Amazon.com
Noam Chomsky is considered the father of modern linguistics. In this richly detailed criticism of American foreign policy, he seeks to redefine many of the terms commonly used in the ongoing American war on terrorism. Surveying U.S. actions in Cuba, Nicaragua, Turkey, the Far East and elsewhere over the past half a century along with the modern American war in Iraq, Chomsky indicates that America is just as much a terrorist state as any other government or rogue organization. George W. Bush's 2003 invasion of Iraq drew worldwide criticism, in part because it seemed to present a new philosophy of pre-emptive war and an appearance of global empire building. But according to Chomsky, such has been the operating philosophy of American foreign policy for decades. Opponents of the Bush administration's tactics consistently point out how the American government supported Saddam Hussein for many years prior to the 1990 invasion of Kuwait (pictures of Donald Rumsfeld shaking Saddam's hand are easy to come by) as a means of pointing out how the United States is happy to fund despots when it's in American interests. But Chomsky, armed with extensive historical notation, takes this notion further, arguing how the repression of other nations' citizenry is, in fact, the very reason Americans support certain foreign leaders. The charges made throughout the book are severe, as are the dire consequences he posits if current trends are not reversed, and Chomsky is no more likely to make friends or gain supporters from the mainstream now than he's ever been. But Hegemony or Survival is relatively dispassionate. Instead of relying on camp or shock value or personal attacks as some of his contemporaries have done, Chomsky drives his well-supported points steadily forward in an earnest and highly readable style. --John Moe
Book Description
"Reading Chomsky today is sobering and instructive . . . He is a global phenomenon . . . perhaps the most widely read voice on foreign policy on the planet." The New York Times Book ReviewAn immediate national bestseller, Hegemony or Survival demonstrates how, for more than half a century the United States has been pursuing a grand imperial strategy with the aim of staking out the globe. Our leaders have shown themselves willing-as in the Cuban missile crisis-to follow the dream of dominance no matter how high the risks. World-renowned intellectual Noam Chomsky investigates how we came to this perilous moment and why our rulers are willing to jeopardize the future of our species.With the striking logic that is his trademark, Chomsky tracks the U.S. government's aggressive pursuit of "full spectrum dominance" and vividly lays out how the most recent manifestations of the politics of global control-from unilateralism to the dismantling of international agreements to state terrorism-cohere in a drive for hegemony that ultimately threatens our existence. Lucidly written, thoroughly documented, and featuring a new afterword by the author, Hegemony or Survival is a definitive statement from one of today's most influential thinkers.
Download Description
The United States is in the process of staking out not just the globe but the last unarmed spot in our neighborhood-the heavens-as a militarized sphere of influence. Our earth and its skies are, for the Bush administration, the final frontiers of imperial control. In Hegemony or Survival, Noam Chomsky investigates how we came to this moment, what kind of peril we find ourselves in, and why our rulers are willing to jeopardize the future of our species.
Customer Reviews:
Connect the dots?.......2007-09-13
This material is not easy to digest in two ways. First, there are so many facts and figures that after a while your head begins to spin. I listened to it twice in succession just for that reason. Secondly, it's difficult to believe that your country's political leaders could possibly be saying one thing and doing another. Aren't we, the US, always the "good guys"? Don't we always do things the right way, "the American way"? Maybe that is a problem. Perhaps other nations want to do things their own way.
If you wonder why so much of the world dislikes or even hates the US, then this book will offer bountiful explanations, dating back to probably the Monroe Doctrine in the first part of the nineteenth century. Whether or not you agree with Mr. Chomsky's conclusions is up to you, but to refute him you will have a lot of offered facts to overcome.
Previous reviewers have labeled him a communist, or at the least, a communist sympathizer. I didn't get that impression. He just doesn't like American interventionist foreign policy which supposedly is leading to a New World Order, with the US the undisputed leader. And a lot of other people in the world think the same way and don't like it either.
If even a small portion of what he writes is true, it's a sad situation in my eyes. But if you consider the facts and connect the dots...where does it lead? Make up your own mind.
Dr. Chomsky.......2007-09-10
The most insightful look at the past 60 some odd years of american foreign policy, it's consequences and possible motives. A thouroughly researched and meticulously catalogued breakdown of the views and voices that have been there every step of the way, the voices that are usualy silenced and swallowed up by the historical accounts of the victors.
Chomsky poses the compelling question of our time.......2007-08-28
Other reviews have covered, at length, the perceived pros and cons of Chomsky's critique of American foreign policy in general and of the war in Iraq in particular, and I will reveal from the outset that my conclusions on these topics are simliar to Chomsky's in many respects. The incredible value of this book, however, is that seeks to address the question of human survival within the context of American foreign policy.
Although Chomsky does not delve deeply into the topic of the pending petroleum crisis, it, as well as other questions regarding the future of industrial civilization, is never too far beneath the surface. According to geologists of the Hubbard school, the world has reached or will soon reach a point of peak oil production after which the ability of global production to meet demand will inevitably decline, leading to a global crisis of unprecedented proportions. To the extent that U.S. policy continues along the lines of exerting hegemonic control over what is left as opposed to engaging in principled and collective effort towards creating a more equitable post-petroleum global economy, it certainly does lead us towards destruction or at the very least, a nightmarish Hobbesian existence in which human lives will indeed be "nasty, brutish and short".
One may choose to agree or disagree with many of Chomsky's arguments. However, for any thinking person who is conversant with history and who has an interest in social justice for all and not just for some, Chomsky drives home a number of points that are practically unassailable:
1. U.S. foreign policy, like the policies of great powers before it, have rarely been predicated on the publicly espoused principles of democracy, equality and freedom, but in the pursuit of its elite's interests, often to the detriment of the environment, democracy itself, and of the well-being of working and oppressed people around the world as well as within the United States. The unprecedented ability of modern man to destroy not only each other, but the very environment that makes sustainable existence on Earth possible however, dictates that unlike any empire or imperial age before it, the consequences of American policy are truly global in scope, and they may prove to be beyond any conceivable ability of repair.
2. The phenomenon of "globalizaton", in practice, has benefited, for the most part, only the financial elites and the military and technocratic elements whose services are necessary to maintain the system. For the rest of humanity, globalization has come to mean a nightmare of economic and cultural disruption and dislocation on a global scale. It is interesting to note that with the advent of globalization, the gap between the rich and poor has increased significantly, not only on a global scale but within the individual economies of the wealthiest nations as well. Lenin's "aristocracy of labor" is shrinking as we speak!
3. Despite the fact that the U.S. can justifiably be seen as the world's only military superpower, its attempts to exert unilateral control over the dwindling energy resources of the Middle East (and by extension of the rest of the world) will increasingly lead it into escalating conflict with other nations and peoples, resulting not only in its own moral, political and economic bankruptcy, but potentially in the destruction of civilization as we know it.
4. Only by understanding the nature of the current situation and organizing to change course can Americans and other people around the world prevent this continuing descent into madness.
Regardless of one's ideological inclination, "Hegemony or Survival" should provoke readers to serious thought on these matters, and for that Professor Chomsky should be thanked and applauded.
Another mandatory reading for those who wish to understand the world. .......2007-07-27
The writing has Chomsky's typical laser-like clarity. The facts are abundant and irrefutable. The arguments are powerful and inescapable. A refreshing break from all the propaganda and indoctrination that cover the landscape.
disturbing revelations.......2007-07-05
I hated how the book made me feel but it gets 5 stars for its brutal edification - as I'm sure was his intent.
