• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Book Folder
The Manipulated Mind: Brainwashing, Conditioning and Indoctrination
by Denise Winn

About the Author
Denise Winn is a British journalist specializing in psychology and medicine. She is a former editor of the UK edition of Psychology Today and has written for national newspapers magazines in Britain for over 20 years. She is author of 11 other books on psychological and medical topics and is currently also editor of The Therapist

Excerpted from The Manipulated Mind : Brainwashing, Conditioning and Indoctrination by Denise Winn. Copyright © 1984. Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved
Excerpted from "The Magic Monastery: Analogical and Action Philosophy of the Middle East and Central Asia" by Idries Shah. Copyright 1972, 1981 by The Estate of Idries Shah. Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
DELUSION A would-be disciple said to a sage: 'I have been listening to you for days now, condemning attitudes and ideas, and even conduct, which are not mine and never have been. What is the purpose of this?' The sage said: 'The purpose of it is that you should, at some point,... read more --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

Book Description
Ever since American prisoners of war in Korea suddenly switched sides to the Communist cause, the concept of brainwashing has continued to fascinate and confuse.

Is it really possible to force any thinking person to act in a way completely alien to his character? What makes so-called brainwashing so different from the equally insidious effects of indoctrination and conditioning, or even advertising and education?

Research findings from psychology show that brainwashing is not a special subversive technique; it is the clever manipulation of unrealized influences that operate in all our lives.

This book, by breaking down so-called brainwashing to its individual elements, shows how social conditioning, need for approval, emotional dependency and much else that we are unaware of, prevent us from being as self-directed as we think; and, conversely, which human traits make us the least susceptible to subtle influence.

See all editorial reviews...

Spotlight Reviews (What's this?)
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
9 of 9 people found the following review helpful:

Good overview, nothing else, April 11, 2003
Reviewer: mouffetard (see more about me) from Elmont, NY United States
I am interested in mind control and this came recommended as a good book on the subject. However this book is one long history of research into mind control. The book begins with a general description of the first case of actual mind control as performed on American POW's in Korea, where many were so brainwashed that they openly embraced their captors and communism. It was at this point, the author claims, that it was realized that mind control could occur.

It is from this watershed event, and the data collected therefrom, that all current study of brainwashing and mind control stem. The author then surveys the Pavlov dog experiments, animal research, various large scale experiments involving humans where unbelievable counter intuitive results occur. This book is worth its price just to read about these studies into things like 'the gun effect' where people were actually mroe aggressive to an armed motorist getting stuck on a highway then to an unarmed one.

All in all, this is a general study, somewhat outdated, and is written from English points of view. This is a book you can start with, and then use its extensive bibliography to explore areas that interest you more closely.

Was this review helpful to you?

All Customer Reviews
Average Customer Review:
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.

9 of 20 people found the following review helpful:

Very interesting....., August 6, 2002
Reviewer: A reader from Los Angeles
HOWEVER, FOR A VISCERAL READ and insider's account, I suggest Deborah Layton's memoir, SEDUCTIVE POISON> It was required reading in my son's Psychology course at Stanford University and at his urging I picked it up. Besides being eloquent the story transported me into the world of idealism, innocent delusion and cults. What Layton brings to this subject / discussion is the Universality of it all. She's the quintessential "girl next door," someone you recognize as "your own", likeable, attractive, searching for meaning in her life. She is not unlike any of us at that age and time-the 60's. Layton's tale reminded me that it could happen to the brightest and best of us. Her experience is not unlike that of Europeans with Hitler's rise to power in the equally turbulent 1930 and 40's. Hitler had a gradual infatuation with putting respect and power back into the hands of Germany. Jim Jones, too, promised his flock that they would have more power over their lives if they followed him to South America. Both charismatic men started out respected and supported by politicians. When it was over the world cried, "How could they have allowed this to happen?" It does! And will! until we understand the phenomenon and admit that we, too, have been lured, seduced, fooled, misguided and ill-informed at various times in our lives. Layton's experience, though extreme IS UNIVERSAL.

Was this review helpful to you?

8 of 9 people found the following review helpful:

excellent book!, May 11, 2001
Reviewer: csteven9 from Garden City, MI United States
I thought this book did a good job of conveying the info in a rational manner without overhyping the findings. I would recommend Sargents book "the battle for the mind" also, to those who are interested.

Was this review helpful to you?

9 of 11 people found the following review helpful:

Outstanding! Rational and Clear - a must read about Media, August 14, 2000
Reviewer: A reader from Hawaii
A very clear and well written study of the various means that the media uses to manipulate and control the mass 'thinking' and behavior. I read the original hardcover (used) and now that there is an updated paperback I am ordering it. Very rational investigation by a media reporter, well cited and referenced and a pleasant eye-opening reading. Should be required reading for all poly sci, media, and psych majors.

Was this review helpful to you?

17 of 43 people found the following review helpful:

Nice, June 23, 2000
Reviewer: Greg M. Wilson from Missouri
This is a great book, now I will use it to take over the world.
Propaganda and Persuasion
by Garth Jowett, Victoria O'Donnell, Garth S. Jowett

From Book News, Inc.
An updated and expanded (1st ed., 1986) overview of the history of propaganda as well as a review of the social scientific research on its effects and an examination of its applications. Annotation copyright Book News, Inc. Portland, Or. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

Book Description
The Third Edition of this successful book has been revised, updated and expanded, building on the book's excellence. The book covers: an explanation of what propoganda is, its history, media and developing audiences, theory and research, and the use of propoganda in psychological warfare. Original methods of propoganda analysis are presented, there are new and revised case studies and a process model that depicts how propoganda works in modern society. This book provides students and scholars with a cogent, applicable approach to the study of persuasion and propoganda. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

All Customer Reviews
Average Customer Review:
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.

0 of 3 people found the following review helpful:

Is it ABOUT propaganda, or IS IT propaganda?, March 25, 2004
Reviewer: A reader from Phoenix, AZ, USA
I was looking forward to a fair and unbiased book about propaganda, so was saddened to see this hope dashed by chapter 3. At this point, several books by conservative authors like Limbaugh, Bennett, and Bloom are referenced, and the authors start using a lot of "quotes" when referring to these authors--of the sort you use when you want to indicate that a thought is silly or wrongheaded. The authors even comment on individuals who make time to "read" these polemical books (their use of quotes indicating that the works aren't readworthy--presumably because they're conservative). I noticed that the discussion only treated conservative icons and books as sources of propaganda in this discussion. Might I take the time to remind authors Jowett & O'Donnell that many liberal authors, such as Franken, Moore, Dubose, Hightower, Conason, and a host of others, exist on the far left--shouldn't these be included in a balanced list of polemical authors? In the next edition of this book, I hope the authors attept more balance in examining a topic that demands fairness. Jowett and O'Donnell might want to include "books" by liberal "authors" as examples of propganda, too, so that readers don't get the wrongheaded impression this book is not just ABOUT propaganda, it is also a SOURCE of propaganda. One shouldn't get the impression that the authors have liberal political biases that are leaking through the page. It's hard to take the authors of this topic seriously if they can't camouflage their own desire to influence opinion.

Was this review helpful to you?

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:

Historical Perspective, November 8, 2003
Reviewer: William G. Covington, Jr. PhD (see more about me) from Edinboro, Pennsylvania
What campaigns have effectively changed public opinions over the years and how were they propagated? This book provides some answers as it traces such movements.

The book opens with a discussion on the differences between propaganda and persuasion. It takes up from there in the second chapter with a look at propaganda's early use in the Church. It was positive, as in propagating the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Later propaganda became institutionalized, as explained in chapter three. In the fourth chatper, the authors begin to examine modern propaganda campaigns. Toward the end some case studies are given. And the concluding chapter talks about how propaganda works in modern society. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition

Was this review helpful to you?

