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

Book Description

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

Customer Reviews:

Has history been tampered with?.......2007-10-23

Watch Video Here: http://www.amazon.com/review/RAZQNMXM4M9CL Has history been tampered with? Yes, it has! Did events and eras such as the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, the Roman Empire , the Dark Ages, and the Renaissance, actually occur within a very different chronology from what we've been told? Yes, they certainly did!

The history of humankind is both drastically shorter and dramatically different than generally presumed.

Why is it so? On one hand, it was usual custom to justify the claims to title and land by age and ancestry, and on the other the court historians knew only too well how to please their masters. The so called universal classic world history is a pack of intricate lies for all events prior to the 16th century. World history as we learn it today was entirely fabricated in the 16th-18th centuries. It's likely that nobody told you before, but

there is not a single piece of firm written evidence or artefact that is reliably and independently dated prior to the 11th century.

Naturally, after what you've learned in school and university, you will not easily believe that the classical history of ancient Rome, Greece, Asia, Egypt, China, Japan, India, etc., is manifestly false.

You will point accusing finger to the pyramids in Egypt, to the Coliseum in Rome and Great Wall of China etc., and claim, aren't they really ancient, thousands of years ancient? Well, there is no valid scientific proof that they are older than 1000 years!

The oldest original written document that can be reliably dated belongs to the 11th century!

New research asserts that Homo sapiens invented writing (including hieroglyphics) only 1000 years ago. Once invented, writing skills were immediately and irreversibly put to the use of ruling powers and science.

The consensual chronology we live with was essentially crafted in the 16th century by the Jesuits.

The world history was compiled from contradictory mix of innumerable copies of ancient Latin and Greek manuscripts and other irrefutable proofs delivered by late mediaeval astronomers that were cemented by the authority of writings of the Church Fathers.

Early in life, we learn about ancient history. Children love the magical lessons of history - they are like fairy tales. Teachers recite breathtaking stories; very soon We learn by heart the names and deeds of brave warriors, wise philosophers, fabulous pharaohs, cunning high priests and greedy scribes.

We learn of gigantic pyramids and sinister castles, kings and queens, dukes and barons, powerful heroes and beautiful ladies, emaciated saints and low-life traitors.

Ancient history is based documents, manuscripts, printed books, paintings, monuments and artefacts - called primary sources.

The problem is that neither these ancient documents, nor events described therein can be irrefutably dated, moreover they contradict each other for the most part.

When a school textbook tells us that Genghis Khan in year X or Alexander in year Y, have each conquered half of the world, it means only that it is so said in some of the written sources.

There are no answers to simple questions:

When were these primary sources written?

Where and by whom were these sources found?

It is wrongly presumed that ancient and medieval chronicles, written by Genghis Khan's or Alexander the Great contemporaries and eyewitnesses, are readily available. Actually, only sources written hundreds or even thousands of years after the events are there, compiled mostly in the 16th 18th centuries, or even later.

As a rule, these sources suffered considerable multiple manipulations, falsifications and distortions by editing. At the same time,

innumerable originals of ancient documents under various pretexts were destroyed in Europe under various pretexts.

The names of persons and geographical sites often changed meaning and location during the course of the centuries.

Geographical locations became clearly defined on maps only with the advent of printing.

This made possible the circulation of identical copies of the same map for purposes of the military, navigation, education and governance tasks.

Historians from Oxford say: "hey, everybody knows that Julius Caesar lived in the first century B.C.

`Julius Caesar' statement is only a point of view as

there is simply no irrefutable documentary proof that Julius Caesar or any other great name of antiquity ever existed.

Better than that - extremely rare sources that can be reliably dated back to the 10th-14th centuries A D, do not show the polished picture of classical history.

They show a picture both contradictory and confusing.

All methods of dating of ancient sources and artefacts are erroneous:

Radio-carbon C14 method produces dating with exactitude of plus minus 1500 years, therefore it is too crude for dating of events in historical timeframe!

The Almagest tractate, which lies as corner stone contemporary chronology, compiled in the 2nd century A D by Ptolemy, the founding father of astronomy, contains astronomical data of 9th to 16th century!

The Bronze Age,that has supposedly began 5000 years ago. Bronze is made of 90% copper and 10% tin, but the technology for tin extraction dates back to 14th century A D!.

All eclipses contained in manuscripts, like Thucydides one, relating 'ancient' events have exclusively medieval dating. All horoscopes cut in stone or painted in Egyptian temples, like Dendera have exclusively early medieval dating solutions.

Not quite what you have learned in school? Open your eyes, and, you will find sufficient proof to reach step by step the inevitable conclusion that the classical chronology is false and therefore, that the history of ancient and medieval world universally accepted today, is also false. Have a fresh outlook on everything said or printed about "ancient" and "enigmatic" Roman, Greek and Egyptian, medieval as well as all other "lost and found" civilizations.

Antiquity and Dark Ages are phantoms invented in the 16th 18th and polished in 19th 20thcenturies. Human civilization is in fact barely 1000 years old!

This book will change your perception of History forever!
What if Ancient Rome, Greece and Egypt were invented during Renaissance?
What if The Old Testament was a rendition of events of the Middle Ages?
What if Jesus Christ was born in 1053 and crucified in 1086 AD?
Sounds Unbelievable?
Not after you've read "History: Fiction or Science?" by Anatoly Fomenko, the genius mathematician.
Armed with astronomy and computers Anatoly Fomenko turns History into a rocket science.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What It Means to Be a Libertarian: A Personal Interpretation

Average customer rating:

Fantastic, clearly written book!
Murray The Part-Time Monster Shrinker
Excellent introduction to Libertarian Thought
Excellent Introduction to Libertarian Thought
Compelling Vision of Libertarianism

What It Means to Be a Libertarian: A Personal Interpretation
Charles Murray
Manufacturer: Broadway
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Theory | Economics | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

History & Theory | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Political Parties | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Libertarianism: A Primer
In Our Hands : A Plan To Replace The Welfare State
The Libertarian Reader: Classic and Contemporary Writings from Lao Tzu to Milton Friedman
Losing Ground: American Social Policy, 1950-1980
Liberty in Troubled Times: A Libertarian Guide to Laws, Politics and Society in a Terrorized World

