Book Description
A century after Appomattox, the civil rights movement won full citizenship for black Americans in the South. It should not have been necessary: by 1870 those rights were set in the Constitution. This is the story of the terrorist campaign that took them away.
Nicholas Lemann opens his extraordinary new book with a riveting account of the horrific events of Easter 1873 in Colfax, Louisiana, where a white militia of Confederate veterans-turned-vigilantes attacked the black community there and massacred hundreds of people in a gruesome killing spree. This was the start of an insurgency that changed the course of American history: for the next few years white Southern Democrats waged a campaign of political terrorism aiming to overturn the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments and challenge President Grant’ssupport for the emergent structures of black political power. The remorseless strategy of well-financed “White Line” organizations was to create chaos and keep blacks from voting out of fear for their lives and livelihoods. Redemption is the first book to describe in uncompromising detail this organized racial violence, which reached its apogee in Mississippi in 1875.
Lemann bases his devastating account on a wealth of military records, congressional investigations, memoirs, press reports, and the invaluable papers of Adelbert Ames, the war hero from Maine who was Mississippi’s governor at the time. When Ames pleaded with Grant for federal troops who could thwart the white terrorists violently disrupting Republican political activities, Grant wavered, and the result was a bloody, corrupt election in which Mississippi was
“redeemed”—that is, returned to white control.
Redemption makes clear that this is what led to the death of Reconstruction—and of the rights encoded in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. We are still living with the consequences.
Customer Reviews:
A Needed Corrective.......2007-04-11
Nicholas Lemann's book "Redemption: The Last Battle of the Civil War," focuses on mostly forgotten and often sanitized versions of specific incidents that marked the end of Reconstruction and the regaining by White Southerns of state and local government institutions leading to Jim Crow and Segregation that continued for another 90 years or so. The book, relatively brief, examines in detail several incidents, one in Lousiana, the others in Mississippi where local vigalante groups seized control from local black officials through intimidation and massacres. It is perhaps not coincidential that the worst offenses took place in Mississippi, and perhaps some sort of rough justice that in exchange Mississippi remained for decades afterwards on the lowest rung of the ladder among the states in nearly every social and economic ranking.
Much of the book is through the eyes of one Adelbert Ames, a Union general, senator and governor of Mississippi, as revealed in the copius correspondence with his wife, Blanche Butler, who most of the time remained at home in the North. Because of weariness of the part of the North, insufficient troops, deliberate foot-dragging by US officials sympathetic to the South, and indecisiveness on the part of President Grant, these events from 1874-76 were allowed to precede with little intervention and protection of Black citizens. In effect, the withdrawal of Northern troops in 1877, the result of a compromise that ended the electoral stalemate in the Hayes/Tilden presidential election of 1876, overturned a major achievement of the Civil War, namely full citizenship and voting privileges for former African slaves. The result was another dark stain on American history and our pretenses of a just and equitable society where everyone has the chance to be president.
Because of its brevity, the book suffers from a lack of context of how overall Reconstruction had proceeded in the South, it's weaknesses and its victories. The book also would have been improved through a map, particularly Mississippi and the various places where the rampages of the vigantes took place. Another improvement would have been photographs of the several colorful characters portrayed. But all in all, for a brief look at an important moment in American history, the book is highly recommended.
Last Battle?.......2007-03-14
The subtitle is a little bit of a cheat, for the Civil War was long over by the time the massacres of 1875 began, but after reading Nicholas Lemann's book on the failure of Reconstruction and the life of Civil War General Adelbert Ames, I can see why he decided to bend the truth and capture the huge Civil War market.
he shows how JFK was a patsy to the Southern Conservative myth of Reconstruction and how, in PROFILES IN COURAGE (1956) Kennedy included Lucius Lamar of Mississippi as an avatar of courage, when in actuality he was a liar and a bigot and was personally responsible for the deaths of thousands of Mississippi freedmen. What was JFK thinking? Well, as Lemann points out, this was not an anomaly in Kennedy's otherwise antiracist public profile. Indeed it was part and parcel of his curiously suspect voting record and public stand towards the race question. It was as though, in the polarized 1950s, he had to keep the Southern Democrats happy in order to win their support for the campaign he saw coming his way. PROFILES IN COURAGE dismisses Adelbert Ames, Lemann's (admittedly flawed) hero, as a mere carpetbagger, not worthy of living in Mississippi, a `foreigner' and an Abolitionist. The strange thing is that, he lived so long (at age 98, he was the oldest surviving Civil War officer) his daughter Blanche was on hand to shame Kennedy into agreeing to change future editions of PROFILES. Then her years of disappointment began, for even though Senator, and then President Kennedy, had agreed to re-research Reconstruction, he never did, and when she kept bugging him he enlisted the help of her grandson, "Paper Lion" George Plimpton, to call his honorable kinswoman off his back. Of course all of these people had incredible privilege and wealth.
A needed corrective to the Reconstruction story.......2007-02-24
Having lived in the South for the first 21 years of my life, I can attest to the staying power of the myths of Reconstruction and the succeeding era which I was taught to call Redemption.
The central motif of these myths is that of courageous, heroic whites finally standing up to a brutal Northern occupation, but turning to violence only when physically threatened.
Some prominent historians -- Eric Foner in particular -- have been forthright and comprehensive in setting out the true facts. In my readings, there have been two aspects still missing from such large-scale works. First of all, a visceral, detailed accounting of the intensity of white-on-black violence has been needed. Second, we have lacked a nuanced, detailed biography of Adelbert Ames, perhaps the best exemplar of the promise interracial cooperation held for the South.
In "Redemption", journalist Nicholas Lemann makes an attempt to remedy both these insufficiencies in a narrative aimed at the non-specialist reader. Instead of giving us a comprehensive study of how integrated southern state governments were driven from power, Lemann chooses instead to focus primarily on the single example of Mississippi, with some inclusion of parallel events in neighboring Louisiana. And the story of Reconstruction Mississippi cannot successfully be understood without considering the career of New Englander Adelbert Ames, a Union veteran who became first the state's senator and then governor during this period.
Lemann recounts instance upon instance of politically-inspired and deadly violence that steadily drove Republican voters, especially blacks, from the polls. While many leading white Democrats maintained deniability and claimed that such attacks were rare and always provoked by the other side, and while President Grant's commitment to federal protection decisively waned, Governor Ames cast off his naivete and tried to counter with what forces he could muster. But without timely federal intervention, this proved an impossible task. Ames was finally forced to face facts, and he resigned the governorship and left the state for good. The Solid South was born with violence as midwife.
Lemann's choices mean that he needs to do three things well. First, with respect to bringing home the intensity, pervasiveness, and comprehensive effects of the violence, Lemann is especially convincing, at least within Mississippi (and to a less significant extent Louisiana). Second, his incorporation of an Ames biography is in itself valuable and multi-faceted. But it doesn't serve as a full-fledged biography due to the author's chronological boundaries. We do learn of Ames' background and his significant relationships with others, most notably his wife and father-in-law; these are important in understanding Ames' behavior in Mississippi. But for Ames' life after Mississippi, Lemann takes only a cursory wrap-up approach.
Finally, we should expect Lemann to do a convincing job of integrating these two intersecting narratives. In this he is largely successful. But there are moments when his attention to the details of Ames' life, while welcome to this reader, may yet seem only remotely relevant to the larger story of the Redemption era.
In 1933 Adelbert Ames became the last Civil War officer to die. The myths of Redemption have lived on long after, and Lemann's book is a significant contribution to puncturing those myths and establishing the truth.
Mississippi Burning.......2007-02-09
This is a story on how government failed, how the civil rights of freed slaves and blacks became a political playground of hate and deceit and how victory on the battlefield was lost to thugs & cowards. It clearly shows how history can be manipulated by the criminals who ushered in a sordid era of Jim Crow laws while others looked away.
Author Nicholas Lemann does a magnificent job in detailing the death of Reconstruction through white terrorism in Mississippi in the 1870s, which emboldened the white racists throughout the south to institute what became known as the "Mississippi Plan" of intimidation and murder to seize power in every government institution and to kick blacks back into servitude.
The heroes are the victims - the blacks and some white Republicans - who boldly stood alone while the mobs seized control in a revolution of aversion, and then afterwards wrote the articles and books, whose key lies are still being taught as factual history today.
You will be angered as Lemann explains as a reporter how Reconstruction was lost. But then look around, and realize that the subtitle, The Last Battle of the Civil War, may be incorrect. Unless this country confronts the harsh realities of the past, the last battle of the Civil War has yet to be fought, or won.
America's Own Terrorists.......2007-02-04
In this short historical account, Nicholas Lemann tells the disturbing story of how ex-confederates in Mississippi brought about the end of Reconstruction in 1875 through an orchestrated campaign of savagery and deception.
The "Mississippi Plan" employed an ugly and brutal pattern: when freed slaves attempted to exercise their political rights--by convening political rallies, becoming candidates for office or simply trying to vote--southern whites responded with hellish violence, not merely fighting the freed slaves, but coldly murdering them in front of friends or family or, worse, hunting them down if they fled.