Whatever your politics are, and regardless of whether you dislike or disbelieve Chomsky's conclusions, the facts laid out in this book speak disturbingly for themselves. Our government consistently pays lip service to supporting and promoting democracy but apparently has a nasty track record to the contrary. I would sincerely rather that not be true but there it is in the historical record. As stated by another reviewer, his facts are correct.
I could only read this book a little at a time. I would get too angry and have to set it aside for a few days until I could handle some more ugly truth.
I always thought Bush's statement that the terrorists "hate us because of our freedoms" did not quite ring true. In light of our government's actions reported in this book, the statement becomes absurdly transparent misinformation.
At least now we know the REAL reasons why they hate us.
SG
Book Description
The Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times columnist and best-selling author of The Lexus and the Olive Tree gives a bold, timely, and surprising picture of the state of globalization in the twenty-first century.
In this brilliant #1 bestseller, "the most important columnist in America today" (Walter Russell Mead, The New York Times) demystifies the brave new world for readers, allowing them to make sense of the often bewildering global scene unfolding before their eyes. With his inimitable ability to translate complex foreign policy and economic issues, Thomas L. Friedman explains how the flattening of the world happened at the dawn of the twenty-first century; what it means to countries, companies, communities, and individuals; and how governments and societies can, and must, adapt. The World Is Flat is the timely and essential update on globalization, its successes and discontents, powerfully illuminated by one of our most respected journalists.
Customer Reviews:
Buyer beware!.......2007-10-22
With this book, Mr. Friedman purports to be a guru of deep thoughts and grand designs.
Yet Mr. Friedman was one of the so-called reasonable people who supported George W. Bush's disastrous decision to invade Iraq because they claimed it was a direct threat to the security of the United States.
The all-wise Mr. Friedman and other neo-conservatives actually thought war in Iraq would spread peace through out the Middle East.
Anyone with half a brain and a whiff of history could have seen what was coming.
Of course peace has not happened - they ask us to wait - maybe a hundred years or so. Yet Mr. Friedman is still asked for his opinions on worldly maters even though every one of his predictions on Iraq was wrong.
Living In the KnowlEdge Society (LIKES) preparation.......2007-10-21
A must for everyone preparing for Living In the KnowlEdge Society. I'm recommending this as an important reading for all undergraduate students so they can be prepared for the emerging Knowledge Society of the 21st century. With NSF support, the LIKES project team is aiming to transform computing-related education, and also to connect the key paradigms of computing (not just programming, but also human-computer interaction, automating workflows, ...) with modern life. We hope that students will be able to engage more in designing, building, and living in the Flat World, that is so eloquently explained and illustrated in this insightful work. Readers should be sure to get past the first section, which may seem to move slowly and be repetitious, since it is the examples and principles and big picture that all emerge, making this a memorable explanation of technology and society. Those choosing careers, and preparing for the work force, should carefully consider the recommendations made.
The World is Flat.......2007-10-17
Friedman does not convince me that radical free trade is the answer to solving problems. While he does cover all the bases for the advancement of the technological revolution, Friedman is merciless in his analysis and does not allow for a lot of other factors to enter into his argument. I finished this book with an uncomfortable feeling in the pit of my stomach. I suggest that you read it but with a grain of salt.
A guide for the Globalized world.......2007-10-13
The World is Flat does a great job at describing the trend of globalization.
On one hand, globalization is raising the standard of living of many people around the world. Productivity and ingenuity are rapidly increasing as many new people and nations participate in the global market.
On the other hand, many people and nations are being left behind. Also, the modernization of countries is straining Earth's resources.
There are very recent statistics and anecdotal stories in the book. He gives a fascinating tour of the business processes of several worldwide businesses such as Walmart, Dell, Wipro, and UPS.
The US is indeed in trouble. Its educational system is falling in proportion to other countries. We are distracted by wars and wasteful political games when we need to focus on empowering our people.
While he has considerable interactions with business, he also has personal stories of India's untouchables striving to have a better life. There are also examples of how people use flattening technologies on the internet, to express themselves.
We are approaching the world where individuals are on a level playing field with large media organizations. Of course this is good and bad. While one person can blog about corruption and inequities in his government, another can use it to spread seeds of hate and prejudice.
These groups that spread hate prey on inequity, lack of voice, and opportunity to participate in global progress that its members feel.
Michael Friedman lays a challenge that we must work smarter, collaborate more, and constantly improve our country and world. I hope that you read this book and, even if you don't agree with his views, strive to make the world a better place.
Friedman missed the key point.......2007-10-01
Friedman relies on personal anecdotes to generalize about a complex topic. His anecdotes are heavily biased, since he hangs around with captains of industry, who are big beneficiaries of laissez-faire globalization. He even justifies his approach with this quote: "One example is worth a thousand theories." Well, this topic is much too complex for such an approach. He is an entertaining (if very repetitive and self-absorbed) raconteur, but he misses the forest by spending over 600 pages congratulating himself for climbing a few low-hanging branches in the most obvious trees.
It is a mark of Friedman's approach and personality that he dates the beginning of "Flat World" phenomena to a few years ago, when he discovered them. He seems blissfully unaware of the long history of globalization. A few examples: 200 years ago, before refrigeration, North American entrepreneurs destroyed the English trade in domestic ice by building insulated ships and shipping New England ice to London (and even Calcutta); cheap water power and cotton in the US destroyed the British weaving trades 50 years later; 500 years ago, the takeover of Peruvian silver mines by Spanish entrepreneurs bankrupted silver production in Spain; there are countless examples of the effects of globalization from the Roman Empire's rise and fall as well (well-managed during the rise, disastrously so during the fall). Friedman's "born yesterday" myopia on this topic, and on the lessons of history, is puzzling.
Friedman glances by what is, in my mind, the central issue (e.g. the one that has the biggest impact on people): the different ways governments act and respond. He admits no expertise in economics, yet declares himself to be a Ricardian (without reflecting on the irony of a self-styled futurist relying on 200-year-old economic theory), and moves on. The rest of us, however, can learn a lot by looking at the differences and subtleties (or lack thereof) of governmental policies, a topic which is completely absent from Friedman's book. Asian countries, and to a lesser extent Western European countries, have created a regulatory environment that promotes a productive response in their own countries. Some examples:
If GM wants to sell cars in China or Europe, it is obligated to build a factory there, and transfer some of its technology to local partners. Intel has just announced that its next processor fab will be built in China; the economics of IC manufacturing is something I know quite a lot about, and labor costs are a negligible factor. Intel was forced to do this by Chinese economic policy, not by cheap Chinese labor. Ditto putting a previous Intel chip plant in Ireland when Intel started selling in volume in Europe. On the other hand, our own government has been a willing partner in the evisceration of American industrial and high-tech production. The governments of Asian and European countries shake their heads at our short-sightedness and short-term consumption greed.
I credit Friedman with making more people aware of this important topic. That earns him one star!
Book Description
America must make a historic choice: Will it strive to dominate the world, or lead it?
