2 comments about Sumner Welles: FDR's Global Strategist.

1. I don't know how Benjamin Welles managed to turn out such a fine and revealing biography of his father, but it must have been a prolonged and painful ordeal, even if (as seems likely) he didn't really know the man all that well.
   
   Sumner Welles is best remembered as a minor player in the FDR administration, a career diplomat and Under-Secretary of State who specialized in Latin America and authored the "Good Neighbor Policy" of that era. Without re-checking the references I can't quite tell you what the "Good Neighbor Policy" was (was that the cartoon parrot selling razor blades?). Neither can most people, even though the phrase recurs in Broadway lyrics and other pop culture.
   
   Therein lies the major tragedy of Sumner Welles's career: he did something grand-sounding but vague, and probably without lasting import; and he did it with respect to a part of the world which is vast in size and monumental in its inconsequentiality.
   
   There is a second reason to remember Welles, the lurid story of his ouster from the State Department. The upper-crust, imperially slim and bespoke-tailored Welles was a total lush, tight as a drum by lunchtime. Although it prematurely aged him (he looked 60 before he was 50) the booze did not affect his daytime job performance. He had no trouble walking a straight line, with homburg and silver-tipped cane, as he went forth to meet and greet foreign dignitaries who were just as tipsy. (Care for another drink, Ambassador?) He'd been dousing himself heavily since his Harvard days and knew how to hold it.
   
   He'd also been a libertine since his youth. If he saw a woman or a man he wanted to hop into the sack with, he had no moral qualms about making a proposition. This is how it was done in those days, at least in the louche diplomatic circles of Buenos Aires and Havana.
   
   As time went on, he developed peculiar sexual tastes that became apparent when the night was very long and he was very very drunk. Famously, he propositioned negro train porters. He did this not just once, but repeatedly during his years as Undersecretary. Eventually everyone from the Brotherhood of Sleeping-Car Porters to J. Edgar Hoover to the upper reaches of DC and diplomatic society were aware of the problem and FDR put a special security detail to accompany Welles and keep him out of trouble.
   
   Welles's boss, the sickly but long-serving Cordell Hull, despised Welles and struggled for years to get rid of him. He repeatedly complained to Roosevelt. But FDR was an old friend of Welles's, regarded him as the most capable man at State, and moreover a useful counterbalance to a more obnoxious and ambitious libertine by the name of Bill Bullitt.
   
   Bullitt was Welles's rival to succeed Hull as Secretary of State. In order to kick Welles out of the running, he made sure that the story of the Pullman porters got spread far and wide. Bullitt already had a reputation as a flighty, unstable personality, and his campaign against Welles had the result of sinking not only Welles's career but his own.
   
   After his ouster, Welles wrote books and toured, stayed drunk, lost a wife and remarried, almost froze to death in a ditch where he lost some fingers and toes, and was the subject of a famous 1955 cover story in Confidential (easy to find in the age of Google). Bill Bullitt didn't fare much better.



2. When I picked up this book, I didn't even kow who Sumner Welles was (don't ask how I ended up reading this one). I found that this book provided an excellent description of Welles contribution to foreign policy in the US during the Rooselvelt administration. All of Welles' official accomplishments were clearly described and outlined. Where I found difficulty with this book was when it went into detail about Welles' personal life. It was clear that the author (Welles' son) was trying to be very objective about his father's life. However the book fluctuates between being very objective about Welles -- mostly on the more controversial aspects -- and revealing too much detail about small seemingly inconsequential events about which the author seems to have included simply because he was there. This book also has a tendency to apply villain or saint status to everyone but Welles. Roosevelt could do no wrong, and Hull, Bullitt, and van Hamme were all selfish evil men who would stop at nothing to get what they wanted. I doubt that in reality, things were that black and white. However, coming in knowing very little about these people, I was very interested in learning about the influence Welles had in World affairs during WWII and the discord that seems to have existed in the US government during this time.

No comments about The True Story of Kaluaikoolau.

3 comments about Salvador Allende Reader : Chile's Voice of Democracy.

1. Salvador Allende, Chile's martyred leader and the first elected socialist President in history, is even more important to read today than ever with the growing shift towards socialism we are seeing in Latin America, especially Venezuela. The fascist goons lead by Augusto Pinochet, who killed Allende in a bloody coup that took place on September 11, 1973, believed that with Allende dead and gone he would be forgotten. Indeed, historical references to Allende and his Popular Unity government were repressed even from school textbooks during the Pinochet regime, and Chile is even today, with a socialist president, still hesistant to really discuss the man and his ideas. But Allende continues to have many supporters and admirers around the globe and in his country and "The Salvador Allende Reader" is the best collection of his speeches. Here we have a portrait of a highly intellectual leader, a deep thinker who wished to reform his country, fight racism and poverty, and stop the looting of Chile's natural resources by foreign corporations. This is not a book about the infamous coup, for that go to "Chile: The Other September 11" and "Paula," the powerful memoir by Allende's niece, the author Isabel Allende. The "Salvador Allende Reader" chronicles Allende's speeches from his stunning election in 1970 up to the heroic, final speech he gave as La Moneda Presidential Palace was being bombed. Allende's speeches here are also a testimony to what was happening in Chile during the three revolutionary years he was in power. We read Allende assuring his people that the fascist plots hatched by Chile's rich, upper classes in conjunction with the CIA would fail, in other powerful passages he stresses the need for education to advance a society and how racism is a plague. In 1971 Fidel Castro made a famous visit to Chile where he stayed for a record 27 days, here we get an interview between Allende and Castro where they both express solidarity and yet admit that Chile's revolution is it's own and not a copycat of Cuba. Allende's farewell speech to Castro is also a great call for unity between those in the Americas who wish to change things. One of the most impressive speeches is Allende's address to the United Nations where he declares that Chile is an independent nation that has the right to determine it's own future. The beauty of the work we find here is that it is not confined just to Chile, Allende's views and ideas about socialism and it's aims should be studied by all political students and socialists around the world. In fact, one can safely say that Venezuela is the direct the result of not just the movement begun by Cuba, but also by the striking example Chile showed the world as it peacefully, democratically elected a socialist to office. Salvador Allende has joined the mythical status of other revolutionary heroes such as Che Guevara, but his words still carry meaning and a potency scarcely found in the writings of long-dead Presidents.



