2 comments about A Tibetan Revolutionary: The Political Life and Times of Bapa Phüntso Wangye.

1. One's respect for Phüntso Wangye grows as one reads this book. This remarkable man went from simple origins to grounding the Tibetan Communist Party, held important posts in the Chinese Communist Party, finally becoming a leading Marxist dialectician. He was closely involved with all the important figures in the Tibet-China question over 5 decades including Mao, Zhou Enlai and the Dalai and Panchen Lamas. He was a fearless proponent of the Tibetan and Khampa identity throughout, while remaining an internationalist, suffering for his integrity with 18 years in solitary confinement. He finally has gained the respect of parties on all sides of the question, while being very clear about his alignment with the CCP.



2. This is a book of unique interest to anyone more concerned with Tibet than with Shangri-la. Phuntso Wangye reveals himself to Melvyn Goldstein as a man of unique vision, courage and energy. The picture he creates of Eastern Tibet in the forties and fifties is fascinating in its detail for anyone seriously interested in how things came to their present pass in Tibet today. His qualities of creativity and endurance and his ability to hold and explicate complexity are dazzling. He was there. He acted. He learned, thought, studied and survived.
   It is also one of a number of records of those who matured through the experience of solitary confinement. His personal courage and clarity make him a natural brother to Nelson Mandela and others who have found their own sanity in the most extreme of conditions.
   
   I have read the book twice now and appreciated its richness more the second time around. Read it and you'll see.

4 comments about George Mason : Reluctant Statesman.

1. the book was very informative and interesting we need more books available about our founding fathers....everyone seems to have forgotten about george washington,,who set us free from britian and made us what we are today...geo. mason is highly recommended...



2. This book is better than nothing. Unfortunately that's its competition on this subject matter. Perhaps due to his privacy, or maybe his limited time as a public official, very little is written about George Mason. That's a shame really, as he put the liberty movement in the colonies to words.
   
   'Reluctant Statesman' is a mere 110 pages (with large print and illustrations no less!). The saddest part of all, is that this is probably overkill for the limited amount of information contained within those pages. Reading this book won't give you much more than a quick glance at an encyclopedia entry would.
   
   I'd recommend this book to anyone looking for a brief introduction to Mason. Just be forewarned, this is only a brief introduction and nothing more.



3. In an era when Americans seem to be quickly losing touch with their own history, one of the greatest crimes of all is that the name of George Mason has faded into almost complete obscurity (if there weren't a university named after him in Virginia, how much worse would it be?).

   In his foreword to this brief book, Dumas Malone, the biographer of Jefferson, notes what a shame this is: 'More than any other single American, except possibly Thomas Jefferson, whom in some sense he anticipated, George Mason may be regarded as the herald of this new era [of declarations of rights]; and in our own age, when the rights of individual human beings are being challenged by totalitarianism around the world, men can still find inspiration in his noble words.'

   Biographies of Mason, the author of the Virginia Declaration of Rights (which inspired, among other things, the US Declaration of Independence and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen) are woefully few. Rutland's short book is a fine and easily digestible introduction to the man, his times, and his impact upon history. The value of that is hard to overstate.




4. This is an accessible introduction to George Mason, a Revolutionary Virginian of lesser fame. The book is very short and the print rather large, making this an easy read. Robert Rutland dwells mostly on Mason's public life, only hinting at his private life. Like Jefferson, Mason was a slaveholder who abhorred slavery (he wished the Constitutional Convention had abolished it), but Rutland leaves this paradox unexplored. For those of a scholarly bent, the book lacks footnotes. Mason was the moving force behind Virginia's Declaration of Rights, and, for that reason alone, is quite significant. Any person wishing to learn more about him will find this book a good place to start.

3 comments about Prisoner of Love (New York Review Books Classics).

1. If the reader is looking for easy explanations to the Palestinian refugees' war with the nation of Israel, Jean Genet's book is not the place to seek them. And I don't advise readers to pick through the text looking for the succinct sentences in which Genet clearly states why he's on the side of the Palestinians, or if he's anti-Israel, or anti-American. There is no proof of reviewer Tim Keane's conclusion that Genet "seethes with hatred of Israel"; there are no such violent emotions in Prisoner of Love. At 430 pages, be prepared to find subtleties of experience shaded by conflicting responses--nuances completely unavailable via print journalism or network news, CNN, or Al Jazeera. But the very fact that Genet wanted to observe life in the refugee camps shows that he had to make a choice. Nearly all the protagonists of his memoir, this textual "souvenirs," are Palestinians and generally Muslim. Indeed, the compelling force which drives the relatively plotless Prisoner of Love are the individuals to whom Jean attachments himself: the dynamic Lieutenant Mubarak, Dr. Mahjoub and the charismatic female doctor, Dr. Nabila, Khaled Abu Khaled and Abu Omar, and an accomplished woman friend, a blond Lebanese guide and translator, Nidal, and dozens of other people. Genet was particularly attached to Hamza and his mother, who he attempts to find again after his absence from Palestine for nearly 14 years. We cannot forget the common fedayee rebel, the fedayeen as a whole who fought to make the Palestinian plight known.
   
   When evaluating Prisoner of Love, it's important to remember that Genet is a writer. Throughout his work, Genet tells us how difficult it is to recount his experiences since he's not sure at times what he's seeing, and he must make his writing conform to the necessities of craft. And whatever writing craft decisions Jean made it is clear that the Palestinians "wrote" him as well; Jean was seldom in control of his experience. As I read, I realized that Genet is the ultimate refugee; he seeks to be with people who are like him. My conclusion is this: Palestine chose him.
   