To justify their heinous conduct, the whites invented an emotionally laden cover story that, to this very day, resonates among the American public. In their view, the violence was necessary to forestall imminent "Negro uprisings," prevent rape and pillage by brutish and bestial blacks, and redeem the honor of the south from the depredation of northern carpetbaggers who seized control of the political system by duping or bribing the newly freed slaves.
The key to the Mississippi Plan was the public relations tactic of presenting the organized slaughter of blacks as random local incidents, a tactic that discouraged President Grant from sending federal troops to secure the rights of the newly enfranchised citizens. Absent this safeguard, the intimidation worked, and the Democrats won control of key offices, despite significant Republican majorities among registered or potential voters. With the outcome of the presidential election of 1876 in dispute, the nation embraced the "Compromise of 1877" in which the Democrats agreed to let Rutherford Hayes become president and the Republicans agreed to the removal of the remaining federal troops from the South. Reconstruction was over.
Much of this tale is told through the eyes of Adelbert Ames, a Northerner and celebrated Union Army general who was elected Governor of Mississippi by the multitude of new black voters. Sometimes the book reads like a biography of Ames. Only at the end does Lemann step back from the detailed account and provide the larger picture of how the "Mississippi Plan" became the blueprint for the entire Southern strategy to end Reconstruction and how the nation shamefully abandoned its commitment to true citizenship for blacks.
As I read "Redemption," a profound sense of disgust and outrage rose within me. So horrific, repulsive, and needless was the conduct of the Southern Democrats that, at times, I felt Lemann must have been omitting facts that would have balanced the story. But this is precisely Lemann's point: when Southerners today celebrate the honor and courage of Dixie, they are endorsing a fiction that was invented in 1875. There was no honor, only terror of helpless black victims.
Amazon.com
"Hutus kill Tutsis, then Tutsis kill Hutus--if that's really all there is to it, then no wonder we can't be bothered with it," Philip Gourevitch writes, imagining the response of somebody in a country far from the ethnic strife and mass killings of Rwanda. But the situation is not so simple, and in this complex and wrenching book, he explains why the Rwandan genocide should not be written off as just another tribal dispute.
The "stories" in this book's subtitle are both the author's, as he repeatedly visits this tiny country in an attempt to make sense of what has happened, and those of the people he interviews. These include a Tutsi doctor who has seen much of her family killed over decades of Tutsi oppression, a Schindleresque hotel manager who hid hundreds of refugees from certain death, and a Rwandan bishop who has been accused of supporting the slaughter of Tutsi schoolchildren, and can only answer these charges by saying, "What could I do?" Gourevitch, a staff writer for the New Yorker, describes Rwanda's history with remarkable clarity and documents the experience of tragedy with a sober grace. The reader will ask along with the author: Why does this happen? And why don't we bother to stop it? --Maria Dolan
Book Description
Winner of the National Book Critics Circle Award for Nonfiction.In April 1994, the Rwandan government called upon everyone in the Hutu majority to kill each member of the Tutsi minority, and over the next three months 800,000 Tutsis perished in the most unambiguous case of genocide since Hitler's war against the Jews. Philip Gourevitch's haunting work is an anatomy of the war in Rwanda, a vivid history of the tragedy's background, and an unforgettable account of its aftermath. One of the most acclaimed books of the year, this account will endure as a chilling document of our time.
Customer Reviews:
Compelling.......2007-09-22
My prep for going to Rwanda was reading this book. This is a snapshot of the state Rwanda was in during the 100 days and the aftermath. However, much has been done to repair the damage. This is a time of reconciliation and healing. Go to Rwanda and see for yourself. It will change your life.
Will really let you see into this tradgedy........2007-05-29
What a great book. Such insight and it really helps you understand what happened in Rwanda. Especially the history of all the long ago violence and things that have happened over the years. Great book and a must read for everyone.
This could happen everywhere or anywhere in the world. Can really open your eyes into how much we all could be killers or saviors at any one time.
Highly recommended.
The Heartbreak of Hate.......2007-04-10
Gourevitch's jarring telling of the atrocities of hate hit with an imact of severe sorrow. The overwhelming scale of the murders in Rwanda are incomprehensible. It is sad to realize that in this age people allow hate and propoganda to rule their lives.
Excellent Book.......2007-03-27
This book was very well written and informative about the genocide that occurred in Rwanda.
Heartbreaking stories from Rwanda.......2007-03-19
This is a superb book, a collection of interviews and incidents from the genocide in Rwanda. There are portraits of unimaginable betrayal, brutality and horror, but also of heroism--the owner of the Hotel Rwanda, for instance. The description of the conduct of the "refugee" camps is particularly useful as a warning on what is likely to happen in the next crisis, and should force us to re-examine our ways of providing relief for people in distress across the world.
Amazon.com
During the three years (1993-1996) Samantha Power spent covering the grisly events in Bosnia and Srebrenica, she became increasingly frustrated with how little the United States was willing to do to counteract the genocide occurring there. After much research, she discovered a pattern: "The United States had never in its history intervened to stop genocide and had in fact rarely even made a point of condemning it as it occurred," she writes in this impressive book. Debunking the notion that U.S. leaders were unaware of the horrors as they were occurring against Armenians, Jews, Cambodians, Iraqi Kurds, Rwandan Tutsis, and Bosnians during the past century, Power discusses how much was known and when, and argues that much human suffering could have been alleviated through a greater effort by the U.S. She does not claim that the U.S. alone could have prevented such horrors, but does make a convincing case that even a modest effort would have had significant impact. Based on declassified information, private papers, and interviews with more than 300 American policymakers, Power makes it clear that a lack of political will was the most significant factor for this failure to intervene. Some courageous U.S. leaders did work to combat and call attention to ethnic cleansing as it occurred, but the vast majority of politicians and diplomats ignored the issue, as did the American public, leading Power to note that "no U.S. president has ever suffered politically for his indifference to its occurrence. It is thus no coincidence that genocide rages on." This powerful book is a call to make such indifference a thing of the past. --Shawn Carkonen
Book Description
Winner of the 2003 Pulitzer Prize For General Nonfiction National Book Critics Circle Award Winner
In her award-winning interrogation of the last century of American history, Samantha Power -- a former Balkan war correspondent and founding executive director of Harvard's Carr Center for Human Rights Policy -- asks the haunting question: Why do American leaders who vow "never again" repeatedly fail to stop genocide? Drawing upon exclusive interviews with Washington's top policy makers, access to newly declassified documents, and her own reporting from the modern killing fields, Power provides the answer in "A Problem from Hell" -- a groundbreaking work that tells the stories of the courageous Americans who risked their careers and lives in an effort to get the United States to act.
Customer Reviews:
The problem of International Liberalism.......2007-09-24
Samantha Power's 'A Problem from Hell' is a broad attempt to document the major acts of genocide/human rights violations of the 20th century paired with the international community's subsequent negligence in each case. She reports on the Holocaust, the Armenian genocide, and especially her major areas of research- Rwanda and Serbia.
However, Powers is content to simply recount major instances of crimes against humanity that the U.S. and other major Western powers simply ignored (a worthy historical task), rather than to document the major atrocities the U.S. supported/participated in (the far more morally serious and honest task). While she is scrupulous in her documentation of the horrors of Rwanda and Iraq, her sections on Indo-China fail miserably. She provides a lengthy and conventional chapter on the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, without mentioning to inform us about the U.S.'s massive contribution to such atrocities (only side references are provided). Additionally, she mentions in a rather depraved manner, that "In 1975, when its ally, the oil-producing, anti-Communist Indonesia, invaded Timor, killing between 100,000 and 200,000 civilians, the United States looked away" (147). In actuality, the U.S. did not look away: it funded the genocide, and President Carter deliberately escalated the intensity of the atrocities. This is the essence of Power's political backwardness. Pointing to the atrocities of official enemies is easy, it is far more difficult and necessary to point to the atrocities of the U.S. and its allies. Nowhere does Powers discuss Israel and the Palestinians, nowhere does she discuss the Pinochet, or the Contras, or Kissinger for that matter. So long as the the liberal intelligentsia refuses to stare in the mirror, the world will continue to be an arena of exploitation, injustice, and crimes against humanity.
Simply put: One of the books one must read in one's lifetime........2007-05-10
Simply put: One of the books one must read in one's lifetime.
Well researched, not so well argued.......2007-04-06
A 500+ page polemic against American non-interventionism in other people's wars. This book won the Pulitzer Prize, and it deserved to for the sheer amount of research that went into it. Unfortunately, the author's zealotry too frequently leads her to making sweeping, overly simplistic declarations, or even to contradicting her own arguments. For example, she stresses the importance of applying the term "genocide" to mass killings because of its emotional impact, yet she wants it applied so broadly that the inevitable result would be a diminution of that impact. She also applies a remarkable double standard to the Serbs: while (quite justifiably) condemning the (many) occasions in which they were the perpetrators of ethnic violence, she either excuses, tries to undermine the credibility of, or simply ignores the cases in which they were the victims. There are a number of examples of this, but the most staggering one is her depiction of their expulsion from the Croatian Krajina. The single largest episode of ethnic cleansing in the Serb-Croat-Bosnian wars, and what does she give to it? Less than one paragraph - and portrayed as a positive development! I almost threw the book across the room when I read that.
