Book Description
The complete and accurate story of the Beslan School Siege that occurred in Russia on September 1, 2004. This book tells the untold story about the victims, the soldiers who were there and the history of the events leading up to the tragic incident. But more than just the story, this book highlights the lessons America's school system can learn from the tragedy to protect itself from terrorism.
Customer Reviews:
A must read.......2007-05-30
Quite simply this book is a must read for all Americans. It's time to take the blinders off and face the facts presented.
A very good read .......2007-01-15
I got this book from a friend who takes an interest in how our public school system shapes the future of this country. After reading Terror at Beslan I see a few things that have been left out of the list of recommendations on how to cope with the potential for terrorist acts against our children and against our schools. I wonder why Mr. Giduck did not suggest the one thing that would make it extremely hard for terrorists to take large numbers of our children captive. That thing is to REMOVE THE TARGET. Mr. Giduck makes it clear in his book that one of the reasons that terrorist attack schools is because to them they are high value targets. One of the best ways to avoid an attack on a targe however - is to not make yourself a target in the first place.
The great service that Mr. Giduck has done for parents of school age children - and for people who truly care about the way our children are educated in this country is to point out that - along with the myriad of other problems that our public schools have - is that they are aggregating our children in one place, making them easy targets for terrorists motivated enough to carry out the attack. And again - as Mr. Giduck has pointed out - the terrorists are not stupid. They are smart and highly motivated. I have recently read books and writings by John Taylor Gatto and Vin Suprynowicz, both of whom are highly critical of our public schools ability to properly educate our children to make them good citizens of our republic. Both Mr. Gatto and Mr. Suprynowicz have pointed out that the public school system in this country was not designed to make our children into free-thinking individuals, it was designed to mold our childrens minds so that they all have a common - government influenced - way of looking at the world. Putting children all together in the same place removes them from the influence of their parents to a large degree and makes it easier to control the educational materials they are exposed to - thereby controlling the mindset they acquire as they are educated. The growing home schooling movement in this country is a backlash against this influence.
Now it appears that the aggregation of our children in large groups has one more detrimental affect on them - it makes them easy to acquire targets for terrorists who have no regard whatsoever for their lives.
In order to find a truly sustainable solution to the terrorism problem in regards to our educational system that also respects the freedom that we wish to keep for ourselves in this country - as well as producing an educated citizenry we would do well to think outside the box and consider all of the alternatives - rather than just turning our schools into armed camps with on demand gas delivery systems, comprehensive monitoring systems, and on campus SWAT teams, as Mr. Giduck suggests. For a parent who is trying to decide what to do to protect their own child - think long and hard about sending your child into harm's way in a public school. Given that the choice of schooling you make for your child may some day be a life or death decision, the alternatives of home schooling, small private schools, or group schooling - like we used to have in this country before compulsory public education took over - may literally be the difference between life and death for your child. And your child may get a better education in the bargain.
I would highly recommend this book by Mr. Giduck, he has done all concerned American citizens a great service. I would however also recommend "Send in the Waco Killers" by Vin Suprynowicz, and "Underground History of American Education" by John Taylor Gatto. Read all three and you will come away with an entirely different perspective on this problem than you may have had before.
Book Review.......2007-01-01
I had attended a half day seminar by the author and bought a copy of the book there. After reading it I have purchased several more copies (for teacher friends and my Chief). If you're interested in this particular incident you'll probably not find any more definative material. Good read. If you get the opportunity to attend the author's seminars, do so! Well worth it.
Sgt. J. Chavalia
Lima, Ohio Police Department
No sensationalism - just the real dramatic truth about our enemies.......2006-10-31
John Giduck does an excellent job of setting the stage for, presenting the facts of, and discussing the implications of one of the most horrendous Islamist terrorists attacks of all time.
In addition, this is one of the few books on Islamists terrorism that doesn't try to sugar-coat the current world wide conflict. The tens of millions of terrorist Muslims that are determined (even to death) to kill, destroy, or violently oppress any non-muslim in the world is a cold hard fact.
We in America have tried to live in a dream and have ignored not only the distant past going all the way back to Mohammed but even the recent past where 99.9% of all the violent terrorists acts in the world have been committed by the Islamist Terrorists. This isn't a few dozen but it is hundreds and hundreds of violent deadly acts with no purpose other than to kill, maim, and oppress the non-,muslim world.
Thanks John for sharing the inside information and insight into how every American can not only wake up but also take action to prepare for the violent acts that are sure to come.
Parents & law enforcement must read this book.......2006-09-06
Terror at Beslan by John Giduck is an absolute must read by anyone who has a child in school and by anyone who is in law enforcement that may need to respond to such an incident. This book is heart wrenching and difficult to read but this must not prevent you from gaining the needed knowledge that this book provides.
I recently attended a training by John Giduck on the Beslan school seige. After attending this training it is apparent that tough questions must be asked and the answers are not easy. For example:
- As a parent do you know what your child's school safety plan is?
- As a law enforcement officer are you willing to shoot a child that is being held as a human shield while the hostage taking terrorist is pointing a gun at you?
We live in a world where terrorists target the weak: children, women, elderly, etc. Law enforcement must be able to respond appropriately. America is a society where if one child is killed in such a seize the public views the police response as a failure. The media will have a feeding frenzy. The reality is that the terrorists will hold children as human shields. This is a difficult and terrible situation to be in as a first responder. We are no longer afforded the opportunity of hoping for the best as we stick our head in the sand. Law enforcement must address this issue now and have clear direction by the highest levels of administration on what an acceptable response will be when this incident happens in the U.S.
Terrorism is about fear. A Beslan type seize is very possible, maybe even probable, in America. Law enforcement must be able to do their jobs, an extremely difficult job, without the fear of civil litigation. It is time to face reality for what it is and pull our heads out of the sand.
As the saying goes: Proper planning prevents poor performance.
Amazon.com
The Haunted Wood fills in a valuable part of cold war history: the Soviet Union's attempts to spy on the United States from the time of FDR's New Deal, through the Second World War, and into the 1950s. Allen Weinstein (author of a highly regarded history of the Hiss-Chambers case, Perjury) and Alexander Vassiliev (a KGB agent turned journalist) show that among the Americans caught in the Soviet orbit were many top government officials, including a Congressman from New York and a close advisor to President Roosevelt, as well as an American ambassador's daughter. Most of these early spies were leftists driven by ideology--as opposed to money, which seems to have motivated many of the later cold war traitors, such as Aldrich Ames. (The Congressman, interestingly, is an exception--he demanded so much compensation that the Soviets gave him the code name "Crook.") The greatest windfall for the U.S.S.R. during this period was the acquisition of atomic secrets, with contributions from agents like Ted Hall, Klaus Fuchs, and Julius and Ethel Rosenberg (the authors do not believe, however, that the scientist Robert Oppenheimer was a Soviet spook). Yet there were also notable failures, many brought on by Stalin's insatiable appetite for purges; defections by Chambers and Elizabeth Bentley also dealt several mortal blows. By the end of the 1940s, the Soviet spy ring in the United States was in serious breakdown. Weinstein and Vassiliev make use of both American sources and Soviet archives to deliver what will surely be an authoritative account for many years--or at least until more top-secret archives on both sides of the Atlantic become declassified. And don't expect that to happen anytime soon. --John J. Miller
Book Description
Based upon previously secret KGB records, The Haunted Wood reveals for the first time the riveting story of Soviet espionage's "golden age" in the United States throughout the 1930s, World War II, and the early Cold War. Historian Allen Weinstein, author of Perjury: The Hiss-Chambers Case, and Alexander Vassiliev, a former KGB agent-turned-journalist, were provided unique access to thousands of classified Soviet intelligence dispatches that documented the KGB's success in acquiring America's most valuable atomic, military, and diplomatic secrets.
The Haunted Wood narrates the triumphs and failures of Soviet operatives and their American agents during the 1930s and 1940s, describing as well the compelling human dramas involved.
Reconstructed from Moscow's messages to its operatives and reports from Soviet recruits in America, The Haunted Wood describes many previously unknown personal tales: struggles for control among contending Soviet operatives and American agents, love affairs, business ventures, defections, and plotted or actual murders. The authors also detail the remarkable range of classified government documents and information stolen for Soviet intelligence during the 1930s and the war years.