   Only Genet could have written this book. He is a bruised romantic searching for a resting place that will caress both his homeless intellect and his orphaned body: "A little while ago I wrote that though I shall die, nothing else will. And I must make my meaning clear. Wonder at the sight of a corn-flower, at a rock, at the touch of a rough hand--all the millions of emotions of which I'm made--they won't disappear even though I shall. Other men will experience them, and they'll still be there because of them. More and more I believe I exist in order to be the terrain and proof which show other men that life consists in the uninterrupted emotions flowing through all creation" (361). As an orphan with prison experience, and disaffected from France, Genet was willing to try on other peoples' lives; I suspect that without the structure dictated by the craft of writing, and his talent coming to the attention of well-known writers, Genet would have disappeared into the French prison system.
   
   Another conclusion I came to: Genet shows us the difference between terrorism and Arab nationalism. Is there any hope that the U.S., of which I am a native-born citizen, will ever figure out this difference?
   
   Overwhelmingly, the single image I have of Prisoner of Love is that to read it is to travel the land that dwelled *in* Jean Genet, this traveler who was intelligent enough to let his emotions guide him. And only by reading can I share in living a life which speaks so eloquently of rebellion and blood, of life and death.



2. Genet allows you to feel the immediacy of the Palestinian situation with particles from lives,from ill-defined fragments of lives disrupted with no future,he stayed with a family in 1980 a half-day and a whole night where the young son,Hamza a fedayee went off at night to fight. Genet hearing gun fire in the distance inhabited his bed and was brought Turkish coffee and water in the night as a replacement for the young man,by his mother. Genet is a writer/poet,a political thinker,but never a man of politics, a deeply sensitive man,a virtuoso of the sensual image, as the starry-night reflected against the curtain in his room with the small blue table. "Of course it's understood that the words,nights,forests,septet,jubilation desertion and despair are the same words that I have to use to describe the goings on at dawn in the Bois de Boulogne in Paris when the drag queens depart after celebrating their mystery,doing their accounts and smoothing banknotes out of the dew."

   Genet was allowed with special permission to visit the massacre site at the camps at Sabra and Chantila,smelling the rotting flesh, "They happened I was affected by them. I talked about them. But while the act of writing came later, after a period of incubation,nevertheless in a moment like that or those when a single cell departs from its usual metabolism and the original link is created of a future,unsuspected cancer,or a piece of lace, so I decided to write this book."

   Genet has an intense need for passion of any dimension,scouring the vigours of whatever parts of fragments of the lifeworld's complexity presents itself to him. I once thought of this book as a romantic means of portrayel a betrayel of a political situation,one, the only one that excited Genet.It means something that only encounterings lives in struggle,bent into a repressive state that Genet finds the only life worth encountering,sensing and feeling about. This book was completed in 1986 after suffering from throat cancer, he died on the night of 14-15th of April,1986,while correcting proofs.




3. This book is absolutely essential to any understanding of the Palestinian situation. It is also the mostimportant work of Genet's entire career.

5 comments about Faith and the Presidency: From George Washington to George W. Bush.

1. Even though tomes have been written on the American presidents, Dr. Smith manages to bring fresh insight as a result of painstaking research. ( It could serve as a model for any student looking to document his research) The book is not "light" reading....but the author writes with clarity and with as much impartiality as humanly possible. I found his distinction between the ways that these presidents' faith shaped their policies to be thought-provoking. This book provides a strong framework from which to examine the coming election season.



2. I encourage you to set aside a block of time each day as you loose yourself in the history and faith of each of these men. It is full of interesting faith facts that just a history of these presidents would never touch. I must confess it took me time to read and digest this book, but well worth the time. I look forward to reareading this book in order to grasp new facts that I did not glean from the first read. I would love to see it used in school class rooms everywhere. The research, notes and excellent writing of this work is outstanding!



3. A first-rate work in which eleven presidents are analyzed in terms of their religious beliefs and their actions. Solid framework of analysis. The work brims with new details, broad understandings, and sound and judicious conclusions. Impressive, varied bibliography. The copious notes, alone, are worth a close read. Sparkling writing and sound organization make this a page-turner.



4. If you are looking for fresh information about the role of faith and religion in the lives of some of America's greatest presidents then I highly recommend purchasing Faith and the Presidency.
   The author, Gary Smith has done his homework. His research is very thorough and his style of writing is clear and free of technical jargon.
   I thought the book presented a balanced view of democrat and republican presidents; and the author covers each president's religious affiliation without bias. After reading this book I finally understand why religion is such a hot topic during every presidential election.
   Reading about Abraham Lincoln and how his faith helped him address the crises of the civil war is the best I have read to date.
   Students, teachers of history, religious leaders and those with a love of presidential history need this book to complete their library. A must read for 2007!



5. Gary Scott Smith's Faith and the Presidency is fascinating to read and weighty in substance. Full of personal details drawn from the lives of various presidents as well as important observations about public policy and religious impulses, Smith hits the sweet spot between bold, exciting claims and strong supporting evidence.
   
   I was particularly persuaded by the book's observation that the foreign policy of presidents more readily reveals their philosophical commitments because the U.S. presidency has greater latitude abroad than at home.
   
   This is a book worth reading from cover to cover. Smith hits a home run with this exceptional book. A tour de force!

5 comments about Reagan In His Own Voice.

1. Rarely have American President's set aside a lengthy paper trail of their thoughts on national issues, apart from the day to day strains of office, before they become President. The public is usually left to discern their thoughts and world views from a variety of sources, often indirectly from the candidate himself. Ronald Reagan though, from 1975 to 1979, gave over 1,000 short radio commentaries, usually around three minutes in length on a variety of topics, that give as clear an indication to what he thought and what he valued as could be expected for someone not in office.
   
   This five CD set, of around a representative tenth of Reagan's more than 1,000 radio commentaries, represent a unique window onto what Reagan valued, and the situation, from his conservative point of view, of late 1970's America. Topics such as environmentalism, out of control government spending, onerous government regulation, religious oppression overseas and liberal thought in culture and faith are addressed with at times great seriousness, and even better genuine humor.
   