3 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

Well-written, easy to understand, interesting, August 11, 1997
Reviewer: rodrens@sprintmail.com from Dallas, Texas
Terrific book for anyone interested in not only propaganda and its history, but public relations, marketing, advertising, etc --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title
The Prince
by Niccolo Machiavelli

When Lorenzo de' Medici seized control of the Florentine Republic in 1512, he summarily fired the Secretary to the Second Chancery of the Signoria and set in motion a fundamental change in the way we think about politics. The person who held the aforementioned office with the tongue-twisting title was none other than Niccolò Machiavelli, who, suddenly finding himself out of a job after 14 years of patriotic service, followed the career trajectory of many modern politicians into punditry. Unable to become an on-air political analyst for a television network, he only wrote a book. <b>But what a book The Prince is. Its essential contribution to modern political thought lies in Machiavelli's assertion of the then revolutionary idea that theological and moral imperatives have no place in the political arena. "It must be understood," Machiavelli avers, "that a prince ... cannot observe all of those virtues for which men are reputed good, because it is often necessary to act against mercy, against faith, against humanity, against frankness, against religion, in order to preserve the state." With just a little imagination, readers can discern parallels between a 16th-century principality and a 20th-century presidency</b>. --Tim Hogan

J. H. Hexter, Washington University
A readable text in vigorous prose. I have not read a translation of The Prince into English that is more lively. --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

Book Description
Rejecting the traditional values of political theory, Machiavelli drew upon his own experiences of office in the turbulent Florentine republic to write his celebrated treatise on statecraft. While Machiavelli was only one of the many Florentine "prophets of force," he differed from the ruling elite in recognizing the complexity and fluidity of political life.

Translated by George Bull
Introduction by Anthony Grafton --This text refers to the Paperback edition.

See all editorial reviews...

Spotlight Reviews (What's this?)
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
14 of 15 people found the following review helpful:

a chilling reflection, August 11, 2001
Reviewer: teencynic (see more about me) from Nicosia, Cyprus
Machiavellism is generally used as a bad term, meaning that you'll do anything to get what you want, regardless, and everyone and anyone who stands in your way ought to be neutralised, pulverised.

But that's no the way it always was.

After getting the sack for being a good patriot, Machiavelli used his knowledge of the internal affairs fo Florentine politics and summed it up neatly in this taut, deadly-accurate treatise on human nature.

He's an observer, Machiavelli, and the Prince was written based on a boss of his, Cesare Borgia. Now Borgia (whose aim was to conquer Central Italy) wasn't one to let anything get into his way. He was ruthless, cunning, cruel. Did I mention that he's brilliant?

Machiavelli wrote on more, like on trading, on enemies, on governing. It teaches one on ways to become a politician, a president, or...a prince, with rules and tricks that every successful person uses but will never admit to.

All these lessons are packed into a slim tome, not quite novella as much as political guide, and the way through the minefields in this messy game of forging ahead.

After reading this, you either love it or hate it -I wouldn't know: I liked it. But no matter how hard one tries to deny what the author says, there's no way to escape from the parallels of Machiavelli's day and ours.

Was this review helpful to you?

56 of 58 people found the following review helpful:

Realistic Map of How Power is Achieved and Maintained, August 14, 2000
Reviewer: Wayne A. Smith (see more about me) from Wilmington, DE USA
There are two good reasons to read Machiavelli's classic, "The Prince."

First, so you'll know what everyone is referring to when you come across the adjective "machiavellian" in news stories or other media. This adjective has become so commonplace (and overused) it is almost a cliche. Also, most who use it have never read this letter from Machiavelli, a Rennaisance courtier to his Prince (written from prison), but they insist on peppering writings with this noun turned adjective so much that as a matter of clearly understanding what is meant by the term, famiality with this brief treatise is helpful.

Second, this book does describe most (not all) power situations very well. From politics to corporations to most settings where advancement, influence and control exist, Machiavelli's observations and rules apply.

You will also discover that Machiavelli was not as evil as he is understood to be in popular thought. What he was doing was describing the rules of the game that have existed and always will exist for many situations involving selfish humans in competition. Machiavelli's rules are neither good nor bad in themselves -- they describe a process. What is good or bad is how those who master Machiavelli's rules use their power and position, in a society that tempers actions according to law and basic Judeo-Christian principals. When those principals do not exist (as in Nazi Germany, the Middle Ages or under Communism, or by those who refuse to live by these constraints), Machiavelli's rules take on their demonic and evil cloak; usually because they serve demonic and evil ends. In societies where positive constraints exist, for example the U.S. political system, Machiavellian behavior can produce excellent results. A good example involves Abraham Lincoln, whose ambition led him to use every legitimate trick and stragety to master (and remove) political opponents. His mastery of Machiavellian behavior constrained by the US political system allowed him to save the Union and end slavery.

To fully appreciate the modern lessons that can be taken from this writing, one must translate Medieval sensibilites to their contemporary counterparts. The casual way in which Machiavelli discusses the need to kill opponents was necessary to those who wished to be princes 500 years ago. Today, of course, "killing" is translated as rendering less powerful, or taking an opponent out of the game.

What does one get from this book? It is a roadmap with insights and lessons about how to 1) get ahead of others to attain power; and 2) maintain and expand one's power in the face of others who would usurp one who is in a desirable position.

This book is about ruthlessness and putting the attainment of goals ahead of any other consideration. Plenty of maxims that are also tossed about frequently in media are to be found in Machiavelli's book: "the end justifies the means," "it is better to be feared than loved," "if you fight the prince, kill the prince" to name a few.

It is essential reading to anyone who would be in a competitive environment and hope to advance, if for no other reason than many of one's competitors operate by Machiavelli's dictums (which arise out of human instinct and selfishness). One does not have to operate according to Machaivelli's code -- many examples of alturism and "pluck and luck" exist to defeat any claim that Machiavelli's road map is essential for success. However, human nature and human history deliver far more examples of ruthless self-interest (Machiavellianism) behind success in power situations.

Is Machiavellianism bad? Not in and of itself. Remember, one must translate the Middle Age ethos to current practices -- there usually isn't blood spilled as a result of today's Machiavellian duels, just power and positon. Most political and business leaders are at least partly Machiavellian. The trick is using one's power to good ends. Thus, even though Lincoln and all of our presidents were Machiavellian in their climb to the White House, some of them did darn good work there. The same is true for business leaders. Jack Welch (GE), Bill Gates (Microsoft), anyone who advances past the first few rungs of the corporate ladder or dominates markets at the expense of competitors is using Machiavelli's dictums. The trick of a just and good society is to set the bounds by which power can be attained and exercised so that good and benefits will flow from those who are able to "claw their way to the top."

To summarize, read this book if you want to 1) truly understand when the adjective "Machiavelli" is used to describe people and 2) understand the rules by which most people navigate their way to power.

Was this review helpful to you?

All Customer Reviews
Average Customer Review:
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.

0 of 1 people found the following review helpful:

The best bok written on Leadership, June 10, 2004
Reviewer: Gabriel Cruz (see more about me) from Glendale, AZ USA
The Prince is a classic and must read book for all people in leadership or going in to business. --This text refers to the Paperback edition

Was this review helpful to you?

A good guide to Politics and Leadership, June 2, 2004
Reviewer: David Orozco from Santa Barbara, CA USA
I've never read any book related to politics in my whole life, and I found out by one of my World History teachers, that this book is a good way to get into politics and learn to be a good leader for your people.
The book really explains or simulates almost every single problem that a king, prince, president or any kind of governor would face. The book talks about how to treat the people of your kingdom, Machiavelly argues if you should use Love to rule your people or fear, to support his ideas Machiavelli uses examples from past rulers explaining what weaknesses they had and big mistakes the made.
For the first politic book I've ever read I found it really interesting and really helpful, the only thing that I didn't really like about it, was that to get a better understanding of the book you have to get some more background of the Kings, Dukes and governors he used.

Was this review helpful to you?

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:

Classic deserving of its fame, April 7, 2004
Reviewer: JPAN (see more about me) from Saint Paul, Minnesota
This classic treatise is the most famous work on the subject of political power, and with good cause. Machiavelli outlines the basic principles of how to properly govern a kingdom, from whether it is better to fight with native troops (he argues that it is better to lose with your own soldiers than with with mercenaries) to whether it is better to be loved or feared (he clearly sides with the latter). Despite its somewhat negative connotations, the author goes to great lengths to outline why he comes to the conclusions he does. Taken in their proper context, Machiavelli's positions are, I believe, much less inflamatory than their stereo-types. One also must considers the time and circumstances in which the book was written.
In conclusion, this book is a must-read for anyone who considers themselves to be a reader of classics. I picked up this edition in the airport for 4 dollars...how could you go wrong? Anyone would be proud to place this on his or her bookshelf. --This text refers to the Paperback edition

Was this review helpful to you?