Complementing its use of the KGB archives, The Haunted Wood incorporates, also for the first time, a number of the previously classified VENONA cables released in 1995-96 by the CIA and NSA. Among these thousands of translated intercepts sent by Soviet agents in the United States to the USSR during World War II were dozens that matched those found in the Moscow records.
The highly placed Americans who assisted Soviet intelligence operatives during this period included:
the passionate daughter of the U.S. Ambassador to Nazi Germany
an influential member of the U.S. Congress
one of President Roosevelt's personal assistants
key officials of the OSS, America's wartime spy agency
a flamboyant Hollywood producer-director
the head of the American Communist Party
Several chapters provide major new accounts from Moscow's own record of its relations with Alger Hiss and atomic spies Klaus Fuchs, Harry Gold, David Greenglass, Theodore Hall, and Julius Rosenberg, among others, along with fresh information on Soviet espionage in the United States by British agents for the Kremlin--Guy Burgess, Donald Maclean, and Harold "Kim" Philby.
The Haunted Wood's pages are filled with extraordinary and previously untold stories, including those of one war-time American spy ring whose head lived in a domestic ménage à trois with other agents, of Soviet involvement in a Hollywood music publishing company and possible major film investments, and of a station chief who proposed (with Moscow's agreement) funding U.S. journalists and congressional political campaigns.
The authors show how defection at war's end by a single emotionally depressed agent, despondent since the death of her Soviet station-chief lover, provoked the swift and virtually complete shutdown of Moscow's intelligence operations in the United States--ironically, years before the FBI and congressional investigations began their decade-long pursuit of "Soviet agents," who, by then, had either returned to Moscow or left the U.S. government!
With its new and uniquely documented information, The Haunted Wood offers the first fresh, realistic, and non-judgmental understanding of Soviet espionage in the United States during the Stalin era.
Customer Reviews:
The Soviet Penetration of the Roosevelt Administration.......2006-11-27
Authors Weinstein and Vassiliev were in the relatively unique position, in writing "The Haunted Wood", of having access to the Soviet as well as the American side of the story. They took advantage of a brief period of access to Soviet espionage achives after the breakup of the Soviet Union. What emerges is an exhaustive study of the penetration by Soviet spies of the U.S. government in the 1930's and 1940's.
The Soviets were materially aided in their espionage efforts by an admiration of Soviet communism shared by some Americans. This admiration looks badly misguided in retrospect, but apparently seemed very rational in the context of the 1929 Stock Market Crash and the subsequent Great Depression and rise of Fascism. This admiration produced a generation of American (and British) traitors who gave away information on American foreign policy, military and industrial secrets.
Some of the names are familiar: Alger Hiss and the Rosenbergs, among others. Less familiar may be the names and operating methods of their Soviet handlers, who worked not just against American counterintelligence but also against the increasing paranoia of the Soviet Government they served. Despite the continuing delivery of invaluable information, Josef Stalin repeatedly purged Soviet intelligence. The disruption caused by the purges almost certainly kept the Soviets from acquiring even more information than they did.
"The Haunted Wood" is written primarily for an audience already fascinated by the topic of espionage. The average reader may find long stretches of dry and sometimes repetitive reading. This book is highly recommended for those studying the history of espionage.
partially an advertisement for two Soviet Agent's talent.......2005-01-02
This book was written with the help of several present and former Soviet Intelligence officers. Be aware that that colored the book with favorable views of these people's talent level and Soviet Intelligence in general. The book does contain valuable information along with important omission and advertising style hot air. I would suggest that you consider Venona by John Earl Haynes or The Venona Secrets: Exposing Soviet Espionage and America's Traitors by Herbert Romerstein. The former is an academic description of the 450+ Soviet agents disclosed by the US breaking Soviet codes used during the war. The latter is an inside story by two US espionage agents and experts. One of the gems it reveals is that President FDR was gullible and had several advisors who were Soviet agents. Stalin was afraid of a two front war in Europe and with Japan in the Pacific. He composed an insulting message for his agents to present to FDR who sent as is it to the Japanese government. This provoked the war in the Pacific. Had this not been done, The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor would have been done much later or not at all.
Second thoughts.......2002-06-27
I reviewed this book in 1999, and gave it three stars. Over time, I've decided it was better than I first thought, and came back here to up it to four...
A Critical View of "The Haunted Wood".......2002-06-04
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Critical View of "The Haunted Wood"
The thesis of this book is that KGB documents prove many New Deal and other US government officials were spies for the Soviet Union. The documentation in the book, however, does not support the thesis, in my opinion.
The co-authors state that one of them, a former KGB agent named Alexander Vassiliev, saw the KGB documents in Moscow on an exclusive basis, in exchange for payments by the publisher, Random House, to an association of former KGB agents. There is no way to verify the authenticity of the KGB documents; no way to check the accuracy of the excerpts and paraphrases printed in the book; no way to study their context, such as the rest of the file from which a particular document came, which every historian and student knows can be crucial to a correct reading and interpretation. We do not even know whether the documents Vassiliev saw are in the Russian language and, if they are, who translated them and how accurately.
The book contains 1099 numbered footnotes, of which 1049 are citations to those off-limits KGB documents. Readers may well ask why those footnotes are there at all. Another frustrating puzzle for readers is the way the co-authors purport to quote KGB documents that contain code names (which the Soviet intelligence agencies routinely assigned to spies and occasionally to non-spies such as Roosevelt, Truman, Churchill, and lesser figures): the co-authors delete the code names and replace them with real names in square brackets -- but often without disclosing what code names they have deleted, and without citing any KGB document or otherwise explaining how or where they got the real names. Compounding the confusion, they state that the Soviets sometimes assigned the same code name to more than one person and sometimes assigned two or three code names to the same person. For instance, the co-authors assert that the American diplomat Alger Hiss had two code names, "Ales" and "Lawyer", while the US Treasury official Harry Dexter White had three code names, "Lawyer", "Richard", and "Reed".
In The Haunted Wood, the co-authors do not explain why they cite no authority or source for ascribing "Lawyer" as a code name for Hiss. For their assertion that "Ales" was another code name for Hiss, they do not cite any KGB documentary source, but they reproduce (and misquote) a so-called "Venona" document, released in 1996 by the US National Security Agency and said to bear a translation of a partially decrypted 1945 KGB cablegram about "Ales". In 1950, an FBI agent tentatively identified Ales as Hiss and said the FBI would attempt to verify the identification; but it never did so, nor could it have done so.
The Venona-KGB cablegram itself, reproduced with the photographs in the book, shows that Ales could not have been Hiss. Ales was a military intelligence (GRU) agent who obtained only military information. Hiss, however, was charged with obtaining only non-military State Department materials; the papers that were used to convict him were copies of State Department documents. Ales was the leader of a group of GRU agents, whereas Hiss was accused of acting alone (except for his wife and his accuser, Whittaker Chambers). Ales conducted espionage throughout the eleven years 1935-45, whereas Hiss was accused of having conducted espionage not later than 1938, etc. etc. But The Haunted Wood does not mention, let alone attempt to explain away, any of those discrepancies that preclude Ales as having been Hiss.
Furthermore, there is an earlier Venona document that tends to exonerate Hiss, but I can not find any mention of it in the book. It contains a fragment of a GRU message that, in the original, included the name "Hiss" spelled out in the Latin alphabet, rather than the Cyrillic. For the GRU to use the Latin alphabet just for the name strongly suggests that the GRU had never before heard of Hiss and wanted to be sure to get the name right. (No first name is given, so we can not tell whether "Hiss" was Alger or his brother Donald, who was also in the State Department.) Moreover, for the GRU to use Hiss's real name suggests that he had no code name and was not an espionage agent, because Soviet intelligence agencies, for reasons of security, normally assigned code names to their agents and referred to them only by their code names. Given the many pages that The Haunted Wood devotes to Hiss, Ales, the GRU, and Venona, it is a serious lapse, in my view, for the co-authors not to tell their readers about this GRU message and not to discuss its implications.
