afghanistan turned to rubble to avenge the 3,000 slaughtered on September 11? Or was "the unlovely Osama chosen on aesthetic grounds to be the frightening logo for our long contemplated invasion and conquest of Afghanistan?" After all he was abruptly replaced with Saddam Hussein once the Taliban were overthrown. And while "evidence" is now being invented to connect Saddam with 9/11, the current administration are not helped by "stories in the U.S. press about the vast oil wealth of Iraq which must- for the sake of the free world- be reassigned to U.S. consortiums."
Customer Reviews:
The Hobo Philosopher.......2007-09-12
I wouldn't have said everything exactly the same way but on the whole Mr. Vidal has it pretty much as I see it also. He hit the Military Industrial Complex right on the head and even mentions the fact that we do live in a socialist state - it is just that it is only for corporate America and the super rich and needlessly wealthy. This is good "liberal" political science. Conservatives won't be reading this book no matter what it has to say, I'm sure. this is an easy book to read. Mr. Vidal doesn't mince any words. He says it as he see it. Sometimes he see it a little exaggerated for me but yet his conclusions are right in line, I would say.
eh..........2006-11-21
Boilerplate rhetoric about how the US is the global policeman and no longer a republic but an empire. We've heard it all before...yawn...
And I even agree!
Thought provoking.............2006-10-20
I thought this latest collection of Mr. Vidal's work was timely and well worth the read. I applaud his bluntness and 'tell it like it is' attitude concerning the U.S. and it's push for world domination. This book will be interesting to anyone who is searching for an alternative view as to what is going on in our crazy, sordid post 9/11 world. Highly recommended.
The United Oil Oligarchy of Amnesia and Entropy .......2006-10-17
...with free enterprise for the poor and socialism for the rich.
The label "conspiracy theorist" holds a powerful stigma. For the most part, the conspiracy theorists themselves are to blame for that. For the most part the people I've run across who propagate and perpetuate these wild schemes are not the most critical thinkers out there. The evidence of this is the way conspiracies run in packs. Once they're talking about secret societies, secret connections and plots, more and more unfold, running off in tangents. It might start with the Kennedy assassination but soon area 51 and Roswell are evoked, the moon landing is a hoax, the Loch Ness monster and the inner Earth people. Not to mention the Catholics, the Masons, and the Jewish-communists.
But that shouldn't dissuade us from investigating anything. The fact that conspiracy theorists are nuts doesn't mean conspiracies never happen. People who believe everything that's slightly exciting to believe are no less critical thinkers than those who dismiss outright anything that threatens the veneer of civility and order.
In reality, a conspiracy doesn't have to be an intricate web of deception, some brilliant design everyone but you is in on. A conspiracy can be lots of powerful people acting in a similar way, through sneaky means and propaganda, for the sake of strengthening and securing their own power. Hillary Clinton was lambasted for speaking of a vast right-wing conspiracy, but as the story unfolds, we see a small handful of very powerful, rich people using their influence to try and drag down a President and his administration by any means necessary. She was right.
This book is a collection of essays unified by the assertion Gore Vidal is making that American is an empire, and that American military action and behavior, since before world war 2, has been an imperial attempt to control as much of the world as possible. If one looks at the whole of human history, none of this should come as a surprise. But in the modern debate, where Neo-con imperialism is compared to Nazism, Mr. Vidal is telling us that a better analogy would be the ancient Roman Empire, and that this has been going on a whole lot longer than since the neo-cons have been in power. The primary difference today is near-transparency of the current administrations goals, and the deplorable depths of depravity to which they'll sink to accomplish it. The unprovoked, unilateral invasion of Iraq was just one of hundreds of unprovoked, unilateral military actions the American empire has engaged in post-WW2. But in the past, America had the self-awareness, pride and patience to do things in a deceptive manner, exercising domination economically (the Marshall plan), or through low-key military presences (like NATO in Western Europe) and by meddling around the world with an alphabet soup of secret police (CIA, FBI, DEA, DIA...). So, there's nothing new going on in the Bush-Cheney Junta. It is a matter of degrees, but previous presidents and previous administrations don't get off the hook unscathed.
And the media, owned by powerful, rich, well-connected corporations, don't get off unscathed. Vidal discusses the role of the media, paid off to keep two major characteristics of the America off the radar off the people, the first being the existence- not to mention the pervasiveness- of a class system, and the second being the nature of the U.S. Empire. Outside of the United States, these are not secrets. When the twin towers fell, Americans turned to each other and asked in genuine bewilderment how anyone could hate us. When the answer was supplied for us, "they hate us because they hate freedom," enough people could actually get themselves to believe this to accomplish the re-election of the worst, most venal bunch of ganefs in American history. American people could accept the premise that people around the world want to attack us with suicidal acts simply because they envy our goodness. That's not just us being stupid, that's us being uneducated and misinformed. (And distracted! Was that really a partial breast seen during a football half-time show? Heaven forfend! Let's have congressional hearings about it.)