American power and a pervasive globalization are the central realities of today's world, and the source of its most difficult dilemmas. America's historically unprecedented power is the ultimate source of global security, yet Americans feel less secure than ever. Global interdependence and the widespread political awakening of humankind promote American dominance even as they breed anti-American envy, mobilize global resentment, and empower America's enemies through the diffusion of ever more destructive technologies.
In The Choice, Zbigniew Brzezinski, former National Security Advisor to the president of the United States, reminds Americans that their preponderance should not be confused with omnipotence. America's well-being and the world's are entwined. Panicky preoccupation with solitary American security, an obsessively narrow focus on terrorism, and indifference to the concerns of a politically restless humanity neither enhance American security nor comport with the world's real need for American leadership. Unless it can harmonize its overwhelming power with its seductive but also unsettling social appeal, America could find itself alone and under assault in a setting of intensifying global chaos.
Brzezinski has been hailed by Samuel P. Huntington for his "clear-eyed, tough-minded...geostrategic thinking in the grand tradition of Bismarck" and by Paul Wolfowitz as one of the world's "most penetrating analysts of international affairs and...one of the leading practitioners of the art of strategy." In The Choice, he identifies America's crucial strategic imperative: America must be both guarantor of global security and promoter of the global common good.
Customer Reviews:
His Idea - Baby Steps - to Simplify His Theory of What to Do.......2006-07-17
I feel like I have been on an overdose of these books having read House of Bush, House of Saud by Craig Unger (excellent book) - the biggest tell all blockbuster, The Choice by Zbigniew Brzezinski, Disarming Iraq, by Hans Blix, Noam Chomsky's Hegemony of Survival, Thirty Days (about Tony Blair) by Peter Stothard, and Price of Loyalty, Paul O'Neill, Why America Slept by Gerald Posner, Against All Eneamies by Richard Clarke, and the Rise of the Vulcans by Mann and Mann. I put together a "listmania" list of the 25 best books - the best books - mainly non political, no strong bias conservative or liberal - a spectrum of opinion when you take them all together.
There is certainly a wide variety of views and all of these books are excellent. I have read and for the most part digested the views and ideas and I would strongly recommend any or all of these books to get a diverse view. One cannot begin to give these books justice in book reviews. In any case there are generally two types of books, i.e: the "gotcha" books which try to show how Bush has made errors or done something illegal such as the Craig Unger book, or the "solution books" like Brzezinski, Soros and Chomsky.
Of all the "best seller" books on the market I would consider this present book by Brzezinski to be one if not the best books that deals with terrorism, the invasion of Iraq, and the future role of the US. Perhaps not the most exciting read (I think Unger's book takes that title) but still this is an excellent book. In this book he is very diplomatic in his comments of the current administration and he presents many well thought out ideas on how to deal with the Muslim countries, American demographics, how the world views the US etc. In some of the other books by say Chomsky or Soros some of the ideas are in fact quite similar to Brzezinski. Here he is also against unilateral action but he manages to calm down the rhetoric plus he suggests that some sort of world government or similar is not realistic and is many generations off. So instead of say going to the UN and supporting the UN or World Court in any absolute way he suggests shorter term goals that are a combination of working much more closely with the Europeans and then expanding that relationship later in stages (my comment baby steps). Also he seems to advocate more support for the Muslim countries to permit them to develop economically and socially.
All in all a well thought out argument, it is well presented, and attempts to make the debate a little more rational.
mostly thoughtful.......2006-07-13
To frame the problem of U.S. grand strategy, Brzezinski emphasizes several frames of reference from which to consider the current dilemma. His emphasis is not only on strategic imperatives but also on the moral, cultural and historical situation.
The only problem I find with the writing is that Brzezinski tends to become diverted into dissections of many what-if type scenarios. This is fine for a strategic studies expert, however, some of these digressions are somewhat far-fetched. Altogether, its a quick read with some interesting insights into how the U.S. and the world might best proceed.
A New Brave Multi-Polar World.......2005-08-29
ZB brilliantly analyzes the choices in front of USA, in its dealings with the rest of the World and the kind of role and status it can achieve and risks and feasibility of various possible policies. He is characteristically far reaching, almost mathematically precise and complete.
Though he is objective and does not promote any particular ideology other than the balanced and realistic welfare of USA, he is after all a man of "Detante". Those "entangling alliences" and the beloved NATO template keeps coming to the forefront. He is no unilateralist. He makes us aware that unless the current emerging powers such as China and India feel secure, and their vital interests secured, there can not be peace and stability for anyone. I think he understands dynamics of "Great Powers" better than most, and that is the World we are moving back to after all. The great polarization of East and West blocs, and to some degree North and South, have dissolved and a new multi-polar World has been emerging. He seems to have dismissed altogether that infamous "clash of civilizations".
It is a good read. There is a unique piece of insight and wisdom in almost every page. Well delivered and smooth. Stands out among many similar works. Highly recommended.
The Future of Hegemony.......2005-06-19
Zbigniew Brzezinski, former National Security Advisor and resident hawk of the Carter Administration, agrues in this excellent book that America is faced with a choice: either lead the world or try to dominate it. The correct answer or course is the former, and the Bush Administration has chosen the latter. Brzezinski is one of the brightest geostrategic thinkers in the firmament, and he offers a very clear and systematic policy statement on which direction this country should be going to achieve national security.
In the era of globalization, especially after 9/11, the link between national sovereignty and national security has been broken. With the growing interdependence of nation-states, our national security is increasingly in the hands of others. It is true, as President Bush claimed in the election campaign 2004 that we do not need permission from others to protect our security; it is also true that we need the cooperation of others in order to have security.
On a couple of points Brzezinski is in agreement with President Bush. The primary threat to international security comes from rogue or illiberal states - called the "Global Balkans" - that lie between the Suez Canal and the Khyber Pass, a part of the world that contains most of the world's oil and natural gas. The region also contains some of the most religiously inflamed, politically turbulent, and ethnically conflicted people on earth.
And to make matters even worse, they are festering with terrorist and criminal groups searching for weapons of mass destruction. It is in the interest of the civilized and energy hungry world to maintain stability.
America is the preponderant but not omnipotent power. America cannot stabilize the Global Balkans alone, nor with "coalitions of the willing." Brzezinski has a special place in his heart for Europe; he sees a healthy transatlantic alliance as the bedrock of global security. Europe and America are natural allies through shared history and culture. As a team our moral authority and political credibility would be greatly enhanced.
Another point at which Brzezinski is in agreement with the Bush Administration is on the primacy of American military power. Europeans and other allies understand, though they don't openly acknowledge, that global security is underwritten by American power. Brzezinski differs with the administration on how this power should be used. America may have the capablity of overthrowing rogue regimes in a few days or weeks, nevertheless, it still needs to build consensus in order to win a war. If the excercise of military power is not done with legitimacy will fail and backfire. Operations in Iraq (a good outcome is still possible) were executed in such a way that they spawned more terrorist groups, and even emboldened Iran and North Korea to press ahead with nuclear weapons development.
It was even more important to build consensus in the invasion of Iraq because, as we know now, it was a preventative war ( a war of choice), not a preemptive war from some imminent threat. The war in Iraq has given us greater insecurity, not only because it created new terrorists groups, but because our moral authority has been greatly undermined.
The task that Brzezinski lays before the Bush Administration is daunting given the events that have take place. And the European Union, for its part, cannot even agree on a budget and or a constitution, let alone a coherent global security policy. Nevertheless, American hegemony must be a consensual hegemony, not a domineering one. Globalism has brought us more interdependence, and global security can only be achieved through cooperation.
