5 comments about Pinochet: The Politics of Torture (Fast Track).

1. This book begins well enough in the description of Augusto Pinochet. The first two chapters describe his early family life along with his reluctant decision to join the junta plotting the overthrow of the Allende government. The last two chapters then go into unproven killing, torture, and drug and weapons trafficing. The author tries to give us a picture of a dictator that knew everything going on in Chile. I am not sure that is the case. I do know this dictatorship in the process of overthrowing the legal Marxist government killed 3,000-4,000 people. That is a fact. I am sure torture and killings were part of the plan to stay in power. I am unsure whether they were systemic, as they are in Castro's Cuba.
   I don't believe this is a balanced view on Pinochet's Chile. I believe there is much truth in this book, but also stories that don't pass the muster of honest reporting.



2. the only problem with this book is that it's not very good. would people stick to reviewing it instead of launching wild political polemics ?



3. Gives a very unbiased account of Pinochets life and times. The author talks about the state terrorism of the DNIA(Chilean Intelligence) against foes at home and abroad. Probably the best unbiased literary acccount of Pinochet and his despotic military Junta.



4. Pinochet saved the country of Chile. More people suffered under the Cuban led Allende. Pinochet is the 20th century George Washington.



5. this is an excellent book to understand the nature of the act commited in Chile by Augusto Pinochet. Althought today many of his supporters try to deny the horror of Pinochet's regime the truth about the atrocities commited by the so call "chilean Libertator" are evident on this book. Pinochet's crimes include genocide,murder,Terrorism, torture, kidnaping and assasination on chilean territory and abroad.The victims of his crimes were chilean citizens and foreigners (including US citizens). This book gives an account of this dictator life and acts in a very organized way from his childhood to his arrest on London during 1998 (as an international criminal).

No comments about Lithuania Independent Again: The Autobiography of Vytautas Landsbergis.

No comments about Love and Courage: A Story of Insubordination.

1 comments about Nobody But the People.

1. Award-nominated historian Warren Trest presents Nobody But the People: The Life and Times of Alabama's Youngest Governor, the first authorized biography of former Alabama Governor John Patterson. A crime-fighting attorney general propelled into the governor's office following the brutal murder of his father, John Patterson dedicated himself to keeping Phenix City cleaned up. He led the state's resistance to federally ordered desegregation; later, he admitted to regret that he had neglected to do more to help Alabama's black citizens achieve equal rights. His administration improved public education, highway construction, law enforcement, old-age benefits, and brought about the state's first program of medical care for the elderly, among other accomplishments. He put loan sharks out of business and changed Alabama law so that low-income and middle-income families could borrow money without paying debilitating interest rates. A handful of black-and-white photographs illustrate this compelling, true-life story of Patterson and the many achievements he made during his four-year administration - achievements that are all too often overlooked when examining his stance on civil rights. Highly recommended, and a welcome addition to American biography and Alabama state history collections.

2 comments about Fighting for Life.

1. "Fighting for Life" is a unique book of alternating stories connecting one person. One story is that of a man facing a fatal disease, undergoing and surviving a rare heart and liver transplant, and returning to productive life. The other is the story of a man who facing adversities reaching his goal of becoming Governor and, on his fourth attempt, is elected and serves two terms. Both stories are of the late Governor Robert P. Casey, and this book is his autobiography.
   
   The one intermingled story is of Bob Casey's fight against Appalachian familial amyloidosis, a rare disease found only in a few people of Irish descent in Kentucky, West Virginia, Chicago, and then Pennsylvania. (Ironically, a similar disease would later prove fatal to both the Mayors of Pittsburgh and Erie.) It would be his Auditor General successor Catherine Baker Knoll who would get Bob Casey to read a book on transplants by Dr. Tom Starzl that would later lead Dr. Starzl to successfully perform this rare two organ transplant. This is a story of incredible medical work and a fighting patient who survived these procedures and not only would be only be return to work as Governor but continue to become a national leader on several issues.
   
   The other story is that of Bob Casey, the State Senator, Auditor General, and then Governor. Bob Casey would arise from political death after losing three races for Governor. In his first race, he won the endorsement of the Democratic State Committee, failed to respond to his opponent's "man against the machine" campaign, and discovered too late the mistake in not answering the charges as that slogan helped defeat him. In his second race, he distanced himself from the political machines, only to discover the political machines such as that of Mayor Jim Tate's in Philadelphia, who then distanced themselves from Casey. In his third race, he was hampered by the inclusion of other Caseys running on the ballot which may have cost him some votes in the confusion.
   
   Still, the name "Bob Casey" held some political magic, even if not initially for Robert P. Casey. Robert Casey, no related to the future Governor, was elected State Treasurer on the basis of having the same name. (Indeed, the Treasurer candidate avoided campaigning to allow the confusion over the two names to build.) Another non-relative named Robert Casey won the Democratic primary for Lt. Governor. Thus, when Robert P. ran for Governor the fourth time, he advertised himself as the "Real Bob Casey".
   