She makes it clear that in all the cases she describes, she thinks the US should have done whatever it took, up to and including sending ground troops, to stop the carnage. But she fails to really think through the logical consequences of her thesis. If genocide really is defined as broadly as she suggests, then there must have been dozens if not hundreds of episodes of it over the past century. Should the US have intervened in all of them, and how exactly - from a practical perspective if nothing else - could it have been expected to do so? Is it really advisable for a country with such a history of imperialism (and with its own record of genocide, certainly by her definition, against the native peoples of its own land) to become the world's cop? If General Dallaire was correct that he could have stopped the killings in Rwanda with just 5,000 more UN peacekeeping troops, then isn't the logical solution to reform the UN so that in future it can and will actually provide those troops? And why just America, what about all the other countries in the world that didn't intervene, either? None of these questions are really answered, at all.
Omission awarded?.......2007-04-03
Despite the Israeli policy towards the Palestinians fits the definition of genocide given in the book, Power ignores the Palestinian case. I wonder if this book was awarded for its contents or its omission. It could be a good book if complete! If you want to know about genocide, read Charny , Finkelstein and others, authors with a wider vision.
a must-read.......2007-03-12
flew through this book...its written with a great style and pace. power goes over quite a few crucial conflicts that still have aftershocks today. i read the section on rwanda in grad school, and it still makes my blood boil. also, power documents the efforts of republicans to block any actions or sanctions on iraq after hussein gassed the kurds and iranians in the 80's - of course now, they reference those crimes as reasons we were right to invade in 2003.
Book Description
Immaculee Ilibagiza grew up in a country she loved, surrounded by a family she cherished. But in 1994 her idyllic world was ripped apart as Rwanda descended into a bloody genocide. Immaculee’s family was brutally murdered during a killing spree that lasted three months and claimed the lives of nearly a million Rwandans.
Incredibly, Immaculee survived the slaughter. For 91 days, she and seven other women huddled silently together in the cramped bathroom of a local pastor while hundreds of machete-wielding killers hunted for them.
It was during those endless hours of unspeakable terror that Immaculee discovered the power of prayer, eventually shedding her fear of death and forging a profound and lasting relationship with God. She emerged from her bathroom hideout having discovered the meaning of truly unconditional loveâa love so strong she was able seek out and forgive her family’s killers.
The triumphant story of this remarkable young woman’s journey through the darkness of genocide will inspire anyone whose life has been touched by fear, suffering, and loss.
Customer Reviews:
A Life Giving Antidote to Self Pity and Unforgiveness.......2007-10-04
This book deeply touched my heart. I found it was too difficult to read before bed but I had a hard time putting it down as well. Immaculee's story is one of true character and forgiveness that is more than just words. It truly challenged me to let go of unforgiveness. Nothing that was ever done to me....and I thought I had been deeply hurt...can compare to what she has had to forgive. This story is a light that shines the way on the difficult path of letting go of hurts, a path to which we have all been called by God. Immaculee tells of how this is, however, a path where Jesus leads and sustains and that ultimately ends in a freedom we could never have imagined.
Left to Tell Left Me Wanting.......2007-10-04
Left to Tell: Discovering God Amidst the Rwandan Holocaust was written by Immaculee Ilibagiza, a survivor of the Rwandan genocide. The story stands as an amazing testimony to the power of prayer and the importance of faith in prayer, but I wonder, how does all the God talk strike a non-Christian? Does it resonate with truth, with an A-ha! that changes a life, or does it exist as a concept without relevance?
The fact that the book is on the New York Times bestseller list says something, but what is it? Does the message of surrendering to Christ get glossed over by the same voyeuristic appeal that drives American culture to support Ultimate Fighting?
As a Christian, the way God moved in Imaculee's life is breathtaking and clear. It's without question. It inspires a hearty "Yes God. Bless you! You are faithful!" It stirs the soul, paints the picture of God's purpose in this world and shows where God was during the slaughter.
But despite that, the book didn't grip my soul. I enjoyed reading it, but it didn't possess me to the point of being unable to put it down. Living in a bathroom with seven other women for three months should be more than a statement of fact; I should live the emotional struggle between fear and faith, between death and life, with Immaculee. Instead, I experienced a foregone conclusion.
It's easy to say forgive your neighbor, but when that neighbor murdered your mother, butchered your brother and looted your home the magnitude of the act is incomprehensible. And the telling of that tale should have stirred more in me.
Left to Tell gets bogged down in details, of walking us through a holocaust timeline as lived by the author, and it's a journey without feeling. But that may just be my problem.
Amazing.......2007-10-03
Imaculee, If I could only meet you! This is a potentially life changing book. There is some shocking material but it is extrememly worth reading and will change you if you let it.
Left to Tell.......2007-10-03
Those of you who have struggled either to find a personal relationship with God, or to forgive those who have caused you harm, this book is for you. Those of you who have wondered what it's like to experience a holocaust from the inside, read this book. Immaculee has the riviting power of Elie Wiesel himself to convey the horrors of genocide, and to expose its demonic nature.
Suspense and God's Providence WON!!.......2007-10-01
Immaculee in her own words presents a chilling account of the brutality and that was happening in a small country in Africa and how with persevence , prayer and trust in God , shows the world that to survive WE must all not forget the Creator!!
Customer Reviews:
Chittums predictions are coming true.......2007-03-26
One look at what's happening with our porous southwestern border, the throng of illegals streaming across it, and our ineffectual government's refusal to seal and protect it makes this important analysis a must read for those who know the score concerning the looming national disaster that the evening news refuses to cover.
Very Good Book.......2007-02-26
Chittum talks about phases of Civil War II: 1. Tribalization, or the undermining of the concept of citizenship. 2. The creeping loss of democracy to private, governmental institutions and international bodies. 3. Gradually falling wages. 4. The slow decay of infrastructure in our cities and the abandonment by Americans and their replacement by minorities wedded to welfare and affirmative action. 5. Growing legal and illegal immigration to transform America into a typical Third World country. 6. Massive drive for gun control to cripple military potential from the working class. 7. Cooperation of the mass media to dumb down the population.
Near the end of the book he makes projections that you can see happening right now:
1.Shrinking hourly wage. 2. More immigrants than Americans. 3. Foreigners hold most Federal Debt. 4. Twenty million Third World slums on our borders known as `colonias'. 5. Manufacturing jobs moved out of the USA making it impossible for us to make or sell anything to the world. 6. Republican and Democratic politicians refusing to deal with the immigration crisis. Worse, both parties aid and abet it. 7. Growing power of advocates of Aztlan or the reconquest of California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas by Mexico.
Buy This Book. Your Life May Depend Upon It........2007-02-01
I moved cross country because of this book. I spent months doing my own research, trying to refute the claims by this author and couldn't. Multicultural nations are filled with animosity, fear, distrust and ultimately do not survive. Even the liberal Harvard researcher Robert Putnam (author of "Bowling Alone") reluctantly admitted that people "hunker down" in diverse neighborhoods and don't trust either people who look like them and amazingly, people who do look like them. According to Putnam, Los Angeles had the lowest levels of trust of any city, while Chittum stated that Los Angeles would be ground zero for the coming civil war. Putnam was so distressed by his findings that he said "we must create a new us." Only an intellectual could come up with something so foolish.
The best part of the book is that he provides a geographical map of where the new nations are likely to be. He even maps out the white enclave areas in Texas, Georgia etc. and shows you the lack of viability and logistical problems of remaining in these spots.
The checklist will make a believer out of you. Some of these trends were somewhat apparent in 1996, but the vast majority were not. This man either had a crystal ball, or he knows what he's talking about. I gladly paid over $50 for this book, but now you can buy it for much less, so what are you waiting for? I literally have hundreds of books in my personal library, but if I were only allowed to keep one, it would be Civil War II.
A glimpse of the present and the future.......2007-01-30
Great book!! The chapter titled Civil War Checklist is especially disturbing because many things he mentions have already come to pass.
The breakup of America is inevitable. The chaos and bloodshed will make the Balkans and our first civil war look like some sort of game.
Dont buy this book unless you are ready for some startleing revelation's.......2007-01-10
This book written about ten year's ago is unfolding like the daily newspaper.SO many truths that are being shown so many lies being unvealed for people who are ready for a life changeing reality check here it is if this dont get you you motivated nothing will.
Book Description
Ian Buruma returns to his native land to explore the great dilemma of our time through the story of the brutal murder of controversial Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh at the hands of an Islamic extremist.
It was the emblematic crime of our moment: On a cold November day in Amsterdam, an angry young Muslim man, Mohammed Bouyeri, the son of Moroccan immigrants, shot and killed the celebrated and controversial Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh, great-grandnephew of Vincent and iconic European provocateur, for making a movie with the vocally anti-Islam Somali-born Dutch politician Ayaan Hirsi Ali that "blasphemed" Islam. After Bouyeri shot van Gogh, he calmly stood over the body and cut his throat with a curved machete, as if performing a ritual sacrifice, which in a very real sense he was.