   These audio commentaries by Reagan are occasionally interrupted by former Reagan aides and scholars who give historical context to the subjects Reagan addresses. Former aide Michael Deaver is clear that these radio commentaries were a principle way that Reagan wanted to stay public and active after his eight years as California Governor ended in 1975.
   
   The overwhelming majority of these commentaries were written, researched and edited by Reagan himself. His previous experience with broadcasting and his ability with plain spoken English, that the American public saw on television throughout the 80's, comes over even more clear here. What is most remarkable is his sense of timing. There are a few commentaries that he obviously rushes through, usually when he is reading a letter; but most of them build up to a point and are succinct, even when he points to supporting material.
   
   Yes, Reagan stood against communism, and that is a frequent topic of these radio spots. What most stands out though is his enthusiastic love and and admiration for America, its ideals and its people, spread over a vast continent, yearning to be independent and creative, were it not for liberalism in government and surrounding culture.
   
   This CD set is a great primary resource to understanding Reagan, the late 1970's and what he wanted to accomplish in the 1980's, a time which was most definitely not inevitable from the years that Reagan speaks here. This CD set makes a great companion for car trips and other listening opportunities; and they would make especially great introductions to the time for those too young to remember today.



2. If you admire, respect, or just fondly remember Ronald Reagan you'll enjoy these CDs. Through the short radio commentaries you'll feel like you've gotten to know the real Reagan.



3. This product is simply amazing. Ronald Regan was one of the best Presidents this country has ever had. These recordings are amazing. Many of the issues that he addressed in his radio announcements are still relevant to today! Decades later!!!
   
   This should silence the "nay sayers" about Regan's abilities and opinions. All these announcements were written by Regan himself between his term of Governor of CA and President. He clearly laid out his plan of defeating communism. It is amazing to hear how a "true" conservative thinks.
   
   Each section is set up and reviewed so that you know the actual context in which Regan was speaking.
   
   It was a true pleasure to hear Regan's views on Government, Freedom of Speech, and faith in the American people.
   
   This series is a must for anyone who doesn't understand what it means to be a conservative. I just wish our current President (George W) would listen and practice Regan's example of what it means to be a conservative.
   
   Ronald Regan knew how the world works, and the role the US Government should play in the lives not only US Citizens, but to the entire world.



4. I doesn't really matter if you're a dem or a rep, this is a voice that can speak to you if you're an american.
   
   He was the greatest president of my lifetime.
   
   First rate audio. First rate documentary. First rate ideas.



5. No matter what your political affiliation is, there is no denying Ronald Reagan was one of the greatest speakers and leaders of our time. The collection of audio commentaries by the 40th president of the United States is an everlasting testimomy to the personality and opinions which reached out and captivated a nation. After listening to his warm voice and sharp wit,it soon becomes apparent how he could almost effortlessly attract and win most people over with his words. The collection of commentaries contained in this CD, were recorded from his radio days prior to becoming president and provide insight into some of the issues and concerns of the American public during the 1970's. Its such a great collection, that his voice, thoughts and charisma remain with you long after listening to the CD.

5 comments about The 23rd Psalm: A Holocaust Memoir.

1. The only reason I put this book down was to reflect. This story is so important - I will do as another reviewer suggests - "This book is to be read and passed down to our children to read.
   Very powerful.
   A suspensful read on a horrific truth.



2. The 23rd Psalm is a story that has been imprinted upon my soul, that will remain there as long as I live. I share in the sentiments of Pat's review; I was both compelled to stay in its pages by day and visited with its images at night in my sleep, somehow sharing in this man's plight.
   
   Thank you Mr. Salton for allowing others, for allowing me, into the most private and intimate and horrific memories of your life. I esteem you, and those like you, with the utmost honor. May the Lord cause His face to shine upon you my friend.



3. It must have taken the author a great deal of inner strength and pain to come to terms with these horrible happenings and be able to put them down on paper to share with all those that read this book. It was amazing that one so young would be quick enough to call on survival skills at the right moment. Though some, of course, was luck, this author displayed a natural instinct to survive throughout his nightmare.



4. The 23rd Psalm: A Holocaust Memoir is the chilling personal testimony and memoir of the daily life of George Lucius Salton, a Jewish man who survived the living hell of a Nazi concentration camp. An intense, gripping tale of hatred and power used as a brutal club to perpetrate atrocity, and the author's witness and narration of the unspeakable, The 23rd Psalm is an welcome and invaluable contribution to the growing library of Holocaust Studies. Providing powerful refutations of anti-semitic revisionist historians, these personal and eye-witness accounts are all the more significant in view of the holocaust generation now reaching an age where they are rapidly passing from among us.



5. This is an incredible accounting of the atrocities of WWII. I was unable to put the book down. It is extremely well written.

5 comments about Empty Without You: The Intimate Letters of Eleanor Roosevelt and Lorena Hickok.

1. A woman I knew so little about comes to life in this book. I generally don't like biographies or autobiographies but this one is the exception!! Order from Amazon to get it quick!!



2. This well-edited book definitely preserves the intimacy of the relationship between ER and Hick. Regardless of your personal interpretation of their relationship, the book makes for fascinating reading. There are many "behind the scenes" details of the workings of the New Deal and other social and political events of the time. This book is nothing less than fascinating.



