We read big portions of this in one of my classes in graduate school. I picked it up from our library to read the whole thing. It's a good book. ProphWe read big portions of this in one of my classes in graduate school. I picked it up from our library to read the whole thing. It's a good book. Prophetic in many ways. Social media seems to have exacerbated the issues that television and other entertainment measured in the volume. This quote in the book from Theda Skocpol really stood out to me:
"In classic civic America, millions of ordinary men and women could interact with one another, participate in groups side by side with the more privileged, and exercise influence in both community and national affairs... In recent times the old civic America has been bypassed and shoved aside by a gaggle of professionally dominated advocacy groups and nonprofit institutions rarely attached to memberships worthy of the name. Ideas of shared citizenship and possibilities for democratic leverage have been compromised in the process." (344)
This paragraph by Putnam follows a bit later:
"Peter Skerry has argued that broad national membership organizations tend to be dominated not by member input - which is, after all, usually just a check sent in for their dues - but by headquarters staff. These people are inevitably pulled toward the wishes of their major patrons: wealthy individuals, foundations, even the government agencies that indirectly fund many of them... There is another reason why large 'tertiary' organizations are no substitute for more personal forms of political engagement: Most political decision making does not take place in Washington. To be effective, therefore political activity cannot be confined to mailing one's dues to an inside-the-beltway interest group."...more
This book never really got traction with me. It documents a number of incidents from the 1980s to the present, including incidents that occurred in otThis book never really got traction with me. It documents a number of incidents from the 1980s to the present, including incidents that occurred in other countries and chalks it all up to American violence. Some chapters present the same story 2-3 different times as evidence for the argument. No tables, no systematic evidence. Disappointing for a book that is supposed to define an entire problem. ...more
Reading this book was very interesting. The writing is such that it could be coming out of the protests on college campuses today. If you are interestReading this book was very interesting. The writing is such that it could be coming out of the protests on college campuses today. If you are interested in history and in taking the ideas of people seriously, then read them in their own words. I don't agree with most of the ideas espoused here, but was able to find common ground. Willingness to do that is crucial if we are to continue as a society....more
An interesting book that uses both survey experiments and detailed case studies to look at how leaders develop reputations for resolve. This is an impAn interesting book that uses both survey experiments and detailed case studies to look at how leaders develop reputations for resolve. This is an important issue in international relations in general, and in crisis diplomacy, in particular. ...more
This is a good overview of post-Soviet Russia's foreign policy. I read it out of curiosity and considering it for use in a course on US foreign policyThis is a good overview of post-Soviet Russia's foreign policy. I read it out of curiosity and considering it for use in a course on US foreign policy toward Russia. It gives a balanced look at Russia's interests and the different political and ideological factions that make up Russian foreign policy thinking. It is a fair look at the ways that Russia has acted and reacted to US - primarily - foreign policy and international relations.
If foreign policy and understanding are to be built on understanding how each other thinks, then this is a critical book for those thinking about US policy toward Russia. You don't have to agree with the thinking, but you do have to understand it in order to engage in real good-faith negotiations and policy.
An interesting theoretical account of the ways in which armed groups participate in national politics. The case studies from Southeast Asia are reallyAn interesting theoretical account of the ways in which armed groups participate in national politics. The case studies from Southeast Asia are really detailed - and can be a bit overwhelming in that detail for a non-area specialist. However, the application of different kinds of methods to explore an issue that is understudied in the civil war literature is really good. The last chapter includes some good ideas for future directions for research.
The bottom line is that armed groups are much more common in politics than we often account for - and the range of ways in which they matter in politics is broad. Not all armed groups are in conflict with the government. Some are allied, some have truces, etc. It's good for thinking about the way the world really works. ...more
An interesting book that systematically explores the interplay between religion and the state and the policies that states adopt. It's thick with descAn interesting book that systematically explores the interplay between religion and the state and the policies that states adopt. It's thick with description of the interplay of church and state with an interesting and fairly parsimonious theoretical description that comes upfront. There is a lot to digest that I'll be working through for awhile as I think of the principles from the book. ...more
There is some good information here. It reads as a "I told you so" book from someone who was hostile to the war from the beginning. Galbraith is a powThere is some good information here. It reads as a "I told you so" book from someone who was hostile to the war from the beginning. Galbraith is a powerful participant when it suits him, and a helpless bystander when that is a better position to criticize from. I think this is an interesting book for people to read who are interested in the politics around Iraq and its invasion at the time when it dominated US domestic politics. The US political angle shouldn't be discounted when evaluating the suggestions and the accusations....more
This is a book that I have read "about" for more than a decade. It is one that I have had on lists of books to read for my research on arms transfers.This is a book that I have read "about" for more than a decade. It is one that I have had on lists of books to read for my research on arms transfers. I can see now that it was a serious oversight that I didn't have this book before. It was hard to find, but now it is print on demand from Princeton and I am able to have my own copy.
I won't write a lot about the book here, except to say that this is an excellent book to understand arms sales even now, 40 years after its initial publication....more
Wallace does a good job of outlining the key issues of prisoners in War from a strategic and military standpoint. This book should be considered the fWallace does a good job of outlining the key issues of prisoners in War from a strategic and military standpoint. This book should be considered the foundational text for such studies going forward. A good mix of theory and discussion, generalization through quantitative analysis, and in depth looks at hard cases in a more qualitative approach.
This is a book I read mostly out of professional interest, but something that sits outside my direct research interests. I have a lot of thoughts abouThis is a book I read mostly out of professional interest, but something that sits outside my direct research interests. I have a lot of thoughts about it, but will probably blog about it on my own blog in the coming weeks as I digest the arguments. It is an interesting book for those that are interested in military history or military effectiveness. It has a good mix of theory and empirical evidence and a mix of quantitative and narrative evidence as part of the empirics .
Perhaps a useful reference for an area studies person or want-to be expert on the region. After the book was halfway over I thought that everything haPerhaps a useful reference for an area studies person or want-to be expert on the region. After the book was halfway over I thought that everything had been said two or three times with just a bit of a different spin. The repackaged essays could have used a bit more narrative to fit them together. It's not a bad book, but it's kind of a dry read cover to cover....more
The book is generally good. I was a bit disappointed that the premise of the three rules was really only applied selectively, and mostly as it has to The book is generally good. I was a bit disappointed that the premise of the three rules was really only applied selectively, and mostly as it has to do with the US. It's a pretty good book to get a general understanding of many of the political issues in the Central Asian states, but its more about the actions of great powers than the agency of the states in the region.
The takeaway point can be summarized quite shortly: patrimonial and corrupt regimes in the region have incentives to keep things the way they are and to play other powers off of each other as much as possible to increase the money that can be appropriated by the regime and its loyalists....more
This book is old and out of print, but very awesome. The premise of the book is to outline the use of covert actions by states. The central premise ofThis book is old and out of print, but very awesome. The premise of the book is to outline the use of covert actions by states. The central premise of the book is that the use of covert actions by sates is not the panacea that was promised in the post WWII and early Cold War era.
Blackstock uses many examples, starting from 19th century Europe and through the Bay of Pigs and support to regimes in Vietnam and the Middle East. I have been working on a long-term project on covert action, and this book is useful in terms of background and theory development. I am most surprised by the fact that this book didn't become more foundational, but was lost history as it were.
There are so many good ideas that are simply lost....more
This book had very little substance about the crisis and instead focused on the potential outcomes of the crisis for Ukraine's relations with various This book had very little substance about the crisis and instead focused on the potential outcomes of the crisis for Ukraine's relations with various states. I was a bit disappointed in its lack of content....more
Loading...
