1 comments about Memoirs of Duc de Saint-Simon, 1710-1715: The Bastards Triumphant.

1. I am the publisher. No kidding, I quit my job and started a publishing company so I could make The Memoirs of Duc de Saint-Simon readily available. As a lifetime reader, I was struck at how much this work reminded me of epic fiction. It has a great story line, opulant setting, bizzare characters, and one of the most compelling and funniest narrators you'll ever read...and it really happened!
   
   This is book two in the three book set, and if you've read book one, I can tell book two takes it up a notch. Now that the scene at the court of Louis XIV has been set, and the mesmerizing cast of characters have been introduced, you can't help but get sucked in to the corrupt and debauched world Saint-Simon lives in. You will not be disappointed.

No comments about Plunkitt of Tammany Hall.

5 comments about Against All Hope: A Memoir of Life in Castro's Gulag.

1. Mandatory reading for humans, along with Jorge Masetti's In the Pirate's Den, which allows to see the other side: the middle-class, comfortable punk turned communist, the appropriate accolyte for Castro's genocide.
   
   This book is a victory of faith and resistance against totalitarianism. Castro deceived the poor, the peasants of Cuba, he perverted the revolution those humble people were expecting. Castro had declared a thousand times that he was not a communist and that the revolution was "greener than palm trees", but when he got the power he proclaimed unashamedly the true nature of his beast.
   
   This books stands as an invaluable monument to the Cubans whom Castro broke but never bent. Those who refused to say: "Yes, Commissar, I have done wrong. I accept Political Rehabilitation because I see now that communism is the only just system, and it alone can bring happiness to humanity" (p.358).
   
   Notes on communism: "The authorities thought, moreover, that weeding out the cabecillas (leaders) would leave the less educated, less 'dangerous' prisoners, lacking leadership, easier to manipulate ... but if there is any ideology based completely on a misunderstanding of human behavior and the workings of men's psyche, their motivations, that ideology is without doubt marxism ... time would show that every man's conscience, system of values, and personal pride were what led him to resist. No man needed another to show him the way" (p.219).
   
   "A communist always seems to prefer an angry, blurted, uncontrolled manner (of speech from their opponents). The truth, spoken calmly to his face always exasperates him. As what I said was unarguable, the two men turned angrily and walked away." (p.477).
   
   I have to encourage the reader to get hold of this astounding book if only for the story of Alfredo Izaguirre (pp.239-242): "The only prisoner I know of who never performed any forced labor for his jailers -not even a minute's. It is fitting that his name go down in the history of the rebellion of the Cuban political prisons."
   
   On Castro's true revolutionary companions: (Eloy Gutiérrez Menoyo) "led the bloody fighting against Batista's Army (in the mountains of Escambray), he had the sympathy of every peasant there -but Eloy had fought to establish a truly democratic system in Cuba, not another dictatorship. Therefore when he saw that Castro was becoming a tyrant, he fled the country; a while later he came back with a small group of armed men who tried to reach the mountains to continue the struggle. But he was trapped, captured and sentenced to 30 years in prison".
   
   "Rafael del Pino had been one of Castro's closest allies when Castro was in Mexico preparing the Granma landing. One night Castro confided his plans for Cuba to Rafael, and Rafael was so shocked at their totalitarian aspect that he abandoned Fidel. Castro never forgave Rafael that 'betrayal' ... Rafael was jailed". In 1977 he died in jail. "No one ever saw the body. The Ministry of the Interior flatly refused to turn it over to his family."
   
   "Ex-commander Mario Chaves, who had assaulted the Moncada barracks with Castro, been in prison with him, and accompanied him on the Granma landing, was brutally beaten (in jail) and literally dragged to the punishment cells" (p.458)
   
   Pierre Golendorf, a French marxist intellectual who had come to Cuba and worked for the Cuban government ... realized that the island was one big farm that Castro ran like a slave plantation ... he wrote letters about the lie the revolution had turned into ... the political police accused him, like everyone who stood up to the revolution, of being an agent of the CIA. He got 3 years and 2 months in prison. "The tribunals do nothing but read sentences (imposed by politicians)". Spain is not very different today. See how judge Gómez de Liaño was disposed of his toga for sentencing a big pro-government media shot (the El País media group).
   