25 of 25 people found the following review helpful:

Tricky Work, Tricky Translation--Highly Recommended!, February 28, 2004
Reviewer: John Russon (see more about me) from Toronto, ON Canada
Machiavelli was a moderately significant figure in Renaissance Florence at the time that city was busy shaping the essence of the modern world. His works (all of them, but especially the Prince) capture much of what is pivotal in this culture. The book is advice to princes on how to seize and hold power. Mostly, that means you need to trick people and use ruthless violence intelligently. (He suggests that, if you could invent something like the Catholic Church, you'd be in a specially good position to set up a rule that would draw a lot of allegiance and a lot of taxes, would have no responsibilities, and would never end.) It's great reading as literature and as history, and also incredibly subtle and insightful as an analysis of human psychology. Mostly, this work praises cunning intelligence; it is also written for the reader who possesses the same. Consequently, it is a book that requires real patience and attention if its real treasures are to be found. Mansfield's translation is, I believe, the best for allowing one to look for the inner depth of the book. The translation is inspired by the work of Leo Strauss, and, as is typical of Straussian translations, it is a translation that is extremely careful to reflect the subtleties of the language of the original in order to retain their complex intimations etc. This is the translation I use when I teach the book because of its precision and elegance. It also has helpful historical notes that provide some of the essential context that is necessary to understanding Machiavelli's words; (Machiavelli often, for example, describes some historical figure in a fashion which will suggest the opposite of his true point to the reader who does not take the trouble to learn the details of the context he is referring to, and Mansfield is helpful in supplying guides to the modern reader for what to study in order to get past these textual deceptions). Overall, this is an outstanding translation of one of the great books of Western culture. I recommend it highly. --This text refers to the Paperback edition
Hard America, Soft America: Competition vs. Coddling and the Battle for the Nation's Future
by Michael Barone (Author)

America is divided into two camps, according to U.S. News and World Reports writer and Fox commentator Michael Barone. No, not Red and Blue, though one suspects Barone may taint the two groups in the hues of the 2000 presidential election. Barone's divided America is one part Hard, one part Soft. Hard America is steeled by the competition and accountability of the free market, while Soft America is the product of public school and government largesse. Inspired by the notion that America produces incompetent 18 year olds and remarkably competent 30 year olds, Barone embarks on a breezy 162-page commentary that will spark mostly huzzahs from the right and jeers from the left. Certainly the unforgiving nature of the marketplace can sharpen skills in upstarts, but what's softer than the landing of a CEO with a golden parachute? And one would assume Barone would favor toughening up coddled kids by retaining, if not drastically raising, the inheritance tax, but the subject never comes up. Still, the Washington, D.C.-based pundit's premise is provocative, his arguments are nuanced, and his writing is sharp. Ultimately, Barone forecasts "a Harder America on the horizon." Would that be what they used to call "hard times"? --Steven Stolder

From Publishers Weekly
In his latest book, Barone, a writer for U.S. News and World Report and a well-known political commentator, describes America as comprising two diametrically opposed characteristics: hard and soft. "Hard America" is characterized by competition and accountability, while "Soft America" attempts to protect its citizens through government regulation and other social safety nets. While Barone's book is not without its political overtones-he identifies Hard America with the political right and Soft... read more

See all editorial reviews...

All Customer Reviews
Average Customer Review:
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.

0 of 34 people found the following review helpful:

america sucks!, June 7, 2004
Reviewer: A reader from Littleton, CO United States
What Barone is basically saying is that living in the early twenty-first America, that he proclaims to love, actually sucks! In his Hard America that he praises,one is nothing more than a gulag inmate with a suit who is supposed to work or die. What wonderful life it is to sacrifice humanity and love for money and be confined to an office for one's life. What Barone refuses to admit is that his dreary depiction of American life has a lot in common with the writers of the Exile and Nypress. One wonders if Barone reads them and agrees that living in America sucks!

Was this review helpful to you?

20 of 23 people found the following review helpful:

Thought-Provoking book, May 24, 2004
Reviewer: lishaz3 (see more about me) from Thousand Oaks, CA USA
This is one fascinating premise. Not exactly ground-breaking but more of a concept that was just not ever articulated in quite this way.

I enjoyed it very much but could see where it might not be well received by some.

The premise is this.

The author describes our "Hard America" as the core of competition and accountability. He argues though that "Soft America" is protected and coddled through government regulation and such.

He argues that Soft America is parasitic on Hard America. The productivity, efficiency and "grin and bear it" of Hard America feeds the weak and unproductive Soft America. We can only afford a Soft America if we encourage a Hard America. Then he seems to say that a highly disciplined military is an example of a Hard America that protects and preserves Soft America.

I repeat I really enjoyed this book even though I guess I see the world somewhat differently to the extent that I do not see competing juxtapositions. I see a remarkable blend in my America. To me fellow Americans who are gifted with talents, intelligence and socioeconomic benefits of health and privilege willingly extend themselves with benevolence to those less fortunate. Our country thrives on charitable foundations that create harbors for those willing but possibly incapable of managing a life of extraordinary productivity. I do (as the author seems to) believe in discipline but I also believe in empathy. I see the magnificence in balance of moderation. I also believe that noone should be disparaging of someone who can afford luxuries. The wonderful thing though is that most who can afford luxuries also share their wealth philanthropically.

Terrific thinking book.

Was this review helpful to you?

28 of 33 people found the following review helpful:

Great America., May 19, 2004
Reviewer: Bernard Chapin (see more about me) from Blue Island, Illinois United States
In our society we generally acknowledge that the only way to gain strength and prestige is through working hard and enhancing one's innate abilities. Even though some may dispute this reality, the proof is in the peripherals as there is probably not a work place in the country lacking one of those mundane "Sharpen the Saw" posters.

That is why it was with considerable excitement that I opened Michael Barone's Hard America, Soft America: Competition Vs. Coddling and the Battle for the Nation's Future. The book was just over 160 pages long and proved nearly impossible to put down. In this extended essay, Barone pounces upon one of the most important questions of our day and his work overlaps public policy, politics, history, philosophy and education. In short, it is a text that just about everybody should be able to relate to if not appreciate.

The theme of Hard America, Soft America is that from the ages of 6 to 18 Americans grow up in a downy world that is largely devoid of competition and accountability, but from the ages of 18 to 30 the texture of their lives radically changes as it becomes rocky and subject to the laws of nature. One either produces or they are fired. It is this world, this cauldron of struggle, that forges the Americans who awe the world with a never-ending parade of inventions and discoveries.

Barone gives us a tour of our own history and concludes that much of our illustriousness was created by the rigid and unforgiving forces of Hard America. Men like John D. Rockefeller and J.P. Morgan may not have been able to release their inner child or give group hugs but they were able to employ thousands and provide the means for mass production that made us the victors of war and peace. Barone views their torch as being carried forward by men like Bill Gates, Jack Welch, Fred Smith, and Sam Walton. Barone makes use of cultural works to justify his thesis and includes films like "The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit," novels like Sister Carrie and infamous dementations like Charles Reich's The Greening of America.

The author stresses that there are no firm boundaries between the hard and the soft. Schools may be bastions of softness but within them are islands of sinew. High school graduates immediately encounter Hard America when they enter the military or the private sector (perhaps earlier should they work at McDonalds or Wal-Mart before age 18).

There is a parasitical relationship between the solid and the downy aspects of our culture. It is only by the grace and skill of Hard America that Soft America can survive: "Soft America lives off the productivity, creativity, and competence of Hard America, and we have the luxury of keeping parts of our society Soft only if we keep enough of it hard." Without a robust military, there would be no way to preserve the freedom and laxity that is Soft America.

Barone dedicated this work to the memory of Senator Moynihan and it is almost a certainty that he would have been pleased by the following description of the effects of excessive softness upon black Americans:

"The Softening of criminal justice, welfare, racial quotas and preferences, and education- had the effect of confining most blacks to Soft America. They were left unprotected against crime, deterred from forming stable families, deincentivized the will to achieve. The advocates of Softening hated the idea of imposing middle-class mores on black Americans, but middle-class mores are necessary for achievement in Hard America, and underclass behavior makes such achievement impossible."

The field of public education is one in which Softness has triumphed and the author believes that this situation will not change until parents force the issue. For many professionals in our schools, the Chaise lounge chairs of pulpous America massages them forever. Only external forces will coerce them into changing their ways or methodologies.

This reviewer has personally witnessed several attempts of individuals to "Speak Truth to Squishiness" by bringing rigor into their classrooms and then observed the predicable punishments that were meted out to them in response.