2. This is a very telling, informative and stimulating collection about not only the life of El Compañero Presidente, but Chilean history in general, especially during the years 1970-1973. One comes to understand Allende not as a Napolean of an Orwellian novel but as the embodiment of democracy, human rights and compassion. You will read about and come to understand how Allende came to power (the world's first freely elected socialist president), as well as the true socialist, not communist, nature of the programs he tried to introduce into Chile. You will read about his friendship and re-establishment of relations with revolutoinary Cuba. Included also are some great discourses given before world bodies such as the U.N., decrying, well ahead of the time it has become accepted to do so, what he viewed as the budding New World Order. More than anything, you will get a feel for President Allende's commitment to democracy, human rights and progress for Chile, as evidenced by his last words via radio to the Chilean nation before his assassination: "I have faith in Chile and its destiny."

   His words and ideas resonate still in our day. Anyone who believes that Allende was a victim of U.S. policy of containment, of U.S. fears, "justified," during the Cold War of Red communism getting another foothold in Latin America, which is now inapplicable, need merely consider the recent coup attempt in Venezuela of Hugo Chavez, a president similar to Allende in his election, political inclinations and friendship with such world malcontents as Fidel. The fact that the U.S., besides El Salvador, was the only nation in the hemisphere to quickly endorse the new government of a rightist who, like Pinochet, suspended all legislative and judicial bodies speakd volumes. Essentially nothing has changed, which provides for the words of Allende to still be applicable and important 30 years later.

   One need merely visit Chile to get a feel for and understand El Compañero Presidente. He lives on in the memories and hearts of many. The tension is still enough that it is a topic better left alone. Allende was a man of the people. He strove to give back to the people. He worked to include the Mapuche, the marginalized of Chile. There was complete freedom of the press in Allende's Chile, as well as not one political prisoner. The situation was entirely the opposite under Pinochet. You will read this and more in this good collection.

   Perhaps the highlight of the Salvador Allende Reader is a word from Fidel Castro, meant as a possible warning to Allende, become the defining and stirring memorial to El Compañero Presidente. Castro told Allende he thought "he trusted in democracy probably a little too much."




3. The words of Allende are not only important and inspiring, but are also urgently needed in our current de-evolutionary perspective of gross-consumerism. The intro. gives us a nicely detailed view of Chile and its potentials w/ Allende as its first democratically elected Marxist president. This was not a regime which ignored human rights. It seemed headed toward a true form of Communism, which may have only become possible by A) A defensive posture unified by the workers and the poor in Chile (i.e. Castroist Cuba during the Bay Of Pigs) and B) A willingness to further the great advancements Allende enacted, to their glorious ends. It reveals the true reality of Socialism and its real possibility and potential. The true failures of Allende were directed more-so by the counter-revolutionary tactics of Chile's Capitalists & those in the US government, who would rather see a military takeover by Pinochet & the deaths of 10,000 Allende sympathizers, including Allende himself, rather than a hint of true justice in the world.

5 comments about An Eye for an Eye.

1. I am Jewish, and we do not blame Germans for the holocaust. We blame the leadership of Protestantism and the Catholic church since the killers were all baptized Christians. Blaming all Germans is as racist as Hitler blaming all Jews. As for those Jewish guards, I am sure most were void of any Jewish education since Lenin ended all formal religous education in 1918. But with idiot Nazi's calling you a Jew because of your last name, and all the ugly controversy, we forget that Stalin caused 'the holocaust and forced migration' of the Germans, just as he did of the Ukrainians!



2. I found "An Eye for an Eye" well researched & highly credible. Unfortunately, humans are imperfect. They are capable of horrific evil. Every nation, ethnic group, religious group etc. has its victims & its villains...without exception.
   
   Anyone who is familiar with Soviet History, should be aware of the Ukrainian Famine Genocide of 1932-1933. Stalin's right hand henchman & architect of this genocide was Lazar Moiseyevich Kaganovich. The bolsheviks eliminated up to 10 million innocent men, women & children, yet, one of the most evil tyrants of the 20th century, Kaganovich, remains unknown.
   
   In 1929, when the Soviet "concentration camps" became "corrective labor camps", the names most associated with establishing a regime of torture, murder & exploitation of slave labor are Henrikh Yagoda, Stanislaw Messing, Lazar Kogan, Matvei Berman, Iakov Rappaport & Naftaly Frenkel.
   Read Anne Applebaum's "Gulag" and Donald Rayfields "Stalin and his Hangmen - The Tyrant and Those Who Killed for Him".
   
   Solomon Milshtein, Lavrenti Beria's railways boss, arranged transportation (by rail & by truck) for all the Polish officers, civil servants & intelligentsia who were executed in the Katyn forest...over 20,000. The bolsheviks blamed it on the Nazis. A Nazi in his position & with his "deeds" would have been prosecuted. There was no Nueremberg for Milshtein, Kaganovich, Mendel Khatayevich, Lev Aronovich Shvartsman, Boris Rodos, Aleksandr Langfang and thousands like them.
   
   People who live in glass houses should not lob "collective guilt" stones at Germans, Latvians, Lithuanians, Estonians, Ukrainians...