The lack of verifiable documentation in The Haunted Wood, its plethora of errors, and its strategic omissions leave it demonstrably untrustworthy. In my opinion, the book falls too far below minimal standards of scholarly or journalistic rigor for any serious consideration.
Very informative. One of the best. But it is a boring read.......2000-11-25
I have read many books on the issue of intelligence. The insight provided by this book is excellent. In particular, the nature and history of America's volunteer ideological spies is the very best I have ever read. But I have found it a hard read. It is possible to be too through. Honest, it is. I had an easier time with Mitrokhin.
Book Description
Retitled from Nations in Darkness, this classic continues its exploration of the relationship triangle of three superpowers: China, Russia, and the United States. Stoessinger frames the dynamics of these constantly-evolving linkages in terms of how each perceives the others. This edition significantly reworks material on the former Soviet Union. Stoessinger chronicles the undoing of the Soviet Union and relates its ongoing efforts at the establishing of a true democracy while also reexamining China's "Old Guard" and speculating on the emergence of new forces and new directions there.
Customer Reviews:
More Information Than You Can Handle.......2006-03-06
I read Stoessinger's book for an International Relations course at college. Though Sotessinger was less "wordy" than other authors, he certainly packed this book full of information. Though under 400 pages, this book contained more information, anecdotes, and facts than the rest of my texts combined. In fact, my only criticism of this book is that it is easy to get bogged down in the details. However, I would recommend this strongly to anyone interested in, or studying, US relations with China and Russia.
Plethora of information!.......2000-03-28
This work was a lifesaver! Stoessinger presents important information that I was unable to find in any other book located in the local university library. This book, which is used by many universities as a text book was extremely useful in my research studies of American foreign relations with China and Russia. Stoessinger I thank you!
Average customer rating:
|
Between Revolution and the Ballot Box: The Origins of the Argentine Radical Party in the 1890s (Cambridge Latin American Studies)
Paula Alonso
Manufacturer: Cambridge University Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover
 Renaissance
| Schools, Periods & Styles
| Arts & Photography
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Central America
| Americas
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Argentina
| South America
| Americas
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| South America
| Americas
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Renaissance
| World
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Politics
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Political Parties
| Politics
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Practical Politics
| Politics
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Political Science
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Central & South America
| History
| Humanities
| New & Used Textbooks
| Stores
| Books
United States
| History
| Humanities
| New & Used Textbooks
| Stores
| Books
American Government
| Political Science
| Social Sciences
| New & Used Textbooks
| Stores
| Books
Look Inside Art Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside History Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside Nonfiction Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
ASIN: 0521771854 |
Book Description
Founded in 1891, the Unión Cívica Radical, generally known as the Radical Party, is the oldest national political party in Argentina. As the strongest opposition party during the 1890s, a pivotal decade in the birth of Argentina's party system, the Radical Party effected a critical development in Argentine politics: it created a system of open confrontation and political competition. This study offers not merely a revised version of the party's story but also a new perspective on the politics of the nation as a whole.
Average customer rating:
- a great introduction to the American labor movement
|
Hard Work: Remaking the American Labor Movement
Rick Fantasia , and
Kim Voss
Manufacturer: University of California Press
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback
Labor & Industrial Relations
| Economics
| Business & Investing
| Subjects
| Books
General
| United States
| Americas
| History
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Americas
| History
| Subjects
| Books
Labor & Industrial Relations
| Politics
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Labor Unions
| Politics
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
General
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Sociology
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
| AIDS
| Abuse
| Adults
| Aging
| Children
| Class
| Communities
| Culture
| Death
| General
| History
| Leisure
| Marriage & Family
| Medicine
| Men
| Occupational
| Race Relations
| Religion
| Research & Measurement
| Rural
| Social Groups
| Social Situations
| Social Theory
| Suburban
| Urban
| Women
Ethnic Studies
| Special Groups
| Social Sciences
| Nonfiction
| Subjects
| Books
Look Inside Business Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside History Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
Look Inside Nonfiction Books
| Trip
| Specialty Stores
| Books
All Titles
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Business & Investing
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Nonfiction
| Qualifying Textbooks - Fall 2007
| Stores
| Books
Similar Items:
-
Rebuilding Labor: Organizing and Organizers in the New Union Movement
-
Why Unions Matter
-
State of the Union: A Century of American Labor (Politics and Society in Twentieth Century America)
-
Poor Workers' Unions: Rebuilding Labor From Below
-
Women of the Klan: Racism and Gender in the 1920s
ASIN: 0520240901 |
Book Description
This concise overview of the labor movement in the United States focuses on why American workers have failed to develop the powerful unions that exist in other industrialized countries. Packed with valuable analysis and information, Hard Work explores historical perspectives, examines social and political policies, and brings us inside today's unions, providing an excellent introduction to labor in America.
Hard Work begins with a comparison of the very different conditions that prevail for labor in the United States and in Europe. What emerges is a picture of an American labor movement forced to operate on terrain shaped by powerful corporations, a weak state, and an inhospitable judicial system. What also emerges is a picture of an American worker that has virtually disappeared from the American social imagination. Recently, however, the authors find that a new kind of unionism--one that more closely resembles a social movement--has begun to develop from the shell of the old labor movement. Looking at the cities of Los Angeles and Las Vegas they point to new practices that are being developed by innovative unions to fight corporate domination, practices that may well signal a revival of unionism and the emergence of a new social imagination in the United States.
Customer Reviews:
a great introduction to the American labor movement.......2005-07-15
In this book, Fantasia and Voss--two long-time, respected labor scholars--provide a great overview of and introduction to the American labor movement. The book was actually originally written for a French audience, so they assume you know very little about the American labor movement, explaining things like the National Labor Relations Board and the Taft-Hartley Act, instead of assuming you know about them. They also at times contrast the American labor movement with those in Eruope, which is also frequently illuminating.
Building upon Voss' previous work, they address the question of the supposed exceptionalism of the American working class--the fact that, unlike European working classes, they never developed a militant labor movement that fought for the interests of all workers and embraced socialist or social-democratic politics; instead, the labor movement has fought primarily for benefits for its members and embraced mainstream politics. But, Fantasia and Viss argue, the American labor movement was not always like this--in the mid- to late nineteenth century, the American labor movement was as militant, broad-minded and radical as its European counterparts, if not more so. What was exceptional was not the American working class, but the American capitalist class, which was far more hostile to labor than their European counterparts. This hostile social environment, in which any major labor organziation that showed signs of a broad vision of social justice was brutally crushed, lead to the thoroughly domesticated politics of the AFL-CIO, in which they agreed to act as business' junior partner, gaining increased wages and benefits for their members, in return for abandonning any broader vision and supporting the Cold War agenda.
Even at its height, this bargain excluded most workers outside the core manufacturing industries. When the US and global economy began to undergo major changes in the 1970s (changes Fantasia and Voss don't explain well--this is one of the few weaknesses of the book), US business decided this bargain no longer suited its needs, rolling back the gains workers had made, a process that accelerated once the Reagan administration came to power. Traditional labor leaders were totally unprepared for this assult and it looked like organized American labor might go down the tubes.
Fortunately, the decentralized structure of some unions, while allowing for local corruption, had also allowed for progressives to survive in some localities. They have responded to the crisis of American labor with innovative new tactics and a new vision that embraces the interests of all workers, not just union members. They have begun working with other community groups and organizing groups unions had traditionally ignored--people of color, women and immigrants. (This is the other big weakness of the book--Fantasia and Voss don't pay enough attention to how deeply entrenched racism, sexism and nativism were entrenched in mainstream unions. They treat these matters casually instead of as central to understanding the crisis of American labor). With the election of Sweeney and the New Voices slate to the leadership of the AFL-CIO, these efforts began to get some official support. It is in this new, social movement unionism Fantasia and Voss see hope. However, it faces huge obstacles, both in the form of the entrenched leaders of many labor unions, leaders who are often conservative, corrupt or both; and the continuing hostility of American business and government to organized labor.
Despite the weaknesses I have mentioned, overall Fantasia and Voss do a great job of summarizing the history of the American labor movement, how it got into the mess it is today, and possible avenues out of the mess. The book is hopeful without being naive.