   Bob Casey is to be credited with upgrading the office of Auditor General. Prior to Casey's tenure as Auditor General, it was mostly a lesser functioning row office usually held by a relatively inactive politician. Bob Casey turned the office into an aggressive auditor, not only of government finances, but of government functions. This not only provided a more powerful check on executive branch functions, but it also prepared Bob Casey to learn how to become a good Governor.
   
   Finally, on his fourth try in 1986, Bob Casey hired Jim Carville, who had never managed a winning campaign, to be his campaign manager, believing that people who have tried hard without winning would work harder for victory. This proved to be the case as Casey finally won elected as Governor. Jim Carville went on to manage the successful Presidential campaign of Bill Clinton.
   
   As Governor, Bob Casey writes that he is proud that he put "family formation" on a similar perspective as "capital formation". His Administration fought dead beat dads and made Pennsylvania the top state in child support collections. He fought for and won passage of laws making it tougher to get abortions. He stopped efforts at bringing legalized gambling to Pennsylvania. He created a program that eradicated water borne diseases that had plagued parts of Pennsylvania, providing us all with safe drinking water that today we all take for granted.
   
   This book summarizes Bob Casey, the politician, and Bob Casey, the man struggling against a rare disease. This is a terrific autobiography that brings together Bob Casey, the person.



2. Governor Casey writes eloquently about his opposition to the violence of abortion, while trying to advance politically in a party that has wholeheartedly embraced unrestricted abortion on demand. His pro-life beliefs were only strengthened by his own life-threatening health challenges as he became even more convinced of the importance of protecting lives that others have concluded are not worth living (the weak, the disabled, the unwanted).

   At the same time he makes the case for protecting and respecting the innocent unborn baby, he insists that society must have great concern and compassion for the young women who find themselves in the desperate position of having an unplanned pregnancy.

   There are no easy answers to abortion, but Gov. Casey's prescription of love and compassion for BOTH mother and baby would certainly be a good beginning to a possible resolution to this tragedy.

5 comments about Stan Lee and the Rise and Fall of the American Comic Book.

1. This is an intruiging narrative of Stan Lee's career & his influence on the American comic book industry. The title is a bit of an oversimplification, the industry went through many business cycles of highs & lows over the twentieth century. Marvel went from an IPO, bankruptcy, & than an unexpected resurgence in the past decade or two.
   
   The author gives you a not so surprisingly "Marvel centric view," which is fine up to a point. I did find his describing the creation of Spiderman & the X-men very good. The former remains my favorite character. Had there been more on DC Comics Superman, European, & Japanese influences I might have given it 5 stars? But, Stan Lee & his cocreators at Marvel provides the reader with a deep & vivid life at the prolific & hectic early years with Lee presiding as editor & writer over many artists who worked slavishly for low pay.
   
   I can see why so much bitterness & controversy erupted over the decades about Mr. Lee's putting his name on most Marvel productions was certainly shameless self promotion. On the whole, the writing is fairly measured to impart a balanced account. Noting that in the old system where work-for-hire was not well defined & comic book artists had little profile in the limelight. Tod McFarlane & Frank Miller appear to be the exceptions. as you get deeper into the book, you get the sense that Sstan Lee sided with the corporate side over the petitions by the artists out of necessity rather than malice on his part. Perhaps, Mr. Lee's convivial nature hid his own insecurities about his own talents?
   
   I got the feeling that some points were discarded & the book is only a half history. Nonetheless, it fills the void in an industry that never got the respect it deserved & I give it four stars. Perhaps, someday someone will write a complete history of this fascinating topic?



2. This book has some pluses and minuses. It DOES desperately need illustrations; however it's well-written and a fascinating read. Raphael and Spurgeon do a great job of overviewing the history of comic books, describing the business side of the industry, and explaining the importance of Stan Lee's contribution. However the authors' finale is, IMHO, unfairly negative. Lee gets needled here, not I think out of bias, but as a bit of fudging the truth for entertainment purposes...
   
   Comic books were invented in 1934 and the first superhero, Superman, debuted in 1938. Stan Lee entered the field shortly afterwards as a go-fer at the publishing house of his cousin, Martin Goodman. Lee soldiered on for Goodman as the boom times gave way to bust, and essentially single-handedly kept Marvel going during the mediums' '50s decline. If Lee hadn't been Goodman's cousin, or if Lee had just given up on the medium and looked for other work, the history of comic books would have been VERY different. Instead Lee created the environment in which superheroes were reinvented in the '60s, reinvigorating the mainstream. He then became essentially a PR person for Marvel in Hollywood.
   
   Lee is an engaging and relentless promoter of the medium in general and Marvel in particular, and in the cynical '80s he was castigated for taking too much credit for his role in creating characters produced by the collaborative model he invented for comic-book production. Raphael and Spurgeon give a qualified defense of Lee against these charges but are not, IMHO, entirely fair in evaluating Lee, particularly in the terms of the complex circumstances surrounding Jack Kirby's claims on the "Marvel Universe." Ultimately the authors condemn Lee as a phoney and almost a hack, a conclusion I think is very unfair.
   