   Children of the Devil: "One would naturally assume him to be a doctor, but he wasn't. He had been a traveling salesman for medical supply companies. This man, "Dr" Herrera Sotolongo, a Spanish communist, had fled to Cuba because of the civil war in Spain, and thanks to the solidarity of the Cuban revolution with Spanish communism, he had become chief of all medical services of all jails and prisons in Cuba. And you always had to call him doctor, or he wouldn't answer you. He knew nothing at all about medicine, of course, but he was a man the leader could trust." (p.233-234)
   
   The Western world's ignominious role: Conversation between Martha, Valladares' wife, and Pierr Schori, social-democrat big shot in Sweden: "-So if you know there's an implacable dictatorship in Cuba, if you know all liberties have been suspended, why don't you speak out? -Because that would be giving the Americans a publicity weapon." (!!) "Schori warned her not to speak to the press about this interview. Perhaps he didn't want to provoke Fidel."
   
   This undescribable book by Valladares, who should be the president of Cuba and give Castro a tour of his own jails and lacks, ends by remembering one of the anonymous victims in this genocide, a Christian martyr at his moment of death: "a heart overflowing with love, raising his arms to the invisible heaven and pleading for mercy for his executioners. 'Forgive them, Father, for they know not what they do.' And a burst of machine-gun fire ripping open his breast."
   
   Valladares writes beautifully, and even through all the horrors od more than 20 years of torture described here he keeps a tone of hope, of mysterious sanity and confidence all along, and which assures him that what he's doing is write, according to his conscience and to the power the Almighty God sustains him with. Why is this book unpublished in Spanish-speaking countries or so hard to find? That's another ignominy.



2. I read this book in Spanish, in condensed form, when I was fourteen years old. (1987, to be exact) Twenty-one years later, I still think about it. It made an anti-Communist out of me, and made me absolutely abhor what Fidel and Raul have done to such a beautiful island as Cuba, and to its people, for almost fifty years.
   
   Sure, you might say they have "free health care". Trust me: they have paid a terrible price for "free."
   
   It should be a must-read, together with Vaclav Havel's essays, for those who need to know what Communism really is: the rottenness of the soul, and an ideology borne out of the bowels of hell itself. Nothing else can describe it.
   
   Viva Cuba Libre! (And this from a boricua.)



3. A beautiful and terrifying memoir of Castro's Cuba. This man suffered unspeakable injustices at the hands of Castro's servants. The honesty and heartfelt memories of this man persecuted by the Communists is one of the best memoirs I have ever read. Wonderful testimony to the bravery and courage of the human spirit in the face of horrible odds.



4. Another Amazon reviewer got it right when he wrote that this book should be given to all one's deluded friends sporting hip "Che" T-shirts. This eye-opening, stomach-churning account of the author's 22 years in Cuban prisons, the conditions of which make Shawshank seem like a Club Med, demolishes the romanticized memory of "freedom fighters" like Che and exposes the lie that Castro's Revolution created a socialist paradise. And it highlights Communism's inability to understand or erase one of the most important traits of human nature: our hunger for individual freedom and personal dignity.
   
   Valladares wastes no time plunging us into a hell Dante himself could barely have imagined - on page one he is abducted in the middle of the night by the political police on trumped-up charges (having been denounced, he feels, by a jealous coworker for his disapproval of Castro's embrace of Communism), and before his prison odyssey is over, he endures and observes the worst extremes of totalitarian repression. The tension and the drama never let up, and often reach the breaking point. The litany of sadistic human rights abuses goes on page after page, every page; the degree of physical and psychological cruelty is so incomprehensible as to nearly defy belief. And yet Valladares and others maintain an almost superhuman strength of character and will to live that are inspirational and humbling. Amazingly, there are even flashes of humor and an ultimate triumph in this maddening and disturbing memoir.
   
   Against All Hope is one of the most gripping books you will ever read. It has a compelling social conscience and an inspirational message of hope, faith, courage, determination, and even love, and it will leave you with a changed perspective on yourself and the world.