Drawbacks? Because this is a collection of essays written for different sources at different times, you get a lot of redundancy if you read this book cover to cover. Also, while I'm not a knee-jerk pro-Israel kind of guy (I have plenty of criticism for the way Israel has acted and I see a lot more complexity in the situation than people on either side ever acknowledge), I do cringe a little bit when Mr. Vidal gets on the subject of Israel's role in today's geopolitical scene. He hints at Israel's mistakes, but then, in his wonderfully droll, mischievous style, declares that one can't criticize Israel without being accused of anti-Semitism, complete with a sarcastic tone that says `gosh, what could be worse than being an anti-Semite?' I know he's making an important point but, as someone who grew up being taught that they will eventually get around to blaming everything on the Jews again, I can't help but feel a touch queasy.
All that being said, this is an important book, it offers an alternate take on the modern situation that needs to be heard. And Gore Vidal, as opposed to someone like Noam Chomsky, reports in his inimitable sassy style, which turns a painful topic into pleasurable reading. That takes some talent. Thumbs up.
Gore Vidal Has Done His Homework and Relates Unpleasant Truths.......2006-07-30
Gore Vidal wrote DREAMING WAR:BLOOD FOR OIL and the CHENEY-BUSH JUNTA shortly after he wrote PERPETUAL WAR FOR PERPETUAL PEACE. The second book is just as good and as well written as the first. Vidal states obvious truths which anger some because they are so obvious and true.
Vidal's collection of essays deal with the American Empire which is a term that the Establishment does not like because the word empire is an accurate term in describing U.S. Government meddling. Such a term might give Americans an uncomfortable view of the reality of U.S. diplomacy.
Some of these essays confront the unconfortable truths regarding the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. Vidal gives a brief but clear account of the FDR lads goading the Japanese to attack this naval base in response to U.S. pressure that would have reduced the Japanese to famine had they adhered to U.S. policy. One should note that U.S. foreign policy against Japanese presence in China was due to some vague nonsense about the Open Door Policy in China. One should note when the Chinese Communists came to power in 1949, the Open Door was slammed shut in everyone's face. By eliminating the Japanese as a power in China, the road was wide open for Mao tse-Tung and the Chinese Communists to take power after a prolonged civil war that lasted from 1927 to 1949.
Vidal is also very clear that the use of nuclear weapons against the Japanese in 1945 was unnecessary. Vidal cites a letter dated July 18, 1945 written by the Japanese Emperor begging to surrender and ending the war. This is a matter of public record now, and few if any "mainstream" historians have mentioned this. Vidal makes effective use of Alperovitz's book THE DECISION TO USE THE ATOMIC BOMB: THE ARCHITECTURE OF A MYTH. Vidal notes that many well known military men including Admiral Nimetz, the General Eisenhower, etc., were very much opposed to the use atomic bomb. Or course, none of this is very well publisized as it undermines the political myths upon which the American Empire is built.
Vidal also deals with more recent events such as the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Cold War, U.S. destructiveness in Latin America,etc. These interventions fit the classcial definition of empire which is largely unknown to Americans. Vidal destroys the myths that have been presented as truth regarding these events, and he undermines the official truths of these events.
Vidal has some interesting remarks re "Official Truth." He well knows that Lord Acton's dictum that, "Official truth is never actual truth" is an accurate statement. When Vidal made a production for The History Channel, some Establishment hacks formed a panal to smear Vidal. Vidal notes that he was not invited to defend himself, and Vidal further conclusively refutes the hacks on this panal. One should note his remarks re this attempt to smear him.
Vidal has some interesting remarks about U.S. domestic policies. He mentions that government authorities have made a war on alleged domestic policies to divert attention from foreign interventions. Americans have had a war on illteracy, a war on poverty, and a war on drugs. If anyone is interested, illiteracy, poverty, and drugs have won.
Vidal has some interesting suggestions for solving or reducing problems. He suggests, to use the expression, "Smaller is better." Vidal cites Thomas Jefferson's remarks re making Washington, D.C. about the centralization of power in that city and the destructive consequences of such a concentration of power. Vidal suggests that Americans should live in confederated sections which, while not eliminating corrpution and economic ruin, would significantly reduce such problems and give Americans more direct control.
Vidal has some interesting comments on American "education." Vidal comments on the ignorance of Americans re their own history or any history. Vidal also condemns the ignorance of geography whereby Americans do not even know where interventions take place. One should note that the "experts" in Congress do not where these areas are either. They have shown their ignorance when some un-American has asked them to locate any of these places on globe, and these "experts" did not know the difference between South American and Antarctic or anywhere else for that matter.