ASIN: 0553069284
Release Date: 1996-12-01

Amazon.com

Charles Murray first got famous for his book Losing Ground's argument that welfare programs actually hamper the progress of poor people. Then he got even more famous for saying (along with his co-author Richard Herrnstein) in The Bell Curve that genetically-based IQ deficits also hamper their progress. This little book is worth the read because we get to see what he thinks the government should really do about all this: not much. On the plus side, Murray is a very clear writer. So we get, for instance, a nicely drawn discussion of the nature of public goods. But although this book is offered in the spirit of the Revolutionary pamphleteers, when it gets down to cases, Murray comes across as a man who's lost his common sense. For example, he claims that if all businesses were allowed to opt out of the current government regulatory scheme, provided that they display prominent signs saying UNREGULATED, "just about every small business will want to be unregulated. ... No more building inspectors, elevator inspectors, or restaurant inspectors. Owners of unregulated small businesses will have to answer to no one but their customers." He doesn't seem to notice that those customers will be running at top speed away from those clearly marked buildings, elevators, and restaurants.

Book Description

"In the last quarter of the eighteenth century, the American Founders created a society based on the belief that human happiness is intimately connected with personal freedom and responsibility. A few people, of whom I am one, think that the Founders' insights are as true today as they were two centuries ago. We believe that human happiness requires freedom, and freedom requires limited government. Limited government means a very small one, shorn of almost all of the apparatus we have come to take for granted during the last sixty years.

Most people are baffled by such views. Don't we realize that this is post-industrial America, not Jefferson's agrarian society? This book tries to explain how we can believe the less government, the better. It contains no footnotes. It has no tables and but a single graph. My purpose is to explain a way of looking at the world." --Charles Murray, from the Introduction

The twin pillars of the nation created by America's Founders were strict limits on the power of central government and strict protections of individual rights. Now, at the close of the twentieth century, that state is gone--and Charles Murray wants to bring it back. In What It Means to Be a Libertarian, he offers a radical blueprint for overhauling our dysfunctional government and replacing it with a system that fosters human happiness because it safeguards human freedom.

Most Americans, Murray argues, have reluctantly come to accept that a sprawling, costly, and intrusive government is an inevitable part of modern life. What It Means to Be a Libertarian encourages each of us to liberate ourselves from ingrained ideas of what government is and consider instead what it ought to be. Imagine, for example, a federal government that is not just smaller, but small, with an executive branch reduced to the White House and trimmed-down departments of state, defense, justice, and environmental protection. Imagine a federal code stripped of all but a handful of regulations and a Congress so limited in power that it spends only a few months of each year in session. Imagine a society in which the government's role is once again to prevent people from initiating the use of force, leaving them otherwise free, in the words of Thomas Jefferson, "to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement."

In this very personal book, Charles Murray paints a vivid portrait of life in a genuinely free society. He explains why limited government would lead to greater individual fulfillment, more vital communities, and a richer culture. He shows why such a society would have stronger families, fewer poor people, and would care for the less fortunate far better than does the society we havenow.

Writing in the tradition of the Revolutionary pamphleteers, Charles Murray has crafted a brilliant treatise that presents a clear, workable alternative to our
current government. Without footnotes, in plain language, What It Means to Be a Libertarian returns to the truths our Founders held to be self-evident
and applies them, justly and compassionately, to this country's most urgent social and political problems.

Customer Reviews:

Fantastic, clearly written book!.......2007-04-10

Charles Murray eloquently explains the reasoning and ideals of Libertarians in a straight-forward, no-nonsense fashion. Easily the best book I've read this year.

Murray The Part-Time Monster Shrinker .......2006-05-30

What it Means to Be a Libertarian is a clear, concise and compelling account of Murray's brand of libertarianism. Murray fluidly moves from point to point, covering the broad range of social and political topics that concern libertarians.

Murray makes particularly good use of his "trendline test" to argue that government interventions are almost always ineffective. His claim is that we can spend a lot of money on government programs to solve what ails us (with respect to crime, poverty, health care, safety, education, etc.) but when you compare trends before government intervention and after intervention, there is usually no positive change. We are wasting our resources. Worse, by intervening, government agencies strip communities and citizens of important functions. Since, "to live a satisfying life, you have to spend a goodly portion of your waking hours doing important things," the pernicious effect of government "help" is incalculable. Murray shows heightened sensitivity to the actual places people live. "When the government stripped neighborhoods of functions, the consequences were most devastating where the geographic neighborhood was most important." 167

Murray separates himself from the strictest libertarians by allowing for legislation in matters where the public good is at stake and the transactions costs of solving problems through common law prohibit tort solutions. For example, "zoning rules provide a way for collections of people to shape the future of their neighborhood and are based on the consensual agreement of the people already living there." "The smaller the municipality, the more likely that the services have consensual support. The larger the municipality, the more likely that they are political arrangements for taking from one set of citizens to benefit another." Murray makes a convincing case for appropriately scaled government under local control of the people.

If Murray's principle is the greater the power, and the further removed the power is from local control, the more objectionable the power is, then it is fair to ask whether this principle applies to all powers that are great and removed from local control, or whether this principle is to apply only to government. Murray asserts that "over time, political and social freedom invariably correspond to the degree of economic freedom that people have retained." Is local control less important if the power is organized in the form of a corporation as opposed to a government?

In our current version of what passes for a "free market" with the putative benefit of unrestrained economic competition between individuals, Wal-Mart, because it enjoys the legal status of a person, is considered the theoretical equal of Bob the local appliance store owner. And if Bob happens to lose in the retail competition because he can't order 50,000 coffee-makers at a crack from a factory 12, 000 miles away, and receive a deep discount for being such an important customer, well, at least Bob was "free" to compete. Right? (Kunstler, The Long Emergency). Bob might expect Charles (Murray), a lover of freedom and defender of the locals against the imposition of remote power, to say something about his plight. Murray, however, gives no indication he is interested in shrinking the monster unless the monster is a government.

Murray gives a couple clues as to why this is the case. "The reality of daily life [Murray says] is that, by and large, the things the government does tend to be ugly, rude, slovenly - and not to work. Things that private organizations do tend to be attractive, courteous, tidy - and to work. That is the way America really is." This is the first clue - corporations (power and location not otherwise specified) come out on the happy side of the attractive / ugly split. The second clue is Murray's working hypothesis with respect to the psychology of human beings. "Libertarians assume that, absent physical coercion, everyone's mind is under his own control." And, "if I cannot use force, everything I get has to be given voluntarily."