3. If you read the letters and not the "explanations" of Streitmatter, you know that this was a classic love affair of the first order. Passionate, intense, full of high levels of emotion, intermixed with politics and social issues of the day. For anyone to read these letters and deny that these women enjoyed each others bodies as much as their minds is really outside the realm of human experience. The question of course that remains is the unequivocal statement by both John Kerrey and John Edwards in the debates in 2004 when they proclaimed that you are "born" a lesbian as they tried to make political points with the sexual orientation of Dick Cheney's daughter. Did Eleanor have a lesbian relationship with "Hick?" Most certainly. Was she born that way and have a "traditional" marriage with many kids fathered by FDR just as a cover? I doubt it, but who knows; which was Bush's much more honest answer in response to the "lesbian" question.
   Was FDR a liar of the first order? He ran in 1940 for the unprecedented third term on the basis of never "sending American men to fight foreign wars" while planning to do so at the same time. Someone so deceitful was most certainly well practiced in the art while having affairs with women at the same time Eleanor was bearing his children. Did she turn to other women for the love that FDR failed to give her, or did he turn to other women because she was really "born" a lesbian. We will probably never know the truth of their relationship, but the letters between Eleanor and "Hick" are pure honest love. The only reason I don't give this book five stars is that the author gets in the way of the story.



4. As an avid reader of all things Roosevelt, I was rather disappointed in Rodger Streitmatter's Empty Without You: The Intimate Letters of Eleanor Roosevelt and Lorena Hickok. The story of how Eleanor and Lorena (Hick) became such intimate friends (maybe even physically intimate) is a fascinating one. Hick was a hard-nosed AP reporter who had a successful 20 year career in a profession dominated almost exclusively by men. In the course of covering FDR's first campaign, she found a kindred spirit in Eleanor. Both women were needy: they both had tough childhoods, suffered humiliations and tragedies, and were deeply wounded by those they loved. They struck up a lifelong friendship, although the intensity of this relationship waned after the first 3 years. During the course of this friendship, they wrote each other almost every day, and sometimes more than one letter in a day. Hick also lived at the White House for some of this time.

   What I found so disappointing about Empty Without You is that out of the many thousands of letters that Eleanor and Hick exchanged throughout their lifetime, Hick destroyed a good many of them-especially those letters from the beginning of their relationship when it was the most intense. There are not many surprises here, and those few that allow a peak at their level of intimacy have been extensively quoted in other Roosevelt books. Also, I found that the story itself is rather depressing. Hick gave Eleanor the knowledge and power to recast the job of First Lady so that Eleanor could better achieve her own political agenda. She encouraged Eleanor to give weekly news conferences with only women reporters invited. She also prodded Eleanor to start writing newspaper columns-monthly at first, and then her daily My Day column that ran for 27 years. Finally, Hick suggested that Eleanor write her autobiography before FDR's first term was even finished. At first, Eleanor depended on Hick to help her with her writing. But Eleanor was a quick study and soon no longer needed Hick. Unfortunately, in broadening her horizons, Eleanor had less and less time for Hick. To make matters worse, Hick was forced to give up her newspaper job because of conflicts of interest, and took on a job traveling the country on behalf of FERA to report on the progress of relief programs. Hick missed the career that had brought her great success, name recognition, positive reinforcement and financial security. Hick also suffered from depression and mood swings-especially when her time with Eleanor did not go as planned. Unfortunately for Hick, her ugly and frequent outbursts were an embarrassment to Eleanor and had just the opposite effect: instead of bringing them even closer, Eleanor started to pull away. Still, Eleanor never completely abandoned Hick and did much to take care of her (especially financially) as they aged.

   One thing that I did enjoy about Empty Without You are the reports that Hick wrote for FERA. Although she mostly gave snippets of these in her letters to Eleanor, boss Harry Hopkins was correct when he predicted that Hick's well-written reports would in the future become a window on the Great Depression. But overall, there is not much new or enlightening in this book. If you want to know more about the relationship between Eleanor and Lorena, I'd stick with Doris Faber's Life of Lorena Hickok: E.R.'s Friend.




5. Eleanor Roosevelt has been an inspiration ever since I was a young girl, a terrific role model for political activists, humanitarians, and women and girls of all ages. But she is often portrayed in biographies (excepting Blanche Wiesen Cook's wonderful recent work) as a cold fish in her personal life. This is one of the reasons that any fan of ER should read these letters. ER is passionate, caring, needy, annoyed - real emotions from a real woman. We also get a look at Lorena Hickok - Hick - beyond the stereotypes, as a woman deeply in love and troubled by the lack of an exclusive relationship.

   One problem I have with the book, though, is not letting whole letters speak for themselves, revealing more of the political discussions that seem to have been a big part of both women's lives and their attraction to one another. Were they lovers? They were certainly "in love," and regardless of where they drew the physical line, this book reveals foremothers any woman, lesbians included, should be proud to claim.

5 comments about America's Queen: The Life of Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis.

1. This was a great book - it was packed with information. Sometimes it had a little bit too much detail in certain sections and it got a little bit boring. Overall, it was really interesting and I was glad that it was so well written as opposed to a quick read that leaves you with more questions. Highly recommended.



2. Sarah Bradford has written a very complete story from Jackie's childhood to her death. There is lots of details about Jackie, as well as her husbands, JFK and Onassis. The book also focuses on JFK's affairs, and how much it hurt Jackie.
   
   Even before Jack died, Jackie was determined to be free from the Kennedy family. To separate from the Kennedy family, Jackie used wit and charm and focused on her children and her own interests, like art.
   
   One of the highlights of the book for me was how Jackie restored the White House. She asked for free donations, like a valuable portrait of Ben Franklin. She enlists the help of experts.Everyone seems willing to help her, because of her charisma and her position as first lady.
   
   I have no way to know how accurate this book is, but the author cites a lot of other books for research. Jackie was a very intelligent and determined lady. It is a shame that she died at only 64 years old.I enjoyed reading it.