Shortly after I finished reading the text I told a teacher about it and she said, "Give me that book now! I need it." The basis for her interest may have stemmed from her name appearing on a school wide memo ranking our teachers based on who passed the most students. Her name was on the bottom. I recall her coming up to me in the hallway and wondering if I knew of a way she could have passed a student who missed 70 out of 92 days of instruction. I had no answer then and I have no answer now.

Another educator told me of an alternative school that got around the dilemma of what to do with students who do not meet even diluted academic requirements. They issue a no grades whatsoever policy that precludes all descriptors (including "Pass" or "Fail"). He is currently being considered for the Principalship of this institution and wanted to know what I thought about their anti-grading scheme. I told him it was insane. He agreed but noted that the salary was 70 grand a year. I advised that he not mention the policy at all during his interview and then quickly abandon it once his contract was signed. We will see whether or not he has the strength to do so.

Unfortunately, although it is not as clear cut as the two examples I cite, most children do grow up in Soft America. It is a land in which they are molly-coddled and excuses are made for their every need and whimper. Many adults are more concerned with injecting them with self-esteem rather than buoying them up with knowledge. Who would have ever thought that the word "facts" would have the negative connotations it has today in educational circles? Children are shielded from the Bizzaro world of Hard America until they graduate and then are thrown into the cauldron of competition.

I think Michael Barone has done America a great service by writing this book and I encourage everyone to read it. There's absolutely nothing wonkish about it. The issues are global and should appeal to most citizens- even if it makes the pens of a few bureaucrats run dry.

Was this review helpful to you?

18 of 83 people found the following review helpful:

Who are the most coddled?, May 18, 2004
Reviewer: Roland Buck (see more about me) from Morehead, KY United States
Barone' ideogical biases are causing him to overlook the realities of who is really being coddled the most. If he wants to find the people who are most coddled, he needs to look at the private sector.

Take, for example, the case of the corporate CEOs who get their multimillion dollar bonuses whether profits are up or down, whose income relative to their workers keeps getting bigger and bigger, and, if they do get fired, get rich golden parachutes that leave them rich for life. Contrast that with ordinary Americans, who if their job is sent abroad are lucky to get a few month's severance pay and inadequate job training so that they end up with a job that pays less and has fewer benefits.

Another of the most coddled groups are people that are rich,not because they earned it, like Steve Jobs, but, rather becauese they inherited it, like Steve Forbes. If one really does not want coddling, the inheritance tax needs to be increased so that one can only become rich by one's own effort, and not without effort.

The author undoubtedly makes valid points in a number of areas, but his obvious right-wing bias keeps him from seeing who is really being coddled.
America and the World, 1898-2025: Achievements, Failures, Alternative Futures
by Walter C. Clemens

Editorial Reviews

About the Author
Walter Clemens is Professor of Political Science at Boston University and Associate of the Harvard University Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. He is author of Baltic Independence and Russian Empire and ten other books.

Book Description
This book surveys US achievements and failures in the world across the 20th century. The analysis builds upon surveys of experts at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and several universities conducted over the last 25 years. The reasons for success and failure are subject to hot dispute. Walter Clemens argues that the individual traits of US leaders account for far more variation in outcomes than the domestic or international contexts. He concludes that the policy outcomes of the past century confirm the assumptions of mutual gain theory, complexity theory, and liberal peace theory. Clemens then uses his analysis to sketch alternative futures that could face planners in the early 21st century.
Global Disorder: America and the Threat of World Conflict
by Robert Harvey

Harvey, formerly a member of Parliament and a columnist for the Daily Telegraph, updates his comprehensive survey of established and emerging threats to world security. Harvey's synthesis covers the entire globe, featuring compressed set pieces on such diverse locales as Saudi Arabia and Colombia, Japan and South Africa, with politics and economics his principal subjects. Harvey sees the world as "a much more dangerous place than it has been for nearly half a century," the sources of instability today ranging from terrorism and nuclear proliferation to the irrationality of disintegrated and even "psychopath" states. The world economy has been shaken by currency manipulations, by a vast Third World debt crisis (covered here in detail) and by the depredations of multinational corporations. The author presents himself as a sympathetic observer of the role played by the United States in world affairs. Calling for greater American engagement in the world, the author envisions a four-part foundation for international security in which the U.S. must take the lead, becoming the "benevolent head of the family of nations" in association with a strengthened Japan and European Union. Many suggestions appear throughout the book for creating what the author calls a New Security Architecture for the world. Harvey is obviously a knowledgeable observer of the global scene, and sets out his views with clarity and passion. However, his portrayal of political and economic trends focuses mostly on the 1980s and early 1990s, and analysis of more recent developments would have been welcome. Still, this volume will hold the interest of devotees of contemporary history and those concerned with international affairs.
Copyright 2003 Reed Business Information, Inc.

Book Description
In 1990 the Berlin Wall fell, the Cold War ended, and to economic and political analysts the world seemed a safer place. But not to political journalist and former member of the House of Commons Foreign Affair Committee Robert Harvey. In 1995, in The Return of the Strong, Harvey published his fear that on the tides of ethnic nationalism and economic globalization the world was drifting toward a new crisis. The attack on the World Trade Center in New York City on September 11, 2001, justified Harvey’s alarm and prompted him to extensively revise and update his analysis of the profound dangers facing western democracy today. Incisive, astute, and brilliantly argued, Global Disorder not only examines the precarious state of world affairs in the aftermath of 9/11 but also offers far-reaching proposals for the reform of global security. After describing the emergence of the United States as the world’s first megapower in part 1 of this important book, Harvey explores the sources of global instability and international tension in part 2, and then in part 3 lays out the perils inherent in the globalization of capitalism without political control. Finally, in part 4, he presents the necessary short- and long-term reforms in policy and action that the West, especially the United States, must undertake to restore stability around the world and to truly ensure international security.

All Customer Reviews
Average Customer Review:
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.

Very interesting, but poorly organized..., December 26, 2003
Reviewer: slashersfinebooks (see more about me) from Crescent City, Florida United States
This book appears to be a set of individually written and unpublished essays that were later compiled and reordered into book format. The publisher did an absolutely horrible job of editing the book, and it is littered with spelling and grammatical errors, with at least one mistake per two or so pages. Even the back cover excludes words from a quote written by a reviewer of the book that seemingly gives the book a negative light in itself.

The book can be easily read if one were to simply mentally autocorrect such errors and ignore them.

However, the book redeems itself by giving tons upon tons of interesting ideas and pretty good analyses of current global issues. It is highly readable and enjoyable.

Was this review helpful to you?

A Mind Dump With No Compelling Theme, November 20, 2003
Reviewer: Redmund Sum (see more about me) from Los Altos, CA USA
This book has an eye-catching title and the author has considerable credentials. The substance of the book, however, is rather lightweight.

The author presents a great deal of information and analysis on many subjects, from history to religion to nationalism to corporate governance, etc. So, for your money, you get to read a lot, but all without much coherence and with little depth.

Harvey is mildly biased against the United States of America. In some sense his tirades are a good illustration of the adage that your are damned if you do and you are damned if you don't. Harvey criticizes the U.S. military intervention in certain cases, Panama and Grenada, but then he also criticizes the U.S. for not intervening in certain crises, like Bosnia and Rwanda. In fact, there was a "lost decade", according to Harvey, of not sending our troops to maintain order. His thesis seems to be that if the U.S. flexes her military muscles to protect her interests, it was wrong, she should only put her soldiers in harm's way to pacify ethnic fighting and other regional conflicts where she has no political, economic or military stake. Thanks a lot for that advice!

Harvey argued that even though the September 11 attack was the worst single act of terrorism, it was not REALLY bad when put beside of the vast number of people terrorists killed year-in and year-out; in fact it was "a drop in the ocean" (!) compared with the number of civilians killed in Dresden, Tokyo and Hiroshima during WWII. This is how Harvey asks to put matters in perspective.
His bias notwithstanding, Harvey does offer some sobering facts on how America is intensely disliked in some parts of the world, and why, at least according to his reasoning. There is, in fact, not much mystery here. Envy is a powerful human emotion. If the price for not being disliked were for the U.S. to be a loser, I would not care much for it.