Highly Recommended!.......2005-05-21
The geopolitical landscape evolves so fast that almost any book about global politics ages before the ink can dry. Zbigniew Brzezinski - known as one of the keenest students of American defense and diplomacy since his service in the Carter administration - urges European-American rapprochement over Iraq. He calls for a transition from a war against terrorism to a moral war for global equality and political representation, namely, democracy. No doubt due to unfortunate timing, his book does not account for recent democratic elections in the Middle East or for new transatlantic diplomatic initiatives. Regardless, he uses his laser-beam intellect to show convincingly how globalism, American geopolitical dominance and American cultural imperialism are interacting to create a perfect storm of misunderstanding that leaves Uncle Sam with a tough choice: how to react to terrorism without overreacting and causing U.S. isolation. He concludes that America can choose to lead or to dominate, but not both. We strongly recommend this book to students of globalism and the ongoing experiment of global democracy.
Book Description
America faces its greatest threat since the Civil War. The worst fears of the Founders are being realized, as powerful corporate interests have taken over our culture and representative government. We the People now face a fundamental choice: take back our country . . . or do nothing, and become victims of tyranny and empire.
Thom Hartmann, the acclaimed author of Unequal Protection and The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight, tells a compelling story -- of how a government of, by, and for the people has been replaced by corporate domination. Through brilliant analysis and imaginative illustrations, this fully graphic book illuminates the central dynamics of American politics.
He reveals the forgotten history of the Founders' intent and the devious way that corporations came to possess "human" rights. He explains what the Boston Tea Party actually was, what constituted the Second American Revolution, and how "corporatists" disguised as conservatives are looting assets from We the People's common ownership through privatization schemes.
Most importantly, the book issues a call to action from citizens who want to restore true democracy, and liberty and justice . . . for all.
Customer Reviews:
A great lesson in civics.......2007-10-17
This was the first Thom Hartmann novel I read, and at first I was put off slightly by the comic-book style it incorporates. However, in typical Thom Hartmann fashion, the text of the book was well-researched and made a strong argument in favor of restoring our government to what our founding fathers wanted and ensuring that the power remains in the hands of "We The People" and not corporations or corrupt commanders-in-chief who rely on fear.
We Need More Thom Hartmans.......2007-09-23
A very unique format for a serious book. Thom Hartman again tries to teach us how important the middle class is for the survival of this country. The middle class has to start grass roots movements to take back our country from the megacorporations.
Blind leftest propaganda.......2007-08-17
This lefest propaganda of lies is just as insulting as a book of conservative propganda lies. People like this are such an insult to our country. Hartmann takes whatever comes out of a conservatives mouth and turns it completely around. Attack after attack on policies that work. For example wire tapping and intercepting mail which is pretty necessary considering the fact that it was proven on september 11th that terrorists are capable of planning,hijacking planes and killing thousands of Americans inside our country under our noses. Bushes policy of wire tapping and etc have foiled numerous terrorist plots after 9/11 saving hundreds and even thousands of lives . Anyway, i didnt want to get into anything detailed... The point is people like this on the left and the right are poisoning the minds of the ignorant and the naive and making it harder to work together for a better America. If you actually like this book and give it a high score then you are pretty blind and narrow minded.
big story told in accessible language.......2007-08-17
Thom Hartmann is a genius. I had my doubts about the graphic novel format, but, hey, it works! This book tells a huge story-- the intentional dismantling of our government, the theft of our commons, the destruction of our democracy-- in clear, straight-forward, accessible language. Buy it! Buy it new! Give it to friends, to teenaged children, to Republican uncles.
Very Informative.......2007-02-06
I like the contents of the book, but don't like the fact that the pictures are in cartoon fashion. I believe this takes away from the seriousness of the contents.
Book Description
After World War II the United States faced two preeminent challenges: how to administer its responsibilities abroad as the world's strongest power, and how to manage the rising movement at home for racial justice and civil rights. The effort to contain the growing influence of the Soviet Union resulted in the Cold War, a conflict that emphasized the American commitment to freedom. The absence of that freedom for nonwhite American citizens confronted the nation's leaders with an embarrassing contradiction.
Racial discrimination after 1945 was a foreign as well as a domestic problem. World War II opened the door to both the U.S. civil rights movement and the struggle of Asians and Africans abroad for independence from colonial rule. America's closest allies against the Soviet Union, however, were colonial powers whose interests had to be balanced against those of the emerging independent Third World in a multiracial, anticommunist alliance. At the same time, U.S. racial reform was essential to preserve the domestic consensus needed to sustain the Cold War struggle.
The Cold War and the Color Line is the first comprehensive examination of how the Cold War intersected with the final destruction of global white supremacy. Thomas Borstelmann pays close attention to the two Souths--Southern Africa and the American South--as the primary sites of white authority's last stand. He reveals America's efforts to contain the racial polarization that threatened to unravel the anticommunist western alliance. In so doing, he recasts the history of American race relations in its true international context, one that is meaningful and relevant for our own era of globalization.
Customer Reviews:
Race Relations - A Global Perspective.......2007-04-12
"The Cold War and the Color Line" by Thomas Borstlemann was a textbook in one of my stepson's history classes at Southeastern Louisiana University. He thought I might enjoy it and I did. The focus is on the presidencies of Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson during the U.S. civil rights era. Borstlemann describes how America's practice of racial segregation (and support of European colonial powers, and the segregationist regime in South Africa) hampered it in the minds of third world countries as these mostly non-white countries chose between capitalist and democratic systems and the Communist model. An interesting observation of Bortlesmann's is that the presidents that did the most in support of civil rights for racial minorities were those who grew up in the South--Truman (Missouri) desegregated the military; Johnson (Texas) got the Voting Rights Act passed, and both Carter (Georgia) and Clinton (Arkansas) took a strong interest in the rights of both African-Americans and blacks in Africa. On the other hand, the presidents raised outside the South (Eisenhower in Kansas, Kennedy in Massachusetts, Nixon in California, Reagan in Illinois and Bush in Connecticut) viewed racial equality as a secondary issue at best, or in some cases even worked to reverse past gains. As a "50-something", I lived through most of this era (albeit in central New York state, not the deep South), and found Borstlemann's work to be very illuminating. Since I've lived in the south (South Carolina, Virginia and Louisiana) for the last 30 years, I appreciated the book from the "new South" perspective as well. Highly recommended to students of history and race relations.
The Cold War and Race Relations out of their Vacuums.......2002-07-25
In The Cold War and the Color Line, Borstelmann evaluates how US domestic and international race relations shaped the Cold War and how the Cold war shaped the domestic and international race relations. From my studies, and I imagine the studies of the majority of average Americans, the civil rights movement, de-colonization, and the Cold War happened in individual vacuums - separate from each other, only linked by common abstract dates. Borstelmann shows these happenings are all highly connected - at times acting as catalysts for another. "There was no greater weakness for the United States in waging the Cold War than inequality and discrimination," Borstelmann asserts. The United States had to confront racial segregation and discrimination within its own borders as well as regimes around the world to develop a multiracial global coalition against Soviet Communism. The US had to inspire the newly de-colonized non-white nations to sway towards the "free world." But how was the US to inspire a world, the majority non-white when Jim Crow was still firmly implanted in American society? Borstelmann follows the developments of these issues through the Presidencies that were tempered by the Cold War. I found the book a pleasant surprise. The book went beyond what I expected - being the race situations during the Cold War. Borstelmann took his work beyond that to a living political environment - domestic and international as one - where de-colonization, the Cold war environment, and the Civil Rights movement were taken out of their individual vacuums and thrown into a perspective that understands the complexities of that no so long ago reality. I am positive that anyone interested in race relations will embrace this book. Also I believe for a complete perspective of the Cold War or for any interested in the momentous events that transpired in the 20th century, this well researched book will make an excellent read.