Vidal has been accused of hating America. Vidal does not hate America. Alleged proof is that Vidal lives part of the year in Italy. So do many other Americans. Vidal does not hate America. He hates what the corporate CEOs and government authorities have done to America and Americans. He is very clear about this. Vidal has been accused of being a Bush Basher and opposed to Republicans. These remarks betray these critics who obviously have been watching too much TV and have not read Vidal's books. Vidal is an ardent supporter of limited government, the Bill of Rights, etc. If supporting lawful restraints on federal power and support of the United States Constitution is un-American, we are in bad shape.
Vidal uses public sources and comments to support his views. He does not refer to arcane nonsense, and readers can read Vidal's books and decide for themselves. Again, readers should note that Vidal displays knowledge, reason, and an exceptional ability to write.
Amazon.com
From 1963 to 1966 the U.S. government assembled a team of prominent thinkers from all walks of life to determine what would happen if "peace broke out." The group, surprisingly but with unassailable logic, determined that war was necessary and desirable and that the government should do all it could to maintain the status quo. If peace became inevitable, the report suggested everything from creating an outer-space menace to setting up some new, socially acceptable form of slavery. The report was leaked in 1967 by a conference member harboring a guilty conscience, and it scandalized Washington.
Not.
The ultimate compliment for any form of political satire is to be taken seriously by the people it is skewering. On that scale Report from Iron Mountain, which has been a lightning rod for both Right and Left since its appearance, could hardly be more successful. The hoax, written in perfect think-tankese, captures the mix of Olympian detachment and awesome cynicism that has flowed out of Washington for much of the American Century. Lewin's book (and he really did write it) exposes the mindset that we can thank for Vietnam and so much else.
Report from Iron Mountain was bolstered, if not trumped, by reality--the Pentagon Papers and the Pax Americana, a Defense Department plan to take over Latin America, emerged soon after. But the book's enduring popularity, particularly among those who never got the joke (apparently Lewin had to sue to get right-wing groups convinced of the book's authenticity to stop printing and selling copies) suggests that the governmental worldview that Report from Iron Mountain lampoons--as well as the paranoia that that immorality unleashes in the citizenry--is very much with us. --Michael Gerber
Book Description
Unveils a hitherto top-secret report of a government commission that was requested to explore the consequences of lasting peace on American society. The shoching results of the study, as revealed in this report, led the government to conceal the existence of the commission - they had found that, among other things, peace may never be possible; that even if it were, it would probably be undesirable, that "defending the national interest" is not the real purpose of war; that war is necessary; that war deaths should be planned and budgeted. REPORT FROM IRON MOUNTAIN tells the story of how the project was formed, how it operated, what happend to it. It includes the complet, verbatim text of the commission's hitherto classified report.
Customer Reviews:
An Alleged Antimilitarist Hoax (Or is it?)........2007-05-17
_Report From Iron Mountain: On the Possibility and Desirability of Peace_ first appeared in 1967 published by The Dial Press and claimed to be a government report compiled by leading scholars who met at Iron Mountain in New York on the possibility and desirability of peace following the Cold War. This edition is published by the Free Press in 1996 and makes the claim that the report itself was a hoax (a spoof on think tank jargon) and was written by Leonard C. Lewin. However, whether or not the report is actually a hoax is difficult to determine, as disinformation is a speciality of the government agencies which release such reports. It should be noted though that even if the report itself is a hoax, that it nevertheless represents the kind of thinking that is typical of the elites. Unfortunately, in the Introduction to this book, written by Victor Navasky, we are treated to the usual establishment apologetics with much fustian about "paranoid ultraright conspiracy theorists", "militiamen", and "right wing libertarian weirdos". Such commentary is all-too-typical and should be simply ignored by anyone who has a working brain and dares to think outside the box. The report itself composes the majority of this book, followed by an afterword by the "author" and some appendices on the "Iron Mountain Affair". It is alleged that when L.B.J. discovered that this report had been "leaked" that he "hit the roof". And, this represents the typical reaction of government officials to those who dare to challenge their reigning hegemony.