The redeeming values of the book are the breadth of subjects covered and a lucid writing style. It is not entirely a waste of time as I do want to get a perspective of the U.S. and the world as seen from a Brit, even though I might not be in total agreement.
Is America Breaking Apart?
by John A. Hall, Charles Lindholm

Unlike many other countries, America as a republic has been free of outside intervention in charting its future. From the early Colonists shared English backgrounds through the continuing assimilation of immigrant cultures, social conflict and political protest have created a society that asserts the equality (and individuality) of all. The federal government is likely to be maintained and political citizenship widely realized; the country (in general) has enjoyed economic growth and can see no real threats to its leadership position in the capitalist world. Hall (sociology, McGill Univ.) and Lindholm (anthropology, Boston Univ.) present a reasoned polemic, arguing that the United States, while not without self-doubt, the stain of racism, and other internal conflicts and disparities, has emerged as the worlds most powerful and stable society, not likely to break apart soon. Readable and highly recommended for academics and the general public.Suzanne W. Wood, SUNY Coll. of Technology, Alfred
Copyright 1999 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

From Kirkus Reviews
Amid the clamor of multiculturalism and ``difference'' politics, Americans wonder if their country can remain a cohesive whole. Hall (Sociology/McGill Univ., Canada) and Lindholm (Anthropology/Boston Univ.) argue that our concerns are unfounded and not all that new; for better, and sometimes for worse, we will survive. American unity derives from both historically conditioned institutional patterns and shared cultural values. Historically, oppositional forces coalesced within a flexible and... read more --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

Book Description
<b>Is the United States a nation of materialistic loners whose politics are dictated by ethnic, racial, religious, or sexual identities? This is what America has become in the eyes of many commentators. Americans seem to fear that their society is breaking apart, but how accurate is this portrayal and how justified is the fear? Introducing a balanced viewpoint into this intense debate, John Hall and Charles Lindholm demonstrate that such alarm is unfounded</b>. Here they explore the institutional structures of American society, emphasizing its ability to accommodate difference and reduce conflict. The culture, too, comes under scrutiny: influenced by Calvinistic beliefs, Americans place faith in the individual but demand high moral commitment to the community. Broad in scope and ambition, this short book draws a realistic portrait of a society that is among the most powerful and stable in the world, yet is perennially shaken by self-doubt.
Concern over the cohesiveness of American society, Hall and Lindholm argue, is actually a product of a shared cultural belief in human distinctiveness and equality. They find that this shared belief paradoxically leads Americans to exaggerated worries about disunity, since they are afraid that disagreements among co-equals will rend apart a fragile community based solely on consensus and caring. While there is little dissent among Americans over essential values, racism still abounds. Here the authors predict that the homogenizing force of economic participation might still be the key to mending the wounds of racial turmoil.

By combining history, sociology, and anthropology, the authors cover a wide range of past and recent challenges to the stability of American society: from the history of unions to affirmative action, from McCarthyism to militant distrust of government, from early prejudice toward Irish and Italian immigrants to current treatment of African Americans. Hall and Lindholm do not skirt the internal contradictions and moral tensions of American society but nonetheless recognize the strength and promise of its institutions and culture. Their book is a vivid, sweeping response to the doomsayers in the reassessment of our society.

See all editorial reviews...

All Customer Reviews
Average Customer Review:
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

There really is hope..., July 11, 2000
Reviewer: Stephen Covert from Fredericksburg, Virginia United States
In this almost hopeful discussion of American societal development, Hall and Lindholm draw upon writers such as Durkheim, Baumgartner, and Garnier to show that America is acutally fortified by its diversity. There are plentiful explorations of race and ethnic issues in contemporary society, providing for a wondefully woven portrait of the American cultural landscape. Hall and Lindholm write in a hopeful and easy to read style, yet their discussion lacks statistical depth for such an important issue. A quality text through and through. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title
America Unbound: The Bush Revolution in Foreign Policy
by Ivo H. Daalder, James M. Lindsay

Hailing President George W. Bush as the architect of a radical new foreign policy, the authors are clearly impressed with America's recent display of muscle. They do not, however, acknowledge critics who claim the Bush revolution may merely be a recycling of failed doctrines of colonialism and interventionism. Still, though most contemporary analysts credit the president's advisors with designing current foreign-policy practices, Daalder and Lindsay insist that Bush himself is in charge. If we have become a lone-wolf nation, it is because of his belief that an unfettered and aggressive America is both secure and capable of altering the international status quo for the better. After outlining the nuances of this new nationalist strategy, its challenges, rewards, and risks are analyzed in detail, providing foreign-policy wonks with plenty of material for debate. Margaret Flanagan
Copyright © American Library Association. All rights reserved

Daniel Schorr, National Public Radio
"Future examinations of Bush foreign policy will be measured against this authoritative book."

Book Description
George W. Bush has launched a revolution in American foreign policy. He has redefined how America engages the world, shedding the constraints that friends, allies, and international institutions impose on its freedom of action. He has insisted that an America unbound is a more secure America.
How did a man once mocked for knowing little about the world come to be a foreign policy revolutionary? In America Unbound, Ivo H. Daalder and James M. Lindsay dismiss claims that neoconservatives have captured the heart and mind of the president. They show that George W. Bush has been no one’s puppet. He has been a strong and decisive leader with a coherent worldview that was evident even during the 2000 presidential campaign.

Daalder and Lindsay caution that the Bush revolution comes with significant risks. Raw power alone is not enough to preserve and extend America’s security and prosperity in the modern world. The United States often needs the help of others to meet the challenges it faces overseas. But Bush’s revolutionary impulse has stirred great resentment abroad. At some point, Daalder and Lindsay warn, Bush could find that America’s friends and allies refuse to follow his lead. America will then stand alone—a great power unable to achieve its most important goals.

See all editorial reviews...

Spotlight Reviews (What's this?)
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
14 of 16 people found the following review helpful:

A sober analysis that deserves to be read, March 31, 2004
Reviewer: Andrew S. Rogers (see more about me) from Seattle, Washington
This book is a thoughtful and comprehensive look at the origins and consequences of the "Bush doctrine" in foreign policy. It's also a serious critique, made more so by the fact that it is not couched (unlike, say, Michael Mann's "Incoherent Empire") in the language of partisan name-calling and electoral bitterness.

In fact, Daalder and Lindsay's argument kind of sneaks up on you, in that the first section of the book almost ... almost ... seems pro-Bush. Unlike many of his critics, these authors are willing to give the guy a little credit for having a brain in his head and a firm, relatively well-defined, set of beliefs. They argue that the discreet facts Bush knows (citing the famous pre-election "pop quiz" of world leaders) are less important than the principles he believes, since the latter are the raison d'étre of his policy. As they note in an important chapter titled "Bush's Worldview," while GWB may not be able to articulate the underlying logic of his hegemonist worldview in "a form that would please political science Ph.D.s" [p. 41], those principles are deeply held and guide his thinking on strategic matters.

This might seem to be damning with faint praise. But it's still more of an admission than we'll get from most subscribers to the kneejerk-but-tired caricature of Bush as a puppet whose strings are pulled by the neocons (or the oil companies, or Dick Cheney, or his dad, or whoever). What it also does, however, is set up the authors' principal argument, that "the Bush revolution" can in fact be traced back to the president himself: his ideas, his declarations, and his decisions.

The conclusion seems to be not so much that this revolution is evil (the arguments here are utilitarian rather than moral, which isn't necessarily a bad thing) as it is poorly thought-out. The administration is surprised to discover that America's historic friends and allies don't automatically line up behind the president's priorities. That falling into disfavor with world opinion can actually have consequences for our foreign policy (and that even a "hyperpower" can't do everything by itself). That pre-emption and unilateralism don't work so well in cases like North Korea or Iran. That how to stabilize post-war Iraq should have given more thought in pre-war times. And that "with us or against us" bipolarism gets murky with countries like Pakistan or Saudi Arabia.

I've read a handful of books in recent weeks about America's descent into empire and this president's new direction in foreign policy. While "America Unbound" lacks the wide historic lens of Chalmers Johnson's "The Sorrows of Empire," it is still a fine look at this president, his administration, his underlying principles, and their geopolitical consequences. Its restrained and logical tone -- unburdened by the polemical language of the Bush-hating Left -- ought to attract thoughtful and open-minded readers, and be a useful contribution to sober debate about the direction this nation is headed.

Was this review helpful to you?

20 of 43 people found the following review helpful:

Short on insight or even new information, January 13, 2004
Reviewer: A reader from Puget Sound, USA
This book was written with all the tact and circumspection of someone angling for a top post in a presidential administration... ANY administration, from Bush to Dean!