3. Jackie Kennedy was the closest thing that America ever got to home-grown royalty. Her birth and upbringing in New York City, refinement, etiquette, and Olympian cool ... Jackie radiated a deep mystery that remains. She was iconic in her need for privacy and protectiveness of it. A woman of another era who remains enigmatic and unique in her persona ... an American icon who seems both American yet not typical of the United States. A sophisticate, debutant of the year, equestrienne, well-manner, posh Park Avenue social doyenne who intrigued the world until she died in 1994. Fluent in several language, a writer of poetry, political wife, patron of the arts, native New Yorker, and poised like any Queen in Europe. She wasn't perfect but she was Jackie. America may never see another quite like her.



4. My comments concern the narrator of the audio cd who felt that she had to change her voice inflection when she read quotes of various people. She talked in a soft wispery tone when quoting Jackie, however, she continued to use that same voice for any of the females quoted. She then attempted a deeper tone for the male voices. Due to all the voice shifting it was disruptive and the reading did not flow. Since it was a narrative and not a play it would have been more pleasing to the ear if the narrator did the entire reading in her natural voice.



5. It was fantastic to be able to grasp a better understanding of the stoic, graceful beauty that was Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis. It was great to see the different facets of her personality from political darling to yacht hopping party girl. Her desire to control and veneer everything that happened in her life was inspiring. Couldn't put it down, was consistantly interesting throughout.

5 comments about Alexander Hamilton: A Biography.

1. McDonald seems to have set out to write a book emphasizing Hamilton's political and financial/administrative contributions to the new republic and that is what he did. There is relatively little on Hamilton's personal life. For that one must look elsewhere (to Ron Chernow for example). The book is largely successful at what it is trying to do and is very good on the finance/administrative areas. One would expect no less from McDonald. As his other works on constitutional history show, he is an expert on the political philosophy and thought of the time as well as the period's economic theories.
   
   The prose is crisp, direct and clear for the most part but perhaps not the most sprightly ever committed to paper. McDonald can certainly be serious and charming simultaneously as he was in his memoir of his life as a historian (Recovering the Past), but his tone in his more formal work is quite brisk and even heavy at times.
   
   I would downgrade the book somewhat for two reasons: First, as mentioned, it scants the personal life in favor of the ideas and actions. With Hamilton, however, the personal life and conduct were utterly intertwined with his political and physical fates, especially as he grew older and (it seems) both increasingly intemperate and fearful that he had not been accorded sufficient esteem by contemporaries and might not have achieved the degree of 18th century style fame that would cement his reputation for posterity. The duel, for example, is one of the dumbest things that a smart man ever did and was to my mind in large part caused by events in his personal life.
   Second, the book is quite partisan and even hagiographic occasionally. Most biographers sympathsize with their subjects and give them more than the benefit of the doubt; but, judging from the book, Hamilton seems to be in McDonald's all-time personal pantheon of historical heroes and it shows. This may be because McDonald appears to share in some part the distrust of popular democracy that gave rise to Hamilton's fear of government by "the mob." Whatever the reason, Hamilton is seldom portrayed as wrong or even in error.
   
   Overall this is a worthy book by a fine scholar of the period and is especially good at making clear Hamilton's financial systems and political ideas in the context of the times.



2. This biography focuses heavilty on Hamilton's fiscal policies, particularly in his role as Secretary of the Treasury. It is well written and relies heavily on primary sources. The book sometimes becomes heavy reading when McDonald disucsses some of Hamilton's more complex financial dealings.



3. Forrest McDonald wrote this book out of a profound knowledge of the legal, financial, and economic environment of the world of late-colonial America that Alexander Hamilton came into, and of the early Republic, that he transformed. Hamilton was a brave soldier, an astute politician, an extremely talented administrator, a great lawyer and a man of extraordinary personal morality and honor. These characteristics were enough to vault him to the upper reaches of early American society. But his financial and economic program -- that rescued this new and foundering nation -- is the true basis of his greatness.
   
   Hamilton was a man of parts, not least of which was his technical mastery of the financial means to establish and maintain a sound currency and national credit. Apprenticed to a merchant at an early age, he quickly came to appreciate the mentally invigorating effects of the commercial life. He was naturally quick and, as in repudiation of his socially marginal origins, a rigorous adherent to morality and "gentlemanly" honor. His talents, hard work and charm bouyed him up, and he seized each new opportunity with both hands, for his ambition would not let him rest. McDonald tells the story of Hamilton's early years with vigor and interest, but it is clear that the thrust of this book is to elucidate his real accomplishment as Secretary of the Treasury. This was the funding and assumption of the debts that the just-formed United States had inherited, the taxes and tariffs to pay for these, and the financial mechanisms -- including the Bank and the sinking fund -- to create, as out of nothing (or less than nothing) a universal and sound currency, as well as a store of capital to fund businesses, which he felt must be the drivers of the economy.
   
   This book is fairly compact, but gives a good feel for Hamilton the man. If you want more in that line, then the current biography by Ron Chernow is where to look. But here you will learn what Hamilton did that no one else could have done, and that needed doing. Even his enemies -- Jefferson especially -- found, though they repudiated the man and his politics, that in the end they couldn't do without his works.



4. Though this biography is about 25 years old now, it's one on Hamilton that I will not part with. Forrest McDonald has written many books on early colonial American history, on the Constitution and on the presidency of Washington and Jefferson. He is now a Distinguished University Professor at the University of Alabama. This biography is more substantive than Brookhiser's and Brookhiser, I believe, actually consulted with Forrest McDonald when he wrote his book on Hamilton. Our government sometimes consults McDonald on Constitutional issues. As to political affiliations, McDonald describes himself as "an unreconstructed Hamiltonian Federalist". (The federalist party doesn't exist anymore; the present day republican and democratic parties are both offshoots from the previously named democratic-republican party).
   