Amazon.com
From its opening-line salvo—"It is time to stop pretending that Europeans and Americans share a common view of the world, or even that they occupy the same world"—Of Paradise and Power announces a new phase in the relationship between the United States and Europe. Robert Kagan begins this illuminating essay by laying out the general differences as he sees them: the U.S. is quicker to use military force, less patient with diplomacy, and more willing to coerce (or bribe) other nations in order to get a desired result. Europe, on the other hand, places greater emphasis on diplomacy, takes a much longer view of history and problem solving, and has greater faith in international law and cooperation. Kagan does not view these differences as the result of innate national character, but as a time-honored historical reality--the U.S. is merely behaving like the powerful nation it is, just as the great European nations once did when they ruled the world. Now, Europe must act multilaterally because it has no choice. The "UN Security Council is a substitute for the power they lack," he writes.
Kagan also emphasizes the inherent ironies present in the relationship. European nations have enjoyed an "American security guarantee" for nearly 60 years, allowing them to cut back on defense spending while criticizing the U.S. for not doing the same. Yet Europe relies upon the U.S. for protection. This has led America and Europe to view the same threats much differently, as evidenced by the split over how to deal with Iraq and Saddam Hussein. Kagan points out that some European leaders are more afraid of how the U.S. will wield its power in the Middle East than they are of the thought of Hussein or other "rogue state" leaders acquiring weapons of mass destruction.
Kagan's brevity is as impressive as it is appreciated; most writers would have required thrice as many pages to get to their point. At any length, the book is nothing short of brilliant. This is essential reading for those seeking to understand the post-Cold War world. --Shawn Carkonen
Book Description
From a leading scholar of our country’s foreign policy, the brilliant essay about America and the world that has caused a storm in international circles now expanded into book form.
European leaders, increasingly disturbed by U.S. policy and actions abroad, feel they are headed for what the New York Times (July 21, 2002) describes as a “moment of truth.” After years of mutual resentment and tension, there is a sudden recognition that the real interests of America and its allies are diverging sharply and that the trans-atlantic relationship itself has changed, possibly irreversibly. Europe sees the United States as high-handed, unilateralist, and unnecessarily belligerent; the United States sees Europe as spent, unserious, and weak. The anger and mistrust on both sides are hardening into incomprehension.
This past summer, in Policy Review, Robert Kagan reached incisively into this impasse to force both sides to see themselves through the eyes of the other. Tracing the widely differing histories of Europe and America since the end of World War II, he makes clear how for one the need to escape a bloody past has led to a new set of transnational beliefs about power and threat, while the other has perforce evolved into the guarantor of that “postmodern paradise” by dint of its might and global reach. This remarkable analysis is being discussed from Washington to Paris to Tokyo. It is esssential reading.
Customer Reviews:
Welcome to the desert of the neocon.......2007-05-13
This book is useful for insight into the thinking of neoconservatives, but has little to do with the real world.
Kagan states that appeasement policies of the 1930's were "a product not of analysis but of weakness." That's funny considering the USSR was the biggest appeaser of any country in Europe, actively conspiring with Hitler to invade Poland. Yet the USSR chewed up the vast bulk of Germany's continental armies and occupied half of Europe. To claim the USSR, Britain, and France all followed policies of appeasement for the same single reason would be dubious no matter the reason. To say the reason was weakness is stupid.
The United States is compared to a heroic Sheriff protecting the weak townsfolk against rogues and outlaws. I suggest Kagan read up on the history of the old west, in fact lawmen were often no better then outlaws and they frequently switched places. Hardly an example to follow if you intend to be a hegemon for long.
Perhaps most delusional is the analogy where he compares dealing with Iraq to shooting a bear. C'mon, wasn't it supposed to be more like shooting a cow?
Throughout the book Kagan conflates Europe with some mythical all powerful female figure. The essay at heart is a cry for liberation from her feminine strictures, a call for men to act like men and shoot each other.
Not very good policy, but this volume is a near perfect time-capsule of neoconservative thought. Future psychologists and social historians are indebted.
God It Has Aged.......2007-04-26
Luckily this book got an afterword in 2004. The initial text is definitely obsolete. But even so three years have passed and the book is quite largely obsolete. First and foremost today the main objection at the decision of the Bush administration to go at war in Iraq is that all evidence, intelligence and testimonies brought to our attention at the time has been revealed as nothing but lies. And maybe even worse than that. The recently revealed top secret classified papers from the French Ministry of Defense have revealed that terrorist attacks were planned with highjacked commercial planes at least nine months before 9/11. Did the Minister of Defense at the time, a socialist, not communicate this intelligence to the newly elected President Bush? Or did the newly elected President Bush neglect this intelligence. A second investigation is necessary. What did the two administrations, French and US, do at the time? And don't forget this field of expertise (military and foreign policies) is the privileged area of presidential governance in France. So Chirac had some kind of say in the decision to communicate or not this intelligence to the US. But that does not change the fact that all arguments used by Colin Powell or President Bush in 2002-2003 were a pack of lies. But even so, and trust cannot be built on lies, the other essential objection of Europeans and many other nations, including China and Russia, was that this war would open up a box of surprises, each one of them worse than all the others. Today in 2007 we are forced say that all these fears have come true. I will overlook the torturing of prisoners in El Ghraib or Guantanamo. I will overlook the nullification of habeas corpus for the prisoners in Guantanamo. I will only look at two elements that cannot be solved in any way by any number of GIs, no matter how many. Iraq is on the verge of a possible explosion that will send waves and tremors a lot farther than the Middle East. Who can imagine what would happen if a reunified Kurdistan was becoming a reality? Who can imagine what would happen if a reunified Shiite nation were to be recomposed, essentially what's more a reunified Shiite nation that would not be Arabic in spite of its being Moslem? What remains on the table is that Iraq has become ungovernable with three million refugees all around the world, and essentially in Syria and Jordania, with at least 600,000 civilian victims so far and the number grows everyday by the hundreds and not by the units. That's why we, the Europeans and many others, said the war was an absurdity. No WMDs but results that are deadly. Iran is running on an everyday more radical road. Hizbollah has taken over Moslem Lebanon. Hamas has been elected in Palestine, and there is no end to that long line of consequences. President Bush has opened up a Pandora's box that threatens to be a well timed but unpredictable bomb. When will it explode? We don't know. Will Israel's nuclear weapons be enough to stop it? We don't know. What will the Russia or Chinese reaction be? We don't know. That's why this book has to be read and meditated upon. It is the revelation of the most extreme impossibility for some American intellectuals to listen to the world and understand history is changing. So far class struggle and war were the engines of history. Today economic welfare and development are becoming this engine because everyone wants electricity, cars, fridges and washing machines. Henry Ford's answer when he was asked why his T Model was black is typical of the extreme dictatorship the mass economy of the mass consumer's society we are living in or aspiring to be living in imposes onto us, and without any kind of a war possible out of it: "I have no objection to any other color, provided it is black." Humanity started its long road towards freedom and democracy and welfare as soon as the homo sapiens, Cromagnon in Europe, decided to develop the division of labor imposed by the premature state of its little babies into an economic division of labor that created then the market economy, since some had goods or services others did not have and they had to start pooling together and exchanging things. The future of the world is democratic because the mass market of our mass consumer's society requires peace and freedom, peace and democracy, peace and personal individual responsibility and creativity. President Bush maybe wants to go faster than the hands of the Big Ben of history. Impossible. One has to desire something to accept to have it, better even to earn it, win it or deserve it. A gift is a gift but if it a basic vital thing it becomes an alienation or a humiliation. The Americans did not understand that, even in Europe. I remember a colleague professor of mine in Davis, CA, presenting the land around the campus as the richest land in the world. Vanity fair, nothing else. In de Gaulle's time hotel managers in Paris explained American tourists that they did not have the biggest king size beds in the world, nor the most spacious bath cum toilet restrooms, but they did have the biggest fleas and all French people were proud of their fleas. Robert Kagan is behind his time, just like President Bush. And I did have a petition signed after 9/11 to express my and many other people's grief and solidarity with the victims and I did have a petition widely signed in my city at the time against the war in Iraq after Babylon had been attacked. So please don't argue the point and the trauma of 9/11 that some of my students read 9-1-1.
Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine & University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne
Breaking down trends in transatlantic relations.......2007-04-19
For such a short book, Kagan simply and adeptly lays out his beliefs on why America and Europe seem to behave differently in the international arena.
Some salient points: Where we are today is merely a reversal of roles--Europe in the 18th and 19th centuries wielded great power, while America played the role of a minor power. Today, America wields great power, while the Europeans have not collectively come together as a great power on the international stage.
Kagan outlines the paradox of this situation: simply put, America, in the post-war era, created, to an extent, the situation that we have today. By providing security to Europe in the Cold War, the Europeans were able to reallocate resources that would have been spent on defense. Which was a problem during the crises in the Balkans, where Europe found itself hamstrung to effectively deal with problems close to home.
While dated, it is still relevant today. While America would like to see the Europeans shoulder more of a defense burden around the globe, it remains a target of European criticism for taking action that others can not. Therein lies the dilemma. Great read, and should be of interest to anyone studying international relations and transatlantic relations.
Discredited Neocon.......2007-02-17
If you want the warmongering neocon point of view, from those same guys who brought us the Project for the New American Century, pre-emptive war on Iraq based on falsified intelligence, and who are now foaming at the mouth to invade Iran, subjugating US foreign policy to Israeli interests and perhaps create a world-wide war in the process....go right ahead!
Everybody in America should read this book.......2007-01-23
To the author, Robert Kagan.
Your book "of Paradise and Power" confirms what the French have known for many years. America took positions which were extremely hostile to France in the period 1920-1940. This led to the second World War, and millions of dead. If America also had supported France in 1914 as G. Kennan says in "America Diplomacy", page 55-73, there would not have been WWI. So America's responsibility in the desasters of the last century is huge, almost criminal.
The above to introduce the present and my disagreement with Mr Kagan. America says it can solve the problems of the world alone. This is just not true. America alone is a disaster. It should have learnt its lesson in Viet-Nam, but it did not and now we have the complete mess in Iraq. If America thinks that it can solve problems by launching rockets, drop bombs and send a few marines, it is 100% wrong. No nation can be "domesticated" by taking such actions. it requires more work. And the European way is the way: long, patient work. America must work with other nations, first of all Europe, and it is the only way to solve the problems. Foch, the winner of the WWI said: "stay united and we will avoid wars"...
Today, terrorism is a minor problem compared to global Warming. This can only be solved if we work together. America must be part of the world.
The book shows very well what can be achieved by America's well understood interest and generosity such in the period 1947/52. The last two pages of this book gives me hope.
Amazon.com
Does anyone still look for the union label? Apparently not, to gauge historian Nelson Lichtenstein's history of the rise, heyday, and long decline of labor unions in America.
In the Progressive era, Lichtenstein writes, the "labor question" lay at the heart of a whole complex of political ideas governing the social betterment of working people and the development of a more equitable society. These ideas flourished through the course of the early twentieth century, as unions attained more and more influence and as Keynesian notions of organized labor being "essential to boost mass purchasing power and thereby sustain economic growth" became established. After World War II, however, unionism began a slow collapse, helped along by the rise of conservative, antilabor politics. Although ideas of workplace justice and the extension of civil rights into the private sector remain strong, organized labor has not--with the result, Lichtenstein argues, that many American workers are worse off today than they were a quarter of a century ago. Lichtenstein's narrative capably summarizes trends in modern labor history, and it provides much fuel for activists seeking renewed labor-based politics. --Gregory McNamee
Book Description
In a fresh and timely reinterpretation, Nelson Lichtenstein examines how trade unionism has waxed and waned in the nation's political and moral imagination, among both devoted partisans and intransigent foes. From the steel foundry to the burger-grill, from Woodrow Wilson to John Sweeney, from Homestead to Pittston, Lichtenstein weaves together a compelling matrix of ideas, stories, strikes, laws, and people in a streamlined narrative of work and labor in the twentieth century.
The "labor question" became a burning issue during the Progressive Era because its solution seemed essential to the survival of American democracy itself. Beginning there, Lichtenstein takes us all the way to the organizing fever of contemporary Los Angeles, where the labor movement stands at the center of the effort to transform millions of new immigrants into alert citizen unionists. He offers an expansive survey of labor's upsurge during the 1930s, when the New Deal put a white, male version of industrial democracy at the heart of U.S. political culture. He debunks the myth of a postwar "management-labor accord" by showing that there was (at most) a limited, unstable truce.
Lichtenstein argues that the ideas that had once sustained solidarity and citizenship in the world of work underwent a radical transformation when the rights-centered social movements of the 1960s and 1970s captured the nation's moral imagination. The labor movement was therefore tragically unprepared for the years of Reagan and Clinton: although technological change and a new era of global economics battered the unions, their real failure was one of ideas and political will. Throughout, Lichtenstein argues that labor's most important function, in theory if not always in practice, has been the vitalization of a democratic ethos, at work and in the larger society. To the extent that the unions fuse their purpose with that impulse, they can once again become central to the fate of the republic. State of the Union is an incisive history that tells the story of one of America's defining aspirations.
Customer Reviews:
The Changing Face of Unions and Society.......2004-11-10
Nelson Lichtenstein's work titled, State of The Union: A Century of American Labor, provides an historical overview of the laws, people, and times in the American labour movement. In producing his research, Lichtenstein contextualizes (with a few glaring omissions) his discussion of the rise and decline of labor unions in the psyche of the American worker and companies alike. By starting his discussion with the period from the Great Depression through World War I, Lichtenstein provides a frame within which to place events, and accompanying mindsets, that developed from both a legal/legislative and social-change perspective. Additionally, in moving through the waxing and waning moments between the end of WWII and the Civil Rights Movement to the current living wage initiative, he presents a respectable work as to the elements that facilitated the decline in significance of unions in post-deindustrialization America; an institution which he strongly and convincingly argues is in need of a rebirth.
I found chapter five particularly engaging due to his treatment of "rights consciousness" and two legal events that were supported by African Americans and the AFL-CIO: the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title VII. On rights consciousness, he asserts, "this chapter seeks to evaluate how and why a rights-conscious strategy became the most efficacious way to approach the labor question during the 1960's and 1970's. It tries to measure the success and failure of this approach, and suggests why the labor movement reaped so few dividends from what would otherwise have been a most nurturing social-cultural environment" (180). While such movements in other countries "strengthened social-democratic movements and increased trade-union numbers and power . . . in the United States, this was an area of relative union stagnation" (181). While this is a well-supported assertion and was a result, in part, of the period of deindustrialization (late 1970's and early 1980's) of America's cities/manufacturing centers, the legal maneuvering is nonetheless worth noting.
Upon reading of the legal positioning, I began wondering what happened to the levels of consciousness of the 1960's that led to the 1964 Civil Rights Act and Title VII? An energized movement that sought to address not only the rights of African Americans and their seemingly intractable marginalization due to their skin color and social stigmatization, but also the rights of poor Anglos/Whites as well, seems to not have served current drives for economic equality. Additionally, I began considering the implications for workers, both African American and American Anglo if the failed Poor People's Campaign scheduled for 19 April 1968 had actually taken place with Dr. King at the helm. I say failed, due to the assassination of Martin Luther King 4 April 1968, in Memphis, Tennessee, and the lack of vigor displayed when the event took place.
The consciousness displayed during the sixties as detailed by Lichtenstein brought forth a new dynamic. He writes, "if a new set of work rights was to be won, the decisive battle would take place, not in the union hall or across the bargaining table, but in the courts and the legislative chambers." This observance is indeed revealing of strategies employed by not only Civil Rights attorneys, but Union officials as well. That notwithstanding, Lichtenstein reminds readers that "a legal/administrative template derived from WWII-era Fair Employment Practice Commission was rolled into the 1964 civil rights law as Title VII," which allowed EEOC to "champion demands for equitable hiring and promotion practices" (192). Later, as Lichtenstein details, Title VII, as backed by AFL-CIO officials, came with "unforeseen" consequences. One such development was the racialization, and later gendering of fair employment "idea." Note: on the question of gender, Lichtenstein says little to nothing as to the feminization of poverty and elects not to discuss current trends in this area, which leads me to a short iteration of the books shortcomings.