Perhaps that's why you won't get a strong sense from these two that there has been anything particularly reckless, mendacious or radical about the so-called "Bush revolution". Relying on such "unimpeachable" sources as MSNBC and the Wall Street Journal, Daalder and Lindsay are more inclined to depict Bush's policies on Iraq as "bold" than deceitful. On precious little evidence, they're convinced that Bush is a decisive world leader with a "coherent worldview"! And they are almost entirely mute on the subject of neoconservative influence on Iraq policy, except to dismiss it out of hand. Yes, Cheney is an assertive nationalist, not a neocon, properly speaking, but why don't the authors point out that Cheney placed neocons like Wolfowitz in key positions throughout the administration or that it was he who asked Wolfowitz in 1992 for a new manifesto touting American unilateralism? Why no mention of the fact that Cheney and Rumsfeld are members of the neoconservative bastion Project for a New American Century, which in Sept 2000 laid out a national security blueprint (Rebuilding America's Defenses) that bears a striking resemblance to the "Bush Doctrine" of 2002?

All in all, this is a patchwork quilt of old newspaper and magazine articles, a hackneyed rush-job that will soon be forgotten. For some really trenchant analysis on the enormous and deleterious influence of Cheney and his neoconservative allies on American foreign and security policy, readers would do better to consult the Internet for the outstanding articles of reporter Jim Lobe. As for books, more thoughtful contributions have been made by Newsweek editor Michael Hirsh (At War With Ourselves) and Professor Joseph Nye (Paradox of American Power). For a more philosophical approach, I'm also looking forward to reading the new book by George Soros: The Bubble of American Supremacy.

Was this review helpful to you?

All Customer Reviews
Average Customer Review:
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.

3 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

America Unbound: The Bush Revolution in Foreign Policy, April 22, 2004
Reviewer: Nilan (see more about me) from Atlanta, GA United States
Two Clinton-era National Security Council staffers offer muted criticism of George W. Bush's foreign policy from a realist perspective. September 11th is identified as the reason for Congressional deference to Bush's "revolutionary" tangent as Bush proceeded to wage war on Afghanistan and Iraq, unleash the CIA from previous legal constraints, and generally pursue a "hegemonist" worldview in foreign affairs. Not unexpectedly, they would prefer the multilateral approach towards exercising American power that has largely prevailed over the past five decades.

Was this review helpful to you?

3 of 4 people found the following review helpful:

Engaging and thought provoking presentation, April 14, 2004
Reviewer: Paul Tognetti (see more about me) from Cranston, RI USA
While obviously opposed to the Bush approach to foreign policy in general and to Iraq in particular, Ivo Daalder and James Lindsay have nonetheless succeeded in producing a remarkably fair book attempting to explain the reasons behind the President's about face from recent U.S. foreign policy. The attacks on 9/11 and other terrorist activities over the past decade had gradually convinced the President that the internationalist view espoused by Bill Clinton and his own father was simply no longer the answer. Bush has chosen instead to embark on a new unilateralist course favored by most of his senior advisors that the authors argue may be somewhat productive in the short run but likely to be a disaster over the long haul. Extremely well written, thoughtful and meticulously documented, this book should be an essential read for any citizen seeking to get up to speed on foreign policy issues before the 2004 Presidential election.

Was this review helpful to you?

5 of 8 people found the following review helpful:

A Compelling Read on Bush and Foreign Policy 2000-2003, April 10, 2004
Reviewer: Dr J E Robinson (see more about me) from Toronto, Ontario Canada
The present book is a compelling read and covers many but not all of the major issues on terrorism and Iraq.

I feel like I have been on an overdose of these books just having read House of Bush, House of Saud by Craig Unger - the biggest tell all blockbuster (my opinion), The Choice by Zbigniew Brzezinski (an excellent analysis), Disarming Iraq by Hans Blix, Noam Chomsky's Hegemony of Survival (truly a book that makes one think), Thirty Days (about Tony Blair) by Peter Stothard, and Price of Loyalty by Paul O'Neill (excellent book), Why America Slept by Gerald Posner, the very popular best seller Against All Enemies by Richard Clarke, and the Rise of the Vulcans by Mann and Mann. I put together a "listmania" list of the 25 best books - the best books - mainly non political taken together, no strong bias conservative or liberal - a spectrum of opinion when you take them all together.

Many of the books are "gotcha" books that link Bush with some wrong doings or alternately books like Brzezinski that lay out solutions. This book is a bit different. It is more of a chronological history, and the book has been highly acclaimed by the Economist, NY Times etc. After reading I can see why.

I started to read the present book and was unable to put it down until I had read it virtually cover to cover. It is a surprisingly good book and neutral in tone and a compelling read - for myself it was a page turner. It brings together the story of Iraq and WMD's in chronological order (all briefly). It starts with the Bush campaign and what he says in his run for the presidency regarding foreign policy, his philosophy, the team that he put together, plus the authors put in some historical perspective starting with Washington, then Wilson, Truman, etc. It then works its way through pre and post 9-11, Afghanistan and Iraq until late 2003.

Surprisingly I found that this book is in almost complete agreement with some of the more recent "tell all" books (Blix, O'Neill, Clarke), and I would strongly recommend reading this book. The overlying theme or conclusion is that the intelligence was flawed and incomplete. Like the Hans Blix book there were no WMD's in Iraq. The Iraq war was pushed by Wolfowitz and others prior to 9-11, and can best be described as a distraction or even an incitement of Muslims towards anti-Amercian feelings. The invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan lacked realistic follow up plans for the post military invasion. So those conflicts still remain unresolved. Also, the more serious threats of Iran and North Korea remain almost unsolvable due to the potential negative consequences of a military solution for those cases including the threat of North Korea dropping nuclear weapons on South Korea.

An excellent book and I highly recommend.

Jack in Toronto

Was this review helpful to you?

5 of 12 people found the following review helpful:

On Target Revelations, March 18, 2004
Reviewer: A reader from Snohomish, Washington
I found much of this book's information to be necessary reading material for any potential voter. It is time and pertinent that the Bush administration be exposed for what it is, and America Unbound provides a starting point for that. Much of what I read has been substantiated in other works (Chalmers Johnson's Sorrows of Empire, one example). The American public is being duped by the current governing group in its efforts to stuff its pockets with oil money and pursuits of empiracle dreams. READ THIS BOOK.

<b>Makers of India's Foreign Policy
J.N. Dixit </b>

Product details
ISBN:8172235925 , Subtitle: Raja Ram Mohun Roy to Yashwant Sinha , Publisher: HarperCollins Publishers India , Edition: 1st ed. , Year of Publication: 2004 , Physical Description: 328p., Index; 23cm. , Book Format:Hardcover, Language: English

In this brilliant, insightful book, J.N. Dixit chronicles the role of those who have played an important role in fashioning and implementing India's Foreign Policy since and before independence-right up to the 12 SAARC summit in Islamabad in January 2004. In doing so he fulfils a major gap in the study of Indian Foreign Policy, for he focuses not just on the Nehru-Gandhis but also on those who are less well-known, including diplomats and policy advisers. In the process Dixit gives us an understanding of the factors that shaped India's Foreign Policy at given points of time - the international situation, the domestic compulsions, and the happenings in India's neighbourhood. Most fascinatingly, however, he shows us how India's Foreign Policy was linked to the personalities and beliefs of the men and women who happened to be at the helm of affairs. Apart from the central role played by Jawaharlal Nehru, Lal Bahadur Shastri and Indira Gandhi, the book highlights the contributions of other Prime Ministers such as <b>Narasimha Rao, I.K. Gujral, and Atal Behari Vajpayee. Also portrayed are ministers such as V.K. Krishna Menon, Sardar Swaran Singh, Y.B. Chavan, Jaswant Singh and Yashwant Sinha. The role of behind-the-scenes operators like Girija Shankar Bajpai, Badruddin Tyabji, D.P. Dhar, P.N. Haksar and Brajesh Mishra is also recalled. A must-read for anyone who wants to make sense of India's role in international affairs. </b>

About the Author
J.N. Dixit
Author of nine books, including the latest international bestseller, India-Pakistan in War and Peace, J.N. Dixit is a former foreign secretary of India and was a member of the National Security Advisory Board. In his rich and distinguished career in the Indian Foreign Service, he has been ambassador to Bangladesh and Afghanistan and high commissioner to Sri Lanka and Pakistan. He lives in New Delhi.