The murder horrified quiet, complacent, prosperous Holland, a country that prides itself on being a bastion of tolerance, and sent shock waves across Europe and around the world. Shortly thereafter, Ian Buruma returned to his native country to try to make sense of it all and to see what larger meaning should and shouldn't be drawn from this story. The result is Buruma's masterpiece: a book with the intimacy and narrative control of a true-crime page-turner and the intellectual resonance we've come to expect from one of the most well-regarded journalists and thinkers of our time. Ian Buruma's entire life has led him to this narrative: In his hands, it is the exemplary tale of our age, the story of what happens when political Islam collides with the secular West and tolerance finds its limits.
Customer Reviews:
Informative Read!!.......2007-09-29
"Murder in Amsterdam" was able to shed new light on the immigration plight that The Netherlands is experiencing. The author explains how some of the immigrants, especially the second generation, are having a difficult time assimilating into a compeletely different culture than that of the Middle East. Ultimately, many of these immigrants, probably more so the males (since they have more freedom) find themselves being sucked into the thoughts and ways of radical Islam.
I thought this book was divided up pretty well. Not only does the author explain why and how the death of Van Gogh happened, but he also mentions how other political leaders in that country are also targeted by radical Islam. There is also a chapter devoted to Van Gogh's killer.
In doing so, he relates this to how the Dutch culture has felt guilty for turning a blind on the Jews during the Nazi occupation. For this reason, the Dutch feel that they need to be more tolerant to present day immigrants, mostly from Morocco and Turkey. But too much appeasement, may be doing more harm than good. In addition, the Netherlands since the 1960's is becoming more secular which makes it easier for radical Islam to penetrate a country that doesn't hold much religious convition.
I had no idea that Van Gogh's and Pim Fortuyn's murder had such a great impact on this tiny nation. If anyone is looking for a closer read on not only the murders, but the national psyche of the Netherlands, then "Murder in Amsterdam" will be a fulfilling read.
Problems of Muslim Community in Europe.......2007-07-16
This is not a murder mystery. We learn up front about the death of Theo van Gogh, why he was killed by Mohammed Boyeri over a film critical of Islam he made with Ayaan Hirsi Ali. The book explores the life and thought of these three Dutch persons in great detail. The real topic of the book is given by the last line of the subtitle, what are: "the Limits of Tolerance" in an open, democratic society towards culturally very different immigrants?
The Netherlands has a Muslim minority of about 15 percent, immigrants and descendants of immigrants, who form a separate community which is assimilating to Dutch ways only slowly if at all. Virtually all intend to maintain their adherence to Islam, and Islamic culture. How great differences can a society tolerate? Surely not murder, not killing for religious, political, or family honor reasons. Can a western society tolerate polygamy, permitted by the Koran? Sending children "home" to be religiously educated in a madrasa, and to learn the parents' language to the exclusion of the national language? Forced marriage of young women?
Ian Buruma, a journalist who grew up in the Netherlands, is well placed to explicate many of these issues. In Theo van Gogh he examins a writer who was outspokenly critical of Islam and the multi-cultural ideal. In Hirsi Ali he assesses a woman who has entirely turned away from her birth culture, and in Boyeri the exact opposite, a Dutch born individual who became an Islamist radical. The role of the Islamic immigration community is a major issue in Europe today. The book is well worth reading for examining part of this question through the life of three individuals.
Beyond right and left.......2007-06-20
Most of the reviews of this books have misunderstood the complexity of its story. Some seem to have been looking for a book that confirmed their prejudices about Muslim immigrants in Europe. Instead, Buruma tells a story that cannot be assimilated to either the ¨¨war on terror¨¨ or apologistsfor terrorists. He paints a picture of a society which is tolerant of lifestyles but very homogeneous culturally and perfectly happy to stay that way. Tolerance means becoming Dutch and any conception that a person could be Dutch and a devout Muslim seems inconceivable to many of Buruma's compatriots. This is in spite of the fact that he interviews many Dutch muslims who see no contradiction in that identity and are in that way like millions of Muslims in the US. The circumstances of Van Gogh's murder are explained straignt-forwardly and the author offers no excuses for the murderer. But he does make it clear how Dutch society creates the conditions in which people like that develop. That is not the same as justifying or apologizing. Read this book with an open mind and a willingness to chalenge all your presuppositions--whether they come from Bernard Lewis or Noam Chomsky. This is not a book to comfort those who already think they know the truth.
much more than a murder.......2007-06-19
more than the murder of Theo Van Gogh the author explores how such a thing could happen in small liberal loveable Holland of all places.How could such a place welcome people from all over the world allowing Amsterdam to become 45percent foreign born now be a place where freedom of speech is dangerous?How does it follow that this enourmous population of Moroccans and Turks who receive every possible state assistance and then some be so resentful of the country that welcomed them?
Holland is of course, a microcosm of the European Welfare State.
I think many of Burumas"s explanations for the turn of events happening in Holland described by other readers are interesting but the one that captured me was the collective feeling of guilt which started in the 60s when the world finally faced and spoke of the Holocaust. With some exceptions such as Anne Frank most of the country and the rest of Europe as well did little but watch their citizens be hauled away to be murdered.Now with the facts out in the open the Europeans had to face their share of the blame and the guilt.Surely they would be careful never to be racist again.Very very careful.
And who should arrive just about then but first the Moluccans and Surinamese(who after all were Dutch Citizens)paving the way for the Turks and Moroccans to do the dirty work the Dutch would not and then their families and then anyone who called themselves "refugees".This continues to this day.
So the irony is that guilt for the slaughter of the jews is what allows the Europeans to bend over backwards enabling and protecting the people who would slaughter the jews again.
And need I mention bringing about the demise of western civilization.
Lots to Digest.......2007-03-04
My headline is not original. It's a quote from another review below. I used it because it is so apt.
Buruma's writing flows. It's like having coffee with him as he recounts his experiences with Theo and describes Theo's life, TV show and art. He explains the earlier, but separate, murder of Pim Fortuyn. The flamboyant libertarian/conservative Fortuyn, killed by an animal rights activist, credits the Enlightenment with his ability as a gay man to be elected to public office. He saw the intolerance of Muslim culture as a threat to the fullfillment of civil rights that Dutch society has finally evolved to provide.
Most provocative are Buruma's interviews. He meets with Ayaan Hersi Ali and (something like) her Dutch foster family. He talks with a psychiatrist, friends of Theo, Theo's mother, young Moroccan women who work in a shelter for Muslim women, welfare workers, teachers... and many others representing a wide range of opinion.
Buruma explains how WWII and its myths and legends hang over the Netherlands of today. Buruma cites the influence of this recent past on the immigration policy and the climate of tolerance. The book takes us to the last "home" of Anne Frank and into "dish cities". The question posed by the subtitle, how to be tolerant of an intolerant society is debated on many levels.
I highly recommend this book.
Book Description
Fred Pearce has been writing about climate change for eighteen years, and the more he learns, the worse things look. Where once scientists were concerned about gradual climate change, now more and more of them fear we will soon be dealing with abrupt change resulting from triggering hidden tipping points. Even President Bush's top climate modeler, Jim Hansen, warned in 2005 that "we are on the precipice of climate system tipping points beyond which there is no redemption."
As Pearce began working on this book, normally cautious scientists beat a path to his door to tell him about their fears and their latest findings. With Speed and Violence tells the stories of these scientists and their workâfrom the implications of melting permafrost in Siberia and the huge river systems of meltwater beneath the icecaps of Greenland and Antarctica to the effects of the "ocean conveyor" and a rare molecule that runs virtually the entire cleanup system for the planet.
Above all, the scientists told him what they're now learning about the speed and violence of past natural climate changeâand what it portends for our future. With Speed and Violence is the most up-to-date and readable book yet about the growing evidence for global warming and the large climatic effects it may unleash.
"Nature is fragile, environmentalists often tell us. But the lesson of this book is that that it is not so. The truth is far more worrying. She is strong and packs a serious counter-punch. Global warming will very probably unleash unstoppable planetary forces. And they will not be gradual. The history of our planet's climate shows that it does not do gradual change. Under pressure, whether from sunspots or orbital wobbles or the depredations of humans, it lurches – virtually overnight."âfrom the Introduction
"If you want to quickly get up to date on climate change and its consequences, I recommend With Speed and Violence: Why Scientists Fear Tipping Points in Climate Change. If you can read only one book on climate change, this is it."
âLester Brown, president, Earth Policy Institute
"Pearce's survey of abrupt climate change science is a compelling and terrifying read." âIn Brief (newsletter for Earth Justice)
"You must read this book." âThe Cost of Energy website
Praise for When the Rivers Run Dry
"An enriching and farsighted work."