With rose colored glasses and a simple psychology, Murray is able to decry the evils of governmental regulation while oblivious to the impact of mega-corporate bullies on the environment and local communities across the country. The attractive products courteously delivered from mega-corporations that have no real stake in any particular local community come with costs that are hidden only from those who do not want to see. And if Murray really thinks that a mega-corporation is powerless to shape his world against his interest and will merely because the mega-corporation does not wield police-power, then he is enjoying quite a fantasy.

I recommend What it Means to be a Libertarian. If Murray had applied his principle of local control to corporate as well as governmental power, he would have written a five star book. He stops short so he gets four stars.

Excellent introduction to Libertarian Thought.......2006-05-10

Murray gives a wonderful introduction to the way a Libertarian looks at and thinks about the issues in modern American life. He also gives many recommendations as to how to make American government better and what an ideal Libertarian government might look like. He even describes how he believes this revolution might come about, and almost predicts that it's closer than we might think. Great read for anyone who is a Libertarian or wants to know more about how Libertarians think... and it's a GREAT book to read if you're a liberal, conservative, or a statist, especially.

Excellent Introduction to Libertarian Thought.......2006-05-01

This is the best single book introduction to libertarian thought. It is better in this regard than the Boaz book in that it is shorter and more personal/philosophical (although the Boaz book is more rigorously argued and comprehensive). Murray gives general principles first and then goes on to make concrete suggestions for improving and limiting the government. At a time when "big government conservatives" are running (and ruining) the country, this sets out a coherent alternative for all those who still believe in the Enlightenment principles of individual freedom and personal responsibility.

Compelling Vision of Libertarianism.......2006-02-07

This book would be more accurately titled 'One Man's Argument for Libertarianism,' as Murray's particular brand of libertarianism is not necessarily that shared by either the Libertarian Party or the average libertarian. Nonetheless, the book makes a very good case for his brand of libertarianism and at least lays out the basics of what libertarianism is and is not.

The book presents libertarianism is two parts: descriptive and prescriptive, with the prescriptions building naturally from the description. Murray lays out his views on the proper role of government in society in the descriptive part of the book, providing a reasonably coherent explanation of how the basic theory of libertarianism applies in specific cases.

The second part of the book is where things get particularly interesting, as Murray starts prescribing how the government should be reshaped to form a libertarian government. He lays out an ambitious agenda and does a remarkably good job of defending it given his space limitations. His arguments for paring away a sizable chunk of the regulatory state will not be accepted by many readers, but his arguments are cogent and reasonable. As he notes in the text, there is no way to be certain that his prescriptions would result in better economic health for the nation. On the other hand, there's also no way to demonstrate that government regulation has provided more than a marginal benefit to the public (and certainly no way to demonstrate its benefits have outweighed its costs). It is unlikely Murray's arguments will win over many converts, as political affiliation is a very difficult thing for people to change, but most who dismiss his arguments will do so from emotion rather than logic.

Murray's writing is crisp and clean, making the already small book a very pleasant read. While the reader will not truly understand what it means to be a libertarian in this small volume, he will certainly understand the basics of the philosophy and how it can be applied to some of the political problems we face today. Well worth a look for anyone curious about libertarians and libertarianism.

To Form a More Perfect Union: A New Economic Interpretation of the United States Constitution

Average customer rating:

A Compelling & Thorough Look at the Economic Interpretation

To Form a More Perfect Union: A New Economic Interpretation of the United States Constitution
Robert A. McGuire
Manufacturer: Oxford University Press, USA
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Economic History | Economics | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

General | Popular Economics | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

Constitutions | Government | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Constitutional Law | Law | Subjects | Books

General | Law | Subjects | Books

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

Business & Investing | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books

Nonfiction | Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007 | Stores | Books

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

An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States
Novus Ordo Seclorum: The Intellectual Origins of the Constitution
We the People : The Economic Origins of the Constitution (Library of Conservative Thought)
E Pluribus Unum
Original Meanings: Politics and Ideas in the Making of the Constitution

ASIN: 0195139704

Book Description

Many important questions regarding the creation and adoption of the United States Constitution remain unresolved. Did slaveholdings or financial holdings significantly influence our Founding Fathers' stance on particular clauses or rules contained in the Constitution? Was there a division of support for the Constitution related to religious beliefs or ethnicity? Were founders from less commercial areas more likely to oppose the Constitution? To Form a More Perfect Union successfully answers these questions and offers an economic explanation for the behavior of our Founding Fathers during the nation's constitutional founding. In 1913, American historian Charles A. Beard controversially argued in his book An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States that the framers and ratifiers of the Constitution were less interested in furthering democratic principles than in advancing specific economic and financial interests. Beard's thesis eventually emerged as the standard historical interpretation and remained so until the 1950s. Since then, many constitutional and historical scholars have questioned an economic interpretation of the Constitution as being too narrow or too calculating, believing the great principles and political philosophies that motivated the Founding Fathers to be worthier subjects of study. In this meticulously researched reexamination of the drafting and ratification of our nation's Constitution, Robert McGuire argues that Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, George Mason and the other Founding Fathers did act as much for economic motives as for abstract ideals. To Form a More Perfect Union offers compelling evidence showing that the economic, financial, and other interests of the founders can account for the specific design and adoption of our Constitution. This is the first book to provide modern evidence that substantiates many of the overall conclusions found in Charles Beard's An Economic Interpretation while challenging and overturning other of Beard's specific findings. To Form a More Perfect Union presents an entirely new approach to the study of the shaping of the U.S. Constitution. Through the application of economic thinking and rigorous statistical techniques, as well as the processing of vast amounts of data on the economic interests and personal characteristics of the Founding Fathers, McGuire convincingly demonstrates that an economic interpretation of the Constitution is valid. Radically challenging the prevailing views of most historians, political scientists, and legal scholars, To Form a More Perfect Union provides a wealth of new findings about the Founding Fathers' constitutional choices and sheds new light on the motivations behind the design and adoption of the United States Constitution.