<b>India-Pakistan in War and Peace ,J.N.Dixit </b>

Born at midnight, fated never to see the sunshine of amity. That, to some, is the India-Pakistan story. Whether it is Kashmir or the nuclear issue or the cricket field, the two seldom seem to agree. A shared culture has ever divided, never united. The subcontinental twins went to war within months of becoming independent. Over the following half-century, they’ve fought three other wars, clashed at the United Nations and in every conceivable global forum. Today, a nuclearised South Asia is seen as among the world’s most dangerous places. <b>Like the Israeli-Palestinian struggle, the Indo-Pakistani rivalry is a legacy of history. It’s roots lie in the Muslim separatist movement of the 1930s and, indeed, can probably be traced back further to the 17 century battle of succession between Dara Shikoh and Aurangzeb.</b> <!--emo&Big Grin--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif' /><!--endemo--> It is a complex conflict, with religious and territorial angles, with two diametrically opposed views of nationhood and national imagination. As a conundrum confronting the still young 21 century the India-Pakistan equation has few equals.

Table of contents :


<b>1. IC-814 to Kandahar. </b> <!--emo&<_<--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/dry.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='dry.gif' /><!--endemo-->

2. Implications of the Kargil war.

3. Tunnel visionaries.

4. Wellsprings of antagonism.

5. From democracy to dictatorship and war.

6. The break-up of Pakistan: Mujibnagar to Simla—the advent of Zia-ul-Haq.

7. Coup to coup: Pakistan, 1972-1999.

8. Kashmir: the intractable bone of contention.

9. India and Pakistan—nuclear weapons states.

10. Retrospect and prospects.

11. The Agra summit and after.

12. Uncertainties or opportunities.


1. Pakistan—birth and objectives.

2. Chronology of significant bilateral meetings between 1994-2000.

3. Joint statement.

4. Memorandum of understanding.

5. Lahore declaration.

6. Simla agreement 1972 : Agreement on bilateral relations between the Government of India and the Government of Pakistan.

7. Tashkent declaration, 10 January 1966.

8. India and Pakistan: military balance (year 2000/2001).



List of his other books are here :

Have any1 read any of his book..?...plz post something here....i am eager to read some inside info on how decisions r made in delhi circle....(i have no online money ..only hard cash..)<!--emo&Sad--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-vishal+Jul 1 2004, 03:50 PM-->QUOTE(vishal @ Jul 1 2004, 03:50 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--> Like the Israeli-Palestinian struggle, the Indo-Pakistani rivalry is a legacy of history. It’s roots lie in the Muslim separatist movement of the 1930s and, indeed, can probably be traced back further to the 17 century battle of succession between Dara Shikoh and Aurangzeb <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Remeber reading the review of his book.

A Review of J.N. Dixit's India-Pakistan in War & Peace

His list of psychological hurdles to normalization has been discussed around at a lenght in some forums

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Towards the conclusion, Dixit identifies a series of Pakistani traits that refuse to live amicably with India.

First, "artificially nurtured memories of Muslim superiority and a subconscious desire to rectify the unfair arrangements of partition".

Second, a certain envy Pakistanis would not acknowledge openly about the failure of their civil society to solidify democratic and tolerant traditions in comparison to an India where khakis and bayonets follow popularly elected representatives.

Third, assumption by Pakistan of the role of protector and overseer of the welfare of Indian Muslims, who in the words of Maulana Azad, could be exploited from forces across the border owing to their "socio-political schizophrenia" since partition.

Fourth, avenging the military defeat of 1971, which is a formal objective declared in the official oath-taking ceremony of every Pakistani officer-cadet when he graduates.

Fifth, irrational faith in the "profound capacity for commitment to jihad amongst the momin", as was publicly declared by Foreign Minister Gauhar Ayub Khan at a press conference in Delhi.

Sixth, confidence that Pakistan's nuclear weapons program is an instrumentality to
further geopolitical objectives in Kashmir.

Seventh, widespread belief in the Pakistani establishment and media circles that India is getting exhausted in Kashmir and would not be able to hold on to it for long (a presumption of Musharraf in Kargil). Eighth, and most significantly, "the unarticulated ambition and hope that if India broke up, Pakistan will emerge as the strongest and most powerful political entity in South Asia". (p 392)
<!--QuoteBegin-acharya+Jun 23 2004, 01:44 PM-->QUOTE(acharya @ Jun 23 2004, 01:44 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--> The Prince
by Niccolo Machiavelli
I guess this is online version :

http://machiavelli.thefreelibrary.com/Prince <!--emo&Wink--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif' /><!--endemo-->
from an email:

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Book Reviews
Indo-Pak story by an insider
By M.V. Kamath

India-Pakistan in War & Peace by J.N. Dixit, Books Today, Delhi, 501 pp; Rs 595

J.N. Dixit, a one-time ambassador to Pakistan and Afghanistan and later Foreign Secretary to India and now National Security Adviser to Government of India, has done a great favour to his country and especially to its Foreign Office. He has, from all accounts, written the definitive history of Indo-Pak relations right upto the present day, saving our ambassadors and foreign policy spokesmen a lot of trouble. All that they have to do is to present a copy of his latest work, India-Pakistan in War & Peace to all those wishing to see South Asia at peace, including UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, US President George Bush, US Secretary of State Colin Powell, not to speak of US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfield. All that they have to do is to read Dixit´s detailed work and they would know exactly what the facts are and how India views duplicitous Pakistan.

For what Dixit has done is to tell the full story of the birth and growth of Pakistan with a sense of detachment and feel for facts that is truly remarkable. Dixit is a man singularly without any illusions. As one who has served as India´s ambassador to Pakistan and subsequently as Foreign Secretary with access to all possible information, Dixit is unique. True, this book was written before Almaty and before the emergency visits paid to Delhi and Islamabad by British and American leaders, but for all that Dixit´s careful study of Indo-Pak relations, his considerable insights into Pakistan´s official mind, cannot the least be faulted.

The book is divided into 12 chapters, starting with the hijacking of the IS-814 to Kandahar, an inquiry into the implications of Kargil, the nature of Pak antagonism towards India, on to a ruthless analysis of Pakistan´s internal affairs, the break-up of the State, the advent of Zia-ul-Huq and the Agra summit. The study of ´Coup to Coup (1972-1999)´ is in a class in itself. Dixit covers a lot of ground inevitably that in the past had been covered by other equally knowledgeable, writers. But what gives Dixit´s coverage additional teeth is that he writes as an insider. His understanding of Pakistan leaves nothing to the imagination. Consider the 12-point lessons Dixit says India must learn from Kargil. The first three are specially pointed. Writes Dixit:
Pakistan is not likely to agree to any practical solution of the Jammu and Kashmir issue on the basis of ground realities and reasonableness in the near future.

Bilateral dialogue at the official and even at the highest political level with Pakistan should not be undertaken with any sense of excessive expectation.

Pakistan´s unalterable objective is to capture Jammu and Kashmir.

That is putting it straight. In the chapter on ´Kashmir: The Interactable Bone of Contention´, Dixit again puts things in their proper perspective. He defines Pakistan´s objectives thus: (a) It considers the acquisition of Jammu and Kashmir the unifinished part of Partition; (b) its claim to Kashmir is firmly rooted in the two-nation theory; © it desires to invalidate the provisions of the Indian Independence Act and the Instruments of Accession signed by the former Maharaja; (d) it also questions the decision taken by Sheikh Abdullah to make Jammu and Kashmir a part of India; and (e) it is of the view that continuing cross-border terrorism and violent intervention including sending mercenaries and non-Kashmir cadres to create a conflict situation in Jammu and Kashmir will achieve the above objectives.

And what are India´s objectives? Priority-wise, Dixit describes them as follows:

(a) The cessation of all violence and acts of terror; (b) to ensure that those portions of Jammu and Kashmir that are part of India do not get separated from the territories of the republic of India; © to ensure that any compromise arrived at on the basis of discussions with various opposition groups representing the people of Jammu and Kashmir does not dilute the strategic position of India in the state; (d) to ensure that it does not result in any ceding of territory to Pakistan; and finally (e) that the compromises reached should be such that they contribute to neutralising the centrifugal forces in other parts of India.

It is Dixit´s thesis that India has to fight its own battles against terrorism knowing fully well that while there is general sympathy in American official circles to India´s problems, their primary concern is to safeguard their own interests. It also seems to be Dixit´s firm conviction that "while Musharraf´s capability and inclination to support violent terrorist organisations may be eroded because of international pressure, he will not be able to completely distance himself from such organisations as far as India is concerned because his survival in power depends on not antagonising them beyond a point".