Surprisingly, his treatment of women's rights and gender discrimination was relegated to less than ten pages. While he does address the living wage initiative and mentions Wal-Mart, a greater degree of attention is needed, but lacking; given current levels of working poor as detailed in Ehrenreich's work Nickel and Dimed: On (Not, Getting By In America, a discussion of Wal-Mart's machinations for crushing unionization efforts would have been both timely and ideal.
Another irony is that Lichtenstein does not discuss the Vietnam War and its economic and social fallout for America in any significant detail. A few paragraphs regarding economic and life estimates would have further served to contextualize "postwar poverty" (195). On this point, he elected not to note that more than 2.12 million people died in the war with more than fifty-eight thousand Americans contributing to the number of the dead. Additionally, he makes no mention of the estimated $140 billion price tag for America's involvement (Source: April, 2002 BBC Series War and Protest). Such omissions as that of Wal-Mart caused me to wonder about Lichtenstein's lack of in-depth discussion on the need to sincerely discuss the plight of the working poor; as opposed to paying lip-service to their very real needs.
In reading Lichtenstein's work and thinking on themes that coincided with Ehrenreich's Nickel and Dimed, which I recently read, I began wondering several things. First, how does one, in a climate less than friendly toward worker solidarity around a living wage, affordable childcare, quality medical care, and reasonable and safe housing, convince companies that the well-being of workers and their families is, and should be, tethered to their long-term economic viability as a socially responsible company and that these concerns are not mutually exclusive? Additionally, What are some methods that can be employed that allow for workers to be made aware of their rights, thus allowing them to press for reforms both in the workplace and society?
Admittedly, Lichtenstein's work is replete with legal and historical information on labor laws and practices. However, one concern this reviewer holds is the lack of discussion of these issues in an approachable form for general readers, not to mention the aforementioned omissions. While this work is excellent for gaining an understanding of labor laws and their affect both on people and companies, it too is realized that in some circles the discussion to be had will be not unlike verbal self-gratification: producing an outcome with no tangible manifestations.
Do unions have a future?.......2002-08-14
The backdrop for "State of the Union" is the "labor question" that the author finds Progressive Era reformers confronting. They regarded the disproportionate power that corporate capitalism wielded relative to citizens and workers as unjustifiable in a democratic society. Changes in workplaces were most troublesome. Skilled workers were bypassed by work-simplifying machinery, an autocratic foreman system enforced Taylorism, or speed-up, and wages hovered at subsistence levels. But American workers, drawing upon a republican legacy, seized upon the WWI rallying cry of making the world safe for democracy to insist that industrial democracy be established within workplaces. Even President Woodrow Wilson recognized "the right of those who work, in whatever rank, to participate in some organic way in every decision which directly affects their welfare." Interestingly, the author does not take note of the fact that Wilson's call for workers' participation did not mention unions. But it is the relationship of unions to this "labor question" and to the notion of industrial democracy that most concerns Lichtenstein.
The lack of a legal and institutional basis for industrial democracy virtually ensured that industrial democracy would fizzle in the post-WWI era. But the major slip-up of American capitalism in the 20th century, that is, the Great Depression, opened the door for a tremendous, pent-up surge of American worker activism. In the Wagner Act, the most significant piece of New Deal legislation, workers were given the right and even encouraged to self-organize or select a representative to bargain with employers. In unionized workplaces, vibrant shop-floor steward systems ensured that workers' concerns received an expeditious hearing. Many labor activists from the Progressive Era were in the forefront of this politicized offensive to push for legalized industrial democracy. In addition, some of the Progressive social-democratic platform such as unemployment insurance, social security, and fair labor standards were part of the New Deal package.
The backlash against this resurgence of worker empowerment began immediately. Conservative justices, hostile corporate managements, racist Southern oligarchs, and anti-statist AFL unions - all opposed state intervention in the private domain of workplaces. But with the onset of WWII, the labor movement was drawn even more tightly into the state web as a participant in peak-level bargaining with the War Labor Board and industry leaders for the purpose of stabilizing industrial relations. For example, to curtail the spontaneous and disruptive strikes that were a part of the self-help tradition on the shop floor, multi-level grievance arbitration systems became standard sections in most bargaining agreements. But that tripartite bargaining did not extend beyond WWII. Some of the agreed to provisions proved to be more debilitating than helpful to trade unions and workers in later years.
With the Taft-Hartley Act in 1947, conservatives were finally able to accomplish the dilution of the Wagner Act. Unions suffered major setbacks in that legislation. Communists and radicals were purged from union rolls, "right to work" laws were enacted in some states; employers could now denounce unions in organizing drives; and secondary boycotts were mostly prohibited. The author refers to the exclusion of supervisors and the subsequent exclusion of tens of millions of professional and technical workers in today's workforce as the "ghettoization" of the union movement.
As the author indicates, Taft-Hartley guaranteed that collective bargaining would be both limited and firm-based. A variety of barriers and penalties now existed to derail broader, classwide mobilizations. Negotiated contracts did not venture outside "mandatory" subjects of wages, hours, and working conditions. The prerogative of management to make virtually all corporate decisions regardless of any impact on workforces was a privileged topic. Industrial democracy received scant consideration as the courts generally held that a grievance clause in a contract overrode the statutory right of workers to strike.
The author takes particular care to debunk the widely held notion that the post-Taft-Hartley industrial relations era through the 1970s was a time of labor-management accord. A companion idea was that collective bargaining represented "industrial pluralism" in action. But classes with opposed interests and distinct ideologies could no longer exist; society now was defined to consist of competing interest groups who engaged in "non-ideological conflict." It was a theory that eschewed the idea that "alert citizen-workers" were the basic political actors of society. Industrial pluralism required that "competing elites bargain, compromise, and govern." Labor unions were only fulfilling their legitimate role when led by unassailable officers of long tenure. In addition, capitalism was now a benign force; it had been transformed into a rational planner for industrial society.
Global economic forces beginning in the 1970s undermined this supposed labor-management accord. Increased global competition, OPEC, inflation, and reduced corporate profits triggered new assaults by businessmen, conservatives, and various pundits on unions, casting them as "self-aggrandizing interest groups." Meanwhile a new rights consciousness, fueled by the civil rights movement, coupled with a loss of credibility and trust for unions persuaded workers to look to state regulatory legislation for workplace protections. But it was a pursuit for protection of individual rights based on gender, race, age, etc and not collective rights to industrial democracy. It was a focus that left unchanged the basic power structures in workplaces. Worker solidarity and workplace democracy no longer resonated with workers.
The author clearly regards the collective bargaining regime of American industrial relations, as it has evolved, to be a "product of defeat, not victory." Obviously material gains were made by many through collective bargaining, but the trade union movement has mostly failed in facilitating the democratic voice for all of the American working class.
What does the author suggest? It is a simple list: militancy, internal union democracy, and politics. There really is no assessment of the feasibility of the labor movement solving the labor question and establishing industrial democracy. Unlike the 1930s, there is no pent-up demand for workplace democracy. Consumerism seems to be the operant ideology of the American working class. This is an important book that leaves little doubt as to the state of unions. One is left wondering about the future of trade unions in the U.S.
A fine study of the crisis of American labor.......2002-07-24
Nelson Lichtenstein's Sate of the Union is a superb study of the current crisis of American labor. If it is not as finely researched or as densely rewarding as his biography of Walter Reuther or Steve Fraser's biography of Sidney Hillman, it is an excellent introduction to the problem and to possible solutions. Lichtenstein demonstrates the vital necessity of trade unions. The average wage of American young families stands at only two-thirds of the their counterparts in 1973, "even though their total working hours were longer and the educational level of the head of th ehousehold higher than a generation before. In the first years of the new century median wages and family incomes were still below their 1989 level." In the decline of civic committment and political life, the untramelled sway of corporate hegemony, the failure to confront health insurance, public transportation, and childcare in the United States and basic civil liberties in much of our brave new globalized world, the decline of American trade unionism truly is an injury to all.