âJai Singh, San Francisco Chronicle
"The one-word review of Pearce's book is: Terrifying. Whether he's writing about the Indian peasant farmers who draw from poisoned wells every day, the oblivious Arizonans who run fountains in the desert, or the apocalyptic moonscape that is the Aral Sea (once a thriving fishery, now a toxic cesspool), Pearce manages to convey the immense wreckage human activity is making of our lifeblood."
âJohn McGrath, Grist
"Pearce provides a compelling compendium of place-based water stories that reveal just how ground-shifting the world's water predicament will be."
âSandra L. Postel, Science
"In a highly readable style, Pearce makes the case for a new water ethos."
âTodd Neale, Audubon
"Pearce cogently presents the alarming ways in which this ecological emergency is affecting population centers, human health, food production, wildlife habitats, and species viability. Having crisscrossed the globe to research the economic, scientific, cultural, and political causes and ramifications of this under publicized tragedy, Pearce's powerful imagery, penetrating analyses, and passionate advocacy make this required reading for environmental proponents and civic leaders everywhere."
âBooklist
"He uses up-to-date science, explains difficult concepts in accurate, entertaining ways and includes a scientific glossary. The result is a gripping, highly readable bookâperhaps the best discussion of climate change for lay readers."âAmerican Magazine
Customer Reviews:
The most important book I've ever read.......2007-09-20
This is the most important book I've ever read. Each chapter is about a climate scientist's work and thinking, covering about 25 researchers. The climatic record in glacial ice cores, sea floor sediment cores, rocks and tree rings shows that climate has changed drastically in very short time periods in the past. Humans are perturbing the system beyond anything that has happened for millions of years. No one knows what the climate system will do, but many possible scenarios are cataclysmic and could happen soon. This book is authoritative and fully believable; it's about Nobel Prize winners and top-flight scientists, not politicians and hacks. Before I had read half of this book I went and bought a Toyota Prius, switched my home to a green electric utility, installed 100% compact florescent bulbs in my home and bought the most efficient laundry appliances available. If you like science, it's also a fascinating read.
When scientists admit they are very afraid.......2007-09-18
My favorite quote from the book: "Hansen says the world, or more particularly Greenland, is on a slippery slope to hell."
Scientists, if you remember the archetypal Spock on Star Trek, generally don't go around making pronouncements or admitting to emotions; rather, they hedge, cautiously state facts, and keep their moods to themselves because they are "subjective", the cardinal weakness in the ethos of science. They don't want to be laughing stocks, lose their grant money or get blacklisted from their elite journals. Their careers and name are very important to them. So it is very impressive when great numbers of these types from the world over admit to a profound "unease" ranging to "terror"- and say they are kept awake at night by current findings regarding climate tipping points. We should be afraid, if they are.
This is a great book to make us afraid. Other reviewers here have laid out in detail what is in the book; I just say, read it and pass it on. It is "an easy read" too, even entertaining, for those who don't like getting bogged down in dry science writing. And if you like to have the hair stand up on the back of your neck. In particular, see: "Chimneys" ,"Amazon Jungle", and "Methane from Melting Permafrost".
Lesley Thomas, author of arctic eco-novel Flight of the Goose
For those who want one good book on the topic, this is it!.......2007-09-10
I've just finished reading With Speed and Violence, and I was so impressed with it that I decided to post my first Amazon review to show my appreciation. I do a lot of reading about global warming and climate change--academic papers, magazine and news articles, and probably more than two dozen books by now. I found Pearce's book to be a thorough yet concise overview of all the main topics in the science, as well as including a few interesting areas that are not given a lot of coverage. But what makes this book stand apart is the way the author covers each topic in a separate, brief chapter that centers around an interesting anecdote with terrific writing that makes challenging science clear and compelling. I'm sorry if I sound like a commercial, but I do highly recommend this book, especially to anyone who only wants to read one book on the subject. And if you think global warming is scary, take a look at this author's other book, When the Rivers Run Dry, for an equally wonderful but eye-opening read.
A must read for all humans on this planet!.......2007-08-28
This book should be required reading in every High School and for anybody that has an opinion on Global Warming. I recommend reading the Appendix before finishing the book so you don't get too depressed or give up before the end. It is a shame though, that we have to get to the point of fear of survival before we do anything about our destructive behavior. Having a clean and healthy planet is not enough of an incentive to counter our materialistic consumerism economies.
A bit scattered but makes significant points.......2007-08-06
The idea of a tipping point in climate change comes from chaos theory in which a system may change in a way that is not only not predictable, but brings about a situation very different than what existed before. A tipping point can be compared to a phase transition in physics in which, for example, liquid water becomes something strikingly different when heated to the boiling point, or lowered to the freezing point. Steam and ice are very different from liquid water in many important ways. So it might be with the earth's climate. If too much fresh water melts and pours into the North Atlantic to join the once warm water from the Gulf Stream, the composition of the water may have too little salt in it to prevent freezing and instead of sinking to return in convey belt fashion to the tropics, it may just sit there as ice. That will stop the great ocean conveyer and make much of Europe nearly as cold as Siberia.
A tipping point of great magnitude can be reached through a feedback mechanism. For example as the planet warms, ice melts. Ice is white and reflects light away from the planet. But if the ice is now darker water it will tend to absorb the radiation and heat the planet further. This will lead to more ice melting which will lead to more heat being absorbed which will lead to more ice melting, etc., which will lead to we know not where.
Science journalist Fred Pearce's intent in this book is to look at a number of these natural climate mechanisms to see if they are in danger of reaching some kind of tipping point, and what the consequences of reaching that point might be. One of the consequences may be a point of no return, such as a runaway greenhouse effect in which the worse case scenario is the earth gets as hot as Venus.
What he finds out is that climate mechanisms are interrelated and enormously complex, which is one of the reasons there is so much controversy about global warming. Is this warming a result of natural cyclic processes about which we can do little or nothing, or is something unprecedented going on because we are burning vast quantities of fossil fuels? That is one of the most important questions of our times and one of the most difficult to answer. Most scientists believe that we are contributing significantly to climate change, but there are others that think differently. See Singer, S. Fred and Dennis T. Avery Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years (2007) for a contrarian point of view.
As Pearce implies in the title, "With Speed and Violence," we may not have the luxury of a leisurely investigation into the factors that are leading to climate change because something catastrophic may happen a lot faster than was previously believed. Not only that but the change may be irreversible. What is particularly scary is that we may already be past the point of no return and not know it, or we may cross that line sometime in the near future.
One thing is clear. It's getting hotter. Whether human activities are contributing significantly to this rise in temperature, and whether that is good or bad news is uncertain. Because the stakes are so high, I believe that we must err on the side of caution and put an end to the pollution of the atmosphere with all deliberate speed. Of course that is not going to happen.
Pearce knows this, and so he advocates a more realistic goal. He begins by noting that at the start of the Industrial Revolution, there were 660 billion tons of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. After a couple of centuries of burning fossil fuels we have 880 billion tons of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. To prevent triggering some kind of "dangerous" climate change, he estimates we need to keep the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere below one trillion tons. He believes it is "a tough call" as to whether we will make it or not (from the "Appendix: The Trillion-Ton Challenge").
Some of the 37 chapters in the book deal with other greenhouse gases, such as methane; and some of the chapters deal with the effect the shrinking Amazon forest is having on climate change, and other chapters deal with the history of various climate mechanisms. There are chapters on smoke in the air, the effect the Sahara Desert has on the Amazon jungle (it fertilizes it!), the danger in melting bogs which will release methane gas, the effect of the sun's cycles, etc. One of the problems with this book is that Pearce considers so many factors and looks at climate change from so many different perspectives, that the reader may very well come away lost in the jungle. I had the sense that Pearce himself bit off more than he could chew and ended up with a book of 278 pages that really needed to be a much larger volume or, better yet, several different volumes that he might write after further digestion of the material.
Let's faced it the climate is enormously complex and we are only beginning to make some kind of sense of it, at least in terms of being able to forecast the changes to come. Each of Pearce's chapters represents perhaps a topic for further research.
Book Description
In mid-2004 the Darfur crisis in Western Sudan forced itself onto the center stage of world affairs. Arab Janjaweed militias, who support the Khartoum government, have engaged in a campaign of violence against the residents of Western Sudan. A formerly obscure `tribal conflict' in the heart of Africa has escalated into the first genocide of the twenty-first century. In sharp contrast to official reaction to the Rwandan massacres, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell called the situation in Darfur a "genocide" in September 2004. Its characteristics-Arabism, Islamism, famine as a weapon of war, mass rape, international obfuscation, and a refusal to look evil squarely in the face-reflect many of the problems of the global South in general and of Africa in particular.
Journalistic explanations of the unfolding humanitarian catastrophe have been given to hurried generalizations and inaccuracies: the genocide has been portrayed as an ethnic clash marked by Arab-on-African violence, with the Janjaweed militias under strict government control, but neither of these impressions is strictly true. Darfur: The Ambiguous Genocide explains what lies behind the conflict, how it came about, why it should not be oversimplified, and why it is so relevant to the future of the continent.