Customer Reviews:

A Compelling & Thorough Look at the Economic Interpretation.......2004-01-31

"In To Form a More Perfect Union, Robert A. McGuire attempts to provide the first solid modern analysis to quantify the impact of the personal economic interests of the Founding Fathers on the structure and content of the U.S. Constitution. Readers familiar with the literature in this area will immediately, and correctly, associate this book with Charles A. Beard's Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States (New York: Macmillan, [1913] 1935). In that book, Beard concludes that the delegates' personal interests shaped their behavior with respect to the drafting and the ratification of the U.S. Constitution. His hypothesis was generally accepted until the 1950s, when most scholars began to question the analysis. An onslaught of counterevidence came during the 1950s and early 1960s, and today most academics believe that Beard's original interpretation was too narrow and that the general political philosophies of the Founding Fathers had greater importance in determining the nature and contents of the U.S. Constitution.

"McGuire essentially resurrects Beard's hypothesis and offers substantial evidence in favor of the view that the Founding Fathers' personal interests had a significant influence on the process of constitutional design and ratification. In light of the substantial body of empirical evidence this book provides, it is likely to bring the personal interest view back into widespread acceptance among academics. Although McGuire draws some of the analysis presented in the book from his previously published journal articles, at least half of what he offers is new and original. What makes the book so compelling is the use of today's significantly better empirical methodology to analyze data, in contrast to the techniques available during the 1950s, when the counterevidence to Beard's hypothesis was presented.

"Readers searching for a middle ground in the debate over whether personal self-interest shaped the U.S. Constitution will find refuge in this book. McGuire repeatedly makes clear that these personal interests were relevant at the margin in the Founding Fathers' decision calculus and that many other factors (such as general political philosophy) influenced these individuals' overall behavior. Among the most compelling findings: (1) personal interests played a bigger role in the specific content of the U.S. Constitution than in the document's overall design; and (2) the framers' debt holdings and slave ownership and the degree of commercialization in their local communities are significantly correlated with their observed behavior and, hence, with the content of the constitution they produced....

"One of the book's strengths is the amount of underlying background data and statistics provided. For example, McGuire includes tables that show not only each individual delegate's vote on an issue (the data used for the dependent variable), but also the predicted probability of a yes vote for that delegate from the estimated logistic regression model. As anyone who has estimated a logistic regression model knows, it is possible for these models to fit well overall but still do a poor job of predicting individual votes. Throughout the book, however, McGuire provides the evidence necessary to comfort readers worried about such potential problems. The book's main weakness is that at times it becomes rather lengthy and dull, but this aspect is simply a cost of being thorough, which is necessary in this case because of the controversial nature of the theory being tested.

"For the great number of readers who are likely to use the results of the book as a single-sentence footnote or reference in their own research, the eleven-page prologue provides all of the background and summary information necessary to make an informed citation of the work. The remaining three hundred or so pages merely fill in the sufficient details to support these conclusions. In that sense, the book reminds me somewhat of Bjorn Lomborg's Skeptical Environmentalist (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001).

"Had I been a reviewer for the book prior to its publication, the only suggestion I might have offered to improve it would have been for the author to include a fuller discussion of the debate surrounding the adequacy and structure of the document that preceded the U.S. Constitution, the Articles of Confederation.... Had McGuire presented this discussion, he would have provided a fitting framework in which to view the Founding Fathers' choices as marginal institutional changes relative to the existing constitutional order.

"To Form a More Perfect Union undoubtedly will elicit additional research in this highly debated area of constitutional research. Future research will benefit from the 122 pages of raw data and empirical results provided as appendix material. McGuire's book most likely will meet with a better initial acceptance than Beard's book received (it was banned from high school libraries in Seattle and condemned by President Taft and by the president of Beard's own university).

"One important implication of McGuire's book is that the condition of a Rawlsian `veil of ignorance,' putatively necessary to produce a `just' social contract, is not and cannot be satisfied in reality. Any constitution or social contract will be shaped by its designers' individual self-interests. Modern public-choice scholars who favor theories based on the premise of methodological individualism will find comforting reassurance as they read To Form a More Perfect Union."

------------------------------

Excerpted from a review by Russell S. Sobel in "The Independent Review," Winter 2004.

The Jewish Question: A Marxist Interpretation
Average customer rating:

The cranks giving this book good reviews don't know squat about history

How anti-semitism came about and how it can be ended.

Against Anti-semitism and Zionism

Capitalism & Anti-Semitism by an inspiring fighter

an inspiring fighter links capitalism and Anti-Semitism

The Jewish Question: A Marxist Interpretation
Abram Leon
Manufacturer: Pathfinder Press (NY)
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Jewish | World | History | Subjects | Books
Discrimination & Racism | Social Sciences | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
General | Social Sciences | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
Socialism | Political Doctrines | Political Science | Social Sciences | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books
ASIN: 0873481348

Book Description

Traces the historical rationalizations of anti-Semitism to the fact that, in the centuries preceding the domination of industrial capitalism, Jews emerged as a "people-class" of merchants, moneylenders, and traders. Leon explains why the propertied rulers incite renewed Jew-hatred in the epoch of capitalism's decline.

Also available in: French

Customer Reviews:

The cranks giving this book good reviews don't know squat about history.......2006-01-08

So anti-Semitism is caused by capitalism. If that's so true, then why did Hitler kill so many Jewish Capitalists? And why were Jews the only capitalists and individualists during the Feudal era. If capitalism causes racism, then why have freer markets led to a rise in people like Oprah Winfrey, Jon Stewart (a Jew) and others. All forms of collectivism (whether they be communism, socialism, or fascism) have ultimately been destructive for all. The right to own private property and pursue one's own interests so long as it doesn't infringe upon another's same rights (the heart of capitalism) has led to racism, sexism, homophobia, etc. But it has allowed to oppressed groups to rise above such garbage as well. Whereas in all forms of collectivism, any person or group can be oppressed for "the greater good of society." Bigotry comes from human ignorance and fear, not social classes, private property rights, or other such things.

How anti-semitism came about and how it can be ended........2002-02-27

This book answers both Zionists who view Jews as the "chosen people" and the justifiers of Jew hatred, by giving a materialist explanation for the historical persecution of the Jews. By examining Jewish history from antiquity through the middle ages, Leon shows how it was the social role of Jews as merchants and traders and moneylenders that led to their persecution. As the only group in feudal society allowed to engage in trade they became a people-class. In this special role Jews played an essential economic role but were despised for it by the feudal aristocracy and this is what led to their segregation in ghettos and the hostility and attacks they faced.