3. Jews have said that God chose them to be the "light to the nations." Thus, they must act in an exemplary manner as God's emissaries. Their actual behavior, however, suggests that most Jews do not take this role to heart. In fact, by and large, when Jews have proclaimed themselves as "lights," they have forced their pronouncements onto peoples other than themselves. The Christian concept of mercy plays an important role in the western judicial system. By contrast, the modern day Jewish concept of justice is "targeted assassination" and get-them-before-they-get-us. The title of John Sack's book neatly summarizes the Jewish concept of justice: "An Eye for an Eye." Towards the end of World War II, German civilians and military alike caught in "liberated" areas of Poland were rounded up into concentration camps. Many believed that they would gain their freedom after the surrender. They were sadly mistaken, for millions of German, the hell continued for several long years after the surrender. Sack describes the Polish hell, which was run by Jews under the auspices of the Office of State Security. It is not entirely clear if there was an official policy to specifically hire Jews as camp commandants, interrogators and police, but the numbers Sack cites speak for themselves - the overwhelming majority of Office employees were Jews. The official Polish attitude towards Germans was to exact revenge, which was significantly magnified in the Jewish-run death camps. It may be difficult for the average person, versed in turn-the-other-cheek style justice to comprehend the behavior of the Jews towards their former captor. However, Jewish thinking is clearly illustrated in the beginning of chapter nine, in an exchange between a Jewish commandant and his prisoner, a German Catholic priest, which can be summarized as "there is a set of rules for us (Jews) and there is a separate set of rules for goyim (non-Jews)." It is the feeling of racial separateness and solidarity, among both religious and non-religious Jews, that define Jewish behavior towards the non-Jewish world. If one remembers this concept when reading "An Eye for an Eye," then the atrocious behaviors exhibited by the Jews make perfect sense. If, however, one clings to the democratic-egalitarian concepts of justice, then nothing in the book -- the torture, the purposeful negligence of prisoner welfare, the executions -- will make sense. Understanding the Jewish sense of uniqueness will explain their actions in the modern non-Jewish world as well.



4. Horrifying account of atrocities committed against German civilians by Jews in the aftermath of World War II. Long-suppressed story -- by a fearless Jewish author and noted journalist -- of how Jews of the Polish Communist "Office of State Security" killed and brutally mistreated many tens of thousands of German men, women and children in concentration camps and prisons in conquered German territories. This story was featured on a "60 Minutes" broadcast segment. Antony Polonsky, Prof. of E. European Jewish History at Brandeis University, comments on An Eye for An Eye: "... Extremely gripping and compelling account of the appalling events which accompanied the end of the war and the expulsion of the Germans ... impossible to put down ... a major contribution to our understanding



5. Great book...what I want to know is why can't the facist-loser whiners writing reviews on this site realize that anti-German atrocities were a direct result of GERMAN-PERPETRATED ATROCITIES? Do they think this happened in some kind of vacuum?Place responsibility where responsibility lies. One caused the other. Also, German atrocities were perpetrated by Germans wearing the uniform of Germany, these Jews who worked the Soviets weren't representing the Jewish people...they were only representing their individual grudges (i.e. seeing their whole family murdered). The Commies knew to use individual Jews because they knew Holocaust survivors would make great anti-Germans--duh!

5 comments about RADIO PRIEST: Charles Coughlin, The Father of Hate Radio.

1. The book fails to deal with Father Charles Edward Coughlin time and time again on the air carefully distinguishing between religious Jews who he sincerly respected and sought to partner with against Soviet Communism and the radicalized post-Judaic secular Jews who he rightly pointed out were disproportionately the vanguard of Soviet Bolshevism, constituting more than 65% of the original Bolshevik Central Committtee. Coughlin also pointed out the Bolsheviks were primarily bankrolled by American investment banker Jacob Schiff, a point accepted by all.
   
   Coughlin questioned why those who cried for the post Hapsburg Czechs in 1938 were oddly silent on the murder of more than twenty million (20,400,000)Russian, Byelorussian and Ukrainian Christians by the Soviets or the murder of thousands of priests, hundreds of nuns and 19 bishops in Loyalist Spain 1936-1939. He wondered why the US did nothing against the Masonic persecution of the Catholic Church 1925-1929 in Mexico which murdered people like Saint Father Miguel Pro who died crying "Viva Christo Rey!" to a largely silent American press.
   
   Coughlin questioned the dupilicity of no one caring for action about Catholic deaths in Spain, Mexico and Belarus. He called the Nazis evil "plunderbunds" and "un-Christian". He called the Communists "Anti-Christian". To call Father Coughlin a Nazi is a blood libel.



2. Without wishing to simply restate the themes of some of the fine reviews already posted, one cannot help but be saddened by the fact that this otherwise good biography is so tainted by "contemporarism." As one who has actually listened extensively to Coughlin's broadcasts, I am appalled that Warren would make any meaningful comparison between Father Charles and Rush, Sean, and other conservative talk-radio stars. It simply does not work. Coughlin always based his tirades upon the almost reactionary clericism then dominate within the Catholic Church and a form of "Americanism" that has far more to do with the doctrine of the Ku Klux Klan of the 1920s and 1930s (their hatred of Catholics aside)and the isolationism of the same period than with anything about modern conservatism. The differences are so apparent and profound and the author's efforts so transparent that the conclusion is unavoidable that Warren has chosen to use his study to promote a radical liberal agenda. This would seem to be either a function of scholarly corruption or of intellectual immaturity. Regrettably the editors and readers of this press did not intervene to keep the author on the straight and narrow of simply writing a good history. Actually, if comparisons must be made, Coughlin's spirit is far more evidenced in the strident tone and emotionalism of the active intolerance of the ACLU for religious expression/belief and the war by the NAACP upon the heritage and identity of an entire segment of the American people. Next time Donald, do it right!



3. The horrors of the Great Depression-the bank closings, the starvation, the joblessness, and the loss of faith in the government-drove millions to question fundamental assumptions about themselves and their country. Similar economic difficulties in Italy and Germany led to the rise of fascistic governments preaching nationalistic hatred. In the United States, however, figures arose touting the same solutions but ultimately failed to bring about a revolution. It was easy for men like Father Charles Coughlin to exploit the desperation welling up in every corner of the nation. Often this exploitation took the form of scapegoating minorities or "international bankers." As the Second World War began, the radio priest and many others on the far right began their long fade into obscurity, but their messages of hate lived on to inspire new generations of far right figures. Donald Warren's biography of Father Coughlin examines his rise and fall as well as the links between this controversial figure and present day radio talk shows.