Gérard Prunier sets out the ethnopolitical makeup of the Sudan and explains why the Darfur rebellion is regarded as a key threat to Arab power in the country—much more so than secessionism in the Christian South. This, he argues, accounts for the government's deployment of "exemplary violence" by the Janjaweed militias in order to intimidate other African Muslims into subservience. As the world watches; governments decide if, when, and how to intervene; and international organizations struggle to distribute aid, the knowledge in Prunier's book will provide crucial assistance.
Customer Reviews:
Clarity Triumphs Over Cliche.......2007-08-05
If you will read just one book about Darfur, I can't imagine a better choice. Nothing else I've read so deftly sorts through Darfur's complex history, making clear how geographic, economic, social and political strands of the region's past made it vulnerable to the crimes perpetrated there. Prunier takes a seemingly incomprehensible story and makes it almost perfectly comprehensible. Prunier shatters all the myths and cliches that pervade media accounts of the conflict and so vex critical thinkers, who know that it can't be that simple- that there is more and at the same time, less to the story. His analysis of the Sudan's history is concise, compelling and dead on. Moreover, though the North-South war which raged for over 40 years is not the book's focus, he brilliantly analyzes how that struggle relates directly to Darfur. Chillingly, he explains how, for the Khartoum government, its actions ( and inactions ) in Darfur are perfectly logical and, from their perspective, quite effective. As one reads Prunier, he can imagine how readers years ago must have been sickened and yet, oddly "reassured "( I can't find the right word ) when they realized that the Holocaust was explainable. I say this not to compare Darfur to the Holocaust. Prunier doesn't do that either. What I refer to is the provision of explanation for events so mind-bogglingly horrible that one wants to grasp the causes, yet fears that this can't be done. If you are compelled to understand the historical roots of this horror, order Prunier now.
Poor Editing Harms Presentation.......2007-07-27
I'm not an expert on Darfur nor do I spend much time reading about Aftrican politics. I came to this book in the hopes of understanding the Darfur crisis better. Parts of this book are excellent, but the poor editing and confused chronology for the updated section at the end nearly make the book useless for the uninformed reader. The first section on historical background is fascinating and for the most part clearly written, although it would have been useful to offer a clearer chronology of events in Chad, which have an important impact on Darfur.
Unfortunately, the editors did not take the time to correct numerous spelling, syntax and grammatical errors that existed in the 2005 version. I'm not a good copy editor with my own work, but these errors were so numerous and obvious as to be a bit disheartening.
But this is a mere annoyance compared to the confusing additional text added in this "revised" edition. (1) The glossary of Arabic terms is useful, but incomplete. (2) The list of abbreviations is incomplete, and quite often the abbreviations are not even spelled out with their first use. Try to figure out what AMIS stands for. (3) There are numerous mistakes and inconsistencies in the use of abbreviations. On page 161 the Common Peace Agreement (CPA), which one does not find in the list of abbreviations, is misspelled as DPA! Or does the author mean the DPA, another unlisted acronym?! Try sorting this out as a non-specialist. The author switches randomly between the use of the abbreviation SLA and SLM for a key rebel group - it's the same group, but again very confusing. I was only able to understand this based upon other outside reading. No explanation is given in the text.
Finally, the constant temporal shifts that occur in the "new and revised text," which should take the reader through 2005 and 2006 is almost on the edge of being useless, unless the reader is so familiar with the material that the reader can sort out the confusion. Read the final pages and tell me, if you can, when the DPA, another abbreviation not listed at the front, was signed, in 2005 or 2006? You'll have to look elsewhere for the answer to this important and basic question.
The editors of the Cornell University Press series Crises in World Politics, have done much better elsewhere with "Peace at Any Price - How the World Failed Kosovo," a far superior work on a similar topic. This book does not live up to that standard. - Mark A. Wolfgram
"...simple killing is boring, especially in Africa,".......2007-04-17
writes author and "renowned analyst of East Africa, the Horn, Sudan, and the Great Lakes of Africa," Gérard Prunier in his explanation (Pp 155, 156) of why he believes that the situation in Darfur does not qualify as genocide - (because there was not an attempt to "destroy a racially, religiously, or politically predefined group in its entirety,") although he admits that it actually makes no difference how exactly it is defined. His explanation of this one point is clear; however, the rest of the book is extremely difficult to follow due to its concise, complex, research paper-like style. In the first paragraph, he states that the introductory chapter, "...aims at giving...an overview to enable the non-specialist reader to grasp the context in which the crisis developed." That may be the case, but this reader felt only minimally enlightened on the subject of Darfur after having read Chapter 1 (twice), and the remaining five, even having taken notes along the way. Prunier's attempt to explain the situation in Darfur to everyman types is no better than that of Julie Flint and Alex de Waal in their Darfur: A Short History of a Long War - an equally tough read.
Two lies and two truths.......2007-02-10
This book makes to bold faced lies. First it claims the British governate of the Sudan tried to keep the people 'stupid' and underdeveloped. This is a blatent lie. The British administration was the one that outlawed slavery and the one that rolled back a thousand years of Arab-white Islamic colonialism and freed the African people of Sudan from bondage. The second major lie of this work is that the genocide supposedly comes out of a mere 'competition' for resources. This is like saying all genocides are just about 'resources' a typical marxist intepretation that is short sighted and wrong. The fact is that white Muslim Arab slavers dominated and colonized Sudan and through many 'jihads' extended their influence deep into Africa, destroying and depopulating part of the continent. These people were angry when the Africans, their Libyan supporters and earlier the British had encouraed the African Blacks to think of themselves as people and not the inherent property of Arabs from Saudi Arabia who dealt in them as they dealt in oil. Even Bin Laden owned black slaves in Sudan. When the Blacks revlted against the racist aparthied government in khartoum the government responded with genocide.
This book is the typical 'economics is everything' drivle. It should be commended for at least calling what is happening 'genocide' but it points to all the wrong causes and reasons. The difference between genocide and conflict is that one is race and hate based and this is what has taken place in Sudan.
Seth J. Frantzman
Comprehensive and Eye-Opening work.......2007-01-27
As Yehudit Ronen stated, Prunier rightly labels the response of the international community to the atrocities in Darfur, a "regression of civilization," a description he convincingly argues for in this comprehensive and eye-opening work. In it, he analyzes the historical roots of the conflict in Sudan's western region and discusses why international efforts to halt the tragedy in Darfur have been so impotent.
Prunier takes the reader to the early history of Darfur as an independent sultanate and relates the human movement into the region of people who now constitute Darfur's diverse ethnic makeup. He details the subsequent annexation of Darfur to Sudan and shows how British benign neglect toward the region began an important trend that endured in the era of independence. Prunier surveys the frustration of democratic politics in Darfur and the devastating famine of the mid-1980s in which about 100,000 people died. He addresses the Libyan interference in Darfur to promote Mu'ammar al-Qadhafi's war in Chad. This, he explains, was a critical cause in pitting the Darfurian "Arab" ethnic groups ("tribes" in Prunier's parlance) against their "African," Muslim co-religionists. It was during the chaotic circumstances in the region between 1985 and 1988, Prunier explains, that the pattern of Arab militia attacks on African villages was first established, and atrocities similar in manner, although not in scale, were perpetrated by the dreaded Janjaweed, the "evil horsemen."
Prunier describes how the cynical opportunism of Hasan Abdallah al-Turabi, the Arab Islamist who had led Sudan jointly with Omar al-Bashir after 1989, further fuelled the combustible components of the Darfurian reality. Turabi's political machinations aimed at removing Bashir from power and gaining sole leadership of the country. The catastrophic results of this power struggle, won by Bashir, would be played out on the backs of the Darfurians and Sudanese society as a whole.
At times bitter, at times scornful, Prunier illustrates the neglect of the international media in bringing the crisis to world attention, largely because of the lack of a catchy angle for another African horror story. Prunier states that the international community also paid little attention to the Darfurian violence due to a combination of reasons, among them the overwhelming desire to finally solve the preexisting Sudanese civil war in the south, the U.S. preoccupation with the insurgency in Iraq, and Khartoum's cooperation in Washington's war on terror. Darfur was thus given a backseat in international priorities as the Janjaweed murdered, pillaged, burned, and raped their way through the region.
While not discussing in depth the socioeconomic problems of Sudan--problems crucial in the ignition of the Darfur fire--Prunier contends that it was notions of race in Darfur that led to the horrors there. Despite the ethnic mixing in the region and the blurred racial lines between Africans and Arabs, this distinction was superimposed on the varied ethnic groups of the region, then exploited by the ruling Arab elite in Khartoum. The possibility of a racial alliance between the Darfurian rebels and their southern "brothers" terrified these rulers. Prunier claims that the killing in Darfur should not be seen as genocide, since the aims of the Sudanese government were not to eradicate a people but rather to carry out the brutal suppression of what was seen as an existential threat. Whatever term one uses, however, the carnage and misery unleashed by Khartoum and its Janjaweed cohorts remains just as horrific.