The report claims for itself to have been received by Leonard C. Lewin from one "John Doe", who leaked the report to him after it was compiled by 15 leading scholars who met in secret. (Later, Lewin would claim that the entire thing was a hoax and that he wrote the report himself. Whether or not this is accurate is of course difficult to determine.) The report claims that it represents a sort of "peace games" study similar to the "war games" played by the Rand Corporation. The report claims to be a study examining the central issue of the transformation of American society from one in which there is a constant readiness to make war to one in which peace would be sustainable. However, the findings of this report are such that a lasting peace is neither desirable nor sustainable that is most disturbing. Following the Cold War (under constant threat of turning "hot"), the United States entered a period in which disarmament became an option. The author(s) first consider various scenarios under which disarmament may occur, including effects of disarmament on the economy (potentially highly negative). The author(s) next consider war and peace as social systems. Following this, they turn to a discussion of the functions of war. The first function of war is economic, in the sense that the author(s) claim that rather than being a "drain" or producing "waste", war actually vitalizes the economy and provides protection against depressions. The second function of war is political, in the sense that the author(s) claim that the elimination of war would lead to the elimination of the nation-state and that war provides a safeguard against class conflict. The third function of war is sociological, in the sense that the author(s) claim that war gives rise to social cohesion and serves as a means of controlling social dissidence and destructive antisocial tendencies. The fourth function of war is ecological, in the sense that the author(s) claim that war serves as an evolutionary device for maintaining an ecological balance between human population and the supplies available for its survival. The fifth function of war is cultural and scientific, in the sense that the
author(s) claim that creative arts and scientific and technological progress are made possible by war. Finally, the author(s) include a section entitled "Other", where they consider war as a general social release, war as a generational stabilizer, war as an ideological clarifier, and war as the basis for inter-national understanding. The author(s) then consider substitutes for the functions of war. These include economic (social-welfare expenditures, the problem of unemployment, health, education, housing, etc.), political (mentioning the possibility of uniting experiences, "alternate enemies" such as space aliens, and the flying saucer phenomenon), sociological (Peace Corps and Job Corps, but also more bizarre phenomena such as human sacrifice among primitive cultures, blood games, and inquisitions), ecological (birth control and eugenics), and cultural and scientific (creative arts, science, and space-related research). The author(s) conclude that each of these substitutes is fraught with difficulties and thus it will be necessary to continue maintenance of government control over war and peace.
This report is infamous for what it has to say about the possibilities of peace. It would seem that the author(s) (noted high government officials and scholars of repute) believe that a lasting peace is neither possible nor desirable. For those who doubt this on the other hand, it would appear that such officials cynically manipulate the public so as to consolidate their own power within the military-industrial complex. If war is indeed a sort of "make-work" project similar to the Great Pyramids of ancient Eygpt, then it remains to be seen whether or not a lasting peace cannot be achieved. This book is highly recommended for those who seriously consider the possibilities of war and peace. Despite the fact that it is alleged to be a hoax, it nevertheless has much to say to us about the thinking and direction in which the global elites intend to take us.
Deviant but brilliant !!.......2006-04-02
Hoax or reality, this report sheds a clear light on the process of elitist thinking and planning. It did not only predict but planned our future. The present situation in the world is the greatest proof of the authenticity of this report.
It's a book worth reading. If you find it buy it...
it was LEAKED: LATER the later spin was that it was a "hoax".......2004-11-10
It's very real.
The foreword is only by Leonard Lewin. He is not the author. It was first published by the Dial Press, NY.
It is not a novel, but rather a report written by the members of a 15-man "Special Study Group" commissioned, they believe, by some governmental entity which wished to remain unknown. The report is addressed to that unknown requestor, the work of the group having been completed after about two and a half years of labor. The members of the group knew that they had been carefully screened and selected for the task, that they represented the highest levels of scholarship, experience, and expertise in a wide range of the physical and social sciences, that they possessed years of service in business, government, and academe, and that among them they had access to a vast proportion of the country's resources in the social and physical science fields. The Special Study Group was clearly possessed of outstanding establishmentarian credentials.
The book comes to us because one of the members of the group, identified only as John Doe, approached Mr. Lewin several months after the completed report had been submitted, and sought his help in getting the report commercially published, since he ("Doe") felt that the public had a right to be apprised of its existence, even though the group had previously agreed to keep it secret. Mr. Lewin, having agreed to serve in that capacity, wrote a foreword spelling out these circumstances and passing on what little he learned from "Doe" concerning the study's origin and its participants.
He further revealed his personal reaction to the conclusions of the report, conclusions which he said he does not share.
In Griffin's The Creature From Jekyll Island, he makes reference to The Report From Iron Mountain. I encourage you to read and absorb his interpretation, which has an emphasis somewhat different than this review. Griffin supplies evidence of the authenticity of the Report by quoting the written assertion to that effect by Harvard's establishmentarian professor John Kenneth Galbraith, who admitted to participating in the study in at least a consultative capacity.
I would also like to borrow from Griffin's conclusions concerning the study's importance. He asks why this study differs from any other think tank effort, and then writes (p. 525): "The answer is that this one was commissioned and executed, not by ivory tower dreamers and theoreticians, but by people who are in charge. It is the brainchild of the CFR....So many things that otherwise are incomprehensible suddenly become perfectly clear: foreign aid, wasteful spending, the destruction of American industry, a job corps, gun control, a national police force, the apparent demise of Soviet power, a UN army, disarmament, world bank, a world money, the surrender of national independence through treaties,..."
Be Prepared if Peace Breaks Out.......2003-11-10
The Foreword tells of a "Special Study Group" that produced a Secret Report. It concluded that "peace is not in the best interest of a stable society". The space program, the anti-ballistic missile, the fallout-shelter programs were all designed to spend vast sums of tax dollars. The purpose of this book is to explain "aspects of American policy otherwise incomprehensible by the ordinary standards of common sense", and warn about the schemes of the ruling class. But not all readers will appreciate this subtle satire. Does the "high uric acid" symbolize something wrong (p.xxii)?