The author, an anti -fascist fighter and communist organizer who wrote the book in Nazi occupied Belgium in 1940, explains that with the rise of capitalism the special social role that Jews played in the economy disappeared. He points out that while capitalism eliminated the special economic role that led to Jew hatred, it is a system that has brought the prejudices and hatreds of earlier societies into the modern world to help keep the oppressed and exploited divided. It is only with the elimination of this system that Jew hatred can be eliminated.

Against Anti-semitism and Zionism.......2002-01-19

This heroic book helped me understand why fascits and other rightists rely on anti-Jewish propaganda and why the Zionist response is a dead end. Abram Leon was a Jewish Marxist and working class leader in Nazi-occupied Belgium until being shipped to his death in Auschwitz. He points out that Jews are a social grouping that played a dynamic role during feudalism but have no role as a distinct class under capitalism. Because capitalist society will not assimilate them, they become ready scapegoats. The solution Leon proposes is to join with other workers in the fight for a socialist society in place of capitalism, which is the root of racist movements. Leon's richly detailed history of the Jewish people challenges the myths of the Zionists. The fact that the imperialist nation of Israel has become the most dangerous place for Jews to live underscores Leon's point about the danger of Zionism. If not available from amazon, booksfrompathfinder will have it--click on "new and used" near the top of the page.

Capitalism & Anti-Semitism by an inspiring fighter.......2001-09-05

Abram Leon, a young Belgian revolutionary who died fighting in the resistance to the Nazis in World War II, shows how anti-Semitism and capitalism are linked. He illustrates the special history of the Jews as a "people class," persecuted and manipulated by capitalism. This Marxist study shows that Zionism, rather than aiding the liberation of the Jewish people, aids imperialism, the main breeder of anti-Semitism and Jew hatred. NathanWeinstock's introduction explaining the life and struggle of Abram Leon is inspiring. Message: 1 of 1

an inspiring fighter links capitalism and Anti-Semitism.......2001-09-01

Abram Leon, a young Belgian revolutionary who died fighting in the resistance to he Nazis in World War II, shows how anti-Semitism and capitalism are linked. He illustrates the special history of the Jews as a "people class," persecuted and manipulated by capitalism. This Marxist study shows that Zionism, rather than aiding the liberation of the Jewish people, aids imperialism, the main breeder of anti-Semitism and Jew hatred. Nathan Weinstock's introduction explaining the life and struggle of Abram Leon is inspiring.

An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States

Average customer rating:

Just because you're paranoid....
A Good Place to Begin Thinking About What it Means to be an American
For Every Student of US History
The real story, told by a brave man, an essential book for all,
Classic Text

An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States
Charles A. Beard
Manufacturer: Dover Publications
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

To Form a More Perfect Union: A New Economic Interpretation of the United States Constitution
Novus Ordo Seclorum: The Intellectual Origins of the Constitution
The Tragedy of American Diplomacy
The Creation of the American Republic, 1776-1787 (Published for the Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture, Williamsburg, Virginia)
The Age of Reform

ASIN: 048643365X

Book Description

This famous study — one of the most influential in the area of American economic history — brought a halt to Americans' uncritical reverence for their country's revolutionary past. Questioning the Founding Fathers' motivations in drafting the Constitution, it viewed the results as a product of economic self-interest. Perhaps the most controversial books of its time.

Customer Reviews:

Just because you're paranoid...........2006-05-05

A noted historian of the early twentieth century, Charles Beard was notorious for his non-traditional interpretations of economics as the driving force behind major historical events. In 1913, at the time of the original publication of this book, he was even considered to be a bit radical. Certainly, the main thrust of his monograph ruffled a few feathers, as it called into question the motives of our founding fathers, placing their feet firmly on mortal, fallible, self-interested grounds, as opposed to the lofty pedestals where they were usually enshrined.
Beard argued that although the delegates to the Convention had many diverse interests, they could actually be grouped into two main categories of economic self-interests: mercantile and land ownership. From a detailed analysis of their biographies, Beard identified a pattern that indicated an economic line of demarcation between Federalists and Anti-Federalists. Those with large property assets or investments in trade unanimously supported the fledgling Constitution, while its chief detractors were the debtors, that majority of new Americans who were among the "have-nots" and who placed more faith in the loose confines of the Articles of Confederation.
This book offers a compelling array of data, which the author himself refers to as a "long and arid survey' with the "nature of a catalogue". However, far from benumbing the mind of the reader, this use of simple exposition allows one to assess the proffered information and arrive on one's own at a conclusion that validates the author's thesis. Beard lists the material assets of each delegate, as well as their class status; not one was from a farming or mechanical class. Paired with evidence that many (including George Washington) were land speculators in the Northwest Territory, and that the implementation of the Articles of Confederation suppressed land values, a damning stain of greed and self-interest threatens to taint the motives behind the drafting of the Constitution.
Beard goes as far as to intimate that the creation of a constitutional government was in effect a "coup d'etat" in which a wealthy interested minority abused and exceeded the authority granted them by the government in order to create a legal document which would bolster their businesses and profits. Evidence is supplied that indicates delegates were restricted by property ownership, cash assets, and in some states by religion. Clearly, only a certain type of man was to be permitted to have a voice in the decision. When the debate opened up upon the quest for ratification, Beard offers anecdotal evidence of goon squads and thuggery to force votes into the Federalist camp. Clearly, this is a view of the nation's origins that goes against primary school heroic notions of 1787.
The most surprising thing about this book is that it was originally written in 1913. Charles Beard was often considered to be controversial amongst his fellow historians. Yet this monograph is shocking in that it is basically an accusation that the founding fathers indulged in a self-motivated and greedy overthrow of a government, which although weak and decentralized, was the preference of the downtrodden masses. He indicates that simply because future generations may have benefited from the decision s taken in 1787, the decisions were not necessarily just.
In an era where conspiracy theories abound and Americans are ever eager to point the finger of blame at any select few, this book seems to fit popular tastes. Yet it would be foolish to dismiss the evidence supplied in this text as pure conjecture or the patterns as easy coincidence. Even today this founding document can be used to interpret the rights of the individual as equal to the rights of a corporation; surely it must have had in its origins the seeds of economic self-interest. Based on the conclusions made apparent in this book, it is hard not to view the Constitution as an economic document, securing in cold verbiage the rights of the wealthy creditors, while incidentally providing for the protection of the debtors. Madison's noble sentiments in Federalist #10 ring hollow when taken in equal parts with Charles Beards Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States.