5. Give a copy of this book to all your friends wearing Che t-shirts. After so many descriptions of beatings and hunger strikes, you become numb to the next ones. I recall the AI campaigns in the 70s-80s to send letters and postcards to the Cuban and Soviet embassies just to remind them that the world was watching. Sadly today AI has degenerated into just another wacko outfit. The UN comes in for a beating of its own in this book, as it just sat back and closed its eyes, passing resolutions against Israel and other nonsense instead of putting pressure on Cuba. This continues today with Zimbabwe, NK, and others.
   
   Take a look at "The Aquariums of Pyongyang" for a look at the same song, different verse.

5 comments about We Belong to the Land: The Story of a Palestinian Israeli Who Lives for Peace and Reconciliation (Erma Konya Kess Lives of the Just and Virtuous Series).

1. I have just completed reading this book a second time and I became compelled to write a review. The book is fantastic! I would love to see this book as reading material in high school classrooms. I would have loved to have it as a reading assignment when I was in high school. It teaches that we are all capable of being compassionate towards others and capable of building a greater world for all of to live in. I think it goes beyond the religion. To me, this book is right there on the list next to Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury. Both are must reads for all. If only the American media actually reported news, we would all know of all the things that happen in the world, instead of just hearing a bias viewpoint.
   
   "All countries keep their citizens oppressed to one degree or another. The countries that are best at it are better at hiding it from their citizens."



2. I bought this to support this peace maker in Israel. He operates the largest private school in Israel and has both Israeli and Palestinian students in class. It works.



3. In Blood Brothers, Abuna mentions the massacre/mass grave in Gish very briefly. Abuna's motivation has been, and continues to be the search (and work) for peace. Yet there are those who dispute him because the truth is too hard to swallow. Abuna does not write a polemic and is not apologetic in his views. He simply and deeply wants peace. I am not a religious person at all, but I am from Gish. Members of my family in 1948 were instructed by jewish soldiers to collect the dead bodies from roof tops and narrow alleys and move them to the mass burial place in Gish. All of us kids [of Gish] knew where that spot was and we never played near it. Some people will accept the truth only when it fits their beliefs. But unless we learn from history and come to terms with certain atrocities (both palestinian and israeli), peace has no chance.



4. Elias Chacour is a man of peace and a man of God. He has been awarded the World Methodist Peace Prize for his efforts, as well as many other accolades. He has brought together people of many faiths and races and broken down barriers of hate and discrimination without himself succumbing to these forces. At the same time, he has told the story of Palestine's tragedy just as it is. I am a Palestinian Christian and I can attest to the accuracy of his facts. His Web site (look under Mar Elias College) tells of the great things he and his supporters around the world have done to educate Palestinian youth who were denied the opportunity to learn by the Israeli school system. The review by Lars399 is stilted, particularly as it is influenced by Maronite Christians whose allegiance to Israel and hatred for Palestinians is a well known fact. Lars was duped. This book is a great eye-opener and a useful starting point for understanding the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, especially for American Christians who are so influenced by the one-sided media blitz after 9/11 and the Iraq war.



5. If all people thought and lived like Abuna Chacour war would not exsist. A true follower of Jesus Christ, Abuna truly walks the walk and talks the talk. How can anyone Not read these books and how can anyone having read them not believed every word as gospel? American Christians especially supporters of Zionism need to wake up and realize what they are really supporting. How silly to think that we can hurry the return of Christ by blindly supporting Isreal (the Zionist and their supporters) and their ungodly actions. REALLY humans hurrying the RETURN of Christ? How silly. One must also know that not all Jews in the Middle East support Zionism. One question that needs to be asked is where have all the Christians gone that once lived in the land where Christ walked? People do your research. Are we not told to question/test all things?

5 comments about The Avenger Takes His Place: Andrew Johnson and the 45 Days That Changed the Nation.

1. This is a nice survey about Johnson and the situation he found himself in April 1865. This is partially a Johnson bio -the start of the book, though interesting, focuses on Johnson pre-presidency, leaving less time for the 45 days of the start of his administration (or, rather, finishing Lincoln's plans). So, if you are looking for super in-depth coverage or brand new research material, this is not your cup of tea. But, it's a well written book, and some of the the old newspaper clippings dealing with Lincoln and Johnson are fun to read.