   As someone who was reading comics from the late '60s into the '70s, I don't remember fans of the MEDIUM under-appreciating the contributions of Kirby or Ditko. On the contrary, those interested in comics as an art form tended to give FAR more credit to the artists of the mainstream than to Lee and his fellow editor-writers at DC etc. Fans of the Marvel LINE undoubtedly did worship Lee - and therefore bought the comix, which was really the whole point of the Lee persona! As for Lee not giving credit to his collaborators, Marvel was THE comix publisher that trumpeted who the artists were: try reading a '60s Dell, Gold Key, Tower, or even DC comic and try to figure out who the penciller, inker, writer, or colorist were!!! Lee, editor, writer, office manager, chief-cook-and-bottle-washer, put that info on page one, in BIG letters: step one to getting the artists the credit and remuneration that even Bill Gaines never gave away. Kudos to Stan Lee!



3. An awful lot of fun to read. Moves quickly without leaving major gaps. It's a balanced telling of Lee's growth and influence within the comic book industry while addressing the changes the industry also went through. The book doesn't lay the story down in black and white. We hear of wise choices and poor choices made by most parties involved through Stan's years. If you have grievances with the man, you may feel it falls a little short; if you are a fan, you'll feel twinges of regret when some thoughts, actions, and motives are revealed. In either case, it's hard to dismiss the infectious spirit and nature Stan Lee carries with his work and you have to admit his influence continues to be felt in the comicbook/storytelling world.



4. This book gives an excellent overview of Stan Lee and his contribution to Marvel and the history of comics. It came across as a balanced view, praising Lee's strengths as well as showing his weaknesses (and we all have them.)
   
   As I read, though, I wanted more detailed information on the 1960s glory years of Marvel; instead, this decade had the same amount of information as the rest and sometimes not as specific. I would've liked some interviews with others as to what they thought of Lee's working relationship with Kirby and Ditko, for example. Overall, though, highly recommended!



5. Stan Lee has been the center of debate in the comic book world for years as to his being an innovative genius or a credit-stealing hack. As this book ably demonstrates the truth is closer to the middle. The authors use extensive research and in-depth interviews to make their case that despite Lee's grabbing of other credit that belonged to other artists, Lee's legitimate contributions to comic books should establish him as true innovator. The book asserts that Lee was able to create unique personalities and dialogue for his characters that distinguished them from other comic books as well as each other. This approach made Marvel's characters different from the cookie cutter personalities that DC had to offer at this time. However, Lee failed to acknowledge the invaluable contributions of other artists to his "Marvel Method," and this has hurt his reputation significantly. This book is balanced in its treatment of both Lee and his critics.

5 comments about Leap of Faith: Memoirs of an Unexpected Life.

1. This biography is not great literature. It's centered in the most complex and violent regions of our times but rarely scratches the surface. Noor's diplomacy in describing people and events - always the high road, even in the midst of deceit and betrayal - is maddeningly constant and obscures rather than reveals. So what's to like about the book? It's an extraordinary story of a young western woman who embraces the east: it's people, culture, religion and thought. It's the story of her love for King Hussein, who in a world of the powerful, is largeless powerless but for his integrity in the struggle for peace. Her perspective, is that of the Palestinian Arab. Their voice needs to be heard. This book is a thoughtful start.



2. Unfortunately the autobiography is boring and somewhat distant and impersonal. Actually, overall the writing is uninspired and quite frankly, flat. Queen Noor, obviously a beautiful, intelligent, well-educated woman uses the book as a platform for spouting some pretty blatant untruths about the modern history of the Middle East. I guess I should have expected that, but it was disappointing nonetheless. I might have gritted my teeth and gotten past her politics if the love story was interesting. But it wasn't simply because the writing was so unemotional and disconnected. As I read the book, it was as if I could hear someone speaking in a monotone voice and it was almost sleep-inducing.



3. Leap of Faith is interesting from the young all American becomes Queen standpoint. It really is amazing that a fairly regular young American woman gains the attention of the King of Jordan and becomes Queen.
   
   It is too bad she was not willing to be more real in her telling of a great story.
   
   The book ends up preaching about Queen Noor's view of the political world and quickly becomes tiresome and boring.
   
   It could have been a very exciting story given her exciting life but she had to go preach to us instead.



4. Here is a glimpse into Middle East history from someone who was there! My own family members have enjoyed reading it as much as I have; I think shall too!



5. I must admit; I didn't get very far, but this book is a self serving pack of lies by an apologist for the intransigence of the Arab world. For example, she refers to the "forced migration" of 1948 without ever mentioning that the ones doing the forcing were Arabs who promised their people that if they would get out they would "push the Jews into the sea". Nor does she mention the origin of the name "Palestinian" (hint: it is a Hebrew name).
   
   The saddest thing about the Arab world is that 1000 years ago they had the most advanced civilization on earth, and entirely due to problems of their own making they now preside over one giant hell hole.
   
   But if she came out and admitted this the Hashemite family would be in danger of losing their position of privilege in Transjordan.
   
   I would recommend that anyone who reads this book should also read "Warrior" by Ariel Sharon. At least he knows the history of Israel, Syria, and Egypt.

5 comments about Trotsky: The Eternal Revolutionary.