Section 1 says their mission was to study the effects of peace on society. Section 2 tells of problems in converting war factories to peaceful use (p.22). Section 3 discusses the problems of disarmament: economic reinvestment, or "the non-military functions of war in modern societies" (p.25). Section 4 points out that plans for peace assume wars support the social systems. War resolves conflicts of interest between nations or classes (p.28). Since conflicts of interest are eternal, so is war. Peace is what breaks out between wars (p.29). Section 5 discusses the function of war: it is used by and for a ruling class to defend "the national interest". Its non-military function is to subject the economy to complete and arbitrary central control (p.35). It stabilizes the economy of industrial societies by creating an artificial demand, and protects against another depression. The civilian standard of living rose during WW II. A military force is needed both for a foreign policy, and to assure the legitimacy and existence of a government (p.39); it can absorb the unemployed. One item in this satire is to link restrictions on grain production in America to "famine in Asia"! Another is to claim a lower speed limit would save 40,000 lives a year (p.46)! But the funniest item is the claim that the Department of Defense is stockpiling birds (p.51)! "War is the principal motivational force for the development of science at every level." From poison gas to atomic bombs.
Section 6 says substitutes for the functions of war must be "wasteful", and operate free of the supply-demand system. All depressions occurred during low military spending (p.58). Alternatives to military spending are inadequate because they cost too little (p.60). The uncontrolled and arbitrary spending on space research make it a good alternative. The end of war would mean the end of national sovereignty. There would be no effective external pressure for a nation to organize itself politically. How to employ the unemployed? The WPA and CCC provide examples. An expanded prison system ("slavery"?) holds the unemployed. Do we need a "menacing social enemy" to serve a function? Would we need to re-create the Spanish Inquisition or witch hunts for "national security" (p.71)? Should procreation be limited to artificial insemination and laboratory embryos to control population levels (p.73)? Would birth control pills be put into water and essential foods? An excess population is war material (p.74). Would scientific progress cease in a peaceful world (p.78)? Section 7 has a Summary and Conclusions. War is not a means to an end but the purpose of modern societies. War has five non-military functions: economic, political, sociological, ecological, and cultural-scientific. They discuss the criteria, models, and evaluation of substitutes for the functions of war. "Genuine total peace ... would be destabilizing" (pp.90-91) Our government should plan for the possibility of a general peace because of its dangers to society (p.94). Section 8 has their recommendations. The best satire is the last sentence in the book (p.101). But the book seems to use a lot of words to say very little. It wasn't written by a George Orwell or Aldous Huxley.
first read this in college, had to read again........2002-09-10
still a very good satire on "what if" from the past. reads very quickly.
Amazon.com
The scope of Philip Bobbitt's The Shield of Achilles is breathtaking: the interplay, over the last six centuries, among war, jurisprudence, and the reshaping of countries ("states," in Bobbitt's vocabulary). Bobbitt posits that certain wars should be deemed epochal--that is, seen as composed of many "smaller" wars. For example, according to Bobbitt the epochal war of the 20th century began in 1914 and ended with the collapse of communism in 1990. These military affairs--and their subsequent "ultimate" peace agreements--have caused, each in their own way, revolutionary reconstructions of the idea and actuality of statehood and, following, of relationships between these various new entities. Of these reconstructions (including the princely state, the kingly state, and the nation-state), Bobbitt is most interested in the current incarnation, which he calls the market-state: one whose borders are scuffed and hazy at best (certainly compared to earlier territorial markers) and whose strengths, weaknesses, citizens, and enemies roam across cyberspace rather than plains and valleys. The Shield of Achilles is massive, erudite, and demanding--at once highly abstract and extremely detailed. There is about it an air of detached erudition, one noticeably free of the easy "decline and fall" hysteria too often present in contemporary historical analyses. --H. O'Billovich
Book Description
"We are at a moment in world affairs when the essential ideas that govern statecraft must change. For five centuries it has taken the resources of a state to destroy another state . . . This is no longer true, owing to advances in international telecommunications, rapid computation, and weapons of mass destruction. The change in statecraft that will accompany these developments will be as profound as any that the State has thus far undergone."
—from the Prologue
The Shield of Achilles is a classic inquiry into the nature of the State, its origin in war, and its drive for peace and legitimacy. Philip Bobbitt, a professor of constitutional law and a historian of nuclear strategy, has served in the White House, the Senate, the State Department, and the National Security Council in both Democratic and Republican administrations, and here he brings his formidable experience and analytical gifts to bear on our changing world. Many have observed that the nation-state is dying, yet others have noted that the power of the State has never been greater. Bobbitt reconciles this paradox and introduces the idea of the market-state, which is already replacing its predecessor. Along the way he treats such themes as the Long War (which began in 1914 and ended in 1990). He explains the relation of violence to legitimacy, and the role of key individuals in fates that are partially—but only partially—determined.