Book Description
This classic work of political ethics has radically reconfigured the way that we think about war. From the Athenian attack on Melos to the My Lai Massacre, from the wars in the Balkans through the first war in Iraq, Michael Walzer examines the moral issues surrounding military theory, war crimes, and the spoils of war. He studies a variety of conflicts over the course of history, as well as the testimony of those who have been most directly involved--participants, decision makers, and victims. In his introduction to this new edition, Walzer specifically addresses the moral issues surrounding the war in and occupation of Iraq, reminding us once again that "the argument about war and justice is still a political and moral necessity."
Customer Reviews:
Very good. It defines some concepts which are absolutely essential in wartime and even before someone decides to go to war.......2007-06-28
This book is one of the most significant modern restatements of just war thinking and also a passionate defense of the old principle of noncombatant immunity. The author is both thorough and persuasive in his exploration of a very intricate subject, although some times he loses his objectivity, especially when he's treating the Israeli military responses to various challenges from state and non-state actors. Some other times he takes some sharp legalist turns whish are really difficult to follow. Of course there are many points which really impressed me with their clarity, fine logic and moral soundness: "The state that goes to war is, like our own, an enormous state, governed at a great distance from its ordinary citizens by powerful and often arrogant officials. These officials, or at least the leading among them, are chosen through democratic elections, but at the time of the choice very little is known about their programs and commitments. Political participation is occasional, intermittent, limited in its effects, and is mediated by a system for the distribution of news which is partially controlled by those distant officials and which in any case allows for considerable distortion". "Soldiers, it might be said, stand to civilians like a crew of a liner to its passengers". " I have argued that soldiers in combatcannot plead self-preservation when they violate the rules of war. For the dangers of enemy fire are simply the risks of the activity in which they are engaged, and the have no right to reduce those risks at the expense of other people who are not engaged".
In his afterword, Mr Walzer gives a chilling idea of how a population (even an unarmed one) can tear down and defeat an occupying force. "Nonviolence has been practiced (in the face of an invasion) only after violence, or the threat of violence has failed. Then its protagonists aim to deny the victorious army the fruits of its victory through a systematic policy of civilian resistance and noncooperation: they call upon the conquered people to make themselves ungovernable... They treat the aggressor in effect as a domestic tyrant or usurper, and they turn his soldiers into policemen". If you add to this recipe some dozens of IEDs daily, you have the nightmare of Iraq!
What is just and what is unjust.......2006-11-04
This is a very legalistic look at history. It helps one understand many of the words used in talking about wars.
As a required text book, it fits my MA degree program........2006-11-03
It is the best book sold by the Amazon and at a cheaper price
All Is Not Fair in Love and War.......2006-06-16
Walzer's historical approach to examining just war theory is, I think, the most useful way to understand morality in war. That is so because empirical facts back up all the philosophical evaluations. Walzer describes experience and draws conclusions here; he is laying a philosophical foundation and implying, if not prescribing, moral norms from which the rules have been extracted. Be forewarned, he does not cut the reader any slack. This book requires some serious attention to the author's train of thought.
Just war theory has two categories: the justice of going to war, and the justice of fighting once in a war. Walzer's discussion usefully and clearly separates the two and examines via historical events what we regard as right and wrong within each sphere. In doing this he has done the modern world a tremendous service. His logical breakdown speaks to thousands of years of tradition about what thinkers have considered right and wrong in war. One of the best outcomes of this landmark work is the complete debunking of the notion that "all is fair in love and war." That is the path of least moral resistance (or as Clausewitz would say, "friction"), yet we all know that soldiers are honored for fighting well and loathed for behaving like armed thugs and murderers. What is amazing from the discusion is the realization that Walzer knows he has to attack that age-old notion, something our collective sense of justice has historically always rejected. Yet it remains a prevailing idea for many. Originally coined by the Romans it seems (Walzer quotes them, "In war the laws are silent"), they themselves were self-consciously contrite over the fates they inflicted on the Greeks and Carthaginians. The book rates five stars for rigorously addressing this issue alone.
Some make the mistake of thinking Walzer is a pacifist--far from it. On the otherside some critics find his argument about "supreme emergency" a moral failure and a cop-out. The case of Nazi Germany is his paradigmatic case of supreme emergency, one where normal rules may be relaxed, if ever so little, because of the especially pernicious nature of state-sponsored genocide. In contrast Walzer does not see Imperial Japan, for instance, as having represented a supreme emergency, and so the atomic bombings and the fire bombings of cities could not be morally justified. Readers may want to compare his view to Paul Fussell's perspective in the essay "Thank God for the Atom Bomb." Walzer's argument here has lent unintended tacit support to many ideas about torturing terrorists at Gitmo and elsewhere. It's pretty obvious Dick Cheney, for instance, thinks the same relaxation of restraints would apply to Islamic terror (but the analogy seems weak). I recommend readers to Tim Challans' book Awakening Warrior for a critique of Walzer's idea of supreme emergency and a very impressive logical attack upon the recent trend toward torturing POW's in prisons outside the USA.
Significantly for current events, readers interested in the distinction between pre-emptive and preventive war will find a well articulated argument in Just and Unjust Wars. The US attack on Iraq was and still is often justified as pre-emptive. That impulse on the part of the neo-conservatives who devised or whipped up the casus belli reflects, I think, a need to cloak a morally questionable war in the robes of legitimacy. There is no way that attack can be justified under the historically accepted norms of "pre-emption." Michael Walzer's well-thought distinction between pre-emption and prevention makes sense even in the milieu of asymmetric warfare against terror and Islamic radicalism, and it clearly shows why the Iraq war was a moral mistake from the start, regardless of its practical success down the road, if we are fortunate enough to see that. The moral precedent of engaging in preventive war will continue to haunt America long into the future. The fact that Iraq was not even on the spectrum where the fine line between pre-emption and prevention exists is a telling aspect of the overall ongoing strategic fiasco. Where one fails to recognize the moral high ground, one is doomed to moral failure. Walzer was vocal about the run-up to war in 2003, and those who read his book would do well to find his comments about the Iraq invasion; they are edifying in terms of understanding the overall argument in this book and, not coincidentally, where we are going in this role as the world's police force.
This book is ultimately not very instructive about just war.......2006-06-11
At a lecture at West Point United States Military Academy April 6, 2006, Naom Chomsky argued, "Just war theory" literature "deserves special attention but is ultimately not very instructive about just war". "Just war theory" is "declarations of personal preference", which "never tells you anything. It doesn't tell you when it is proper to intervene, what it tells you is 'I think it is proper to intervene'...there is a big gap between assertion and argument, between surmise and evidence." "We learn very little about just war from 'Just war theory'" what we do learn is "mostly about the prevailing moral and intellectual climate in which we live." Walzer's book relies crucially on such premises as "Seems to me entirely justified, or I believe, or no doubt." Chomsky then discusses scientific studies on human behavior which is noticeably absent from Walzer's book.
Walzer uses the term "I think" at least 52 times in the book. "I don't think" 7 times. "I believe" twice, "no doubt" at least 41 times, and "seems to me" 12 times (I write "at least" because the same phrase twice on one page would be counted once.)
Walzer's hypocricy
In a book which suffers from terribly bad organization, on page 62 Walzer finally systematically lays out his arguments, stating that "Once the agressor state has been militarily repulsed, it can also be punished."
On December 29, 2005, in an interview on NPR Morning Edition ('Just and Unjust Wars' Author Critical on Iraq.) Walzer stated that the Iraq war was not a just war:
"If you are going to use military force in someone else's county...There has to be a cause of some urgency, a massacre in progress. A massacre in memory is not a just cause."
Therefore, if you follow Walzer's assertions to its obvious conclusion, the Iraq war was not a just war and therefore "the agressor state", the US, should "be punished."
But Walzer signed and endorsed The Euston Manifesto, which states in part:
"We are also united in the view that, since the day on which this occurred, the proper concern of genuine liberals and members of the Left should have been the battle to put in place in Iraq a democratic political order and to rebuild the country's infrastructure...rather than picking through the rubble of the arguments over intervention."
Therefore in Just and unjust wars, Walzer argues that "agressor states" should be "punished" but yet Walzer signs a document which criticize those who "pick through the rubble of the arguments over intervention."
Although the Iraq War is not covered in this book, Walzer's inconsistent views on the Iraq war should give serious students of International affairs pause before subscribing to his arguments. It is one mans opinion, full of statments such as "Seems to me entirely justified" "I believe" or "no doubt."
Walzer's arguments are unscientific rablings of one intellectual which are "ultimately not very instructive about just war".
Book Description
In this true story of our nation's love affair with firearms, Clayton E. Cramer debunks the myths and takes readers along a winding historical trail full of surprising revelations and riveting anecdotes, explaining the roots of America's gun culture.