1. This is probably the best biography written by Russian military historian Dmitri Volkogonov. Using previously unreleased data from the archives of the KGB and the Russian Communist Party makes this biography of Trotsky unique. He is critical of Trotsky exposing him as no better or worse than his "colleagues" Vladimir Lenin and Joseph Stalin. However I always detected in Leon Trotsky far more honesty and leadership quality than his victorious adversary Joseph Stalin, who was not only a mass murderer but had an uncanny ability for mendacity.
   It is also my opinion that if Trotsky wouldn't have been assasinated (by order of Stalin) in Mexico in 1940, he would've evolved into an advocate of Progressive Populist Democracy as he slowly realized that it was the very same system that he helped create which caused him to fall from grace in the former and then newly formed USSR.
   I highly recommend this book.



2. As someone who is interested in the Russian Revolution, I have to say that Volkogonov's biography is inaccurate. He makes false claims, which he never backs up. (For example, Volkogonov states that Trotsky was corrupt, early on his book, but he never presents any supporting facts for this assertation.) He also grievously misquotes Trotsky as saying, "It is impossible to organize an army without repression. It is necassary to give soldiers the choice of death at the front or the rear." This is only a part of the original quote, taken from My Life, by Trotsky, which reads, "It impossible to organize an army without repression. It is necassary to give soldiers the choice between death at the front or the rear. That was the principle of old armies, but we organized an army on the principles of the October Revolution." The point is not to disput the accuracy of Trotsky's statement, but to get an idea of what he said.
   I am sure Mr. Volkogonov worked very hard on his book, but reviews by disillisioned ex-communists are not really the best source of information about revolutionaries. As Chris Harman says, "You have to sympathise with a revolution to write about it." This is because without sympathy, no one will understand what motivated the Bolsheviks, or any other bunch of revolutionaries. It seems to be popular now to beat dead Marxists even deader. Whatever our political opinions, it does no good to judge Trotsky from the view-point of the 21st century, after the collapse of Stalinsim. People have to be judged in the context of their time. Ignoring the battle between the Bolsheviks and the Mensheviks also gives a distorted view of Trotsky, who, like all Russian Marxists of his time was deeply changed by the split. Hate to say it, but, Trotsky: The Eternal Revolutionary is an ax job. Ironic, huh, that Trotsky's biography whould be called an ax-job. There should be a limit on the number of those one person can get. For a REAL analysis of Trotsky, I would go for Isaac Deutscher's biography (it's three volumes but is absolutely fascinating, I read the first book in two days. GREAT books.) A warning with those books, however, is that Vol. 1 seems very pro-Trotsky, until the end, where Deutscher brings up some very tough questions about Trotsky's involvement in the so-called "Labour-armies". W. Bruce Linclon has written an amazing trilogy of books about the Russian Revolution in general, though it essential to read his Red Victory to gain a clear understanding of the conditions facing the Bolsheviks at the end of the Civil War. Trotsky's autobiography (My Life) is also a good source, though like all autobiographies, it has to be taken with a grain of salt. A warning about My Life- it is very interesting but contains some passages that might require liberal use of the Marxists Internet Archive's Dictionary of Marxism. I hope readers will turn to more balanced sources than Trotsky: The Eternal Revolutionary, when researching Trotsky's life. A modern-day Marxist could easily blow off Volkogonov's work as crap. Deutscher's sympathetic but relentless biography is impossible for anyone to brush off or forget.