   I've written this review so many times, mainly because I think that this Hamilton's life deserves a careful study, particularly with regard to his work on getting the Constitution ratified and his work in the treasury department. I highly recommend Frederick Scott Oliver's Alexander Hamilton:an Essay on Union which I've reviewed previously and Knott's Alexander Hamilton and the persistence of myth. Oliver's book is really dated, going back to 1928, and is written from a British viewpoint. He was a Scottish lawyer, read by Lord Tweedsmuir/John Buchan, who unfortunately only wrote several other books; his biography on Hamilton, in my opinion, is beautiful. This biography is good too. I love the quotes from Pope that McDonald heads every chapter with. (Hamilton's favorite authors were Pope and Plutarch). Chapter 8 is entitled Funding and Assumption which deals primarily with Hamilton's solution to the huge debts the colonies owed other nations following the Revolution. Stephen Knott's suggests in his book that Hamilton's solution of setting up a sinking fund would have been a good solution to another huge debt that our Treasury Department had to deal with soon after, (I believe), Bush Sr.'s four years, yet Congress gave this suggestion little notice. What makes McDonald's bio a standout, I think, is the depth of material he provides in explaining what he did as Treasurer. He's also biased toward Hamilton which I think actually is a good thing and paints not so rosy a picture about Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, or Burr.
   
   I think this biography will stand the test of time because of its solid research from Hamilton's birth to his death; McDonald's biography is the most comprehensive and complete. (I haven't read the newer biographies yet; I do believe this one will remain the standard). I was particularly impressed with his treatment of Hamilton's youth and parentage. I'd like to give this book 5 stars, yet American politics and writers to some extent alarm me. If I could, I would give this book 4.5 stars, the 0.5 subtracted for my cautious misgivings stated previously, and, compared to Oliver's biography, Oliver really understands the characters of Hamilton, Jefferson and others, most accurately portrays them, which is what a biography should be. To McDonald's credit, his and Oliver's agree on many points. Highly recommended for serious students of American history and of this most notable, yet rarely noted founding father.



5. The author of this book is so enamored of Hamilton that it completely blinds him to any faults Hamilton may have had. Furthermore, anyone who showed any opposition at all to anything Hamilton proposed is deemed either delusional or a traitor. His treatment of Jefferson and Adams is amazingly disrespectful. Even Washington comes accross as a feeble leader at times without the constant support and advice of his most trusted advisor Hamilton.

   As the book progresses, the bias gets worse and almost preachy.

   Shockingly, the famous duel with Aaron Burr gets only about 3 pages worth of description.....probably since it was not exactly a high point in his life.

   Avoid this book if you want a well-balanced biography.

5 comments about Nonviolent Soldier of Islam: Badshah Khan: A Man to Match His Mountains.

1. I am so impressed with Badshah Khan to the point of being overwhelmed with admiration. One reason is his breadth of vision and his tolerance. At one point Gandhi asked Khan if his English sister-in-law had become a Muslim, and Abdul Ghaffar Khan replied that he did not know: "Why should not a husband and wife adhere each to their respective faiths?" (p.145) I long for this kind of tolerance in the world!
   
   The book is an amazing story of success and failure. Khan and Gandhi succeeded nonviolently in bringing independence to India. The failure lies in the facts that: 1) Neither one of them wanted to see the partitioning in to two nations, 2) their dreams of a united Hindu-Islamic nation turned into a nightmare, 3) they both envisioned a nonviolent nation and that has turned out to be a far-fetched notion. Yet, Khan & Gandhi proved that non-violence can work, as proven again by Martin Luther King, Jr., and Nelson Mandela.
   
   As the author notes, probably no other leader suffered so much for the cause of peace and nonviolence as did Khan. No, not even Gandhi or even Mandela. I think we have in this book the profile of THE most amazing man in world history!! And the fact is that he is probably known by far less than one percent of the world's population.



2. I love everything Eknath Easwaran writes and this book exceeded my expectations. The stories and information are priceless - buy this book if you want to know about the life of Badshah Khan.



3. I request customers and other visitors to read the article by Arif H. Akhunzada titled "Bacha Khan legacy is Questionable" with caution because in Pakistan objective interpretation and description of history is mostly marred by the official stand on history enshrined in the so-called "Pakistan Ideology".
   
   Pakistan Ideology i.e. the Idea that sparked the struggle for Pakistan is a highly communal, theocratic, and Pan-Islamist view of history that considers the people of the Subcontinent to be divided into two religious communities-Hindus and Muslims-with entirely different ways of life and very little in common to live in a single state or society. According to this ideology, the Idea of Pakistan was born when the first Arab Muslim invader i.e. Mohammad Bin Qasim invaded India (Sindh) and converted some of its inhabitants to Islam.
   
   This divisive and jingoistic philosophy very well serves the interests of the military bureaucracy that has been ruling Pakistan since inception and the allied religious and fudal classess.
   
   As Abdul Ghaffar Khan aka Bacha Khan espoused a non-communal approach to life in which the highest spiritual act and worship was the "service of humanity" irrespective of religious affiliation and practically upheld what he thought as the true purpose of life ( evident from his personal life and joint struggle with Hindus, Sikhs, etc. for freedom), he, therefore, is an anathema to Pakistani national elite. This elite, through a systematic campaign, has tried its best to malign Abdul Ghaffar Khan, mispresent him to the world and his own people i.e. Pashtuns, make him controversial, and permanently erase him from history and the memories of the successive generation of Pashtuns. These elite want Pashtun society to evolve the Taleban way.
   
