Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Published on Thursday, December 24, 2009 by CommonDreams.org
Holiday Reading List 2009
This is the golden age of muckraking books and documentaries but some of them may have escaped your attention because reviews and promotions cannot keep up with the sheer volume of material.
Here are my recommendations for your Holiday and later reading time:
1. Achieving the Impossible by Lois Marie Gibbs; Published by the Center for Health, Environment and Justice (www.chej.org) is an inspiring collection of short stories about how ordinary people have risen to meet the challenges of toxic pollution confronting their families and communities. The author herself rose from the Love Canal controversy in Niagara Falls, New York to lead a grand national grass roots organization.
2. Europe’s Promise: Why the European Way is the Best Hope In An Insecure Age by Steven Hill (University of California Press, 2010.) His thesis is that Western Europe treats its people better in many ways than the United States does its people, and not just in social insurance and services. Read, wonder and galvanize!
3. Grand Illusion: The Myth of Voter Choice in A Two-Party Tyranny by Theresa Amato (New Press, 2009.) My former campaign manager weighs in with an indictment of the two-party barriers to a competitive electoral system, candidate ballot access and voter choice. Partly personal memoir of her battles in 2000 and 2004, part history about the decades long ago when third parties could get on the ballot easier and make a difference and part a series of reforms that only an outraged public can make happen.
4. Priceless Money: Banking Time for Changing Times by Edgar S. Cahn is a revolutionary elevation of traditional assets in how time can become a currency—a means of exchange that is beyond price—that does not allow market price to define value. It is a limited edition booklet you’ll never forget, free. Send two first class stamps to TimeBanksUSA, 5500 39th St. NW, Washington, D.C. 20015.
5. Empire of Illusion by Chris Hedges (Nation Books, 2009) The Pulitzer Prize winning war correspondent turned prolific author and lecturer, Mr. Hedges goes to the core of a culture that cannot distinguish between reality and illusion. He “exposes the mechanisms used to divert us from confronting the economic, political and moral collapse around us.” In gripping, memorable concrete prose that resonates the moment we let ourselves think.
6. The Buyout of America: How Private Equity Will Cause the Next Great Credit Crisis by Josh Kosman (Portfolio Hardcover, 2009.) Think it is all about the brand names of a corrupt, reckless Wall Street? Try the entirely unregulated private equity firms that acquire and strip mine them under the guise of saving them, then leave behind debt time bombs and mass layoffs as the value of these leveraged buyouts is sucked out by the corporate bunccaneers. Kosman predicts a coming private equity-caused big bubble crisis.
7. Ordinary People Doing the Extraordinary: The Story of Ed and Joyce Koupal and the Initiative Process by Dwayne Hunn and Doris Ober. This husband-wife team “just ordinary people,” in their words, started out powerless and in over a decade, largely in the seventies, built Initiative power to qualify reforms on the California ballot for the popular vote. A story for the ages that strips away excuses steeped in a sense of powerlessness. This small but invigorating paperback can be obtained from The People’s Lobby (peopleslobby.hypermart.net) for $15, including shipping. California St., Unit 201, San Francisco, CA 94109.
8. Getting Away With Torture: Secret Government, War Crimes, and the Rule of Law by Christopher H. Pyle (Potomac Books, 2009) A former captain in army intelligence and Congressional staffer, now teaching constitutional law at Mount Holyoke College, Mr. Pyle shatters our belief in the rule of law before the unconstitutional government of Bush and Cheney in waging war crimes and torture, while seeking Congressional amnesty to those responsible for implementing their rogue, secret regime. Veteran constitutional law specialist, Louis Fisher asserts these practices have “left American weaker politically, economically, morally, and legally.”
9. It Takes A Pillage by Nomi Prins (Wiley, 2009.) A former managing director of Goldman Sachs, who quit Wall Street, and now is dedicated to educating and mobilizing the American people so that they press for reforms to prevent myopic greed from bringing down our economy again and to hold the speculators and crooks accountable. She “gets inside how the banks looted the Treasury, stole the bailout, and continued with business as usual,” in the words of one reviewer.