A Good Place to Begin Thinking About What it Means to be an American.......2006-02-23

Jumping to the end of Charles Beard's book, his conclusions state the following:

i) The US constitution was enacted to protect the interests of: a) the moneyed classes (the rich), b) the bond and stock holding classes (the rich speculators), c) the manufacturing interests (rich capitalists), and trade and shipping interests (the rich capitalist speculators).

ii) The constitution was the result of an elite group of men representing the aforementioned interests.

iii) The constitutional convention held in Philadelphia was organized undemocratically by the aforementioned elite group of men to secure the aforementioned interests.

iv) Those not holding the aforementioned interests (the poor) were excluded from participation in the constitutional process.

v) Those participating in the Philadelphia convention personally benefited from the outcome of that convention (the constitution).

vi) The US constitution is a document protecting private property rights over that of a democratic people and/or its government.

vii) These assertions are on record as evidenced by the property and monetary interests of those who proposed and passed the US constitution.

viii) In the ratification of the US constitution, 3/4 of the qualified voters were excluded by some means or another, aiding the 1/4 who benefited from the passage of the constitution.

ix) The ratification of the US constitution was further narrowed down to where only 1/6 of the qualified voters participated in its passing.

x) Therefore, the majority of qualified voters did not participate in the ratification of the US constitution.

xi) This 1/6 who ratified the constitution were the same minority who held large holdings in money, bonds and stocks, manufacturing, and trade and shipping.

xii) The main societal divisions in the ratification of the US constitution were among classes cited in i) and the farming and debtor classes at that time.

xiii) The constitution was therefore not created by "the people," but by the those motivated by the monetary interests cited in i).

To see why Beard thought this you must read this book, which is a laundry list of those participating in the Philadelphia convention and the ratification process, and a catalogue of their documented monetary interests.

After reading Beard, then you can read the introduction by Forrest McDonald holding Beard's thesis up to the crucible of historical criticism.

After reading Beard and McDonald you can begin to reflect on the implications of Beard's materialist hypothesis and the host of corroborating and refuting philosophical considerations, then form your own conclusions, then repeat the cycle over and over.

This is probably a good departure point to begin examining your personal beliefs and expectations of what it means to be an American.

For Every Student of US History.......2005-11-04

Obviously, the top 500 reviewer Ryan Setliff has not read the book. His review stated
"_This book basically puts forward a theory that the founders just established the Constitution for their own personal economic gain._ This book is well-researched, but its premise is totally flawed. Moreover, it tries to portray all of the founding fathers as self-serving and looking out for their own economic interests."

Had Ryan read the book, he might have know that Charles himself says on page 73:
"The purpose of such an inquiry is not, of course, to show that the Constitution was made for the personal benefit of the members of the Convention." Beard explains, also on page 73, that he is trying to show, by researching the personal economic statuses of the members of the convention, that the members belonged to the "four [socioeconomic] groups... [that] were adversly affected by the government under the articles of Confederation, and that [the] economic motives [of those socioeconomic groups] were behind the movement for a recontstruction of the system..."

It is most unfortunate that seemingly educated people deride this book without having read it, and doubly so since it is such a valuable work, still accessible and readable today.

The real story, told by a brave man, an essential book for all,.......2005-08-20

Beard was a courageous man, not afraid to say the truth, not afraid to look into reality of American life and see the abuse of power, the denial of justice, and the real social interests at stake. This book establishes the real context of the constitution, displacing the usual hero worship of the "founders" as demigods and showing them as real men who served their class interests. Beard situates the constitutional convention in the great social struggles that went on in the period after the achievement of independence. Without such an understanding the struggle over the adoption of the constitution, and the role of the Bill of Rights are simply not understandable.

Post independence America was a place of economic crisis for the farmers, workers, and small tradesmen who had been the bulwark of the revolutionary struggle. Montarization of economic exchange in villages and towns where a large amount of the exchange had been based on barter, a massive inflation, and a growth of the power of the banks and other money lenders spread like a plague, particularly in the Northern States, especially New England. Farmers were losing their land; tradesmen were losing their shops; goods not made on the farms and villages became too expensive for many working people and farmers.

The power of the state governments, squarely in the hands of the merchants and planters, stood behind the seizure of the lands of farmers who could no longer pay the banks and merchants. Farmers and small tradesmen rose against this. Desperate farmers and their supporters shut down courts that met to authorize confiscation of farms. With no Bill of Rights, in Massachusetts set up kangaroo courts made up of merchants and bankers that made no attempt to be fair to the farmers. Newspapers and speakers who criticized the state government and the banks and big merchants were charged with treason.

Full-scale civil war broke out in Massachusetts, with the plebian rebels coming close--it is said only prevented by the delay of one detachment by a snowstorm--to seizing the national arsenal in Springfield. It was these threats to property that threatened the power of the wealthy and the order that had been established after the revolution. This is why the constitutional convention gathered, not some abstract interest in more ethereal and philosophical forms of government.

Whatever is said about divine motivations, the constitutional convention which gathered the wealthy and powerful, would have had to have been a bunch of insane dreamers, not to have had the interests of their wealth and power first in their minds in this situation. This Beard shows with abundant documentation.

Beard documents that this was by and large a gathering of the wealthy men of the country who had profited from the revolution and who had profited by the economic disaster farmers and tradesmen faced by buying up certificates for land in compensation for services to the revolution, many farmers and tradesmen had to sell in order to keep their own land. Beard indicates that the concern for a secure state that could safeguard these interests was the dominant question for constitutional convention. He also notes that the few delegates who were sympathetic to the popular struggle opposed the constitution. Others among the leaders of the American Revolution who opposed this trend stayed away.

Beard's book has been pilloried because it challenges the public myth about the constitution and the government that is needed to maintain the continued rule of the wealthy and powerful

The constitutional convention did not write a democratic constitution. There is no provision for national elections. There are only provisions for the state legislatures to select electors that would meet to select the president in what the constitutional convention thought would be another gathering of the wealthy and powerful.