   There is also another dimension to all this. The political, bureaucratic, economic, and intellectual elite of Pakistan predominently comes from two communities; Punjabis and Muhajirs. The other three communities of Pakistan i.e. Sindhis, Baluchis, and Pashtuns have only peripheral rule in Pakistan. The Punjabi-Muhajir elite wants to build a Pakistani nation based on Islam and Hindustani Muslim Culture. Therefore, any thing that gives these marginalized communities (i.e. Baluchis, Pashtuns, and Sindhis) a sense of identity, pride, self-esteem, and confidence is virtually unbearable for the Punjabi-Muhajir elite that dominate Pakistan.
   
   I will request the world not to forget Bacha Khan. The values and the view of life he upheld are eternal and humanistic. His legacy belongs to the entire humanity rather than a specific community. As a Pashtun, I believe that my people i.e. Pashtuns can achieve spiritual and material success only if they follow Bacha Khan's philosophy of non-voilence and peaceful struggle for personal and collective development. Unfortunately, initially British and later Pakistani state ruthlessly suppressed his movement and philosophy. The politics of the Cold War, in which radical Islam and Jehad were used as counter to communism, also have its share in weakening Bacha Khan's "Khudayi Khidmatgar Movement".
   
   I will further request that readers should read anthropological studies on Pashtuns than relying on superficial views about them here and there.



4. All the Amazon reviews for this book below perceive Abdul Ghaffar Khan superficially, only from the angle of the non-violent doctrine and rural Islamic philosophy he preached, rather than any practical political accomplishments and impact on history and his society that may have been made by him - or the lack thereof. High ideals are fine, except that they are a little ephemeral as far as practical reality is concerned - unless they help achieve something effective and concrete. And sadly this is what this otherwise good and simple man failed to do. Living in the same society as he did, I will focus on him from the angle of Pashtun social realities and issues, unlike the other foreign reviewers who are just content with the usual wishy-washy praise of his non-violent Islamic ideals. It must also be kept in mind that Eknath Easwaran is a pacifist Hindu thinker, and so has written this book mainly from the viewpoint of highlighting his pacifist aspect above all else. Which is true, since Ghaffar Khan's pacifism was largely Hindu inspired, but for Pashtuns he is basically a politician and cultural figure, and pacifism is just a facet of his character, albeit a key one. 20th century Pashtun political history is an obscure issue but still crucially important, inspite of its failed and forlorn character. I consider this book as perhaps the most useful introduction so far for the foreign reader, of the man at the centre of it - and I rate it at five stars because there are only a handful of books worth the name on the international level that deal with his doings, and this one is about the story of the man himself. Ghaffar Khan aka Badshah (or Bacha) Khan was a towering figure mainly because of his personal qualities of head and heart - infinite patience, steely determination and simplicity. He himself belonged to the Hunnish origin "Khan" Pashtun landowning class. He is acclaimed by most Pathans (Pashtuns) as being the father of their "nationalism". He founded a simple rural political-cum-cultural-cum-religious movement in the countryside to "dignify" Pashtuns and their culture and language and free them from first British and then Pakistani rule. They were known as "Red Shirts", the name being derived from their uniformed cadres and were first affiliated politically with the All India National Congress of M.K.Gandhi and later merged into and then broke with many other Pakistani groupings (when they couldn't dominate them). They were finally turned into a formal political structure of their own by 1986, which came to be dominated by his late son and daughter-in-law, and is now very much their family concern, a "lucrative" political party in the hands of his grandchildren and their in-laws and other cronies. They now use his image and "philosophy" to keep their fortunes alive. He was the key regional ally of Gandhi in his non-violent independence struggle for India. His position on Pakistan was varied and inconsistent. He had earlier tried vainly to oppose the dissolution of the Turkish Caliphate in the 1920s. All these activities earned him long spells in jail. But his anti-British stance didn't stop him from getting his sons elitist British educations and properties in Britain, as well as good political positions and alliances in later Pakistani governments.
   