10. Censored 2010: The Top 25 Censored Stories of 2008-09 edited by Peter Phillips and Mickey Huff with Project Censored (Seven Stories Press, 2009.) This book contains investigative pieces on important topics too often neglected by the mainstream news organizations. Read this book, it will make you angry and then it will energize you to take on a significant societal problem in the New Year.
Here are my recommendations for your Holiday and later reading time:
1. Achieving the Impossible by Lois Marie Gibbs; Published by the Center for Health, Environment and Justice (www.chej.org) is an inspiring collection of short stories about how ordinary people have risen to meet the challenges of toxic pollution confronting their families and communities. The author herself rose from the Love Canal controversy in Niagara Falls, New York to lead a grand national grass roots organization.
2. Europe’s Promise: Why the European Way is the Best Hope In An Insecure Age by Steven Hill (University of California Press, 2010.) His thesis is that Western Europe treats its people better in many ways than the United States does its people, and not just in social insurance and services. Read, wonder and galvanize!
3. Grand Illusion: The Myth of Voter Choice in A Two-Party Tyranny by Theresa Amato (New Press, 2009.) My former campaign manager weighs in with an indictment of the two-party barriers to a competitive electoral system, candidate ballot access and voter choice. Partly personal memoir of her battles in 2000 and 2004, part history about the decades long ago when third parties could get on the ballot easier and make a difference and part a series of reforms that only an outraged public can make happen.
4. Priceless Money: Banking Time for Changing Times by Edgar S. Cahn is a revolutionary elevation of traditional assets in how time can become a currency—a means of exchange that is beyond price—that does not allow market price to define value. It is a limited edition booklet you’ll never forget, free. Send two first class stamps to TimeBanksUSA, 5500 39th St. NW, Washington, D.C. 20015.
5. Empire of Illusion by Chris Hedges (Nation Books, 2009) The Pulitzer Prize winning war correspondent turned prolific author and lecturer, Mr. Hedges goes to the core of a culture that cannot distinguish between reality and illusion. He “exposes the mechanisms used to divert us from confronting the economic, political and moral collapse around us.” In gripping, memorable concrete prose that resonates the moment we let ourselves think.
6. The Buyout of America: How Private Equity Will Cause the Next Great Credit Crisis by Josh Kosman (Portfolio Hardcover, 2009.) Think it is all about the brand names of a corrupt, reckless Wall Street? Try the entirely unregulated private equity firms that acquire and strip mine them under the guise of saving them, then leave behind debt time bombs and mass layoffs as the value of these leveraged buyouts is sucked out by the corporate bunccaneers. Kosman predicts a coming private equity-caused big bubble crisis.
7. Ordinary People Doing the Extraordinary: The Story of Ed and Joyce Koupal and the Initiative Process by Dwayne Hunn and Doris Ober. This husband-wife team “just ordinary people,” in their words, started out powerless and in over a decade, largely in the seventies, built Initiative power to qualify reforms on the California ballot for the popular vote. A story for the ages that strips away excuses steeped in a sense of powerlessness. This small but invigorating paperback can be obtained from The People’s Lobby (peopleslobby.hypermart.net) for $15, including shipping. California St., Unit 201, San Francisco, CA 94109.
8. Getting Away With Torture: Secret Government, War Crimes, and the Rule of Law by Christopher H. Pyle (Potomac Books, 2009) A former captain in army intelligence and Congressional staffer, now teaching constitutional law at Mount Holyoke College, Mr. Pyle shatters our belief in the rule of law before the unconstitutional government of Bush and Cheney in waging war crimes and torture, while seeking Congressional amnesty to those responsible for implementing their rogue, secret regime. Veteran constitutional law specialist, Louis Fisher asserts these practices have “left American weaker politically, economically, morally, and legally.”