   The author argues that conservative talk radio pundits owe an enormous debt of gratitude to Father Charles E. Coughlin. It was this priest, broadcasting out of his Shrine of the Little Flower in Royal Oak, Michigan during the 1920s and 1930s, who perfected the techniques used today to spread vitriol via the airwaves. Coughlin was the first to create "infotainment," the melding of news events with a bombastic delivery style aimed at capturing a large audience. He was wildly successful in this endeavor, attracting through his radio speeches and his magazine "Social Justice" an audience that numbered in the millions. The subject of Warren's book was the first public figure to obliterate the distinction between politics, religion, and mass media entertainment.

   Coughlin's life reads like a fantastic fable of the self-made man. Born in Canada to devoutly Catholic parents, his life was unremarkable until he decided to become a priest and entered the Basilian Order after college. This Catholic sect opposed banking, usury, and other supposed ills of an industrialized society. Coughlin's later positions on the economic woes caused by the Great Depression stemmed largely from the views he learned from the Basilians. In the meantime, he moved to the United States to become a diocesan priest in Michigan. Placed in charge of a small Catholic church in Royal Oak, the young priest eventually took to the airwaves as a way to raise funds for the construction of a new church building that would carry the name the Shrine of the Little Flower. The first broadcasts, intended for children, consisted of simple Christian teachings. Eventually, Coughlin's vocal abilities and an increasing willingness to criticize public figures led to a huge response from the public. From his first lecture attacking Norman Thomas, he soon moved on to excoriating President Herbert Hoover for the government's failure to alleviate the worst aspects of the depression. Money poured in from adoring listeners, and Charles Coughlin was on his way to fame and fortune.

   The priest originally endorsed Franklin Roosevelt as the panacea America needed to cure its misfortunes. After the New York politician captured the White House, Coughlin often went to Washington to advise the new president on economic matters. New Deal officials, however, were suspicious of the radio priest and his ideas. The eventual falling out with Roosevelt led to the formation of the Union party in 1936. Led by Coughlin, Gerald L.K. Smith, and Francis Townsend, this political attempt to unseat the president by running William Lemke of North Dakota as a presidential candidate failed miserably. The priest, embittered by his loss, began to move to the far right by advocating decidedly pro-Axis viewpoints. The entry of America into the Second World War caused further difficulties: the government banned the "Social Justice" newsletter from the mails as seditious materials, threatened to file charges against the priest, and put pressure on the Catholic Church to force his retirement from the airwaves. Barred from his former avenues of influence and power, Charles Coughlin drifted into obscurity. He died in 1979.

   Warren's attempt to tie Coughlin to modern day conservative radio talk shows is amazingly forced. It's true that there are some shared aspects here, but there are more differences. The book fails to take into account how much America has changed between the 1920s and 1930s and the 1990s. The Great Depression was an event unparalleled in the history of the country, a time when unemployment rising to unheard of levels led to the emergence of demagogues who promised simple solutions for the nation's ills. No similar comparison can be made for the 1990s; a time of unparalleled prosperity thanks to the Internet boom saw unemployment sink to record lows. The only thing remotely the same during these two disparate periods was a controversial democratic president in the White House.

   Moreover, the conservative talk show hosts of today never engage in the blatant blather Father Coughlin indulged in; it's simply unacceptable to the American public of today to blame minorities for controlling the banking system or being the guiding hand behind world communism. Warren seems to think there is a comparison, citing a talk radio listener's on-air comment in the 1990s about blacks. But that is a listener airing a viewpoint not shared by the host of the program, very different from Coughlin in the late 1930s. Donald Warren's "Radio Priest: Charles Coughlin, The Father of Hate Radio," is a capable book when it describes the biographical details of an influential figure in American social and political events of the 1920s and 1930s. Unfortunately, it neither proves its central thesis nor sheds new light on one of America's premier demagogues.




4. "Radio Priest" is meant to remind people the author fears have both forgotten Father Charles Coughlin and may be unwisely underestimating those eager to apply his brand of media manipulation in the age of the internet. From the depths of the depression until shortly after America's entry into WWII, Coughlin, a Detroit Priest had become a political force of nature. Using his radio show and "Social Justice" his newspaper, he spread his message across the nation - a message that grew progressively overt in anti-Semitism and Facist advocacy. With the severity of the depression destroying lives across the world, the time was ripe for many to question democracy - as they had across the world, the popularity of socialism and fascism flourished across America. Though many figures grew out of the clash of these movements, Coughlin stood out - mostly because his position as a priest but mostly because of the eloquence with which he gave his fans the message they wanted to hear. He even possessed his own trademark accent, with its distinctive rolling rrr's. Coughlin attacked banking interests and polticians - codewords for the jews and those they were thought to have bought. Confronted with growing reports of Germany's anti-Semitic repression, he claimed sympathy for the jews, but attributed Germany's conduct to a natural response to Jewish Bolshevism. Ostensibly adhering to a religion which had suffered religious intolerance, Coughlin adopted the same penchant for mass hysteria as those who had victimized other Catholics.

   Though war with fascism forced him into a sort of hiatus, Coughlin's decline had actually begun with the 1936 Presidential Elections. Unsatisfied with GOP front-runner Alf Landon, and seized by an outright hatred for FDR, Coughlin campaigned fiercely for the Social Justice candidate, William Lemke. Those left unfulfilled by FDR and unimpressed with Landon, flocked to Coughlin and his allies. Among them, Francis Townsend seemed more dignified, GLK Smith had more energy and Huey Long had more savvy, but Coughlin possessed something of the qualities of all three. Though Coughlin had the power, he displayed little interest in using it for even his idea of a greater good, and the social justice ticket ballot was dwarfed even by Landon's showing. By then, Long was dead by an assassin's bullet, and his political machine in Louisiana collapsed under the weight of its own corruption. Emboldened by his landslide, FDR embarked on a strategy to fast-track the New Deal with legislation designed to end run a hostile supreme court and thinly veiled threats to pack the high court if the first idea didn't work out. Coughlin, on the other hand, now embittered with politics, lost much of his dignified veneer. Both in his own tone and those of his followers, Coughlin became more closely identified with all that was bigoted in domestic fascism. By 1940, Coughlin had been sufficiently cut down to manageable size for his own church's hierarchy, and the Bishops silenced him. The threat of prosecution for sedition further kept him in line.