Following the Agra summit, Dixit´s analysis is even more forthright. With eyes wide-open, he writes: "An inescapable conclusion to be drawn is that there is not even a tentative meeting ground on the substance of political issues at discussion between India and Pakistan." That is telling it as it is. So where do we go from here, especially after Almaty? In his concluding chapter, Dixit holds that "the hope for rationality in Indo-Pak relations has to be tempered with abundant political caution." That surely is true, but where does it take us? Dixit provides us no answer. For all one knows, there is none.

The importance of this book is that it casts a look at Indo-Pak relations in their totality and with inside knowledge. That is where Dixit scores over practically everyone else. But are his conclusions necessarily sound? Would they hold good today? One wishes Dixit could give an addendum bringing us to post-Almaty conditions and what they presage. If, as he puts it, it is Pakistan government´s policy "not to allow norms and easy people-to-people contacts between Indians and Pakistanis", then the future looks bleak. That is obviously not Dixit´s fault. The author is a realist, if ever there is one.

His chapter, thus, on ´Retrospect and Prospects´ needs careful study. Dixit sees no prospects of a friendly neighbour coming closer to India even if Jammu and Kashmir were to join Pakistan. As he sees it-and he quotes Pakistanis as well-"As long as India remains the largest polity in South Asia, tensions are inevitable and will continue." It is a depressing thought. And rather frightening as well. But Dixit´s idea is not to apply the calming unguent to our souls but to wake up his fellow countrymen, to <b>the reality of Pakistan and Islam that first manifested itself when Aurangzeb defeated his older brother Dara Shikoh at the battle of Samugar in the summer of 1658. The seeds of Pakistan were sown then and today we see the fruition of that poisonous tree. </b>

Can some history expert explain statments in the end (highlighted in bold) in one of the history threads?
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Click here: Amazon.com: Books: <b>New World Order: The Ancient Plan of Secret Societies </b>
Please click on this link and read the three or four inside pages of the book.
at the back cover on the last page gives away the conspiracy to dismantle Hindu dharma (positive Hindu Nationalism which is all inclusive panthiestic creed) The secret supremacist right wing racist power money hungary societies agencies that control all the worlds money wealth recources and peoples(engineering genocides to destroy and uproot nonwhite populations and breeding global sweatshops where indigenous native people are exploited in a crass and ruthless manner to provide cheap but high standard raw and finished materials and products mass produced for corporate giants and mass manufacturers to enrich these greedy conglomerates who use thier giant power size and weatlh for world domination and exploitation.all non western Nationalism is a threat to this conspiracy of servitide and cheap labour to be used for the enormous global profiteering of these bandits pirates and mfiaso disguised as legitimate business corporations.The ethos of true Nationalism is being reengineered to mean those loyal to their enslavers and paymasters.Hence Hindu nationalists are branded anti national fanatics.do you see the plot ti hijack and upstage Hindu dharma african dharma Philipino dharma through globalization (which is really selfish vested racist corporatization colonialization) and coopt and corrupt true nationalism by incorporating it into the western structure and definitive and weakening and rendering inffectual true nationalism.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Has anyone read this book?

<b>Op Kartikeya - Round Five in South Asia</b>

What an exciting book! After a long time a military thriller from an Indian writer and with an Indian perspective...Gen Paddy gave us some good moments in his "Writing on the Wall" but Airavat Singh is FANTASTIC!

The book opens with a Mirage 2000/LCA one-on-one.

The lead character is a flyer from the famous No. 1 Tigers squadron.

Indian leaders are assisted by the newly-formed Defence Staff Headquarters.

Airpower is secretly assembled near the Paki border and a massive assault in waves of 200 and 150 jets tears apart the Paki landscape!

The writing style is good and the story flows beautifully.

The opening chapter can be read at:

<b>TOC and opening chapter</b>
I forgot to add; the ebook version of Op Kartikeya is also available. this is the one that I bought <!--emo&Smile--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo--> because it's cheaper and quickly delivered.

Just happened to read the book, "From Fission to Fusion" by Dr. M.R.Srinivasan, the former Chairman, AEC. Having been involved as an understudy of Homi Bhabha and grown with the Atomic Energy scene in India, he gives a good introduction to how India incrementally grew. He captures the excitement in setting up various power plants and the trials and tribulations and how some of our brilliant engineers overcame problems. Also, on how each successive power station learned from the past mistakes. He discusses elaborately on individual power stations as well as the saga of the various Heavy Water Plants. He has neatly sidestepped or diplomatically avoided some personality issues in the AEC like when Vikram Sarabhai followed Homi Bhabha or the known issues between him and Sethna and later between Sethna and Raja Ramanna. He meticulously mentions names of hundreds of persons in the Establishment and their various contributions. Though there is no mention of the weapons programme, the book is an excellent read for understanding the Indian achievements in the Atomic power sector field.
Carroll Quigley's Tragedy and Hope: <b>A History Of The World In Our Time</b>.
Financial Express

Good review of Operation Kartikeya

As India and Pakistan dabble with the latest set of peace initiatives, we have a novel that reminds us that if things go wrong now—as they did when Pakistani militants attacked Indian Parliament in 2001 and India mobilised its troops—New Delhi might be tempted to go for air strikes.

<b>Airawat Singh’s Op-Kartikeya: Round Five in South Asia </b>is based on a scenario in which, this time, New Delhi might just order a series of surgical air strikes by the Indian Air Force (IAF) simultaneously across Pakistan, by Mirage 2000 fighters from air bases in Gwalior and elsewhere.

As intelligence intercepts reveal that a new set of missiles and weapon systems that Pakistan has received from China, via the Karakoram highway that runs from north of Kashmir, could strengthen the resolve amongst the hardliners in Islamabad to step up their campaign of terror across India, the government in Delhi sanctions “Operation Kartikeya” — named after the god of war — and orders the men and machines of the IAF to gear up and meet the challenge.

Set in 2005 — two decades after Ravi Rikhiye’s controversial The Fourth Round — this facto-fiction account is different from other such works about India-Pakistan wars. Mr Singh’s book is more about air battles than land battles, because in today’s electronic era, conventional wars are of limited value, whereas, as the author states, “In the air force, time is measured in hours and minutes. The tactical movements that two opposing armies or navies engage in usually extend into days if not weeks. But when the opposing birds are set in motion the conflict is decisively altered in favour of one or the other.” The ‘birds’ are India’s nuclear capable Mirage 2000 fighters.

Written with the expertise of an insider, but by one who has interestingly never flown a fighter, the book is surprisingly accurate about the details that so many want to know, but never quite get to know. And about how the services methodically deliberate over the consequences of a conflict at the bomb-proof integrated service head quarters in Delhi; or for that matter the ‘G’ forces that a pilot faces as he pulls the joystick of the Mirage 2000 and becomes air-borne in no time.

Here is a sample: “Squadron Leader Karan Dev Singh eased back the throttle of this Mirage 2000 fighter jet and rolled the joystick to the left and pulled. When the jet turned, he instinctively tensed the muscled of his lower body, even as the G-suit inflated to help him fight the gravitational force of the landmass 10 kilometres below. The Mirage 2000 could handle up to 9Gs of that force, but at that level the pilot would experience ‘tunnel vision’ as the blood rushed away from his head causing him to eventually black out ... but just then Karan decided it was time for some fun, he told himself and rolled the jet right and on to it back, allowing it to drop like a dead weight even as he gripped the stick and held that position. This manoeuvre was meant to avoid negative G-forces ... then blood rushes to the pilot’s head and induces a feeling of weightlessness.”

OP-KARTIKEYA: Round Five in South Asia
Airavat Singh; iUniverse (USA);
$14.95 (paperback)

This is a book that will thrill military buffs and arm-chair strategists alike. A facto-fiction, that is thoroughly researched but still a most readable account of how the next military confrontation between India and Pakistan could shape up. But for the hypothetical outcome, get a hold of a copy and read it for yourself.

<i>Maroof Raza is a series editor of the Military Affairs series of Har Anand Publications</i>
Has anyone read or used the book <b>Vedic Mathematics</b> (ISBN:8120801636)

by Shree Bharati Krsna Tirthaji Maharaja

If yes, please post your comments.

Post away...

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)