9. It Takes A Pillage by Nomi Prins (Wiley, 2009.) A former managing director of Goldman Sachs, who quit Wall Street, and now is dedicated to educating and mobilizing the American people so that they press for reforms to prevent myopic greed from bringing down our economy again and to hold the speculators and crooks accountable. She “gets inside how the banks looted the Treasury, stole the bailout, and continued with business as usual,” in the words of one reviewer.
10. Censored 2010: The Top 25 Censored Stories of 2008-09 edited by Peter Phillips and Mickey Huff with Project Censored (Seven Stories Press, 2009.) This book contains investigative pieces on important topics too often neglected by the mainstream news organizations. Read this book, it will make you angry and then it will energize you to take on a significant societal problem in the New Year.
Comments are closed
72 Comments so far
Show AllLooks like another good list from Ralph. He manages to hit just about every Progressive issue except for healthcare insurance reform - we'll see a bunch of those books next year.
It would be nice to discuss the matters addressed by Ralph's titles but this thread will soon devolve into anti-Obama rants and Foxtard trolling.
Cahn's book is the first one that I'm going to read.
q
I agree. It's an evidently very good selection of books that we can all be confident about recommending to others.
And I also agree with your second paragraph. I would expect and accept references to corrupt presidential administrations, their related wrongs, as well as those of the Congress and Senate, but would not want empty, worthless, non-contributive flaming about Obama, etcetera; and we tend to get a little too much of the latter sort of posts.
*snicker*
Excuse me while I reel this fish in.
"Any intelligent discussion of the "matters addressed by Ralph's titles" must naturally involve the recognition that Obama is essentially Bush in superficially modified packaging."
Why? It is possible to discuss all of these issues from systemic, cultural, or societal perspectives without including Obama or Bush - or republicans or Dems for that matter.
Thanks for making my point.
q
You're really struggling with some of these points.
"How could one possibly discuss that issue without mentioning the fact that Obama & the Democrats stink just as much as Republicans?"
Because the discussion deals with the various dynamics (political, social, economic, etc.) that have produced our current two-party system and not about the specific parties themselves. If we were voting between Whigs and Federalists, the discussion would deal with the same issues.
Consider the United Kingdom's parliamentary system. It virtually assures the existence and participation of more than two parties and yet British elections are dominated by two parties (Labour and the Tories) which produce many of the same problems as ours do in the US.
"And because, more broadly, the rest of the titles are about problems (like the Wall St bailout, torture, etc) whose very existence results from the fact that the 2-party system is not "democracy," but rather corporate tyranny posing as democracy."
So what you want is a discussion of the means and methods by which "corporate tyranny" operates in a representative democracy. While such an examination would be quite worthwhile, it would not really involve the specific failings of any particular party or individual.
"And because the essential merit of Ralph Nader is that he's NOT a corporate whore, like Obama and Bush."
What a pathetic, tacked-on piece of non-logic.
"The "systemic perspective" begins from the recognition that the 2-party system is a complete fraud . . . ."
No, the systemic perspective begins from the recognition that a two-party political system exists and then examines the various factors which produced it and the reasons for its failures.
q
The society's values are probably the most fundamental. With good values, the society can build up and even work around imperfect structural elements, such as a two-party political system. USan society is pushed by elites into rejection of the earth, and our own nature, so USans are detached from the ground and are unable to trust/respect people and planet, so there's constant turmoil in the USA, which is medicated with large doses of material opiates. The people pursuing these opiates affords the elites a surplus to steal. Even the relatively perfect structural elements such as the UK's parliamentary system do no good amid corrupted values. The system doesn't matter much either way. The values are everything. Localism is an approach that helps people keep their feet on the ground, and not lose those good values we naturally embrace when we're free from elite oppression.
I won't address everything in the above post by quickstepper, but will select one or two parts to comment on.