   Doanld Warren argues persuasively that Coughlin's defeats - both in 1936 and when war broke out against those he had championed - were far from certain. Coughlin and others had long fed anti-Semitic hysteria in their warnings against the war. When the severity of the war was realized, hysteria against the Jews could have exploded in Coughlin's favor. Warren even cites outbreaks of anti-Jewish violence in American cities. Further, despite the consent decree that immunized Coughlin in return for his silence, the radio priest remained active in using the mail system to search for a new generation of adherents among wartime servicemen. Warren highlights the depths of anti-Semitism in wartime America, but doesn't do the same for the horrific conditions of the depression - conditions that made us ripe for Coughlin and his followers. Also, he loses his focus after 1936, when Coughlin and company become more outright in their bigotry. Lastly, Warren frequently telegraphs his own sentiments against more modern day Coughlins like Pat Robertson and the Moral Majority. Whether today's right wing approximates that of 1936 America is a worthy subject, but one that Warren's asides seem to cursorily accept as true - an indisputable yardstick of conservative religious bigotry. Worse, it telegraphs the author's intention to write for a narrow readership - something Coughlin was doubtless famous for, though admittedly on a higher scale. These faults wouldn't matter if "Radio Priest" wasn't already a compelling book. Luckily, the book is not only compelling, but substantive enough to rise above what's wrong with it as well.




5. This is an excellent biography of one of the most appalling figures in recent American history. Father Coughlin was a hatemonger, an anti-Semite of tremendous proportions, and often a liar. That ANYONE could believe him to be worthy of praise, let alone "the sort of priest we need more of," is a sad, sad commentary on America.

   It is hard to believe that Father Coughlin was allowed to stay on the air and spew his poison for as long as he did. I wonder what he would have thought of the death camps? Or would he have found a way to deny the fruit of his hateful, unchristian ravings?

5 comments about I Didn't Do It for You: How the World Betrayed a Small African Nation.

1. What a book! Shall I call it a novel? For me it read like a suspensful novel rather than an ordinary narrative about an obscure Afrcan nation.I commend the young writer for her lucid style and insightful observation The narrative for the story takes place mainly in the Sahle Mountains and the main characters are the Eritrean fighters and the other charcters- the villains are the Ethiopian Army, the Italains, the British, the Russians, The Americans, last but not least the UN.Like in a good novel, at the end the protagonists- the heroes or the winners are the Eritreans



2. I am from Ogaden, the Somali region still occupied by Ethiopia, and Eritrea's tortured history is pretty similar to ours.
   
   When I bought the book, I Didn't Do It For You, and read John Le carre's powerful commendation on the cover, I took his comments with a grain of salt, thinking he was putting a good word for a colleague. However as I delved into the book, I was surprised to find every laudatory remark made by Le Carre got instant affirmation from my own mind!
   
   This book is very informative and intensely honest. The author's tone is restrained and her style is modest. She avoids polemics because she obviously knows indulging in any propaganda variety tends to undermine one's credibility.
   
   Michela is sympathetic to the Eritreans. However she makes it clear, in her own austere way, that, Issayas, the Eritrean leader and his dictatorial tendencies, has squandered the fruit of the Eritrean struggle, the dream of its people, and the goodwill of Eritrea's friends throughout the world, and thereby rendered the once promising young republic into just another African heartbreak!
   
   Unlike many western authors and scholars who, when writing about the developing countries, tend to sanitize facts to protect the image of their own mother countries, Michela Wrong simply exposes the unpleasant facts for everyone to see. Of the three European countries(The French, Italians, and the British) that colonized the Horn of Africa, the British had been the worst. As a Somali, I know the British were pitifully stingy and penny pinching: for the 75 years they colonized Somaliland, for instance, they built or invested in it practically next to nothing, whereas the Italians built and invested in Eritrea all the machines, factories, and infrastructure, including state of the art railway system, and all the building blocks necessary for a modern state in the first part of the 20th century.
   
   However one of the explosive segments in this book is the part that exposes and gives British colonialist a real black eye, not because of their stinginess and selfishness, but because of their unabashed shamelessness of looting and stealing all the factories and machines and the modern equipment, including rail way wagons and wires that the Italians invested in Eritrea! Not only that, but the British also looted almost all the factories and machines that the Italians built in Ethiopia during its brief occupation of Ethiopia. That is, Ethiopia, the very country the British were supposed to be liberating!
   
   In light of these shocking facts about British proclivity for looting, stealing and pillaging, I was left wondering how many factories and machines and modern equipment the British forces looted from Southern Somalia when they defeated the Italians and occupied Southern Somalia in 1941?
   
   It is the exposure of these raw, unsanitized facts about the nature, greed and the attitudes of European colonialists that sets Michela Wrong apart from many western authors and scholars!
   
   My only wish is that she would, one day, be interested in the plight of the Somalis of Ogaden, who have been occupied, betrayed, and subjugated by none other than the very authors of Eritrea's horrendous history: the Italians, the British and the Abyssinians. Since she already extensively researched about history of both Eritrea and Ethiopia, writing about Ogaden which is still occupied by Ethiopia would be relatively easy.
   
   Alternatively, if I may digress, she could write about the cause of the Somali people in the horn of Africa. The Somalis have the misfortune of being the only people divided and dismembered into five limbs and each limb grabbed and swallowed by a different colonial master. And the tragic consequences of that dismemberment has been the complete collapse of the Somali Republic. Contrary to the popular notion, the principal factor responsible for the collapse of the Somali Republic in 1991 was the Ogaden war of 1977 and its consequences. The dictatorial rule of former President Siyad Barre, the epidemic of Qaat, and the curse of clanism were merely contribuiting factors. Theoratically, If Somalia stayed out of Ogaden, it could have remained peaceful, relatively prosperous, and strong. But Somalia could never have stayed out of Ogaden for very long. And if it didn't invade Ogaden in 1977, it could have invaded in 1987, or 1997, or 2027! And the reason is that the limbs of the same body tend to gravitate into the same direction! And every time Somalia mastered enough strength it will do everything in her power to regain its dismembered limbs, be it NFD or Ogaden. That is why the Horn of Africa will never see peace or stability so long the dismembered limbs of the Somali nation continue crying for one another.
   