Lichtenstein, notwithstanding his title, starts with the thirties. He tells the story of how mass industrial unionism boomed during that decade. The story he tells is not particularly new, concentrating on the famous struggles, as well as the fatal limitations of the CIO on race and gender. But he also goes on to point out that the partial welfare state, far from creating the dreaded dependence of conservative rhetoric, actually gave millions of workers the opportunity to exert civil rights and real power that they did not under the mythology of a producer's republic. Although he is scathing abou the flaws of the AFL's short sighted and often openly racist stratgey he duly notes that their craft unionism did have some advantages in some places.
The next two-thirds of the book are much more interesting. Lichtenstein denies that there was ever a "Labor-Management Accord," the belief that labour problems were essentially solved held in the sixties by complacent liberals and confused leftists. Lichtenstein points out the exceptional qualities of American management that differed them from their European counterparts and made them less amenable to compromise. He points out the continent wide nature of their businesses, the absence of cartelization and self-regulation, the increased power of big businesses, who were not tained with collaborationism, and the increasing stress placed on smaller companies which made them blame the federal state. He points out the dead weight southern segregation had on trade unionism and other liberal hopes, He notes how Taft-Hartley legalized right to work laws, as well as banning supervisory unioism making the unionization of many service industries like insurance or engineering "virtually impossible."
Lichtenstein goes on to discuss the increasing complacency of the AFL-CIO, under its spectacularly unimaginative leader George Meaney, as well as the calcification of the grievance system, the dissipation of shop-floor pressure, and the strategic disaster of supporting a private welfare state via union contract. This would not stand the ruptures of the eighties and which dissipated efforts to create a national social wage for all. He also reminds us that Kennedy's Keynesianism was the most conservative form on tap, while LBJ's war on poverty failed to confront the structural roots of poverty and thought that if could be fought on the cheap with training programs.
Lichtenstein then goes on to discuss the decline of the union ideal among liberal and leftist thinkers, and notes how even the Warren Court hampered trade unions. Lichtenstein is most helpful in discussing the limits of "rights consciousness." He is unflinching on the complacency and bigotry of many trade unionists that made this necessary. But he quite properly notes that it cannot be a substitute for trade unionism. First off, the legal-regulatory system is not self-supporting and it needs a coherent voice from workers themselves--ie a strong trade union, to support them. Secondly, rights discourse puts the emphasis on regulators as opposed to the workers themsleves, an unhealthy sign. Thirdly, rights consciousness does nothing to change or alter managerial authority. Finally, rights discourse by itself cannot solve the structural crisis that confronts American society. Lichtenstein provides the example of the steel workers where African-Americans challenged and beat Jim Crow, only to end up with fewer steelworkers as the industry collapsed.
Lichtenstein's book is concise and well documented, if largely based on secondary sources, and it contains useful apercus about globalization, the disaster of concession bargaining, the fraud of "quality of life" initiatives, and about the folly of the construction workers. Tthey supported Nixon, beat up anti-war protesters, but were still shafted by him anyway). He also discusses the health insurance debacle, and notes some promising signs of renewal in the last few years, especailly among Hispanic Americans. One might feel he is trying too hard to end on a positive note, but one can only agree when he says that "At Stake is not just an effort to resolve America's labor question but the revitalization of democratic society itself."
solidarity forever.......2002-04-04
Nelson Lichtenstein's new book, "The State of the Union," gives a history of labor unions in the United States by way of arguing for the need to restrengthen them, and I think the case is very persuasive.
Lichtenstein weaves together a number of themes to explain the decline in union membership and power. One is increased reliance on individual rights and legal protections. Federal laws ban all sorts of discrimination, endangerment, and abuse, but the federal government does not do an effective job of protecting workers from retaliation for asserting their rights and almost nothing to maintain other important elements of the workplace, such as wage levels or the prevention of mass layoffs.
We have learned to think of ourselves as individuals protected by laws, rather than brotherhoods and sisterhoods protected by our strength in numbers. We have a long list of rights, including - most notoriously - the "right to work." So called Right to Work laws clearly hurt unions but are not too far afield from modes of thought that labor supporters have engaged in themselves.
Unions are now seen as ways to protect individual jobs and proper grievance procedures following individual wrongs, not as cross-company efforts to lift the wages and benefits of entire industries. If the purpose of a union is simply to protect me from specific injustices, surely I ought also to respect my coworker's right to not be coerced to join, right?
But if the purpose of a union is to change society and improve the lot of all workers, then clearly the "right" of my coworker to be a freeloader and drag us all down is not to be respected.
The case Lichtenstein makes is that in the process of making fantastic gains in the Civil Rights, Feminist, and other movements, leftists unwittingly sacrificed a conception of the labor union that is badly needed today. No doubt, this analysis will annoy some people, but it ought to be taken as encouraging. The right didn't defeat us; we beat ourselves. Therefore, a reconstituted labor left can successfully fight back.
Book Description
Gettysburg, late afternoon, Thursday, July 2, 1863.
The Union left wing is a shambles. General Dan Sickles has been carried from the field with a gruesome wound and his Third Corps is in full retreat.
Confederate troops cross the Emmitsburg Road and advance on the center of the Union position. There is no coherent Union line, just two-thirds of an over-extended Second Corps scattered the length of Cemetery Ridge. A desperate Winfield Scott Hancock organizes a defense, placing artillery batteries, hurling regiments forward, trading men for time. It is a masterful performance under extreme conditions.
The Union and Confederate forces collide in Plum Run Ravine. More than at any other point in the three days of fighting, the issue hangs in the balance. This great battle is reduced to less than an acre of ground.
This book pays close attention to the terrain, how it shaped the battle, how it dictated the movement of troops and how it guided Hancock's decisions. The thrilling narrative and the detailed driving and walking tour make it a must for both casual and serious students of the battle.
Customer Reviews:
Suffers From Lack of Maps.......2007-09-29
This book addresses an important part of the Battle of Gettysburg. Unfortunately, the maps are woefully deficient, which detracts from the book's effectiveness.
HANCOCK SAVES THE UNION CENTER.......2007-03-11
The author does an excellent job of describing the activities of Hancock as they relate to the Union defenses on Day 2 at Gettysburg. He was willing to give credit to units other than the 1st Minnesota in the stopping of Barksdale's Brigade,e.g., the 111th New York. Most of the credit seems to go to the 1st Minnesota. They suffered the highest percentage of casualties but not the highest number. Had Hancock not been all over the battlefield the outcome could have been different or there could have been more Union casualties. I highly recommend the book for those interested in accounts of specific parts of the battlefield.
Pop-rate Microhistory of Part of the Gettysburg Battle.......2007-02-24
Most books now published relative to the Battle of Gettysburg are "microhistories", focusing in on small segments of the whole, exploring those segments in great detail. "The Battle between the Farm Lanes" is such a microhistory, examining a crucial moment during the second day of fighting at Gettysburg. The Confederate successes at the Peach Orchard and the Wheatfield and their failure at Little Round Top during the grand assault on the Union left on July 2, 1863, are well-known and well-documented in many works. Less familiar is the story of how the Union Army of the Potomac brought the Confederate onslaught to a halt and preserved the integrity of their main position along Cemetary Ridge. "The Battle between the Farm Lanes" is the story of how the Army of the Potomac brought the Confederate advance to a halt and turned it back. The authors carefully examine the role of Winfield Scott Hancock (commander of the Federal Second Corps) in directing that Union effort, and they give him high marks for saving the Army of the Potomac from grievous defeat. But they do not neglect Hancock's subordinate commanders in how they carried out his orders and performed heroically on the battlefield. "The Battle between the Farm Lanes" is a volume that belongs on the shelves of anyone seriously interested in Gettysburg, and it provides a a vivid look at Civil War combat on the infantry regiment and artillery battery level.
Walking Gettysburg's Battlefield: Hancock and the Union Center on July 2nd.......2007-02-20
The Battle Between the Farm Lanes: Hancock Saves the Union Center, Gettysburg July 2nd 1863, David Schultz and David Wieck, Forward by Jeffery Wert
301 pages, paperbound, endnotes, bibliography, index, Ironclad Press, 2006.