This book anticipates the coalitional war against terrorism and lays out alternative futures for the world. Bobbitt shows how nations might avoid the great power confrontations that have a potential for limitless destruction, and he traces the origin and evolution of the State to such wars and the peace conferences that forged their outcomes into law, from Augsburg to Westphalia to Utrecht to Vienna to Versailles.
The author paints a powerful portrait of the ever-changing interrelatedness of our world, and he uses his expertise in law and strategy to discern the paths that statehood will follow in the coming years and decades. Timely and perceptive, The Shield of Achilles will change the way we think about the world.
Customer Reviews:
A frighteningly insightful explanation of a frighteningly complex topic.......2007-10-15
Philip Bobbitt is a constitutional law professor. Having gone to law school and a few dozen legal textbooks along the way, I felt right at "home" trudging through this beast of a book. It's a difficult read, there is no doubt.
For the person considering reading this book: be warned. This is not lowest common denominator drivel or faddish revisionist history. It is not sensationally written, nor is it even pleasant at times. But this book is way too cerebral to simply be called pedantic. It is crafted like a contract is carefully crafted. It is precise, thorough, and, if you can get going with the scholarly vocab and prose, riveting.
What this book is is a masterwork on the nature of the state -- what is is, how it functions and thrives, and how it dies. Bobbitt takes you through the history of the modern state since its beginnings in the Renaissance in Italy with the "princely state," how its bases of legitimacy have changed, and how law, history, and strategy have, and do mutually influence and shape each other, and the successfully innovative state along with them. The end is a look at "possible futures," three hypothetical approaches (most, there are no absolutes) states will take in their metamorphoses into market-states, mirroring the three approaches that fascism, parliamentarianism, and communism were to the nation-state. It pretty much predicts a lot of things becoming relevant to us only as mere glimmers on the horizon, such as whether we will choose to integrate the economies of Canada, the US, and Mexico, with a common currency, and also strategic issues, such as positing that the market-state, with its ostensible abandonment of society-wide total wars where entire populations fight other entire populations such as with the end of the "Long War" (basically the name of the wars of 1914-1990 as one continuous conflict of what form of nation-state would be triumphant, a central theme of the book), will find its elite states in those that most quickly eschew giant military infrastructure of tanks and aircraft carriers for resistance against, for example, information system and biological weapons attacks.
In a nutshell, this is a book that tells you how the world works, at least through one very qualified lens. The book leads up to, as Bobbitt maintains, the present, where we are transitioning to a new form of the state, the "market-state" (the US began as a "state-nation," was transformed into one of the earliest "nation-states" by the Civil War and the resulting 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution), with, as each state form before it, though they are contiguous and continuous, radically different bases of legitimacy, threats, and advantages.
Along the way, I got a giant dose of actual, factual history, like about the wars of the Balkans, which I didn't know much about, the real reason we entered World War I, which I always wondered about, and, interestingly, even cutting-edge political prognostication, foretelling stuff like the North American Union the US is in the process of entering right now. There was even the "Kitty Genovese Incident" that is a law school staple in criminal law classes being used as an incredibly apt metaphor for the paralysis of action leading to the slaughters in the former Yugoslav states. And it's all in there specifically to show you how the state functions and how it and history, law, and strategy transform each other.
If you don't want to be a know-nothing about history, you'd better read this book. Also, if you don't like it, please don't write a review that looks like you stopped to look in a thesaurus every five seconds. Philip Bobbitt will always be smarter than you, sorry. I'm not sure I like what he either predicts by his genius, or perhaps simply repeats from his inside view of the State Department and Council on Foreign Relations (I guess it's both), but the simple fact is this is one of the most scholarly, and easily the most insightful, book I have ever read. A banal description of evil? Perhaps. Indispensable? Also yes. It's right up there with "The Prince," though obviously not as uh, "concise," since, you know, "The Prince" is about 90 pages and this is about 820 pages.
The mountains heave in childbirth ...........2006-05-20
.... and a little mouse is born. A flaccid bladder of utter banality inflated by the hot air of middle-brow legalism and obscurantist prose. No exploration of any depth or detail is carried out of the disruption wrought by a market-dependent way of life on the ecological, anthropological, cultural, social, political and psychological fibres that hold together the world's various societies, or on the fragility and volatility of the global market itself, which, of course, is portrayed as a fait accompli. Thus there is simply no contextual platform for the author's analysis, and, despite the standard air of portent, no clear picture of what law and militarism can or might actually do in the near future, and we are left non the wiser about what the course of history might actually BE. This work is fairly indicative of the mainstream American understanding of history; my advice is that they take a break from making it, or we are all in big trouble.