Customer Reviews:
Something missing..........2007-01-10
Overall I thought the book was very well put together and achieves what the author set out to achieve. Based on my knowledge (personal and professional) it is an accurate reflection on the UAE. However, two points I would like to make in relation to the book. First, while Davidson discusses the role Indians played in the early days of the UAE unfortunately they have been left out of modern developments. At the commercial level, expatriate Indians have been a very significant force in the overall development of the UAE. Second, Davidson wants to use quantity as an (almost) measure of quality. When he refers to the various public services available (notably hospitals and public schools) there are some questions about the quality of the services being provided, especially in some of the Emirates outside of Dubai and Abu Dhabi. But he does manage to capture and convey the dynamic and rapidly changing nature of the UAE.
Historically Unreliable .......2006-08-28
Davidson's book may appear to be a useful guide to those unacquainted with the region. But, for those who are from the Gulf and know enough to question his information and assertions we find names that are mispelled or confused with others, we find events relating to the succession of rulers made up, quotes misinterpreted, vagueness in describing time periods and the text riddled with gossip. This is not unique to his book, as similar errors can be found in his article on the politics of succession that was published in the Middle East Policy Council Journal. Two examples readily available from his article that was published this summer (2006) are 1) his description of Sheikh Abdullah as the Minister of Information & Culture, when as of January 2006 he has been Minister of Foreign Affairs. 2) Where he explains that the `best informed locals and veteran expatriates' predicted a succession that bypassed the two eldest sons of Sheikh Zayed.
Davidson's (incorrect) sequence of imparting information jeopardises his analysis of events and their importance. Hence, while it may make for interesting reading of fiction, it can hardly be taken seriously.
If you take a look at his acknowledgements, he thanks his students for contributing information.
The UAE.......2006-06-18
This is easy to follow and has some very good diagrams. It shows that independent research can be done in countries like the UAE which most people seem to assume are still far too sensitive. There is a huge list of sources including interviews and government documents, and at the end is probably the most extensive bibliography (in English and Arabic) on this part of the world. Saudi Arabia could use a similar book.
Why no democracy?.......2006-01-31
This is a very well put together book, and after reading it all the way through I realised it's the first time I have been able to fully understand why democracy has not taken root and, in the western sense at least, is unlikely to take root in the near future. The book is also very useful for showing how the rulers have desperately tried to diversify their economic base, and although most of the statistics only go up to 2004, this is easily the best book I have seen of the development of a Gulf state.
One of few available serious studies of the U.A.E........2005-12-07
As a researcher at a major New York financial firm I needed to quickly find information to help me begin to assess the risks of doing business in the U.A.E. Fortunately I came across a reference to this volume. I found it extremely useful for my work, providing me with substantial up-to-date information on the politics and economics of a country quite different from most I have studied. In particular, Dr. Davidson provided some answers to one of my initial questions about the U.A.E.--what holds this group of seven monarchies together? While the book could have benefited from more editing (it still reads like a doctoral dissertation)it is full of information and easy to use.
Amazon.com
John Perkins started and stopped writing Confessions of an Economic Hit Man four times over 20 years. He says he was threatened and bribed in an effort to kill the project, but after 9/11 he finally decided to go through with this expose of his former professional life. Perkins, a former chief economist at Boston strategic-consulting firm Chas. T. Main, says he was an "economic hit man" for 10 years, helping U.S. intelligence agencies and multinationals cajole and blackmail foreign leaders into serving U.S. foreign policy and awarding lucrative contracts to American business. "Economic hit men (EHMs) are highly paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars," Perkins writes. Confessions of an Economic Hit Man is an extraordinary and gripping tale of intrigue and dark machinations. Think John Le Carré, except it's a true story.
Perkins writes that his economic projections cooked the books Enron-style to convince foreign governments to accept billions of dollars of loans from the World Bank and other institutions to build dams, airports, electric grids, and other infrastructure he knew they couldn't afford. The loans were given on condition that construction and engineering contracts went to U.S. companies. Often, the money would simply be transferred from one bank account in Washington, D.C., to another one in New York or San Francisco. The deals were smoothed over with bribes for foreign officials, but it was the taxpayers in the foreign countries who had to pay back the loans. When their governments couldn't do so, as was often the case, the U.S. or its henchmen at the World Bank or International Monetary Fund would step in and essentially place the country in trusteeship, dictating everything from its spending budget to security agreements and even its United Nations votes. It was, Perkins writes, a clever way for the U.S. to expand its "empire" at the expense of Third World citizens. While at times he seems a little overly focused on conspiracies, perhaps that's not surprising considering the life he's led. --Alex Roslin
Book Description
Confessions of an Economic Hit Man reveals a game that, according to John Perkins, is "as old as Empire" but has taken on new and terrifying dimensions in an era of globalization. And Perkins should know. For many years he worked for an international consulting firm where his main job was to convince LDCs (less developed countries) around the world to accept multibillion-dollar loans for infrastructure projects and to see to it that most of this money ended up at Halliburton, Bechtel, Brown and Root, and other United States engineering and construction companies. This book, which many people warned Perkins not to write, is a blistering attack on a little-known phenomenon that has had dire consequences on both the victimized countries and the U.S.
Customer Reviews:
Confessions of an Economic Hit Man .......2007-10-23
This book will leave your hair standing on end. A riveting piece of work; must read material for anyone trying to understand what is happening to America.
Fact or fiction? Not sure... but.......2007-10-23
The narrative is fast paced and readable. However, in the end one is left wondering about the "facts" and what it means to us.
The book is about the author's account of his involvement in creating "large deals" and later his disillusionment with the idea of being an "Economic Hit Man."
In a sense, I think many consultants too have some self doubt about the "overall value" they help create or how their ideas actually lead towards larger goals. A few end up writing memoirs and books (like this one).
A decent read if you have some time to kill. Nothing more, nothing less.
Not Substantive.......2007-10-21
John Perkins wrote a book that contains no real insight. Most of the information in the book is available through other sources. There was also no satisfaction of him taking us from the start of a project to the end. He speaks vaguely of his various projects, never confiding in us about any details. However, he took ample time to talk about his feelings of guilt and second-guessing. For someone who second-guessed himself as much as he claimed to have, he seemed to make it through a good 20+ years of this work. Without the details, the stories do not have the ring of truth. And, the imposition of his self-doubt and guilt on virtually every page, just leaves the whole story flat and unmoving. And the biggest question is, if he really was a member of such a ruthless and powerful organization, how can it be that he is still alive after writing this book?
Love or Hate it..........2007-10-17
It seems that this book is either a love or hate it affair. I think that the book was a useful look into the ethics of American business and foreign politics, but I also think the book is a little sensational. I must however question the motives of all of those who rated the book, it looks like conservatives rated the book very low, while lefties, tended to go the other way. Like I said I think that the book was an interesting look into foreign affairs, I would read this book again.