2. Shortly after Lincoln's murder, while the entire country reeled from rumors that Lincoln's death was the result of a huge conspiracy that involved Confederate leaders, Herman Melville published "The Martyr," an ominous warning to all those who might've been involved. The "Forgiver"--Lincoln--has been murdered. "But the People in their weeping/ Bare the iron hand/Beware the People weeping/When they bare the iron hand." Why? Because "The Avenger [now] takes [Lincoln's] place."
   
   Andrew Jackson was that terrible Avenger--or so the radical Republicans who wanted the South punished even before Lincoln's assassination hoped. There was good cause to think that Johnson was the man to crush the South. Few politicians had been as vocal about the need to punish treason with a hangman's noose than Andy Johnson, Tennessee's military governor. Moreover, the Republicans believed they could control Johnson in a way that Lincoln always successfully resisted: after all, Johnson was a backwoods lout who'd actually been drunk at his own inauguration! So the consensus was that the Avenger was in place: a President who on his own wanted to punish the South, and who could be manipulated by bloodier-minded, vengeance-seeking northern Republicans.
   
   As author Howard Means points out, however, things didn't quite work out as planned. Johnson proved much more independent than Washington powerbrokers anticipated, and his hang-'em-high attitude toward the South proved to be more rhetorical than real. In fact, his plan for reconstruction pretty closely mirrored the 1863 suggestions Lincoln had left: a 10% solution (readmittance to the Union upon the election of new state governments voted in by at least 10% of eligible voters), and constitutionally guaranteed freedom for blacks. Johnson's stubborn refusal to endorse radical Republican plans to enfranchise blacks led to congressional resistance and then impeachment. After the first 45 days of his presidency, Johnson was increasingly powerless. It would take several administrations for the presidency to recover.
   
   Means' account of the "45 days that changed the nation," as his book's subtitle has it, is well-written. The trouble, however, is that it says virtually nothing that hasn't been written about elsewhere, is severely limited in its documentation, and (bizarrely) doesn't really begin to focus on the 45 days until midway through. It's almost as if there are the beginnings of three books crammed between two covers: a bio of Johnson, an account of the national chaos and confusion following Lincoln's murder (Means shines here, and is to be commended), and (finally!) the conflict between Johnson and the Republican congress over Reconstruction. When it comes to this final point, Means' argument ultimately is that Lincoln probably could've pulled off what Johnson attempted. "It wasn't policy that would bring [Johnson] down so much as it was lack of political skills" (p. 212).* Perhaps. But it takes a lot more arguing than Means supplies to give this conjecture weight.
   
   All in all, then, an interesting but not terribly essential book.
   ________
   * To his credit, Means goes on to provide three other reasons besides lack of diplomacy for why Johnson's moderate Lincoln-inspired plan for Reconstruction failed (pp. 206-225)



3. Andrew Johnson was one of our worst Presidents. In this book, author Means relates the personality of Andy Johnson, and his failings in the leadership role. Johnson was the aftermath of the great Presidency of Abraham Lincoln. To be judged according to what Lincoln did was a gave injustice to Johnson. However, Johnson's personality was not suited to a leadership role in such a viotile time. Johnson was personally brave, and was a thoughtful man. However, once he took a position, he never changed or compromised. This made him an unsuccessful leader in a time when the nation was changing so much. His moderate policies pleased no one, least of all his former enemies.
   
   This is a nice read about a transition time in American history. There have been many, but this one was probably the foremost time when a personality did not take charge and shape the destiny of the country.



4. Well, I wasn't sure if I liked Andrew Johnson before I read this book. (I actually knew very little about him.) Traditionally, he is portrayed (when he is portrayed) as the brave successor of Lincoln who "stood up" to those mean old Radical Republicans in Congress, who wanted to punish the South and open the door to all their carpetbagger and scalliwag friends. He made his stand; saved the presidency; and then faded into obscurity. Well, of course it wasn't that simple: Johnson, while admirable for his pluck and courage, was in the main, a hard-headed zealot of limited intellectual and creative range, who kept his own counsel, did what he pleased, and ended up as perhaps the least effective president in American history. It's still probably a good thing that the attempt to remove him from office failed; such would have been a blow from which the presidency might never have recovered. But certainly Johnson's pig-headedness and inability to compromise did as much to weaken the office as anything the Radicals could have done.
   