Quote:
"And because the essential merit of Ralph Nader is that he's NOT a corporate whore, like Obama and Bush."
What a pathetic, tacked-on piece of non-logic.
End quote
What's pathetic and tacked-on about what you quoted from RichM, and what causes you to think it's "non-logical"? He's right. The Bushes, Clintons, Obama, and many members of the U.S. Congress and Senate are corporate whores; while Ralph Nader isn't and has a long track record to prove this about himself. So please explain what non-logic you perceive in this; and what's pathetic and tacked-on about it.
Quote:
"The "systemic perspective" begins from the recognition that the 2-party system is a complete fraud . . . ."
No, the systemic perspective begins from the recognition that a two-party political system exists and then examines the various factors which produced it and the reasons for its failures.
End quote
Why do you call the U.S. a "two-party political system", because of the Constitution, or simply because it's not the kind of political system the U.S. legally has, but nevertheless effectively is what the country has had for a long time, now?
According to what I believe was a recently dated article, but if not, then which I nevertheless recently read, The League of Women Voters helped to ensure that third parties could run and participate (fully) in electoral debates, but the LOWV's excellent and essential role was rogue-ishly replaced in 1987 or 1988 with an extremely corporatist think tank run by two corporate predators. I forget the name of that think tank, but some readers here might know what it is.
Another article that might not be recently dated, but which I recently read, describes how the two-party politics in the U.S. and due to the corrupt two main parties in the U.S. really and basically rigged the 2008 elections and with Obama and McCain seeing to this out of public view. They worked together to define what debate topics and which candidates would be involved; and they didn't do this without the leaderships of the two parties knowing about it.
Or maybe what these two paragraphs, above, say or are about is entirely from the same article, for it just came back to mind that what the second paragraph describes is not new as of 2009; it started back when the LOWV was replaced with the corporatist think tank.
Legally, the U.S. is a democracy and third parties must be allowed to run and to participate in debates. If the latter wasn't true, then we could hardly speak of the U.S. being a real democracy according to law; according to law, because it really and obviously is not respected and enforced law, and the majority of voters are as guilty in this as their political "representatives" are, most or too many of them, anyway. Real democracy has effectively been hijacked, highly corrupted or shelved (whatever), in the U.S. and this is because of the two main political parties. Therefore, it's appropriate to specifically refer to them when speaking of or discussing about the political system in the U.S. It's also pertinent to specifically refer to the corporate hands in this, for the government politically is corporatist; because of the two main political parties, again.
I first agreed with the second paragraph of your post, but these additional posts of yours provide a clearer understanding of what you meant by that paragraph and I don't see how to agree with you about it being supposedly irrelevant to specifically refer to or discuss about the wrongdoings of the two main political parties and the corporate corruption involved with these two parties.
The problem is systemic, as are other problems of serious import in the U.S., but being systemic doesn't mean that all political parties are corrupt and disrespectful of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. Ralph Nader isn't, and Cynthia McKinney evidently also is not. Libertarians, some of them anyway, are corporatist, but Ralph Nader and, I believe, Cynthia McKinney both are innocent of this rogue way or trait, say. The problem is systemic because it's been implanted, say, but corrupt members of the two main political parties and their complicitly supportive voters.
The voters, therefore, can't be left out of a full discussion on the problem of the corrupt political system in the USA. And this, I believe, leads to the validity of introducing "culture" into the discussion; especially when we include the fact that corrupt propaganda from msm "news" media and their corporate owners plays a serious role in all of this political corruption.
As said in my reply to your initial post, I wouldn't want nonsensical or stupid flaming about the two main political parties, but this is far from saying that the two parties and specific members of them shouldn't be specifically referred to. They and their corporate "pals" are the leaders of the cause(s) of the systemic problem and injustice, as well as crime.
When wanting to include discussion of the causes, then these various parties or elements should not be omitted, for doing so might be out of ignorance, or negligence, but cold also be like trying to pretend that they're innocent in all of this when they're extremely guilty for this hijacking of the political system in the USA.