A Unique New Analysis of International Relations.......2006-04-12
Phillip Bobbitt has created something very rare in the realm of International Relations: an entirely unique new idea. For those students of history and current events who have grown accustomed to the accepted world views: Realism, Idealism - internationalism vs. isolationism; this new entry will provide a welcome and refreshing perspective.
Rather than defining international politics in the typical framework of the "balance of power", or that of a "bipolar" or "mulitpolar" world, Bobbitt has completely redefined the course of history with his thesis. He states the modern state has evolved through the course of history and taken many different forms, based on the demands and interplay (or history) of Strategy and Constitutional development.
These various forms of the state have had differing expectations demanded from their populaces, and differing relationships amongst themselves at the international level. Based on a field relationship between Strategy and Constitutionalism, different forms of the state have proven dominant at different periods of time. Developments in one arena will create new trends in another- and the interplay is constant. Currently Bobbitt makes the case that the current incarnation of the modern state, the Nation-State, is giving way to a new form which he has named the Market-State.
Bobbitt backs up his arguments well with an historical analysis of the modern state ranging from the Machiavellian Princely-State to the wars of the Nation-States and beyond. The entire book is very well documented with Primary and Secondary sources, which are indexed and included in a comprehensive bibliography.
There is also a very interesting section written on the "Possible Worlds" of tomorrow based on the ground rules laid down throughout the book. So Bobbitt not only comments on our past and present, but continues with speculation and predictions on the near term future. This gives the "Shield" very well rounded experience for its contemporary reader. What will be interesting is if this section stands the test of time. I also hope that Mr. Bobbitt comments on his theses in future editions and expands this particular section as history progresses.
The book is Mammoth, and would require a mammoth review to do it justice. So at the expense of thoroughness, and to save you a few minutes I will say this: "The Shield of Achilles" is a long read well worth your time and its arguments should be considered by any students or participants in the field of International Relations.
Complex Interaction of War and Peace in Modeling States.......2005-05-16
In "The Shield of Achilles," Philip Bobbitt has realized an impressive tour de force in studying in great detail the intimate interaction of law, strategy and history between 1494 and the contemporary era. Bobbitt correctly points out that there is no state without law, strategy and history because they complement and influence one another (p. 6). There can be a state only when the governing institutions of a society have an acknowledged monopoly on the legitimate use of violence at home (law) and abroad (strategy). History relates the account of the stewardship of a society over time that in turns influences law and strategy. Contrary to the conventional wisdom, Bobbitt convincingly shows that the history of the Modern State did not begin at Westphalia in 1648, but in the North of Modern Italy in 1494 (p. 805).
Bobbitt clearly demonstrates that the Modern State was put together when it proved necessary to create a constitutional order that could wage war more efficiently than the feudal and mercantile orders it replaced (p. xxv). Bobbitt spends most of his time covering the pattern of epochal wars and state formation, of peace congresses and international constitutions in Europe. The Modern State was indeed born and went through successive mutations in Europe before spreading to the rest of the world. Bobbitt gives his readers a nice pictorial representation of the six constitutional conventions of the international society of states at the end of Book I dedicated to the State of War (pp. 346-347). Book II focuses on the States of Peace.
To his credit, Bobbitt does not reduce war to a pathology that could one day be eradicated totally. War is as inevitable as death because the Modern State aims to be as efficient as possible to wage war when the opportunity arises to maximize its chance of survival and prosperity (pp. xxvii, 819). Contrary to the popular wisdom, Bobbitt rightly construes war not as the result of a decision made by an aggressor, but as the reaction of a state which cannot acquiesce to the legal and strategic demands of the aggressor (p. 8). Operation Iraqi Freedom is one of the most recent applications of this recurring observation.
Bobbitt also makes an interesting comparison between the assassination of Kitty Genovese occurring in New York in 1964 in the presence of multiple passive witnesses and the wide indifference of the international community to the plight of Bosnia for years in the early 1990s (pp. 411-467). The international community will find in this chapter a well-articulated argumentation for doing little or nothing in the naïve or vain hope that such problems as the on-going genocide against certain groups of population in Darfur, Sudan will disappear as if by magic.
Furthermore, Bobbitt rightly draws the attention of his audience to the importance of the Peace of Paris of 1990 that ended what he called the Long War starting in 1914 (pp. 24-64, 609-663). The Peace of Paris celebrated the triumph of the parliamentary democracy as the winning nation-state model at the successive expense of fascism and communism. Bobbitt is probably at his weakest when he launches himself in scenario analysis about the future of the three competing constitutional forms of the market-state that is taking the place of the nation-state (pp. 717, 728). The international society of states has indeed the choice among the entrepreneurial market-state (e.g., the U.S.), the mercantile market-state (e.g., Japan and China) and the managerial market-state (e.g., the European Union) (pp. 670-676). Each incarnation of the market-state has its pros and cons.