   Certain peoples with numeric superiority such as Arabs, for instance, may withstand or whither division and dismemberment. However Somalia with a small country and smaller people cannot. As Farah Omaar, the well known Somali patriot said long ago, "My country is smaller than to be divided; my people are frailer than to be enslaved!"
   
   Now Somalia hit rock bottom. And because of its occupation of Ogaden and invasion of Somalia, Ethiopia is going to sink into a black hole! And Kenya will be next! And the vicious cycle for peoples of the Horn of Africa will continue unabated. Therefore for those who care about world peace, the most productive and cost-effective endeavor to restoring peace into this troubled region is to work for the reunification of the dismembered limbs of the Somali nation. But so long that objective is either neglected, ignored, or overlooked, the key to peace and stability in the Horn will be very difficult to locate.
   
   With her talent, courage, and honesty, Michela Wrong can take up this challenging issue, uncover the sad facts that the British and other western scholars have been sanitizing and glossing over for decades, and produce a groundbreaking must-read book for anyone interested in the Horn of Africa, and thereby not only make a significant contribution to enlightening people around the world, but also perhaps help finding a lasting solution for the never ending tragedy of the peoples of the Horn of Africa.
   
   To come back to this book, I Didn't Do It For You is impressive. And it is worth every penny and every minute of one's time.
   
   Mohamed Heebaan



3. This is in some ways a good and necessary book. It spotlights a nation and a set of problems that most of the world doesn't pay much attention to. But there is a problem. Michela Wrong is too close to the subject and her emotional attachment at times results in the book not being as objective or as good as it might have been. In particular, she seems to have been far too close to Eritrean rebel groups and their leaders.
   
   Eritrea's history isn't about "betrayal". Its about the same problems that most African nations have faced. Rather than face the fact that the problems of Eritrea today are largely self-inflicted wounds, she falls back into blaming colonialism and cold-war politics in really unconvincing ways.
   
   In her coverage of Italian colonial rule, she confuses events in Eritrea with those in Ethiopia. She is also willing to judge Italy to a far higher standard than she applies to the pre or post-independence governments of both countries. She is also more than a little unwilling to understand the role that Italy played in creating Eritrea.
   
   The lowest point in the book is her coverage of Britain's wartime rule of Eritrea. She advances a theory that the british were racist than the italians because their rule produced fewer multiracial children. Somehow she sees superior morality in men who promoted widespread prostitution and produced children which they abandoned. It makes no sense to me. Her logic is also full of wrong assumptions about the number of British in the country and the nature of the occupation.
   
   She also isn't very good about the details of the war. The war in East Africa and in particular the victory at Keren was not a British victory, but a victory of the British Indian Army. Somehow she misses the basic fact that much of the army that conquered and occupied East Africa was Inidian.
   
   The British wanted out of Eritrea and got out of it seven years after the war ended (1952). As they got out, the issue of Ethiopia's historic and economic claims to Eritrea came to the surface. Wrong wishes to blame the united nations for betraying the people of Eritrea. But its not that simple. Eritrea's national identity has no particular good historical basis and arises mostly from the period of Italian rule and the money Italy spent on their colony. Furthermore, its independence results in two weak states in East Africa rather than one. Eritrea and Ethiopia need each other. Economically, independence is a disaster for both.
   
   The war for Eritrea's independence was a pointless waste of lives for everyone involved. Wrong wishes to see it as a justified noble struggle for "freedom", but as events since independence have proved, it was anything but that.
   
   After the overthrow of the Ethiopian government in 1976, horrible things were done in Eritrea and the author gets that part of the story right. Then she goes on to show the bright future Eritrea had before it in 1993 at independence and how everything went so terribly wrong.
   
   But she can't bring herself to hold the right people accountable. She can't bring herself to admit that the rebels she had admired so much once in power turned to be little better than a criminal gang. A gang that destroyed the economy of the country, introduced a dictatorship and then threw the country into a disasterous war with Ethiopia. The world didn't do these things. The world's "betrayal" didn't make these decisions. It was the rebel "freedom fighters" who are responsible.
   
   And thats the fatal flaw in the book. The author wants to give critiques of colonialism and the UN from on high. But the truth is that the country's problems are not a matter of "I didn't do it for you", they are "we did it to ourselves".
   
   The end result of the great "struggle" for Eritrean independence has been an economic disaster for both Ethiopia and Eritrea. The political result is a government running Eritrea that is as bad (or worse) than what the author claims were the "repressive" Ethiopian governments of the 1950s and 1960s. Eritrea's government budget is wasted in preparations for more war with Ethiopia. The country is trapped in a situation where things will never get better. Its not a situation that outsiders should be credited or blamed for.
   
   When the author says things like: "the national character traits forged during a century of colonial and superpower exploitation were about to blow up in Eritrea's face.", she in engaging in massive political self-deception. Her (dated) anti-colonial/anti-imperialism rhetoric leads her to excuse every bad decision made by an African as someone elses fault.
   
   She also goes out of her way to make the American soldiers stationed in Ethiopia in the past look like they were exceptionally bad. Having worked and travelled in Africa, she must know how soldiers behave in most countries. Go to the area around any military base (including those on American soil) and you will find all sorts of unpleasent things going on. I'm not trying to excuse the behavior of anyone, but the selective moral outrage in the book is of little value to anyone.
   
   I wanted to like this book and I want to see the author write more books about Africa. But she needs to put her political ideology to the side and report on Africa as it is. She did a far better job in "In the footsteps of Mr. Kurtz" than she did in this book.



4. If you are an Eritrean and you are often at loss for words ( like me) to explain where, why, who, where and what of this small nation,
   say no more! Buy and give each of your audiences a copy of this book.
   
   Michela Wrong plainly expounds the intricacies of one of the longest wars in Africa, making this book to be exceptionally one of the best books ever written that comprehensibly states the Truth, The Whole Truth, Nothing but the Truth about the smallest nation in the world.