READ IT.......2007-10-15
This book, regardless of it's validity, is an interesting read. There are plenty of summaries, I will spare you that, what makes this book interesting isn't in the book, but the questions it raises. What in this book is true? How much impact does the American consumer have on the world? etc... to bigger questions: What impact does anyone (wo)man have on the world? What relations should corporations and governments have? What is Power? and how is it derived? etc...
My advice to everyone I know is: read this book, with an open mind and a large grain of salt.
P.S. Two things, there are parts of this book that are unreadable (e.g. the dream about Jesus) and this book is not for academics, it is, at points, a memoir and for a large portion of the book is a chronicling of world events.
Book Description
People around the world are confused and concerned. Is it a sign of strength or of weakness that the US has suddenly shifted from a politics of consensus to one of coercion on the world stage? What was really at stake in the war on Iraq? Was it all about oil and, if not, what else was involved? What role has a sagging economy played in pushing the US into foreign adventurism and what difference does it make that neo-conservatives rather than neo-liberals are now in power? What exactly is the relationship between US militarism abroad and domestic politics? These are the questions taken up in this compelling and original book. Closely argued but clearly written, 'The New Imperialism' builds a conceptual framework to expose the underlying forces at work behind these momentous shifts in US policies and politics. The compulsions behind the projection of US power on the world as a 'new imperialism' are here, for the first time, laid bare for all to see. This new paperback edition contains an Afterword written to coincide with the result of the 2004 American presidental election.
Customer Reviews:
Provocative.......2006-05-23
Picking up on a few key theoretical points not included in other reviews. Harvey is pressing an academic point within the broad Marxian tradition-- a point which also has broad practical consequences for confronting imperialism's latest incarnation. A central contention is that the capitalist world has been experiencing a crisis of overaccumulation since about 1973, as evidenced by a lack of opportunities for profitable investment (for which, by the way, he offers no statistical data, but which is not at issue here). Growth prior to the 1973 watershed, he argues, was driven by expanded reproduction with the US exercising hegemonic authority as a result of its WWII reorganization of old European colonialism. However, for various reasons (chiefly Vietnam era inflation) this regime broke down. At that point, he argues, the much-marginalized neo-liberal thinking of von Mises and von Hayek began to get a sympathetic hearing and commenced its long march through the institutions of the capitalist world. This new strategy utilizes neo-liberal measures, such as trade and finance liberalization (IMF, World Bank, GATT, et al.) to force open hitherto closed or regulated foreign markets, thereby helping to employ surplus capital. A related tool is to force devaluation upon a target economy, enabling foreign investors to buy cheaply and improve opportunity for increased profit margins. Thus, in broad outline, a new form of imperialism has arisen, one that remains similar to its classic colonial predecessor in that it still seeks to relieve accumulation problems at home by shifting profitability problems abroad, sometimes forcibly so.
Harvey descibes this new imperialism as accumulation by dispossession, a controversial description since dispossession in classic Marxist thinking is supposed to be restricted to the primitive forms of accumulation of times gone by. Still, the evidence is considerable given the wave of privatization of formerly public assets (water and education, in particular) in many parts of the world, (think also of recent attacks on Social Security). Indeed, these institutional measures inside and outside the US, do in fact resemble the classic "enclosues" of capital's earlier, more primitive stage. Recent attacks on formerly state-sponsored economies such as Yugoslavia's and Iraq's amount to further cases in point. But, again, this revived dispossession need not depend on military invasion; the subtler form attacks through the avenues of capital markets and state-sponsored privatization. Though the current period is dominated by dispossession, Harvey points out that accumulation by reproduction still continues. In fact, he asserts, the two are `organically' related and `dialectically' connected, for which however he offers scant elaboration.
The practical upshot of imperialism by dispossession is to force a shift in anti-imperialist thinking away from the familiar strategies that challenged the pre-1973 expanded reproduction regime. That earlier response stressed organizing the proletariat into a political force in order to seize state power in behalf of socialist principles. Movements outside that exclusive strategy were considered secondary at best, and counter-revolutionary at worst. Though this effort failed in its primary task, the author points out that it's hard to conceive of Europe's social democracies or America's New Deal as taking place without the single-minded drive of communist party politics. However, these methods are now clearly inadequate for confronting neo-liberalism and its capacity to bypass both organized labor and state power (consider neo-liberalism's sabotage of France's Mitterand in his effort to deepen socialist programs in the 1980's). Instead, current forms of resistance are much more diverse and localized, as evidenced by Mexico's Zapatista movement or Bolivian resistance to water privatization schemes. If there's a central rallying cry among these diverse groups, it's opposition to `globalization', at least in neo-liberal form. Generally, the central challenge facing anti-imperialists, as Harvey sees it, is to combine the wisdom of former strategies with the developing modes of today-- a not inconsiderable task, to say the least.
All in all, this is a stimulating read. There is much to digest, especially in grappling with the theoretical aspects. It's important to point out that Harvey approaches the topic as a critical observer and not as an economist, a fact which some may count as a fault since many of the conclusions rest on economic data. Still and all, the work remains an important prism for examining current trends.
American Empire on a New Course?.......2005-12-08
Excellent book...
D. Harvey places in context the recent developments in US foreign policy. He wrote this book before April 2003 yet, he could still easily see through the smoke screen arguments of WMD, democracy!
Concerning Iraq, Harvey argued that the main goal of USA was regime change and to establish a client state there to control the oil reserves & routes of Middle East. He reminds the US had plans set up for a conflict with Iraq much before the first Gulf War.
Harvey notes the existence of a US empire was long recognized by leftists long ago. It was only after 9/11 when the conservatives started also to recognize this empire and in fact argued for the benefits of one. During Clinton years, this American empire was more like the old Ottoman Empire, a tolerant one with light footprints. Now, it is more like the hard-pressing Roman Empire, trying to change cultures wholesale, not satisfied with only the consent of governments. Most Americans don't understand this, but the pressure by USA in less developed countries in fact causes only resentment and anger there.
He also speculates the war may be a method to distract Americans from rebelling against the government because of deteriorating conditions in economy.
Overall, it is an easy short read containing substantial arguments.
Right on the money, though tough reading........2005-07-08
In the last thirty years or so, there has been a growing body of thought and literature in the world that America is the next Empire, maybe not in the Roman mold, but surely as powerful as the old English empire. Contributions to this train of thought have come from numerous corners; peace activists protesting the Vietnam War, anti-globalization groups protesting US corporations, French farmers protesting McDonalds, Muslim scholars and clerics throughout the world, and isolationists within American politics. These groups and their arguments have tended to emphasize the how of empire; how America came to empire, how it is an Empire, and of course, how we will fall like other Empires. This book tries to give a why, and does so from the oldest of corners opposing the American Way: socialism, and the writings of Marx and his followers. As such, it does an impressive job within a very short number of pages.
To be brief, this book proposes several points. First, America has gradually turned into an empire over the last fifty years. As evidence, the author points to the dozens of military bases the US has around the world. American now has more military installations in more places than any other nation that has ever existed. Many of these bases are located in countries that are not democratic; i.e. the citizens of these countries did not vote to invite America's military in. The only possible conclusions are that the local government stays in power through America's support (financial or otherwise), or are outright puppet governments.