RichM may've expressed some anger in his post, but it's understandable anger; instead of being nonsensical or empty flames or bitching.
Want some bait? I'll provide you with an immediately relevant example. Do you believe the official story on the 9-11 attacks is true?
Mike Corbeil
Very well said.
"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth."-Albert Einstein
"How could one possibly discuss that issue without mentioning the fact that Obama & the Democrats stink just as much as Republicans?"
because that particular stench is a given.
instead of trying to establish yet another "third" party (how many can there be?) - what is needed is the removal of all parties.
No need to devolve into anti-Obama rant.
Obama was always Obama.
It just that Norman Soloman, Robert Sheer and other progressive Democrats saw what they wanted to see instead of what was there.
They can now be more understanding of Creationist and others who suffer from similar delusions.
Excellent list. The only two I'd add, though they weren't released in 2009, are Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein, and Overthrow by Steve Kinzer. Both of these provide sort of an historical underpinning to much of what we're seeing in US government today.
Why not read a book you are likely to disagree with so as to test your critical thinking skills and to be prepared to deliver a counter argument? Wouldn't one get bored after reading nothing but books that already confirm your world view?
Not quite. If you read and understand the books on Nader's list, you will be able to articulate counter-arguments for the next 100 years. I, for one, will not enrich any jingoistic, warmongering, imperialist, corporate shill by buying their book. When one studies politics for years, the issues are well-known and have been around for decades, if not more. If you don't know how to form a counter-argument, education is the answer, not enriching your enemy.
"When one studies politics for years"
If by this you mean you have already read the books of opposing views by the dozens, then you are off the hook in my view. I doubt you did though and instead expect you are a perfect candidate for my suggestion. Have a nice Christmas.
Jakenewton's suggestion makes little sense since one is already surrounded by opposing views [which, of course, are really another way of saying conventional thinking] in the mainstream media. Rarely does one hear the thoughts and the ideas that are expressed by the articles and the comments that one reads on Common Dreams ever put forth on the network and cable outlets as well the vast majority of newspapers in this country. That being the case it would then beg the question as to why a liberal or a leftist would want to trouble him or her self to read the propaganda that one constantly sees and hears on a daily basis in the corporate media which is then published into books in order to reinforce more subservient thinking by the American populace.
"one is already surrounded by opposing views [which, of course, are really another way of saying conventional thinking] in the mainstream media."
We were taling about *books*. And I also wonder if you think an idea lacks merit only on the basis that it is "conventional". Some conventions are good.
"why a liberal or a leftist would want to trouble him or her self to read the propaganda that one constantly sees and hears on a daily basis in the corporate media"
Said as if the themes in the books listed are never heard about: Private equity is "bad". Two party system is "bad". Reform of Wall Street "good". European style socialism "good". Are you serious? I hear about these themes and other leftist favorites in the "corporate media" all the time. Have a nice Christmas.
Your comments simply confirm that your views continue to make little if any sense at all. You appear taken aback at the comments that are presented here on Common Dreams apparently because they rarely conform to the conventional views that are given in the mainstream media. But what you seem to refuse to acknowledge is that there are plenty of web sites that you can go to, both conservative and liberal, that believe and advocate in the conventional type of thinking that you seem to enjoy.
Regarding your other bizarre comment, while it may be true that in your universe you may see and hear and read of forums which discuss topics which you list such as third parties and socialism, the world that I and others inhabit rarely if ever brings up the subject of third parties except during a presidential election and only then in a tangential way. Even less seen or talked about is any mention of that dreaded word socialism by, of all people, an actual socialist on any of the network and/or cable programs. Perhaps you can inform the people here when would be the last time you have seen a person advocating for socialism on corporate television. That, of course, would mean in the real world and not the one that you are a part of. Given the hysteria that is connected with socialists and socialism, it remains highly doubtful if the corporate television airwaves and the major newspapers and the halls of Congress will be overrun anytime soon with anyone who dares to speak on the merits of socialism, at least in any sort of positive way. But again, this would be in reference to what is occurring in today's America as opposed to the parallel universe which you seem to occupy.