Paying close attention to the physical terrain of the battlefield, Schultz and Wieck offer an important re-visitation to familar material regarding the 'close run thing' of the Union center between 5:00 and 7:00pm on July 2nd 1863. A great amount of detail is offered and succesfully puts into context the charge of the 1st Minnesota, which in popular treatments of the battle, is second only to the 20th Maine's heroics on Little Round Top.
The authors make clear that the glory the 1st Minnesota gained during the charge was with the aid of the 111th New York infantry, commanded by Colonel Clinton MacDougall and the 4th U.S. Artillery, Battery C, commanded by Lt. Evan Thomas. The flanks of the 1st Minnesota were aided by artillery on the right, and on the left by a infantry charge immediately before the Minnesotans effort. The 111th New York was one of the three regiments that was unfairly lableled as the 'Harper's Ferry Cowards' stemming from an unfortunate command decision during the Sharpsburg Campaign of 1862.
The personality and presence of Winfield S. Hancock is a recurring theme in every chapter. He is the single most decisive element in the preservation of the Federal center along Cemetery Ridge. Lacking from the discussion is a description of Hancock's staff, which in this micro-history, would have been enlightening and enjoyable. This reader finished the the book thinking that Hancock was unaccompanied by couriers, advisors, and aides as he rode between the farmslanes during the afternoon of July 2nd.
Yet, there are some difficulties with this book. The size of the type font must be 18 point or larger. Initially I thought the publisher had sent me the Large Print edition for the visually impaired. There was a period of adjustment for my eyes to accommodate such large text. Also, some printer/publisher proofreading needed to be done before setting this book between its covers. The pages listed for the maps in the table of contents does not match with the actual page locations of the maps in the book. Also, the maps do not have the farmsteads labled which is a curious thing for a book that has the word 'farmlanes' in its title. Only one map, Tour Stop # 5, has a farm building labled. The maps have on them only the modern park roads and not the 1863 farmlanes. Furthermore, it would have been convienent for the reader if the publisher put a few maps in the first section of the book that describes the 1863 fighting. All the maps are in the second section of the book that describes the modern driving and walking tour.
In addition, the portaits of officers do not have their units in the captions. Lacking is a picture of Colonel William J. Colville (1st Minnesota) though it is located in the Library of Congress. At times the writing style doesn't carry the narrative consistenly forward. A favorite expression of the authors is 'by the time . . .' but there is very few statements of time in the book. Of course, given the fact that the book covers about two hours of fighting, the reader does not expect a minute by minute account, but an estimation of the range time, such as the phrase '. . .about 3:30pm . . .' or ' . . . probably sometime between 4:00pm and 4:30pm . . .' would have helped.
From the bibliography is missing Richard Moe's highly regarded 'The Last Full Measure: The Life and Death of the First Minnesota Volunteers.' Missing from the book are appendices at the end of the book; especially helpful would have been an Union and Confederate order of battle of those units on the field at the Union center. There is an appendix which offers an essay on measuring the ground on which the fight occurred; the appendix is located in the middle of the book, between the narrative and the tour.
Though mechanically the book has its flaws, overall the discussion it offers is enlightening and clearly presented.
Excellent addition to Gettysburg history.......2007-02-09
Ironclad Publishing continues to bring affordable high quality Civil War histories to the public as part of The Discovering Civil War America Series. This is the fourth excellent book in the series the others are:
Protecting the Flank: The Battles for Brinkerhoff's Ridge and East Cavalry Field
A Little Short of Boats: The Fights at Ball's Bluff and Edwards Ferry
"No Such Army since the Days of Julius Caesar" Sherman's Carolinas Campaign: from Fayetteville to Averasboro
Each is a paperback book of 200 to 300 pages, with illustrations, maps, index, bibliography and notes. Each book is a very good introductory to intermediate account of the subject and is about the best buy available in Civil War history.
July 2, 1863 at Gettysburg is my candidate for most written about event in the Civil War. The Pickett's Charge is the other event that could be considered for this status. Do we need/want another book about this well covered event? Considering the work of Coddington and Pfranz this is a very valid question. Some of you may not consider buying this book as you have the mentioned volumes in your library.
While this is a valid consideration, I feel that you will lose a unique view of this action. Most accounts focus on the Confederate side of Longstreet's' attack. The Union response while not slighted has not gotten equal coverage. Unintentionally, this promotes the idea that Longstreet's attack ran out of gas as darkness ends this very long day.
Shultz and Wieck focus on Hancock's responses on July 2nd. Starting with the arrival of his Corps and deployment thru the end of the day, with the attack broken and the Union line intact. Sickles unauthorized advance that weakens the Union left complicate Hancock's task. Sickles being out of position and trying to defend to long a line forces Hancock to reinforce to him. As the battle moves into Hancock's area, he no longer has a full Corps and must cover Sickles area too.
This book is a detailed history of how Hancock held. Riding from crisis to crisis, meeting threat after threat, we come to understand the wrenching decisions he makes. The 19th Main, the 1st Minnesota, the Harpers Ferry Cowards and Turnbull's Battery march and fight across the pages. Each of these actions is detailed and placed within the larger action, allowing us to understand the unique dangers and contributions these units made.
This is a well written easy to read account of the Union response. One of the nicer items is a detailed tour of the area. This allows the reader to visit and understand the why to much of the actions. This book is a valuable addition to your Gettysburg library and highly recommended.
Amazon.com
With this new volume, John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr build upon their groundbreaking work in The Secret World of American Communism and solidify their reputations as the foremost historians of Soviet espionage in America. In Venona, they provide a detailed study of how the United States decrypted top-secret Communist cables moving between Washington and Moscow. This account, based on information unavailable to researchers for decades, reveals the full extent of the Communist spy network in the 1940s. At least 349 citizens, immigrants, and permanent residents of the United States had a covert relationship with Soviet intelligence agencies, among them Harry White (assistant secretary of the treasury in FDR's administration and the Communists' highest-ranking asset) and State Department official Alger Hiss, whose association with the Soviets had been hotly debated since the moment he was first publicly accused in 1948.
"The Soviet assault was of the type a nation directs at an enemy state," write Haynes and Klehr. They go on to suggest that Venona's code-breaking "indicated that the Cold War was not a state of affairs that had begun after World War II but a guerilla action that Stalin had secretly started years earlier." Moreover, "espionage saved the USSR great expense and industrial investment and thereby enabled the Soviets to build a successful atomic bomb years before they otherwise would have." Haynes and Klehr deliver what is at once a real-life spy thriller and a vital piece of scholarship. A grand achievement. --John J. Miller
Customer Reviews:
Great research, but somewhat moralistic.......2007-04-26
Informative, though reads a little like a phonebook. The all-too-often repeated pattern: so-and-so -- name, birthdate, birthplace, education -- became a Soviet agent, and passed such and such secrets (and so on for about hundred times). Motives of individual agents are seldom explored (though the final chapter has important insights into the "why" of agent work), while the authors rush to make moralistic judgments: so and so betrayed his country, so and so committed treachery, how many lives would have been saved had the Soviets not learned of US military or atomic secrets!
The argument that Stalin would have been much more circumspect and cooperative if he had not obtained a bomb in 1949 is not convincing in the light of what is now known of his foreign policy behavior; indeed, Stalin's apprehension of US military superiority only made him more stubborn and adamant in the face of perceived American pressure.
Was MaCarthy right about the communist conspiracy? This book shows that some of his allegations were justified, though not his paranoia.
The book makes the argument that US security was lax, allowing spies to penetrate all government agencies and even the Manhattan project. Indeed, US efforts to penetrate the Soviet atomic project came to nothing, and recent research show
On Combat
Innocent Targets: When Terrorism Comes to School
Training at the Speed of Life, Vol. 1: The Definitive Textbook for Police and Military Reality Based Training
Sharpening the Warriors Edge: The Psychology & Science of Training
LEADERSHIP AND TRAINING FOR THE FIGHT: A FEW THOUGHTS ON LEADERSHIP AND TRAINING FROM A FORMER SPECIAL OPERATIONS SOLDIER