3. Leon Trotsky is one of the most fascinating, and yet despicable
   men in history. The most brilliant of the Bolsheviks who made the October Revolution in Russia and its number 2 leader during the Civil War that solidified the Communist regime, the man is truly an enigma. At a young age, he decided to use his talents to create a Marxist world-wide revolution and still at a young age, had already made a name for himself by moving into Lenin's close circle before the famous Second Party Congress that led to the formation of the Bolshevik and Menshevik factions and then to being one of the leaders of the abortive 1905 Revolution in Russia. It is already at this early stage we see the strange combination of far-sightedness combined with myopia that came to characterize him. This is manifested in Trotsky's correct realization that Lenin's formula for creating a tightly controlled movement ruled by the Center would ultimately lead to a one-man dictatorship. Yet, in spite of his almost prophetic perception of Lenin's flaws, when the February 1917 Revolution leading to the overthrow of the Tsarist regime occurs, Trotsky throws all caution to the wind and rejects all his previous criticism of Lenin and the Bolshevist path and wholeheartedly joins him in his plan to carry out a Bolshevik coup. With the success of the Bolsheviks in coming to power, Trotsky reaches the peak of his career, first as Commissar for Foreign Affairs given the unenviable task of negotiating with the Germans who were demanding immense
   swaths of Russian territory. He then moves on to be Commissar for War. Here Volkogonov explodes one of the myths that has come up around Trotsky which claims that, overnight, this bookworm and orator suddenly became a military genius in creating the Red Army and leading it to victory over the White forces opposing the Bolsheviks. Volkogonov points out that Trostky, against the views of others like Stalin and Voroshilov supported the use of former Tsarist military officers (called "specialists") to lead the Red Army and they are the ones who really ran the war, even though their "ideological purity" was suspect. Trotsky's role, although important, was primarily to give motivational speeches to the troops and party cadres and to be the liaison with the government in Moscow.
   We also now see the dark side of the man, in his support of mass terror, executions, confiscation of grain and the like, in order to bring about his Marxist "utopia".
   With the victory of the Bolsheviks, coinciding with Lenin's deteriorating health, the other Bolshevik leaders, always jealous of Trotksy's eloquence and brilliance and his late "jumping on the bandwagon", began to plot to remove him.
   At this critical point, Trotsky's myopia, combined with poor health come into play, and he easily falls into the trap of his enemies, the principle one being Stalin, and he is eased out of power. Even though Lenin viewed him as his successor, Trotsky (who was tricked into not coming to Lenin's funeral) is unable to use this and falls quickly.
   After this, Trotsky's life quickly goes into a downward spiral. Because of his blind belief that world revolution (which the other Bolsheviks were rapidly losing interest in) is more important that "building socialism in one country", he is expelled from his posts, then the Politburo, then the party and then the USSR in short order. He spends the rest of his life in exile.
   Although we again see his farsightedness in predicting that Stalin would reach an accomodation with Hitler, and then correctly predicting that Hitler would turn on Stalin and invade the USSR in 1941, we also see his blindness in refusing to view Lenin as anything other as a perfect saint and prophet (his cult of Lenin was just as extreme as that of Stalin's, only less cynical), and his ridiculous belief that Stalin's adoption of Trotsky's radical farm collectivisation in 1929 might lead to Stalin recalling him from exile. Stalin's show trials against "Trotskyism" sends Trotsky into a mantle of self-pity about all the "lies" being told about him, all the while ignoring his own role in creating the terror state and all the innocent victims he created. He denounces the Stalin terror against the Party, yet he criticized Stalin for halting the collectivization program that led 10 million deaths from terror and famine. All these contradictions lead in the end to Trotsky being isolated by the Marxists outside the USSR and the pathetic failure of his attempt to create a Fourth International. Finally, his own entourage is infiltrated by Stalinist agents, his close family members are murdered, and he is left alone in Mexico to face the inevitable-an assassin (Ramon Mercader) who easily gains access to the old man who lets down his guard because he is tired of being perpetually on the run from Stalin's murder machine. Mercader finally puts him out of his misery.
   The life of Trotsky is a tragedy, the story of a man with great potential, who used it to create one of the most evil regimes in human history, and in the end he is consumed by it. This book is a good introduction to this fascinating figure. The author admits that Deutcher's book is very good, but for someone who wants a shorter introduction to the Eternal Revolutionary, this is a good place to start.



4. Volkogonov has written a very sensitive portrait of Trotsky. For specialists, of course, it should be combined with a reading of Deutscher's three-volume biography, but for general readers Volkogonov should suffice. Volkogonov's "Trotsky" is not as scholarly as Deutscher's masterly work, but it's more balanced. The author, a disillusioned former Communist, recognizes Trotsky's genius and portrays him in sympathetic and tragic terms, yet frequently reminds us that his subject was working under fatally flawed premises. Since he doesn't take communism seriously on an intellectual level, he spares us most of the details about theoretical clashes among the Bolsheviks over Marxist interpretations. He also reminds us that even though Trotsky never ceased criticizing Stalin's tyranny, his own role in the development of the murderous role of the CPSU was not innocent. Some readers may justly criticize Volkogonov's haphazard organization of his materials, but I find it doesn't detract from his work, and I rather enjoyed his more personal observations.



5. "The entire structure of Leninism is at present based on lies and falsification and carries within it the poisonous seeds of its own destruction."

   Lev Davidovich Bronshtein, known as Trotsky, the one time Social Democrat, one time political opponent of Lenin, one time war correspondent, one time toast of radical society dilatants, one time People's Commissar for Military and Naval Affairs, one time member of the Bolshevik Central Committee, and finally political fugitive and Stalinist purge victim wrote the above quote in 1913. Dmitri Volkogonov's book, Trotsky, provides a stimulating portrait of this fascinating personality and the various roles/political outlooks that he struggled through.

   To start let's consider Volkoganov's view of the 2nd Party Congress held in London in the summer of 1903. Far from repeating the usual interpretation, he offers a new one, namely that instead of being simply a question of party organization which divided the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party, it was "over a difference in the theory and practice of revolutionary methodology. The congress formalized the coexistence of two parallel tendencies: one radical, revolutionary and uncompromising, which would characterize the Bolsheviks; the other reformist, evolutionary and parliamentary, which was to become the hallmark of those henceforth known as Mensheviks" page 29. As the author mentions, it is also interesting to note that the original platform of the RSDLP advocated democracy, secret suffrage, inviolability of the person, freedom of thought, speech, press, movement, assembly, strikes and trade unions as well as other similar goals.