   This book concerns itself mainly with a very brief period (45 days, the subtitle says) in American history wedged between the assassination of Lincoln and Johnson's impeachment by Congress and trial in the Senate. As such, its focus is somewhat limited. Readers wanting more information on either of those epic events in U.S. history will have to look elsewhere. But it does help to identify the significance of the former, while providing important groundwork for the latter. As such, it is certainly worth reading. Means is a splendid writer, and his text marches swiftly acorss the pages. His research and scholarship seem flawless; but he also is unafraid to draw comparisons with contemporary events in American history and provide the occasional bit of humor and irony. This book is not long (just over 200 pages, exclusive of endnotes) and it moves along very fast. It's worth the read in and of itself, but more importantly as background for later developments in Reconstruction, a too often overlooked (but critcally important, as Means infers) period in our national history.



5. 
   The title makes you think you will read about Johnson and a 45 day period in or around his inauguration. I kept looking for this, and the suggested "avengence". It was there, but only partly and scattered.
   
   The book goes from details of the night of Lincoln's assassination, (a detailed piece on Leonard Farwell who brought the news to Johnson leads you to believe he will become significant later) to a bio on the early life of Johnson and back to the inauguration of Lincoln and forward to the early days of Johnson administration. Here the time frames go back (with extraneous info such as the economic rationale for why the South would never have won) and forth (impeachment, two years later).
   
   The 45 days (which ones, depend on your chosen starting point) are worthy of a much deeper treatment. The text weaves and the chronology isn't clear. I had to look up dates elsewhere to get a handle on the story. The main events actually range from the March 4 Lincoln Inaugural to the July 6 hanging of the assassination co-conspirators.
   
   Means does a good job of presenting the facts about Johnson, where he came from and his Jacksonian brand of populism. How he went from point A (avenging) to point B (Lincoln's program) is not clear. One result is that when the author blames Johnson for the mess of reconstruction, the reader can't agree (or disagree).
   
   Means is at his best in describing the social climate of Washington at the time and relating a parade of veterans. The description of troops (including Sherman's fresh from the battle soldiers) and viewers is wonderful. Other well described events include the repatriation of prisoners and southerners haunting the capitol looking for pardons.
   
   If there were 3 1/2 stars, I'd use them, because, this book is a starting point for someone to acquire some background to delve more into this neglected period.
   
   I like that the Endnotes begin with the quote from the text. A browse through it makes it seem that he made a selective use of sources, or, perhaps not many exist for this period.

No comments about The Bolivian Diary: Authorized Edition (Che Guevara Publishing Project).

4 comments about To End All Wars: Woodrow Wilson and the Quest for a New World Order.

1. This book is about Woodrow Wilson's quest for a new world order during and after WW I, especially his strong desire for the creation of a League of Nations which would mediate all future disputes between nations. The U.S. Senate, of course, voted it down. I found it interesting how the country (and Wilson) had strong socialist leanings, especially in international affairs, until War was declared in 1916, when a huge reaction took effect. Knock does a good job relating events and portraying Wilson as one whose ideas for truly ending warfare was convincing to world leaders but not his own country. The effort of trying to persuade his countrymen of the importance of a League probably broke his health and led to his death. Recommended.



2. When I was very young, I read somewhere that Wilson was the greatest swindler in human history. And Wilson has always been a mistery to me. Reading this book, I expected to learn the reason why Woodrow Wilson decided to lead America into World War I. But it was not a main theme of this book. And the explanation about it was not satisfactory to me. My misunderstanding about Wilson, however, is removed now thanks to this book.
   Thomas J. Knox decidedly focused on the League issue. He meticulously studied the process of the formation of League of Nations. And his analysis of American political spectrum of that era - especially progressive internationalism & conservative internationalism - was excellent. It was very helpful in studying American history.