As Bobbitt points out elsewhere in his book, Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda could be considered a fourth, malevolent version of the market-state that is a common threat to the other three versions (p. 820). For the first time since the birth of the Modern State, a state structure is no longer necessary to constitute a lethal threat to a society (p. 806). The market-states will have to cooperate with one another for example to contain WMD proliferation, cyber-terrorism against their critical infrastructure, which is increasingly privatized and internationalized, or environmental threats to the planet (pp. 785-797, 800, 806).
Bobbitt states that there is no certainty that the first three constitutional forms of the market-state can coexist peacefully (p. 781). Bobbitt enumerates the ten constitutional conditions that will facilitate the peaceful coexistence of market states (p. 802). Unlike the three constitutional forms of the Nation-State, i.e., parliamentary democracy, communism and fascism, the three constitutional forms of the Market-State could coexist peacefully in the long run. The members of the European Union will probably stick to their managerial model of the market-state because Europe was the theater of the bloody development of a highly competitive society of states for centuries. As the leading entrepreneurial market-state, the United States will remain the champion of globalization and push for the further opening of regional trading blocks and mercantile market states in the foreseeable future.
The greatest source of instability besides terrorism and rogue nations could eventually come from some mercantile market-states such as China and Russia. These two states have not yet fully embraced the tenets of Liberalism and are not satisfied with their military position in the world as Michael Mandelbaum correctly points out in "The Ideas that Conquered the World." In all scenarios, the United States will have to bear a disproportionate burden towards the maintenance of the society of market-states as long as it has the willingness and capability to assume its leadership role (p. 803).
To summarize, "The Shield of Achilles" clearly does not target readers who have a short attention span, do not acknowledge the importance of the past to peruse the future, lack persistence, or are interested in simplistic answers to complex issues.
7 Habits of Highly Effective Nations.......2005-01-06
This book blends all of the tediousness of a middle-management PowerPoint presentation with the slipshod history of Oswald Spengler. Too long. No synthesis. And chock-a-block with sexy corporate jargon.
Book Description
Why do some civil wars end in successfully implemented peace settlements while others are fought to the finish? Numerous competing theories address this question. Yet not until now has a study combined the historical sweep, empirical richness, and conceptual rigor necessary to put them thoroughly to the test and draw lessons invaluable to students, scholars, and policymakers. Using data on every civil war fought between 1940 and 1992, Barbara Walter details the conditions that lead combatants to partake in what she defines as a three-step process--the decision on whether to initiate negotiations, to compromise, and, finally, to implement any resulting terms. Her key finding: rarely are such conflicts resolved without active third-party intervention.
Walter argues that for negotiations to succeed it is not enough for the opposing sides to resolve the underlying issues behind a civil war. Instead the combatants must clear the much higher hurdle of designing credible guarantees on the terms of agreement--something that is difficult without outside assistance. Examining conflicts from Greece to Laos, China to Columbia, Bosnia to Rwanda, Walter confirms just how crucial the prospect of third-party security guarantees and effective power-sharing pacts can be--and that adversaries do, in fact, consider such factors in deciding whether to negotiate or fight. While taking many other variables into account and acknowledging that third parties must also weigh the costs and benefits of involvement in civil war resolution, this study reveals not only how peace is possible, but probable.
Books:
- When the Wind Blows
- Zlata's Diary: A Child's Life in Wartime SarajevoRevised Edition
- 55th North Carolina in the Civil War: A History And Roster
- A BLUE WATER NAVY: The Official Operational History of the Royal Canadian Navy in the Second World War 1943-1945, Volume Two, Part 2
- A Long Way Gone: Memoirs of a Boy Soldier
- Across Five Aprils
- America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It
- Battle Colors: Insignia and Aircraft Markings of the Eighth Air Force in World War II: Vol.1: (VIII) Bomber Command
- Be Expert With Map and Compass: The Complete Orienteering Handbook
- Benedict Arnold's Navy
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- The Complete Visual Dictionary of Star Wars: The Ultimate Guide to Characters and Creatures from the
- History: Fiction or Science
- A Field Guide to the Atlantic Seashore: From the Bay of Fundy to Cape Hatteras
- Biodiversity Dynamics and Conservation: The Freshwater Fish of Tropical Africa
- Concrete Countertops: Design, Form, and Finishes for the New Kitchen and Bath
- Leading Geeks: How to Manage and Lead the People Who Deliver Technology
- Everybody Wants to Go to Heaven, but Nobody Wants to Die: Or the Eschatology of Bluegrass
- Architect's Essentials of Presentation Skills
- Ancient Greece: The Famous Monuments Past and Present
- Oaks of Asia
Maverick Marine: General Smedley D. Butler and the Contradictions of American Military History
The Plot to Seize the White House: The Shocking True Story of the Conspiracy to Overthrow FDR
It Can't Happen Here
They Thought They Were Free: The Germans, 1933-45 (Phoenix Books)
How The World Really Works