   Let us now review Badshah Khan's accomplishments - and those of his successors - for those are what really count in the historical long run. What is there visible to us that he has achieved for his people through his struggle and philosophy? Nothing but a vague demand for some sort of a "Pashtun nation" of sorts that even its proponents very conveniently refrain from defining exactly - and some sort of "unity" for the Pashtun ethnicity divided between Afghanistan and Pakistan. That was never really elaborated upon either. First of all, he desired Pashtun political union with India, after it became independent; later, he toned that down and would give the impression of wanting total Pashtun independence; otherwise, he would only demand Pashtun provincial autonomy within Pakistan; and many a time, he swore fealty to Pakistan's integrity! He is also known for his advocacy of Afghanistan as the "real" Pashtun state, and that is where he now lies buried. In the end, he merely wanted to change Pakistan's Pashtun province's name from NWFP to the more realistic "Pakhtunkhwa". That was the nature of his ever efflusive politics. No doubt he talked about some vague Pashtun independence and national self-determination, but avoided really important issues like improving and reforming their cultural quality. Otherwise he was just a popular rustic social figure, wearing the rude homespun cotton garb of a village simpleton who gave his society nothing of particular merit other than going around from village to village drinking green tea with the men and extolling the virtues of rustic Pashtun goodness and their good old rough Red Shirt camaraderie. Now let us see what effect this influence of his has had. When we look at the Pashtun society in 2006 and compare it to what it was in 1930 - at the height of his movement - we see no real changes in it at all: their dirty mud caked village roads and stinking ramshackle bazaars are the same, their rich, exploitative landowning upper and noveau riche classes, who use their educational skills and government jobs to enable their legendary corruption, plunder and pelf (and who are the local comprador dependents of US global imperialism) - are the same; the great masses of the Pathan populace are boorish vicious tribesmen and illiterate peasant artisans, cultivators and daily wagers, little better than animals in any respect, going around swathed in their rough stone age felt sheets and caps and turbans, working with much the same equipment in their fields as they did 3000 years ago in the days of their Gandhara predecessors, and living likewise: the open drains by the roadside and walls serve as the men's public urinals. The only notable differences between Gandhara and now are that there are some dilapidated roads, vehicles, electricity and various other trappings of modernity that were introduced here by British influence; and lately Pashtuns have been inundated with cell phones, in an unnatural and despicable mix that I call "neolithic globalism" - and Badshah Khan or his marvellous legacy are certainly not responsible for that. (It is because of the folly and misdemeanours of the modern world that we see the likes of backward Bedouin sheikhs sporting chunky Rolex watches and Rolls Royces, and medieval Pathan ruffians of all hues - and other such "natives" - having undeserved free access to the latest electronic gadgets and vehicles, and taking them for granted. Sad paradoxes indeed). The modern state institutions that exist in the Pashtun areas under Pakistani rule are those bequeathed by former British rule, and they exist merely as a modern verneer beneath which things go on here as they have been doing for thousands of years. With these institutions existing just as rubberstamps, the real decision making power lies with informally constituted tribal councils made up of "elders" and "influentials" and "notables" at the local level, extending all the way up. Bribery, patronage and coercion and are considered normal business procedure. Nobody pays taxes, and smuggling constitutes trade. Gun running, narcotics and counterfeiting are traditional lucrative sources of income here. Merit doesn't exist. People tend to settle all disputes personally owing to police and government ineffectiveness in such a society, and given the extreme and proud Pashtun temperament - often end up using guns whatever the nature of the problem. Grasping, greed, jealousy and lawless behaviour are customarily extolled as being "manly". "Insults" have to be avenged - often by death - and so many things are regarded as insults, that normal people elsewhere can't even imagine: for instance, asking someone to remove his car parked wrongly behind yours can be regarded by him as insulting, and among most Pashtuns in general such incidents are the norm because of their lack of adherence to and cynical disregard for proper procedure and manners is so universal as they haughtily dismiss all such procedural "fuss" as being beneath strong, clever men. Even someone overtaking another person's car is often regarded by the one being overtaken as an insult... Pashtun fracticide, treachery and tribal disunity are unparalleled and legendary. Extreme religious fervour has always been the norm in this claustrophobic society. Its conventions are extolled and enforced ruthlessly. Marriages are all arranged. Women are still bought and sold in marriage deals. Polygamy is considered normal and even a prestigious aspiration. Pashtun society is infamous for its sub-human and extreme cultural attitudes regarding its women and their rights. Afghan tribesmen use the Pashto word "kaddah" for wife which literally means "baggage" or "belongings". Women are made the cornerstone of a twisted all-pervasive male "code" of feudal-tribal "honour" that rules day to day Pashtun living, involving senseless butchery, blood feuds, duels and land and money grabbing. What is more, the women willingly and "proudly" accept their place in all this too, may I inform those shocked western and other liberals who read this! (After all, it is they who make sure to pass on these noxious traditions to their sons).
   
   In short, Pashtun society is a lowlife jungle society in every sense of the word, at a time in history when all should know and do better. It is stuck in a time warp. All this is what Badshah Khan (and now his brood) endorsed and glorified as the "Pashtun nation's precious cultural identity", a situation to protect and be proud of. His non-violence was mostly a tactic for political activities against the British, and later the Pakistani administrations. And not all of this was non-violent either, if one cares to read about the Qissa Khwani Bazaar massacre of 1930 and the Baburra massacre of 1948, where he got hundreds of his uniformed cadres slaughtered as they were preparing for confrontations. No doubt the reader will come across gushing, over-reverent Pashtun views regarding him. (An example is a Pashtun's Amazon review for the 1998 edition of this book, on a separate webpage). But these are worthless tinsel, the bombastic rigmarole typical of the blustery and exaggerated Pathan mentality and "public morality" that they show to others, especially foreigners. You can ask me instead about what Badshah Khan & Co. accomplished. I belong to the same provincial district as the Badshah Khan family, called Charsadda, and my family is even distantly related to theirs.
   
   So honestly, what did this man achieve in his society that merits such a fuss? His successors are nowadays typical Pakistani politicians, who run an opportunist business venture of a party devoted to robbery and thuggery. That is what characterises Pakistani politics nowadays. Not only have things not changed in Pashtun society, but they have in fact taken a turn for the worse since America revived and equipped Islamic fundamentalism here to counter the USSR in the 1980s. Whatever little cosmetic good 100 years of British rule did the Pashtuns in Pakistan has now been effectively wiped out by that. Badshah Khan could not give his people what their British "oppressors" had given them, and he merely created a cheap circus troupe, a cheerleading carnival performing in red uniforms for the benefit of bored peasants and later, corrupt politicians. Although he himself definitely had a strong character, with a deep sense of genuine personal committment and he suffered greatly for his rustic nationalist causes, that alone amounts to nothing on the real level as he had nothing significant to offer and improve his society with other than calling for some ephemeral nationalist unity based on a decidedly decrepit culture. If Pathans honestly realise that, then there might be some hope for change in their dark lot. If not, then they should happily keep Badshah Khan as their icon along with their pathological, medieval state of being for as long as they exist. It is indeed sad to see how the exaltation of the lowest common denominator factor pervades all affairs of life globally nowadays - whether that means praising rarified ideals, or eulogising inferior and bad culture among other things. After 9/11, these negative potentials become very clear indeed.



5. This is a sweeping portrait of Badshah Khan, a courageous Muslim figure. I felt inspired as I read this touching work, though I wanted more.
   I wish that Khan's autobiography, My Life and Struggles would be more readily available. Also, a more detailed biography would be helpful. This book is wonderful as an overview but one who wants to dive deeper should investigate further.
   This book is an excellent introduction to Badshah Khan. It shows how one can use the bismillah (in the name of God the infinitly compassionate and merciful) as a means to internalize compassion and mercy in ourselves. This is the core of Islam and of the utmost importance today.