Customer Reviews:
The Story of Guns in Early America.......2007-10-06
Clayton E. Cramer has an MA in history from Sonoma State University and has taught history in Boise State University. He published several academic books on history and firearms. His knowledge allowed him to reveal the lies in Bellesiles' book. The 'Acknowledgments' thank those who helped to make this book more entertaining. Cramer notes the changes from the Julian to Gregorian calendar in 1752. Cramer's discussion on Bellesiles' revisionist history begins this educational book. Bellesiles misquoted the historical record to provide false facts for his now discredited book (p.xii). Bellesiles used probate records that were destroyed in the San Francisco earthquake (p.xv)! Another scandal was the dishonesty of university historians (p.xvi). [Upton Sinclair wrote a book in 1922 on corporate control of universities.] Cramer explains the difficulty of evaluating written records from 300 years ago (pp.xviii-xx).
Part I deals with Colonial America (1607-1775). America followed the English tradition of a militia, people armed for their protection against Indians and England's enemies (p.3). Gun ownership was required by the 18th century (p.4). Chapter 2 tells of the class and race prohibitions on gun ownership. Some whites were distrusted for religious reasons. Indians were banned from owning guns (Chapter 3) but acquired them through commerce. They were armed for their fights with other tribes (p.42). Chapter 5 tells of the probate records that record personal property; there are problems with these records (p.55). Ads in newspapers may be more reliable, as well as gunpowder import records (p.56). Chapter 5 lists the hunting practices. Murder rates were higher then (p.78). Fights occurred over political concerns (p.80), and tenant uprisings in NY. Pistols were common (p.83). So too were accidents (p.86). Part II documents the Revolutionary War. There are many detailed records on gun ownership. These chapters cover Guns in New England, the Middle Colonies, the South, and the Continental Army and Militias. "Guns were the great equalizers of social status" (p.166).
Part III covers the Early Republic (1783-1846). There are chapters on Militias, Ammunition, Pistols, Guns and Sport, and Guns and Violence. The militia system was superior to a regular army in three ways (p.178). They were low-cost, they were plentiful, and they were widespread. The militia was politically reliable (p.180)! There were arguments against a standing army (p.183). Gunpowder mills were common in most states (Chapter 11). Chapter 12 examines the availability of pistols in America. Hunting was very common and universal on the frontier (p.201). Violence was all too common because of an "honor culture" (p.224). Dueling was quite common, the laws against it nearly useless (a jury would not convict if it conducted honorably). "Regulators" enforced the laws (p.229). Violence was common, often because of slander (p.232). [No mention of the rate of violent death in England or Europe.]
The 'Epilogue' notes that America was a society where guns were common for military defense, defense of a home and family, as a symbol of citizenship, and for violence. Newspapers, law books, memoirs, travel accounts, and advertisements documented the common ownership of guns. The 'Bibliography' lists the Primary and Secondary sources (pp.244-255).
[Neither Bellesiles or Cramer tell how America was a peaceful refuge from the wars and oppressions of Europe.]
Who will debunk the debunkers?.......2007-07-28
Michael Bellisiles wrote a book that, for some reason, scared the NRA. Bellisiles argued that America's gun culture didn't develop until around the time of the Civil War. He did not argue that America does not have a gun culture. Why the right got so exorcized about whether gun lust has a 17th century or 19th century origin is beyond me. But anyway, Mr. Cramer, we are told, figures prominently in the anti-Bellisiles crusade. This is not a good omen. Yes, Bellisiles lost his post at Emory -- that's in the liberal stronghold of Georgia, folks, where their idea of a historian is Newt Gingrich (can you say 'political pressure?' I knew you could.) Yes the Bancroft prize was withdrawn (ditto). Does any of this lend credence to the claims of Mr. Cramer and his NRA allies that Bellisiles work has been revealed to be a complete 'sham' and discredited in toto? Not at all. The official disciplinary committee that backed his dismissal from Emory took issue with only a few items in Arming America, notably one specific chart of probate data that proved to be in error. The vast majority of professional historians though, however they may feel about the bits of Arming America that have been repeatedly challenged, concede that the vast bulk of this large book is accurate. That leaves Cramer more or less alone in trying to debunk the whole enchilada. As the other negative reviews here indicate, there's a lot of questionable assertion going on here. If Cramer draws different conclusions from the same facts Bellisiles notes, we might compare the logic behind the arguments. Both authors note that laws in early America encouraged gun ownership for the purpose of strengthening militias -- lest the Brits return etc., as they did in 1812. Cramer seems to think this proves guns were popular. Bellisiles argues that the fact people had to have all this coaxing to acquire guns indicates the public was not keen on acquiring them of their own accord. Did the laws passed in the 1960s and 1970s encouraging the addition of safety devices and improved fuel economy in automobiles indicate that these features were in demand, or the opposite?
I wonder how many of the folks who laud Cramer's expose of Bellisiles have actually read Arming America and compared the two cases, and how many only have Cramer's version of Bellisiles to go on. This seems to me a pretty common phenomenon on both right and left: we tend to take reports of someone else's supposed outrageous conduct for granted and join the outrage, without carefully examining whether the actual facts fit the outraged reporter's description.
Interesting ideological footnote: look at the Amazon 'Better together' feature that offers to pair the book on the page you're viewing with another similar book. For Armed America, Amazon suggests another pro-gun book. For Arming America, Amazon suggests... Armed America. Not a bad idea if was reciprocated, eh. So go ahead and buy this book if you're interested in the topic, but buy Bellisiles book as well, and try to think for yourself.
Good book, but it won't convince those who "know" it isn't so.......2007-07-16
A few years ago Michael Bellsiles wrote a book claiming that early Americans didn't own guns, didn't have them, and that historical documentation proved it. He was widely discredited even by many of his anti-gun peers when it was found that much of his research was false or totally inaccurate.
Clayton Cramer spent five years researching the same records Bellesiles "used" and found totally opposite results, guns were very common all over the colonies (the book covers a period from the 1600's to the 1840's). Divided into 3 sections, Colonial America, the Revolutionary war, and the early Republic- Cramer gives exhaustive detail on what America was really like. The author is even careful to note that sometimes a modern reader can't be sure just what some statements from the past meant.
There are a lot of footnotes (unfortunately he gives no indication of just how hard it is for the average person to get at the original documents to read them, he does mention that Bellesiles usually reported just the opposite of what sommething actually said in print.) and a 12 page bibliography to back up his statements.
My worst problem with the book was that the few included photographs are too dark, hard to get any detail from them. It's a good fascinating book that I don't regret owning, it just won't convince anyone who doesn't believe it is true.
Excellent scholarly work.......2007-05-13
This is definitely a book for people who enjoy history through original sources. Mr. Cramer brings together a wealth of material that many "professional" historians can't seem to be bothered with.
Guns and Apple Pie--You left out Baseball and Mom, Mr. Gun Nut!.......2007-05-11
The title alone is so over the top and ridiculous as to invite uncontrollable laughter. Cramer is the almost perfect incarnation of the type "Creepily gun obsessed loner" of which we see many poorer examples in the cheerleading reviews posted here.
Really, these people are to be pitied, lonely and frightened little boys trying to be men and failing so utterly, caressing their rifles in the darkness in the absence of human warmth and comfort, fantasizing psychotically about being John Wayne or Rambo and constantly being drawn back to the cruel truth that they are merely anti-social, hateful, angry, psychologically unbalanced hermits, many of whom will never know emotionally real human companionship, and who are far more likely to use their guns to intimidate or kill their family members or blow their own brains out than to heroically defeat Evil in the form of a 15 year old kid trying to steal a ten speed bike off their front porch at night. What a sad bunch.
Books:
- Return To Me
- Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead
- Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead
- Seductive Poison: A Jonestown Survivor's Story of Life and Death in the People's Temple
- Seven Up (Stephanie Plum Series #7)
- Skin: The Complete Guide to Digitally Lighting, Photographing, and Retouching Faces and Bodies
- Sous Vide and Cook-Chill Processing for the Food Industry (Chapman & Hall Food Science Book) (Chapman & Hall Food Science Book)
- Successful Proposal Strategies for Small Business: Using Knowledge Management to Win Government, Private-Sector, and International Contracts
- Swing: A Mystery
- Tell No One
Books Index
Books Home
Recommended Books
- Film Directing: Shot by Shot: Visualizing from Concept to Screen
- Zero Limits: The Secret Hawaiian System for Wealth, Health, Peace, and More
- The Color Book: 11,264 Color Combinations for Your Home
- The Big Book of Ford Tractors: The Complete Model-by-Model Encyclopedia...Plus Classic Toys, Brochur
- The Making of Star Trek Deep Space Nine
- Wiley CPA Exam Review 2007 Regulation
- Tough Cookie
- Drawing Shortcuts: Developing Quick Drawing Skills Using Today's Technology
- The Architecture of Ralph Adams Cram and His Office
- Elephants Can Remember
Reconstruction
| 19th Century
| United States
| Americas
| History
| Subjects
| Books
There Goes My Everything: White Southerners in the Age of Civil Rights, 1945-1975 (Vintage)
The War of the World: Twentieth-Century Conflict and the Descent of the West
Blood and Thunder: An Epic of the American West
Lincoln and Chief Justice Taney: Slavery, Secession, and the President's War Powers
Mayflower: A Story of Courage, Community, and War