   How did all these noble dreams of a great humanist state end up as a mass gulag? The answer in one word is Lenin. Lenin, the egotistical nihilist, rejected out of hand any "bourgeois theory", relying solely instead on his own interpretation of Marx and Engels. Any non-Bolshevik political opponent was subject to the worst sort of derogatory comments and personal attack. In March of 1917, Lenin arrived in revolutionary Petrograd unwilling to compromise with anyone and enjoying unlimited financial resources thanks to the German General Staff. Trotsky, who had since joined the Bolsheviks, supported Lenin's hard line unquestioningly. While the Provisional Government worried of an attack from the right, Lenin, ever the cynical opportunist, promised an end to the war and land to the peasants. Bolshevik agitators spread through the army to convince the troops to desert or simply ignore the orders of their officers. By October the stage was set, a radical party of limited support and scope was able to overthrow what remained of the Provisional Government with little effort or bloodshed, but by rejecting all compromise and by ruthlessly exercising complete power, Lenin, Trotsky and the Bolsheviks made the Russian Civil War a reality. After the October "Revolution" Trotsky became ever more important to Lenin, whose effectiveness as a speaker was limited. As Yaroslavsky described him at the time, Trotsky was "a man most profoundly dedicated to the revolution, a man who has grown up to be a tribune, with a tongue as finely honed and flexible as steel, a tongue that can cut his enemies down, and a pen which scatters a wealth of ideas like handfuls of artistic pearls." Page 82.

   Perhaps the author's most important view is that the tragedy that became the Soviet Union required each of the Bolshevik triumvirate to play the part he was most suited for. Lenin was the ruthless opportunist, his unquestioning will to destroy and control by terror setting the tone and shape of the entire system. Stalin was the pathological paranoid master of conspiracy, the consolidator, basically a fascistic criminal, who had got his start in the Party as a bank robber. And Trotsky? He provided the siren's song for the masses, the pure light of his reason projected to attract a storm of adolescent and unquestioning human devotion and energy willing to follow whoever held the red flag. Is it any wonder that Trotsky didn't outlast the Civil War period by very long? After his expulsion, Trotsky provided the excuse for Stalin's tyranny, even supplying the ideological framework for the disasterous "Second October Revolution" of 1928-40. The Bolshevik system required all three and played itself out in a very mechanical, a very deterministic way, success meant retaining absolute power and in that one sense, the only goal with any meaning for Lenin, it was successful until 1991 when the machinary collapsed.

   Why do unrepentant Leninists in the West continue with the charade that Bolshevism held any hope for mankind? Pride and egotism, along with a cynical and patronizing view of humanity blind them to the shambles all around them, block their noses from the smell of the grimacing, yet rancid Leninist corpse that they have strapped to their backs. That and the role they play as scarecrow/whipping boy for the reactionary and Reaganist right which automatically labels any opposition to the corporate-dominated national security state as "communism" gives them a false, yet ego-enhancing, sense of importance. In other words they'd love to stop acting like trick dogs, but they can't give up the attention they get.

   This book and the author's biography on Lenin tell the whole sordid history. Time for the "left" to finally bury the Leninist corpse and decide on a counter-argument that exposes Reaganist "behind-closed-doors-government". What America especially needs is a new urge and will to protect our basic human rights and liberties, such as the original goals of our Founding Fathers or, for that matter, of the RSDLP. Nobody needs another utopian ideology, such as Leninism or some deluted, "people-friendly" version of Reaganism, but a pragmatic program that sees humanity, its natural physical environment and its artifical economic environment for what they are and responds accordingly.

5 comments about House of Abraham: Lincoln & the Todds, a Family Divided by War.

1. Why did the majority of the Todds choose the South over the North? Their's was a border state that stayed in the Union. They owned too few slaves to have fortunes staked on the system. On p. 174 Berry defines the Todds as being "shrill with hatred... collapsed in self interest and grief". What drove them to this?
   
   Are they really "a once happy family" as Berry says? The litigation over their father's estate belies this. The litigation not only left their father's second wife (mother of 6?) dependent, but also disinherited those, like Mary, who had already had gifts from the father. Did early favoritism cause the rift as much as the war?
   
   Lincoln appears to be the model brother-in-law. Risking charges of favoritism and nepotism, Lincoln helps his Union oriented brothers-in-law (who also married Todds), giving one the ability to contract for provisions (which he exploits and when challenged threatens blackmail) and another a coveted army position away from the fray in the west. He entertains a Confederate Todd in the White House, and provides a pardon for another who will not take an oath of allegiance to the country that pardons her. His tolerance and charity towards his family recalls his tolerance of McClellan and a host of cabinet officers of similarly dubious motives.
   
   Mary personalizes the Confederate allegiance in her family as a fight against her. Maybe Mary was close to being right. Some seem to bask in the status of being able to malign a relative. Others just expect too much which can breed disappointment even under normal conditions. Maybe some of their intensity was a family rebellion against the one grown up who, by chance, had married into their family.
   
   While the book is short, it is not entirely focused. For a book on the family, too many of its precious paragraphs are devoted to sketching the war such as the battles of Manassas and Shiloh and the seige of Vicksburg. I would have liked a reference table in the beginning showing the birth order of the Todds and their marriages. Most importantly it needs some discussion on why the Todds did what they did.
   
   In a lighthearted afterward the author describes his research. While a lot went into this effort, I hope it is not thorough, because I would like to know more of these Todds.



2. Their have been some good Civil War family biographies lately. The Whalen's book on the Fighting McCook's and this book on the Todd family come to mind. Family biographies can help us understand the human cost of the Civil War as no other histories can. As family members die, we understand the war's causalities in very personal terms gaining an idea of what this costs those involved.
   