The Bill of Rights was not part of the constitution they wrote or proposed. This was not an oversight, but because the authors of the constitution did not support these rights or democracy as it is understood today. As I mentioned above, in Massachusetts rather than a "jury of their peers," farmer rebels were tried by juries packed with merchants and bankers; rebels in Western farming communities like Springfield and Pittsfield were tried by juries from Boston. In states like Connecticut and Massachusetts, the Congregationalist church was an established church and membership in it was required to vote. Writers and speakers could be charged with treason for attacking the state governments.

Most people in the United States opposed the constitution that came out of the Philadelphia convention. Many cited as "founders" opposed it. The bill of rights was proposed as a compromise addition to safeguard the rights of the popular majority. Without it, the constitution would not have passed.

Even so, many provisions of the Bill of Rights were not actively enforced, some until the 20th Century. The establishment of religion continued in Connecticut and Massachusetts as states until 1820s and 1830s, and establishment of the Congregational churches by town government continued in many areas of New England until the late 19th and in a few places the early 20th century!!! Massachusetts's courts still charged and convicted newspapers for blasphemy in the 1840s.

Popular voting without property, religious, or other qualifications was not me insured in this constitution. This came only with the amendments others that followed the Civil War, which Beard famously termed The Second American Revolution.

Beard tells the real story here. For that, he was pilloried. Similarly, during and after WWII he documented, using congressional hearing testimony for the most part, how Roosevelt took the US into the Second World War. Again he was pilloried with new attacks generated against this book, even though this was written decades before.

We are lucky for a man like Beard who wasn't afraid to tell the truth, even when the truth clashed with myths that are propagated in the interests of the billionaires who run this society.

Classic Text.......2005-04-13

Charles Beard caused a minor scandal when this book was published in 1913. He argued that the Founding Fathers had foisted the Constitution on the country in order to protect their property interests in land and public securities. This was strong medicine 90 years ago when the public still thought of the Founders as demigods rather than conspiratorial politicians.

Despite its age, the book reads well and is refreshingly iconoclastic. Since rightwing politicians and jurists still talk as if the Constitution had a divine origin, Beard's message hasn't lost its relevance. However, there's no denying that his book is a one-sided lawyer's brief, which selects and presents only the evidence that supports its thesis while ignoring everything else. No one who has read The Federalist would even recognize Beard's description of it.

Modern readers who want a balanced and comprehensive history of the origins of the Constitution should look to books by Forrest MacDonald or other historians.

The French Revolution: An Economic Interpretation

Average customer rating:

The French Revolution: An Economic Interpretation
Florin Aftalion
Manufacturer: Cambridge University Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Economic History | Economics | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

General | Popular Economics | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

General | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

Book Description

The economic history of revolutionary France is still a neglected area in studies of the revolution of 1789. While some attention has been given to the condition of the peasants, the urban working classes and the financial crisis of the Ancien Régime, there has been a general tendency to regard economic factors as external and somewhat peripheral to the truly political nature of the Revolution. This book is designed to redress the balance, providing a clear, accessible and thought-provoking guide to the economic background to the French Revolution. Professor Aftalion analyzes the policies followed by successive Revolutionary assemblies, examining in detail taxation, the confiscation of church property, the assignats, and the siege economy of the Terror. He shows how decisions taken in 1789 by the Constituent Assembly inevitably led to a deepening financial and economic crisis, and to increasingly radical and disastrous policies. The study is important also for its exposure of many of the economic fallacies propounded both by many Frenchmen at the time, and later by many modern historians.

Wordsworthian Errancies: The Poetics of Cultural Dismemberment

Average customer rating:

Holy Cow! This Rocks!

Wordsworthian Errancies: The Poetics of Cultural Dismemberment
David Collings
Manufacturer: The Johns Hopkins University Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Policy & Current Events | Popular Economics | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

Development & Growth | Economics | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

Economic Policy & Development | Economics | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

Book Description

According to David Collings, Wordsworth interpreted the outbreak of war between England and France in 1793 as a cataclysmic event, one whose utterly disfiguring effect he would trace in his work over the next decade. Expanding upon this extravagant interpretation of events, Collings argues, Wordsworth constructed a poetics of cultural dismemberment -- a way for culture to imagine that it survives in the midst of its own destruction. In Wordsworthian Errancies, Collings challenges prevailing critical approaches to Romantic poetry by describing and critiquing this deconstructive account of culture in Wordsworth's poetry.

Drawing ideas from deconstruction, psychoanalysis, Marxism, feminism, and queer theory, Collings' reading reveals a radically new Wordsworth, one who is far more concerned with various "queer" modes of sexuality than previously suspected. In a provocative reading of The Prelude, for example, Collings argues that Wordsworth associated his poetic power with homoerotic masochistic fantasies and with his involuntary delight in traumatic events. He also redefines the debate concerning the politics of Wordsworth's poetry: disputing recent critics who claim that Wordsworth retreated from history into a poetry of the self, Collings argues instead that the very notion of the solitary, autobiographical subject derived from Wordsworth's sense of cultural trauma.

The suspect dimension of Wordsworth's poetry, Collings concludes, is not its retreat from history but rather its claim that history is disaster.

Customer Reviews:

Holy Cow! This Rocks!.......2000-03-18

Oh my god. Oh my everlovin god! I don't use the word "super" very often, but this book is super, damned super, totally super, even really super. I used to think Wordsworth was such a totally dry whiny-boy bore, but now--HOLY COW! This Collings character is great. I don't know what he did to Wordsworth but I liked it and I want more! The only thing that is too much with this book is quality. It is that good. Period. I recommend this book to, doy, everyone. To readers with children who read also-- "dismemberment" is not as dirty as it sounds, no, wait, yes it is.

Theory And History: An Interpretation Of Social And Economic Evolution (The Liberty Fund Library of Ludwig Von Mises)

Average customer rating:

The Methodology Of Individualism

Theory And History: An Interpretation Of Social And Economic Evolution (The Liberty Fund Library of Ludwig Von Mises)
Ludwig Von Mises , and Bettina Bien Greaves
Manufacturer: Liberty Fund
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Popular Economics | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

Theory | Economics | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books

General | Business & Investing | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

Human Action: A Treatise on Economics
The Anti-capitalistic Mentality (Liberty Fund Library of the Works of Ludwig Von Mises)
The Theory of Money and Credit
Epistemological Problems of Economics
Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis

ASIN: 0865975698

Book Description

Like Hayek, Mises moved beyond economics in his later years to address questions regarding the foundation of all social science. But unlike Hayek's attempts, Mises's writings on these matters have received less attention than they deserve.