Second, this is not an empire built on the control of land and the founding of colonies in say the English mold, but instead is an empire built on opening up consumer markets for American corporations and controlling non-renewable natural resources such as oil, again for domestic consumption. The first part of this argument is self-evident; America has no colonies in the most literal sense and our ambassadors in most countries are holed-up in concrete fortresses instead of prancing around like local kings of the hill. The second part of this argument is also as self-evident, to those whose eyes and ears are open. Specifically, America's aid, money, attention and soldiers often end up in places that are either important trade posts (Suez and Panama Canals), have oilfields (the entire Middle East), or have a large business community which we do business with (Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Germany).
Third, America has made this transformation to the ignorance of most of its citizens, but to the alarm and suspicion of almost everyone else. This is probably the most important point of this book. Pull over any American on the street, give her a map of the world and ask her to point out all the countries which have been militarily attacked (bombed, invaded, occupied, etc...) by the US since 1900 (excluding the two World Wars). She should answer Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and might recall North Korea, Somalia and Serbia. She will probably leave out Haiti, Cuba, Panama, Philippines, Libya and Mexico, and will surely be unawares of Russia (US troops invaded during the Russian Revolution), Cambodia (secret bombings ordered by Nixon during the Vietnam War) and China (prior to World War II). No other nation in the history of the world has intruded upon the soil of so many other countries as has the USA. If this does not qualify America as an empire, than nothing can.
Fourth, this growth of empire has been fueled by the same historical reasons and processes that fueled the growth of the British Empire, the Nazis, the Roman Empire, and other great empires. War serves as a way to divert the public attention from domestic troubles; usually economic. To be exact, the fruits and costs of war alleviate various economic pressures that could doom a nation's leadership if otherwise left to fester. The centuries prior to England's Age of Empire was marked by a stratification of English society. Most of the livable land in England passed into the ownership of a small, wealthy minority. You were either born into it or outside of it. Those born into it were not going to give up wealth to their less privileged brethren, so colonial expansion provided a way by which those born outside of it could achieve wealth and status in life. Population growth was relieved by sending people off to other lands. The poor benefited because emigration kept the labor pool small, thereby keeping up wages. The rich benefited because English colonies provided an outlet for their produced goods, and a source of natural resources (e.g. tea from India) and cheap labor (cotton from the American south). Similarly, war and the resulting influence of other countries economic and political policies help the US economy grow.
Fifth, all of this is not unexpected. The path America has taken was described over a century ago by Karl Marx and his followers as the path all capitalist countries take. After the end of the Cold War, intellectuals the world over concluded that Marxist thought was over; relegated to the trash heap of history. Actually, the historical processes described my Marx have played themselves out numerous times in the 20th century.
Sixth, the current Bush administration marks a watershed in the history of America, akin to the rule of Augustus in Rome. Specifically, the latter's rule marked the official transition from Roman Republic to Roman Empire. The Bush administration, with either the consent or ignorance of the American electorate, have quickly exited the numerous treaties it had bound itself to in the previous five decades, has openly called out enemies to oppose, and has invaded two countries (so far). As such, the span from 2001 - 2008 is when America, in the eyes of others, has decided to transform from world leader to world bully, akin to the transition from Roman Republic to Roman Empire.
Seventh, like all empires, America clothes its actions abroad (i.e. foreign policy) in morals and ethics, but they are mostly driven by self-interest. The author does not argue this point fully, primarily because it is elaborated elsewhere. This keeps the page count down, but reduces the impact and persuasiveness of the book. In response to the other (incredibly ignorant) review for this book, I will take up this argument here.
a. In World War II, the US declared war on the Nazis ONLY AFTER they declared war on the US. If the US was such a high-minded nation as the other review implies, America would have declared war on Germany the moment Nazi troops entered Poland. Related to this, millions of Jews tried to flee Europe during the 1930's and 1940's. Many of them tried to enter the US. The US rejected most of them and only allowed in those with political connections, those with money, and those with training in quantum physics, nuclear physics, weapons technology (Einstein, Oppenheimer, etc...), and others that could help US science and technology. If the US was such a moral nation, it would have allowed in all the Jews. We, America, defeated the Nazis because they declared war on us, and posed a mortal threat to us. This is no different and no better than one street gang eliminating another street gang that steps on its turf.
b. During the Cold War, the US intervened militarily in other countries to prevent the spread of communism. This was often and usually done without the explicit consent of the populations of the host countries. Vietnam is a prime example. Throughout the 1960s, the US military frequently held secret, mock elections in villages throughout South Vietnam. The Communist candidates nearly always won, even when the US-backed candidates had more funding and resources to bribe the electorate. Why? Because the Communist candidates offered what the people wanted. This is why there was never an election in South Vietnam during the US occupation. America did not care about what the South Vietnamese wanted; we only cared about what we wanted.
c. During the Cold War, the US provided aid to other countries that publicly supported the fight against communism. An example is South Africa. As long as the white government publicly opposed communism, the US government and US corporations turned a blind eye towards apartheid. It was only the civil rights movement, and especially black activists that brought this to a halt in the 1980s.
These and other experiences in countries around the world prove beyond a doubt that America did not care about liberty, justice, freedom and democracy in other countries, but only that they oppose communists. The question then begs as to why America was so interested in opposing communism. This leads to the last point argued in this book. Every empire needs an opposite; Greece had Persia, Rome had Carthage, the English had first the Spanish and then later Napoleon. We had communists. Communists are bad for business because they believe in communal, non-transferable rights to everything, which is anathema to the concept of individual, transferable ownership of anything, the basis of capitalism and business. Who runs America? Not civil rights leaders like Caeser Chavez or Martin Luther King Jr. Not progressive politicians like Eugene Debs or Ralph Nader. No, America is run by businessmen (current and ex) and those who cater to business interests. It was Robert McNamara, JFK and others connected to the business world who led America and its naïve president LBJ into Vietnam, not those who were fighting for freedom and liberty like MLK Jr. or Malcolm X.
In all, this is a great book to read, though the text is tough and hard to work through.
Pure lies.......2005-06-20
Let us examine the argument herein:
1) The U.S is an empire
2) U.S interests conspire to dominate the world bank, the IMF and the U.N to push american interests.
Let us see how this was done. In 1941 when the Nazis had overun all of Europe and the Japanese tried to take over Asia, America dared to be an evil imperialist by opposing Nazism, after all Nazism was actually 'anti-colonial'.
When the Russians took over Eastern Europe and ensalved their own people and those of 15 other nations America dared to stand up for its imperial interests and defend Europe and the world. Instead America should have done nothing and let the world all end up like North Korea so that every nation can end up like cambodia where 1/3 of the population is killed and 1/3 put in a Gulag.
In the 2000s when Militant Islam went on a rampage in Europe, in Nigeria, the Phillipines, Indonesia, Thailand, Sudan, Israel and India, slaughtering innocents, America dared to retaliate when 3000 of its citizens were killed.
This is the empire of America. The WTO and IMF bail out starving nations, helps build dams and infrastructure and that is bad. Yes America is an empire and if these are the sins America is accused of then America must keep going full steam ahead, and keep opposing religious fundamentalism, Nazism and th enslavement of the world.