   The McCook family had no conflicted loyalties, no question of who to fight for nor any hesitations in committing to a side. They were able to establish a record of service fighting for the Union that was unique. The Todd family had conflicted loyalties, questions on who to fight for and hesitated in committing to a side. A large slave owning family from Kentucky with an in-law in the White House would cause problems for everyone. Lincoln, his wife, her brothers & sisters their spouses created a series of confrontations, personal and political problems that make up this story.
   
   The author introduces the Todd family and the principle people giving us a solid foundation for the story. Lincoln tries to keep as much of the family on the Union side as possible. His efforts delay some members "going South" and produce some real political problems in 1861 for him. Each year of the war is a chapter. This allows us to follow everyone from assignment to assignment or battle to battle. Against this backdrop, Lincoln's personal life and family problems becomes worse and worse. Each newspaper story, each battle death adds to Lincoln's problems and Mary's woes. However, at Springfield as Lincoln is buried, the Todd in-laws stand as family.
   
   The author is easy to read and manages to keep all the story lines together. These are not likable people and he clearly does not like them. This come through in a number of places and may have colored the story. In addition, the author makes misstatements about the battle of Shiloh and the POW exchange. None of his mistakes are major but he is accepting of popular stories as opposed to good scholarship. A nice touch is to take each person from 1865 to his or her death. This is always something I look for in this type of book and feel is really important. The author does an excellent job on each person giving the reader a feel for who they were.
   
   Overall, this is a very readable book. The people are well drawn allowing us to see their world and have some understanding of their choices. In addition, the author shows how the divisions in Lincoln's personal family helped him reach out to the national family as reflected in many of his speeches.



3. This is an entirely new perspective of the Lincoln family, specifically that of his wife's. While there is much known about Abraham Lincoln's wife, Mary Todd Lincoln, as well as their oldest son, Robert Todd Lincoln, who was the only child to live to a ripe old age, I know very little about the Todd Family, and was especially intrigued that a book had finally been written on this little known side of the Lincoln family. Although the book was short, and, as admitted by the author, only a cursory story of several of the members of the Todd family could be done, it was admittedly an interesting book and whetted my appetite for additional information on the Todd Family. I found that the book added a few more pieces to the complex character and personality of Abraham Lincoln the man, and found further that his "melancholia" that is so much discussed was not solely due to the failures of many of his generals, the exorbitant loss of life in the battles of the conflict, the political intrigues of the Radical Republicans and the Democratic-Copperheads, but also partly due to the inner family turmoil that he and Mary experienced with their own family, specifically the Todds. Truly, Abraham Lincoln was quite prophetic when he said that a "House divided against itself cannot stand", and surely this could be said of the Todd family who themselves were divided with several family members serving in the armed forces of the Confederacy and the Union, several killed in battle, and one assassinated. I would recommend this book, and hope to see further detailed studies of the Todd Family in the future.



4. Stephen Berry's work House of Abraham: Lincoln and the Todds, A Family Divided by War is a wonderful addition to the field of Lincoln historiography. His work is very insightful to the machinations of the Todd family. The Todd's were truly a family divided by the Civil War and its aftermath. The work is well written and researched throughly by the author. Lincoln's extended family, i.e. the Todd's were surely an embarassment for the president and his wife. However, even though many of the Todd's were confederate sympathizers, Lincoln always was supportive of his wife's sisters. This is a fine work on Lincoln and essential for Lincolnites to read.



5. Abraham Lincoln is one of the most-written about men in the English language. As a long-time Lincoln-buff, I don't mind that there are so many books, but I have to admit, I occasionally wonder if we've reached diminishing returns. A lot of Lincoln books are what I'd call "old wine in new bottles."
   
   But House of Abraham really is that rare thing: a truly new and important perspective on Abraham Lincoln. Having read most of what there is on Abraham and Mary, let me just say what I think is new here: First, the author fleshes out the Southern wing of the Todd family for the first time. These are some seriously colorful characters: David Todd was arrested for desecrating corpses in a Richmond jail; Samuel Todd and Alex Todd were Confederate soldiers killed in action; George Todd abused African-American prisoners who had been taken while storming Battery Wagner; Emilie Todd, widow of a Confederate Brigadier, spent a week in the White House, despite the scandal; Margaret Todd smuggled contraband through Union lines, on and on. In all my reading I'd never known any of this.
   
   Second, the author connects these scandals to Mary's growing unpopularity in Washington. Many books have mentioned that Mary lost three half-brothers on the rebel side (the author proves that it was only two), but none have demonstrated so clearly why her family-ties became such a problem.
   
   Finally, while House of Abraham begins as a book about the Todds, it becomes more and more a meditation on family, on the nation as a family, and on Lincoln's evolving understanding of the War. Ultimately, the author convinced me that Lincoln saw the Todds as a microcosm of the nation and that he understood the war as a "mosaic of family crises."
   
   As some of the other reviewers have pointed out, the book isn't very long, but considering it limits itself to saying something actually new about the most-written-about-man-in-America, I don't think that's surprising. Team of Rivals (which I loved) was 900 pages, but not that much of it was new. It was really the framing that was so impressive. In fact, I'd recommend reading Team of Rivals and then House of Abraham in succession. They make a terrific pair.