3. To End All Wars attempts to show where President Wilson's ideas on the League of Nations came from and why he ultimatly failed. A fascinating protryal of early 20th century poltics, Knock successfully intergrates both the domestic policies of Wilson with his international policies. The links between the progressive, pacifist leagues and Wilson's views are clearly marked and appear credible. What is not examined is the moral conflict between Wilson's anti-war views and the fact he lead the country into World War I. Further research into this inconsitency could have led insight into why Wilson treated his former progrssive allies with such contempt as the war progressed. The ultimate result was his political inability to convince the American people to join the League of Nations after he alientated his greatest supporters.



4. Professor Knock turned my head around on the foreign policies of Woodrow Wilson. This book takes the reader back into the 1890s, when Wilson was a professor of politics and history, in its quest to understand the evolution of his foreign policy thru American entry into the First World War. Nothing is sacred in this author's hands either. He devises a large-scale drama encompassing a spectrum of players--Jane Addams, William Howard Taft, Elihu Root, Eugene Debs, and more--as he dissects how and why Wilson failed to gain Senate ratification for the Treaty of Versailles. If it is a familiar story, Professor Knock's retelling of it is both original and compelling. I think this is the single most important book currently available on Wilsonian foreign policy.

No comments about A Journey Through The Life of William Wilberforce.

5 comments about The Sole Spokesman: Jinnah, the Muslim League and the Demand for Pakistan (Cambridge South Asian Studies).

1. This is a excellent book on the history of Pakistan. Ayesha Jalal has done her home work and has presented the facts in a very logical fashion. I find this book among the few honest assesment on India and Pakistan division.



2. You say Moderate and secular Congress :

   I say : "Mahatma" Gandhi and "Pandit" Nehru? Is this secularism?

   You say Poisonous fruit of their efforts "A Nuclear Rogue pakistan"

   I ask you which country detonated the nuclear device first? Gandhi's so called secular India or the Nuclear Rogue Pakistan?

   Kindly tell me where you acquires such biases... have you even tried to read the book? Have you read about Mr Jinnah? Why is it that people like yourself wish to propagate the same false myths again and again, and not salute people like Ayesha Jalaal who have done an extremely good job in bringing out the facts..

   Ayesha Jalaal mentions a very important fact... the Muslim Extremists and fanatics like the Ahrar were actually in alliance with your Mr Gandhi and the "secular Moderate Congress Party". Indeed Gandhi brought all fundamentalists and religious fanatics together regardless of religion caste or creed. Truly secular!




3. Indeed, the premise of the book is correct, Mr Jinnah was a SECULARIST! However, by 1946, did he still want a unified India? I dont think so.

   By the way, the guy who wrote the first review.. I am afraid, Bias aint gonna get you anywhere.




4. In her masterly work of deceit, Ayesha Jalal would have a century of research hung by the way side.

   A generally well-accepted principle called Occam's Razor says that a problem should be stated in its basic and simplest terms. The simplest theory that fits the facts of a problem is the one that should be selected. When applied to the events in the Indian subcontinent, the picture appears like a moderate and secular congress fighting to keep India united; pitted against a brilliant political-Muslim Jinnah hell bent on breaking it. A chronic problem of Muslims with peaceful co-habitation manifesting itself into Pakistan.

   But Ayesha would have us believe otherwise..... Congress a Hindu party. Jinnah and his cronies paramount examples of "secular ideals" (look at the poisonous fruit of their efforts .... The nuclear rogue Pakistan...) Gandhi .. the father of Indian partition. Even Bart Simpson won't say "I didn't do it" this innocently.........




5. Ayesha Jalal has delivered a highly impressive piece of work. The research is impeccable and the analysis rigorous. Contrary to most historical accounts of the creation of Pakistan, Ayesha does not engage in rhetoric or political slogans. Instead, her efforts to remain unbiased clearly come across and are admirable. She is a historian par excellence and her talent for writing clearly and lucidly about complex subjects is clearly revealed in this book. A provocative piece of work which might actually get students of India/ Pakistan interested in a subject which they have always found dull.

No comments about La Era de las Turbulencias.