Perhaps your strange thinking is due to your having consumed a few too many potent egg nogs while celebrating the holidays. That certainly would account for your less than lucid comments. As you say, have a nice Christmas. And please, whatever you do, do not drink and drive during the holidays.
Incoherent. You need an editor. *shrug*
And you need a life if this is how you spend Christmas--compulsively trolling on a left-wing list with your masochistic "kick me" sign firmly attached to your bulging rear end.
Situationist
Your description of Mr. jakenewton as being a masochist is most applicable to him. One has to wonder why he continues to post his incomprehensible comments at this site since he apparently finds the opinions stated here to be too far left for his way of thinking. But yet he insists upon criticizing those people here who dare to espouse such views. One has to wonder why he does not write his statements which condemn those who do not follow his conventional thinking at the more popular conservative and liberal sites.
But then the fault may lay partly with us as we should acknowledge the truth in the bit of dialogue that was stated in the classic 1957 film Twelve Angry Men when juror #7 [played by Henry Fonda], attempts to console juror #8 [played by Joseph Sweeney], by explaining to him that it was futile attempting to engage in an intelligent discussion with juror #6 [played by Jack Warden], when he tells juror #8 that:
"He can't hear you. He never will."
Appeal to Motive denied. Your speculation as to why I post has nothing to do with my suggestion about reading books that contain and describe ideas that you don't agree with. This suggestion has directly to do with Critical Thinking. In committing the logical fallacy called "Appeal to Motive" as you have done above, you demonstrate once again your need to acquire the most basic skills. Didn't we go over this with you before? I'm quite sure we did.
I suggest starting with the Logical Fallacies, so you can learn to identify them when others use them and to avoid them yourself. The Nizkor Project site is good but there are many others. If you are able to budget even a half hour per week, you would by *way* ahead of where you are now by springtime. Good luck!
BTW, is there any reason you haven’t addressed the posts that agree with me? Just curious.
Mr. JNewton
I must say, your comments are simply more examples of incomprehension at its finest [or worst]. You continue to illogically claim that I and others are not engaging in what you believe to be critical thinking while ignoring the obvious fact that the web site of Common Dreams does exactly that. If this were a site that promotes the idea of militarism and allegiance to what those in power say then you most certainly would be correct. But articles like this by Ralph Nader and the books that he is recommending are doing the exact opposite of that by daring to, as they would say in the old days, challenge and question the establishment.
Nader is engaging in critical thinking by recommending the book Grand Illusion which questions the validity of a two party system. Nader recommends the book Empire of Illusion by Chris Hedges in which Hedges demonstrates that the reality of so many Americans, which is filled with gossip and ultra violence, is a facade and empty of truth. Nader recommends Getting Away With Torture a book which throws aside the belief that the United States is a country which does not torture. Nader recommends Censored 2010: Censored Stories of 2008-9 which focuses upon those stories which were ignored and suppressed by the mainstream media because they actually, despite your misguided belief, decided to challenge conventional thinking by thinking critically of those who are in power and the way that that power is used in this country.
As I wrote before, if you do not think that these books by Nader are too unconventional, then why in the world do you not go to where your beliefs are more accepted such as the more conventional conservative and liberal sites? If you feel that your sensibilities and your seemingly giant intellect are offended by Nader's recommendations, then it would seem that you should stop torturing yourself by coming here. Perhaps it would be better for you if you were to seek solace at more orthodox sites. Despite your strange assertion, I most certainly am thinking critically by not accepting the pablum that is handed out by the government and others who are in power.
"incomprehension"
LOL! See below.