Seth J. Frantzman
Book Description
The Bush Agenda is the first book to expose the Bush Administration's radical economic agenda for global domination, a plan more extreme, unilateral and audacious than any of his predecessors, a plan that has created the greatest level of violent opposition to America and Americans in recent history.
The Bush Agenda: Invading the World, One Economy at a Time explores the Bush Administration's plan to invade the world through a corporate globalization agenda, first in Iraq, then the Middle East with the proposed U.S.-Middle East Free Trade Area, and ultimately as a cornerstone to the global Bush Doctrine of Pax Americana. What is Bush's "free trade?" It's an economic model that argues that by removing restrictions on multinational corporations, these companies will be freed to become engines of economic growth in countries around the world, but in fact bring vast wealth of a small number of global elites while entire populations suffer dislocation, poverty and violence, creating a perfect Petri dish for breeding terrorists. The instruments for this takeover include such corporations as Bechtel, Lockheed Martin, ChevronTexaco, Halliburton, and many others.
This book addresses the history of U.S. economic relations throughout the world over the past 25 years, the key role of U.S. corporations, and the larger Bush economic agenda and what the potential impact of this agenda will be on the United States and the world. It concludes with specific alternatives to guide the U.S. on a more peaceful and sustainable course in the future. Using Naomi Klein's No Logo and Eric Schlosser's Fast Food Nation as models, The Bush Agenda is based on hard analytic fact and presented so that it will not only be persuasive, but highly engaging and entertaining to a broad audience.
Customer Reviews:
Meticulous documentation of the progress of Cartel economics and empire.......2007-05-23
"Once you've got Baghdad it's not clear what you do with it. It's not clear what kind of government you would put in place of the one that's currently there. How much credibility is that government going to have if it's set up by the US military.... I think to have American military engaged in a civil war inside Iraq would fit the definition of a quagmire, and we have absolutely no desire to get bogged down in that fashion."--(page 174) Dick Cheney, April 1991, explaining why Bush the First did not take Baghdad after Gulf War I
Antonia Juhasz has performed a major public service in exposing the history, players, and motivations behind the second Iraqi war and occupation. "It's about the oil, silly."
Actually, not totally about the oil but for the material benefit of several industries to which access to petroleum-based energy is a key contributor. She does not mention the Carlyle Group[1], instead focusing on four top bananas: Bechtel, Chevron, Halliburton, and Lockheed Martin. The individual histories and blatant aggression of these companies, each largest in its field, are truly eye-opening.
Agenda is primarily documentation of the relationships between the war and energy corporations and the Bush dynasty...
For my complete review of this book and for other book and movie
reviews, please visit my site [...]
Brian Wright
Copyright 2007
Essential Reading.......2007-05-11
Bush agenda is absolutely essential to understanding the unfolding story in the Middle East. Turning each page was like opening a new door of insight.
Here's Why the US is in an Endless War!.......2007-05-07
Antonia Juhasz has assembled expertly the pieces of the puzzle. Readers of "The Bush Agenda: Invading the World One Economy at a Time" will have it all put together by the time they finish reading this well-documented expose. It is so important that I have given copies to three brothers and five children I love.
The World Should Wake Up.......2007-05-06
If you want to have an understanding of how the Bush Administration is pushing their ongoing agenda/policy for globalization and corporatization of our world (with the help of a handful of elitists) this is a must read. What frightens me about the future of our world is that this book illustrates that those in power have no interest in the protection of the average person or our planet, it's about controlling resources, i.e. oil, water and food, using any method necessary,including military to further their own agenda...greed and power.
The Juhasz Agenda: Depriving The World Of Oil, One Combustion Engine at a Time.......2007-04-28
Juhasz zeal and fanaticism against anyone or anything that engages in oil exploration or consumption makes Ed Begley Jr look like the equivalent of a one man Exxon Valdeze.
The author is of course not a journalist, or a reporter, or even a fair minded observer, but rather a far left activist with many axes to grind. Her total disdain for oil, whether refined or crude, extends to her personal ownership of any transportation that uses the pernicious benzene. What is Juhasz's stated reason for this life long eschewing of the automobile? "I refuse to give money to evil gas companies," says this holder of Public Policy degrees. One has to wonder if Juhasz was frightened by a car backfire in her cradle.
I guess Juhasz's abhorrence of lining the pockets of oil company ceo's only extends to paying at the pump as she isn't as persnickety when it comes to flying to all her public speaking engagements around the country.
Juhasz is a member of International Forum on Globalization and Oil Change International whose ideology and purpose is conveyed in this synopsis:
"We focus on the oil industry because we understand and view the oil industry as a source of global warming, human rights abuses, war, national security concerns, corporate globalization, poverty, and addiction. We also see their interests behind every major political barrier to a clean energy transition."
This intransigent position seems at odds with the purpose of a public policy masters degree that is supposed provide the candidate with analysis of the political, economic, quantitative, organizational, and normative aspects of complex problems. Juhasz has distilled all historical and current complex geopolitical issues and events down to three grimy letters: oil. She is the Freud of the anti-industrial revolution set. Even though both are not mutually exclusive, Juhasz substitutes oil for sex as the motivation for all human endeavor.
Let's examine Juhasz's rational for Bush's continued secret ulterior motives for remaining in Iraq.
"The process of securing this access involves three steps. The first, put into motion with the December 15, 2005, election, is the formation a legitimate Iraqi government with the authority to, among other things, sign contracts with foreign oil companies. The second step is the completion and passage of a new national oil law that is set to conclude at the start of 2006. The third, having enough security on the ground for U.S. oil companies to get to work, is uncertain, and therefore the time line for full U.S. troop withdrawal remains unknown."
Well, this "secret" Bush master plan must have been kept a secret from Rumsfeld since Bush approved the number of troops used in the initial Iraq invasion and subsequent mop up. If securing the all the oil producing fields, as well as Baghdad, was the intended goal after taking out Saddam, why didn't Bush accept Gen. Eric K. Shinseki's estimate that several hundred thousand troops would be needed in postwar Iraq?
Surely Juhasz isn't advocating Iraq oil only for Iraqis? It would seem antithetical to Juhasez's extremist views on petroleum; that any country's petroleum should be taken out of the ground, refined, and used to power evil machines belching toxic fumes.
What is Juhasz's position on nuclear energy? Never mind. I'm sure there are dastardly robber barons who also enjoy a monopoly over the power of the atom. But how would Antonia achieve martyr status if she merely eschewed atomic submarines and nuclear powered aircraft carriers as modes of transportation?
Book Description
Andy Stern, one of the most visionary leaders in America today, has fought relentlessly to ensure that Americans' hard work is rewarded in today's hypercompetitive, globalized world. As the newsmaking president of the fastest-growing, most dynamic union in America, he has led the charge for modernizing the "house of labor" -- taking unions out of the past and into the twenty-first century. He has spearheaded the campaign against the "Wal-Marting" of jobs and has innovated transformative solutions to the daunting problems facing Americans, from job insecurity to runaway health care costs. In this powerful critique and call-to-arms, he offers a revelatory dissection of the gathering threats to our standard of living -- threats that 
General
| Politics
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Failed States: The Abuse of Power and the Assault on Democracy
Media Control, Second Edition: The Spectacular Achievements of Propaganda (Open Media Series)
People's History of the United States: 1492 to Present (P.S.)
9-11
Confessions of an Economic Hit Man