Theory and History should be required for any student of 20th century ideas.

Customer Reviews:

The Methodology Of Individualism.......2003-10-09

Ludwig von Mises wrote four masterpieces: THE THEORY OF MONDEY AND CREDIT, SOCIALISM, HUMAN ACTION, and THEORY AND HISTORY. THEORY AND HISTORY was published in 1957 and is the easiest of the four books, and a good starting point to understand the philosophical underpinnings of Mises' thought.

THEORY AND HISTORY is an outstanding work on the methodology of the social sciences. As usual, Mises uses economics and sociology to criticize all varieties of leftism. The starting point for von Mises is the acting individual. Man acts rationally to achieve certain ends. What appears to be collective action is simply the action of numerous individuals. Based on this, Mises shows that collectivist theories fail to take into account the essentially individualist nature of human action. Marx claimed to be a scientist of the inevitable forces of human action, yet he inconsistently involved himself in day-to-day politics. Engles went so far as to say that had Napoleon died when he was young, history would have produced another Napoleon. Mises then discusses theories of history such as those advanced by Buckle, Spengler, and Toynbee.

One of the most exciting things about reading von Mises is how socialist fallacies fall page after page. Not only does he refute their fallacies, but he has a way of seeing right through them. For example, how can one criticize modern capitalist society for being "materialistic'" when it allows the common man to attend Beethoven concerts?

Von Mises dealt with methodology in THE ULTIMATE FOUNDATION OF ECONOMIC SCIENCE, EPISTEMOLOGICAL PROBLEMS OF ECONOMICS, and HUMAN ACTION.

Slavery and Freedom : An Interpretation of the Old South

Average customer rating:

Academic, well-researched, thought-provoking
Excellent view of the Old South

Slavery and Freedom : An Interpretation of the Old South
James Oakes
Manufacturer: W. W. Norton & Company
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

The Ruling Race: A History of American Slaveholders
The Radical and the Republican: Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, and the Triumph of Antislavery Politics
Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men: The Ideology of the Republican Party before the Civil War With a New Introductory Essay
Slavery: A Problem in American Institutional and Intellectual Life
The South Vs. The South: How Anti-Confederate Southerners Shaped the Course of the Civil War

ASIN: 0393317668

Book Description

This pathbreaking interpretation of the slaveholding South begins with the insight that slavery and freedom were not mutually exclusive but were intertwined in every dimension of life in the South. James Oakes traces the implications of this insight for relations between masters and slaves, slaveholders and non-slaveholders, and for the rise of a racist ideology. Features 43 period illustrations, including drawings made by Clark.

Customer Reviews:

Academic, well-researched, thought-provoking.......2007-04-03

After reading Oakes' The Ruling Race (which I highly recommend), I decided to give this book a try. This book is just what the title says, an interpretation of the Old South. Specifically, Oakes looks at slavery and how it affected the antebellum South politically, socially, and economically. He also spends the last chapter discussing the differences between the South before the Civil War and after Reconstruction, disagreeing with historians who have stated that sharecropping was just like slavery and politics was exactly the same. In most of Oakes' arguments, he is very persuasive. Oakes brings a lot of new ideas to the table, but all of them are based upon meticulous research so he deserves kudos for that.

The only negative about the book is that it can be scholarly and academic, which means, at times, it does not read like a page turner, but at other times it really does read easy and flows well. Oakes' writing style helps, though.

Overall, while this is certainly not a definitive look at the antebellum South (and Oakes says as much in the preface), it can serve as an excellent intro or open even the most seasoned Southern historian's eyes to some new possibilities. Well worth the time.

Excellent view of the Old South.......2000-03-11

I was really impressed with the unbelievable wealth knowledge Professor Oakes brings to light in this book. I recommend it be used in high schools throughout the country. Everyone should have access to this information. I knew him from Northwestern University. Thanks Dr. Oakes.

The Material Unconscious: American Amusement, Stephen Crane, and the Economics of Play

Average customer rating:

The Material Unconscious: American Amusement, Stephen Crane, and the Economics of Play
William Brown
Manufacturer: Harvard University Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Social Sciences | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Arts & Photography | Subjects | Books

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

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

A Sense of Things: The Object Matter of American Literature
Our America: Nativism, Modernism, and Pluralism (Post-Contemporary Interventions)
The Gold Standard and the Logic of Naturalism: American Literature at the Turn of the Century (The New Historicism : Studies in Cultural Poetics, 2)

ASIN: 0674553810

Book Description

Within the ephemera of the everyday--old photographs, circus posters, iron toys--lies a challenge to America's dominant cultural memory. What this memory has left behind, Bill Brown recovers in the "material unconscious" of Stephen Crane's work, the textual residues of daily sensations that add up to a new history of the American 1890s. As revealed in Crane's disavowing appropriation of an emerging mass culture--from football games and freak shows to roller coasters and early cinema--the decade reappears as an underexposed moment in the genealogy of modernism and modernity.

Brown's story begins on the Jersey Shore, in Asbury Park, where Crane became a writer in the shadow of his father, a grimly serious Methodist minister who vilified the popular amusements his son adored. The coastal resorts became the stage for debates about technology, about the body's visibility, about a black service class and the new mass access to leisure. From this snapshot of a recreational scene that would continue to inspire Crane's sensational modernism, Brown takes us to New York's Bowery. There, in the visual culture established by dime museums, minstrel shows, and the Kodak craze, he exhibits Crane dramatically obscuring the typology of race.

Along the way, Brown demonstrates how attitudes toward play transformed the image of war, the idea of childhood and nationhood, and the concept of culture itself. And by developing a new conceptual apparatus (with such notions as "recreational time," "abstract leisure," and the "amusement/knowledge system"), he provides the groundwork for a new politics of pleasure. A crucial theorization of how cultural studies can and should proceed, The Material Unconscious insists that in the very conjuncture of canonical literature and mass culture, we can best understand how proliferating and competing economies of play disrupt the so-called "logic" and "work" of culture.

Books:

Books Index

Books Home

Recommended Books