5 comments about The Singapore Story: Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew.

1. Mr Lee Kuan Yew - or LKY - as he is fondly referred to by both admirers and critics, has been a controversial figure as easily discernible in the oxymoronic titles he is often given, such as "benevolent dictator" and "enlightened despot". But to call him such names without heavy qualification is to utter a painful half-truth.
   
   "The Singapore Story: Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew" aptly displays the range of LKY's sensitivity, insight, and wisdom harvested not only from his personal experience from WWII onwards but also from the experiences of others. As a young Singaporean who has lived in Singapore all her life I thought I was very familiar with this iconic figure who I had often read about from his speeches, newspapers and textbooks. However, his memoirs displayed another angle of his personal self which is rarely seen in the media.
   
   I think it's a waste that not many young Singaporeans have read this book. Perhaps they should. His writing is powerful but easy to read, and I found myself reading it into the small hours of the night. This book would also appeal to you if you're interested in Singapore, its policies, and its history.



2. This is simply the most amazing and interesting biography, i have ever read. What makes Lee's narrative interesting are his crisp observations supported by official British documents made public after 35 years.



3. This volume is childhood up to Singapore's dumping by Malaysia.



4. Reading Lee Kuan Yew's "The Singapore Story" is analogous to swimming in an ocean of enlightenment. It is a unique piece of writing. Candid and down-to-earth, Mr. Yew's memoirs showed that courage, faith, hope, and perseverance are not only enough to transform a man, but an entire nation. Singapore's victories over colonialism and communism showcased this fact. I no longer wonder why Presidents, Prime Ministers, and other top-notchers find this book irresistible.



5. He will go down in history as one of Asia's most famous (or infamous) statesmen. "The Singapore Story" tells one side of the story - Lee's. Former Singaporean prime minister Lee Kuan Yew has long been acclaimed for his outspoken persona and alert and thorough intellect. However, it is not certain that he is fully aware of his impact (or maybe he is) on other people - specially on Tunku Abdul Rahman. With this, the inaugural volume of his autobiography, he also proves himself as an charming and pleasant narrator - and therein lies the problem. The tone of the book is almost benign - but was her really. His tale begins as an distinguished student from a non pretentious bourgeois, English speaking home (this proves problematic in the future as Lee makes his way around the Chinese speaking communities).

   Lee's deftly moves to recount how his education was discontinued by the Japanese occupation in World War II - of which he also elaborates how it taught him the many life lessons and impressions he would take into the future political and personal trials he would undergo. After a brief experiment as a black-market entrepreneur during the war (for which he was able to support his family as well as other interests), he decided to make his way to England after the Japanese defeat - to become a practitioner of the Law. He recounts as well how he managed to convinced Cambridge University to admit - not just himself - but his future wife Choo as well - they were both eventually called to the Bar in England. Upon passing the British rendition of the bar examination, Lee decides to return home - to Singapore. Lee is quickly embroiled in the complex labyrinth of Singaporean politics of independence while both fighting and using - the Communist Party. If you read between the lines, it is clear that Lee was anxious to be rid of this red menace while playing "The Prince" and playing sides against each other.

   Convinced that the red threat from Singapore could only be controlled by assimilation into the federation of Malaysia, the Tunku entertains the call by Lee to form Malaysia. Lee's story, told in extended and obviously well documented detail really zeroes in on his dream of uniting Singapore with Malaysia - only for it to come apart in the seams - of which he is not completely blameless. Lee bitterly relates his disappointment over Malaysian Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman's decision to ungraciously expel Singapore from the recently formed Malaysian federation. Lee wishes to play the victim. If you treat each side as a discourse - with its own set of truth creating mechanisms (ontology) and societal formulas - it will be quickly evident the Lee's formula is not welcome in the Tunku's Malaysia. No matter which side of the argument the reader places him/herself, Lee posed a threat to everything that the Tunku and his cadre held dear. As much as Lee viewed (or perceived) the ills or threat that the Tunku's cadre (if not the Tunku himself) represented, Lee had to admit that he was not in his "zone" - he was out of his element. He did, in effect, break a trust not to engage in federal politics (as originally agreed) - predictably causing the ire of the Tunku. It is the chickens coming home to roost.

   While gracious towards the Tunku, Lee turns his harshest appraisals of other politicians in Kuala Lumpur - zeroing in on the close cadre of the Tunku - the book goes into very informative detail in this regard. Lee's wonderfully in-depth character analyses and impressions only foreshadows volume two (Lee, Kuan Yew From Third World to First - The Singapore Story: 1965 - 2000 Singapore and the Asian Economic Boom New York: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc., 2000 - also available on Amazon.com) describes an entire generation of world class leaders. It seems that most leaders were mindful of this as several former presidents, secretaries of state, prime ministers, and foreign ministers have sang the praises to Mr. Lee. There is no argument from this reviewer that the praise is well deserved and the reader of this and the subsequent book will come to know Lee as crafty but exceptionally brilliant political animal - but there are always more sides to a story.

   Miguel Llora