5. I read this book because one of my colleagues knows the writer. I wanted to know more about different countries throughout Africa and he suggested I read this and vouched the information was very accurate. I found the book to be 100% fascinating. I was intrigued by the way the Ethiopians and the rest of the world treated Eritrea. The terrible things the Eritreans had to endure not only from the Ethiopians but the British and the Italians. It so sad that all this went one with mere mentions of it throughout the world because no one cared enough. I would recommend this book to anyone who is interested in history on Africa.

2 comments about Stalin's Russia (Reading History).

1. Chris Ward provides a well structured, useful text book that should be welcome to teachers of modern Russian history. His book sets an example of historical writing that currently seems especially serviceable to the field of Stalinism studies. Ward neither presents nor analyzes entirely new data. Nor does he develop a truly novel interpretation of Stalinism. His study essentially constitutes a long review essay on the literature on Stalinism, and an extensive general introduction to the field. This determines his structuring of the book.
   The chapters do not follow an exclusively chronological line, but refer to the issues of contention and various sub debates in Soviet studies. After an outline, in the introduction, of the changes in the source base of Stalinism studies in pre- and post glasnost Russia, the chapters discuss:
   - various explanations of the rise of Stalin, 1917 29 (ch. 1);
   - conflicting assessments of the industrialization campaign,1924 41 (ch. 2);
   - contending accounts of the reasons for and results of the collectivization drive, 1927 41 (ch. 3);
   - diverging views on the origins and nature of the purges, 1928 41 (ch. 4);
   - different evaluations of the sources, successes and failures of Stalinist foreign policy, 1922 41 (ch. 5);
   - opposing appraisals of the war period and late Stalinism, 1941 53 (ch. 6); and
   - competing interpretations of the role of, and changes in, Soviet culture and society during Stalin's rule, 1928 53 (ch. 7).
   The conclusion "History and Stalin's Russia" juxtaposes the consequences of different historiographical approaches for understanding the Stalinist period. It finally gives an outlook where future research into Stalinism may and should go.
   The chapters are uniformly structured into sections called "Narrative," "Interpretations," "Evaluations" and "Suggestions for further reading". The first section links the crucial dates, events, names and numbers; the following two discuss diverging conceptualizations and explanations of the data. The section "Interpretations" reconstructs the respective debate in the - primarily academic English-language - literature. In "Evaluations," Ward criticizes the various approaches and presents his own - sometimes reconciling, sometimes partisan - solutions. In "Suggestion for further reading," Ward lists selected, important books and articles, and summarizes their content or locates them within the debates. The book is thus as much devoted to the historiography of Stalinism as to the phenomenon itself. It is a guide book to the literature, as much as a textbook, on Stalinism.



2. Although the preface says that this book was designed for undergraduates, it is not. It was designed for Chris Ward. The author tends to bypass any explaination of who and what historical figures and organizations were. Just one example: What exactly the Checka was, although Ward mentions it, is never explained at all. The racing "narrative" jumps around from one factoid to another. There is no sense of continutity. I was baffled as to what Ward's point was at the end of the first chapter and found myself more confused about Stalinism than before.

   Even more, Ward's use of an overwhelming amount of tangential footnotes is irritating at best and only serves to confuse the reader at worst. Each chapter is arbitrarily and very post-modernly divided into a "narrative" section, an "interpretations" section and an "explainations" section.

   I wanted to send Ward off to a gulag after reading this.

5 comments about Fighting Bob La Follette: The Righteous Reformer.

1. Nancy C. Unger's "Fighting Bob La Follette - The Righteous Reformer" makes a timely and valuable contribution to the biographical record of one of America's greatest Senators and Statesmen. Unger's work easily stands on its own among other great biographies of Senator La Follette, including Belle Case and Fola La Follette's two-volume "Robert M. La Follette" and David Thelen's "The Early Life of Robert M. La Follette 1855 - 1884," among others. A refreshing reminder of what is possible when a politician becomes a Statesman and fights for what is right for all Americans. The book also provides a valid and insightful analysis of the strong influence La Follette's mother, extended family, and wife had on the development of his character, and on the values and motivation which compelled La Follette to an extraordinarily effective and selfless career in public service. America is long overdue for another such beneficent "shaper of democracy," and this book will provide effective food for thought for any true patriot willing to lay down his life for the good of his country. An important book, inspiring, and enjoyable.



2. I found Dr. Unger's book on Bob LaFollette to be insightful and thorough. In a provocative way, the author challenges some of the common beliefs about LaFollette, and creates a new awareness of his contributions to political history.



3. Nancy Unger has written an outstanding and insightful biography of one of turn-of-the-century America's most influential political figures. Indeed, it is the first full-scale biography of Robert M. La Follette of Wisconsin. For anyone seeking to understand the Progressive Era this book is a must read, for Unger's subject was at the center of the defining reform struggles of the age - from women's rights and corporate regulation, to labor and political reform. Drawing upon a vast collection of private papers and primary sources, Unger brings to life not only the public persona of "Fighting Bob" but also the private La Follette that few people know about. We learn, for example, how his early life struggles shaped his personality (for good and for ill), as well as how much he relied upon his wife, suffragist and reformer Belle Case La Follette, for advice and strength. Written in a lively yet balanced style, this book greatly adds to our knowledge of a complex and fascinating man and era.



4. This is an excellent biography of a most worthy subject. Nancy Unger provides readers with a vivid and often entertaining account of one of the most important American political figures of the early twentieth century. Crucial to Unger's effectiveness is her dedication to balanced histocial writing. Her portrayal of La Follette is multifacted. It is political and personal. La Follette comes to life for the reader, not only enroute to his many political successes but also amid his failures and personal shortcomings. Unger's lauditory praise of her subject is deserving and her sharp criticisms are valid and substantiated. La Follette was an influential and flawed champion of democacy and social equity, and interested readers will thoroughly enjoy this insightful retelling of his life story.



5. As a public library director with a special interest in the Progressive era, I found Fighting Bob LaFollette by Unger exactly what I seek in history writing. It has the strengths of all solid history in its sources but the author draws on other fields, in particular medicine, to broaden our understanding.