"You continue to illogically claim that I and others are not engaging in what you believe to be critical thinking"
I have only stated in general that you can find many exhibits of poor thinking here. As to you specifically I demonstrated your use of a specific logical fallacy, Appeal to Motivation. That remains on the table, as do other examples I've cited with you in the past, and as do my original points left untouched by your misdirection.
"ignoring the obvious fact that the web site of Common Dreams does exactly that."
LOL! A website does not "think" in any way at all. Only the authors and the commentators think. That you participate on such a comment board does not preclude you from writing illogically as you have just done here yet again, just because that board lies outside of the main stream. Such "incomprehension" by you of what the web site of Common Dreams is and is not.
"Nader is engaging in critical thinking by recommending the book Grand Illusion which questions the validity of a two party system."
So what? I have no beef with Nader or his books list and expect that he generally thinks critically, in spite of any errors he might make. I might even want to read some of them. In no way do I say you should not read *any* particular book.
"why in the world do you not go to where your beliefs are more accepted "
I can think of nothing more boring and weakening than discussing ideas I already agree with.
"I most certainly am thinking critically by not accepting "
"Not accepting" in and of itself does not constitute Critical Thinking. C'mon, do some reading. Half an hour a week. As a Troother you have to know this stuff.
More lack of clear thinking exhibited by Mr. Newton. Are your powers of omniscience that great that you are able to divine what books I read during the week? I think not. That makes about as much sense as your last unintelligible last sentence: "As a Troother [sic] you have to know this stuff." If are attempting to intimate, in your garbled way, that I accept much of what the 9/11 truth movement says, then I am guilty as charged for, as you might say, daring to think critically of what the government claimed to have happened on Sept. 11, 2001. To borrow from what you have written, C'mon, do some reading. A half hour to an hour a week [if not a day] will help to lead you in the right direction on this subject. The works of David Ray Griffin would be a good place to begin as well as the book Towers of Deception by Barrie Zwicker [which also comes with a DVD].
As those who are religious might say, the truth shall set you free [from your conventional way of thinking].
"Are your powers of omniscience that great that you are able to divine what books I read during the week? I think not."
You have gotten way off track on this one. I haven't said anything that would have required knowledge about anything you ever read, so that was pretty weird that you would ask that. Let's see if I can get you back on track.
"[sic]"
I spelled it that way intentionally and you know it. Therefore you don't "sic" it. I meant it specifically as a pejorative.
"daring to think critically of what the government claimed to have happened"
Now pay close attention: Disagreeing with something does not mean you have done any critical thinking. Agreeing with something does not mean you have done any critical thinking. Do you understand that? You need to be able to actually support your view via facts and logical reasoning.
"To borrow from what you have written,"
So now you agree with my original point. And here it is for your reference:
"Why not read a book you are likely to disagree with so as to test your critical thinking skills and to be prepared to deliver a counter argument? Wouldn't one get bored after reading nothing but books that already confirm your world view?"
Clearly you agree with the original suggestion. Good. You still need to study Critical Thinking principles though.
"David Ray Griffin"
I have read a bit more from him since we went through this before. He can think critically that’s for sure, the only question is whether he suspends his skills around certain important points intentionally or unintentionally. I happen to think he's just trying to make money so I go with the former.
Seriously though, that was really weird about thinking that I should know what books you've read, where did that come from?
Droning unto infinity and nullity . . .
"Why not read a book you are likely to disagree with so as to test your critical thinking skills..."
So what's your take on 'Going Rogue'? :D
Personally, I find it a waste of time and money to read drek*. If reviews suggest I was wrong, I will try it later. I suspect there are more books than readers (exaggeration for effect) considering the number of books touted on tv where ppl are, by definition, watching tv, 'not' reading, lol.
*drek (Yiddish; 'Farscape'): trash, sh*t.
dusseven 4:40,
When I lamented to my "rightie" sister that I was number 135 of 250 holds for "Going Rogue" at out local library, she sent me a copy (hard back, no less...$30 to Sarah's war chest).