   More than a century ago, LaFollette said "We are one people" and recognized the importance of minority groups shaping their own future. Before the mass media and big money took over political campaigns, Progressive reformers focused on the needs of average people. In three-hour speeches, LaFollette fought for what was needed and was the right thing for the nation to do. The author's direct and clear prose brings the reformer and the times to life. We can learn much from the book for our time.

2 comments about Samuel Adams: America's Revolutionary Politician (American Profiles).

1. Samuel Adams comes alive in John K. Alexander's enthralling biography of the pioneer of American political warfare.
   
   Separating myth (that Adams operated by mob rule) from reality, Alexander carefully shows how the Boston patriot - steeped in the ancient classics, John Locke and an abiding Christian faith - combined reason, rhetoric, political organization and perseverence to achieve the goal he arguably founded of American independence.
   
   Alexander's book chronicles how Adams pioneered modern political agitprop by organizing the Committees of Correspondence to link Massachusetts towns, sympathizers in Europe and ultimately all the 13 colonies in a communications underground. It describes Adams' masterful political takeovers of town and colonial legislatures, hugely successful political theater, economic warfare, social stigmatization of enemy collaborators, and the creation of extralegal parallel institutions that usurped political power from the crown and empowered the common citizen.
   
   Adams is an underappreciated Founding Father: he helped pen the Declaration of Independence, served on the Constitutional convention and almost singlehandedly wrote the original language of much of the Bill of Rights. Alexander acknowledges Adams' human flaws while demonstrating how the Boston revolutionary remained true to his beliefs for half a century without seeking personal profit or aggrandizement.
   
   The book is unfortunately lacking in footnotes and it paraphrases Adams more than it quotes him, though it contains a substantial bibliographical essay.
   
   Alexander has authored an important biography of the founder of American political warfare. He is one of the few Adams scholars who gets the nuances about Samuel's political warfare genius. In reading the book, one understands Thomas Jefferson's emphatic comment that, if anyone was the helmsman of the American Revolution, "Samuel Adams was the man."



2. This biography focuses on the political life of Samuel Adams and his key role in leading Massachusetts to rebel against Britain to protect its liberties. Little is written about Adams' personal or family life and the coverage of his participation in the Continental Congresses is also slim, apparently due to a lack of sources, since Adams destroyed most of his correspondence and Congressional deliberations were secret. There are issues that I wished would have been discussed in more detail, e.g. the author has only a limited discussion of Adams' alleged role in replacing Washington as commander-in-chief (apparently a canard spread by his enemies).
   
   The author explains well the development and sources of Adams' political philosophy and how it guided his actions before, during, and after the Revolution.
   
   The prose is well-written with many short quotations from Adams. Overall, an informative and fairly interesting biography of a key and often overlooked figure of the American Revolution.

4 comments about Patrick Kennedy: The Rise to Power (Real Politics in America Series).

1. As a New Englander who is attending school in Rhode Island, I had hoped that this book would provide me with some interesting information on a little-understood political figure making a quite a rise through the ranks of the Democratic Party.

   Boy, did I pick the wrong book.

   First of all, West has no writing ability whatsoever. His vulgar, crass style is not appreciated and is wholly inappropriate. Frequently laughable, his "prose" disqualifies himself as any sort of an expert on the subject matter.

   Second, the book is so fiercely partisan that it is factually incorrect throughout. It appears to this reader that West has little understanding of political issues and even less of how to explain political matters to an audience. This book was little more than preaching to the way-outside-the-mainstream radical leftist crowd. As a political independent, this book was too polarizing to be informative.

   Third, there are many things Patrick Kennedy is and an angel is not one of them. How anyone can pretend that Kennedy's long history of reckless behavior is either a coincidence or is otherwise not his fault is foolishly naive. I think there has to come a point where West is going to have to accept that Patrick Kennedy might not be the unfortunate saint he believes him to be.

   Bottom line: This was the worst book I have ever read. Where I had hoped to find intelligent, insightful commentary, I found a book that was vulgar and ridiculous with a gaping hole where integrity should be. I cannot imagine a publisher actually deciding to publish this book and I wish Mr. West would learn some manners and writing skills. Note to West: Partisan cheap shots do not equal quality writing outside of Brown University.




2. I was initially alarmed at the slender length of the book, and had braced myself for choppy reading and hurried accounts. I was glad I kept an open mind, because this book easily surpased all of my content expectations.

   West neither massacres nor coddles his subject, and I could actually identify with some of Kennedy's emotions and struggles to define himself. As a college student, I was very impressed that he was in the legislature while finishing up his degree---no easy feat in a state of any size. His personal health led him to identify with the disadvantaged and disempowered.

   Tracing his childhood and young adulthood, West shows how the "un-Kennedy" Kennedy emerged to become the chair of the DCCC. For a public figure, Kennedy has managed to keep his life largely private and scandal free. He does not engage in the life style that has created headlines for so many other members of the family.

   Although I am more partial to his father's voting record, I respect the niche Kennedy carved out on his own terms and was impressed with the many different things he had accomplished. This book is especially inspirational for young democratic politicians.




3. This book provides a highly readable account of the Kennedy's political operation. Generally sympathetic to the family, but hard-hitting at times. Good stories from people who have worked for the Kennedys as well as those who have opposed them. The average person would like this book!



4. I expected the worst and was pleasantly surprised to get the best. This book by Prof. West is a fair, in-depth and thoughtful account of a young "celebrity" politician who challenged himself to succeed and so far is doing a pretty good job at it, according to Prof. West. The book gives an in-depth look at the early struggles of Patrick Kennedy, son of the famous Senator Ted Kennedy (and his likeable mom, Joan) and heir to the Kennedy fame. It chronicles the family and public life of this young man's rise to poltical power (number 5 Democrat in the House of Representatives yet he is only in his early 30's).

   What I liked most about this book is that it was not a typical knee-jerk analysis of the Kennedy's and I felt truly showed Patrick Kennedy as a human being, committed public servant and rising star. Hats off to Prof. West for his research, his fair analysis, and his ability to tell a good story.