Smooth, quick read... 406 pages in a little over 24 hours (and I am NOT a speedreader).
As a northern Wisconsinite, I rather liked (and identified with) her recounting of her small town, early family years close to nature and was impressed by her tenacity at pursuing public service. She took on her own corrupt Republican state leadership as well as Big Oil.
She gives her accounting of the rough handling she received from the post-veep-nomination
"A Team" (Republican top brass) but speaks with gratitude about her own "B" team; she has only praise for McCain hmself.
Yes, the media did treat her poorly, though there is some serious doubt about her think-on-your-feet ability. She mentions her daily reads (WSJ, Investors' Business Daily, among others) a page before she agonizes over the blown Couric interview: "What do you read?"
---"All of 'em..."
Critics have tagged her as "whiny" for her post-election let-down blame-tossing, but she does make some reasonable defense for the subsequent gubernatorial drop-out.
Beside the "pals around with terrorists"(Bill A.) accusation against Obama, she clusters a couple more on the same page... taking swipes at that "communist dictator from Venezuela" and Obama's "goddamn America" pastor, accusations that unravel and disintegrate when pursued in depth.
In his "Idiot America", Charlie Pierce spoofs Palin's qualification for international relations advanced by some, Alaska's proximity to Russia. By that reasoning, smiles Pierce, she can be a lunar astronaut because she's from the planet closest to the moon.
No, I wouldn't want her a heartbeat from the presidency, but where she's at home "up home"
in Alaska, she's a remarkable lady. The book "de-caricature-izes" her and presents a much warmer image than I'd anticipated.
Oh, and I'm now 114th on the library waiting list...
"$30 to Sarah's war chest"
I heard it for 4.99 but you had to sign up for a newsletter or something.
Thanks, Jake. Betcha that's where she got it. She's an admirer of Sean and Rush.
Ray
"So what's your take on 'Going Rogue'? "
I don't read any of the pop stuff.
"I find it a waste of time and money to read drek"
Of course.
"*drek (Yiddish; 'Farscape'): trash, sh*t."
Choss.
You've raised a good question.
I would argue that since we are immersed in mainstream arguments and ideology, we hardly need to do more than look around us if we want to sharpen our critical thinking skills. An occasional pause from the mainstream is appropriate around holidays that include the giving of gifts.
Provided you have the skills to begin with I agree. Alas, you need only to look at this board for many examples of those completely lacking. Have a nice holiday.
Surprise! I agree with you! And that's why I consider myself neither Right nor Left. -- Politics on one level is the art of compromise, which is why ideologues don't have a lot of use for it. (They would rather take their battles to the streets, since voters are unreliable.) On another level, politics is a struggle to tell people how they should lead their lives -- i.e., how they will be taxed, which activities are illegal, how we should act towards other countries. I find most people far too willing to let others do their thinking for them. -- Some folks on this site describe themselves as "socialist." There are obviously many highly admirable historical figures who applied that label to themselves -- but to call oneself what Hitler (a "nationalist" socialist) and Stalin (an "internationalist" socialist) called themselves -- well, perhaps I'm just too sensitive.... Isn't there a better word? (And don't say "progressive" -- everyone wishes to work for progress.)-- The internet seems to encourage echo-chamber thinking -- like-minded people speaking to one another (and calling their opponents "idiots"). I'm hoping that you are indeed an exception to the rule.
"(And don't say "progressive" -- everyone wishes to work for progress.)"
However, one person's view of progress is perceived as regression by another person. War-makers' views of progress is only for themselves and is opposed by most people on Earth, so the latter clearly don't perceive the war-makers' objectives as progress. Progress really has no qualitative association; it can be good, or bad, we can progressively improve, or become worse than before. The words infers direction, but doesn't say what the direction leads to; good, or bad. Most people in the U.S. used the word as if it can only mean good, but it doesn't necessarily or always mean that.
Quote:
n.
1. Movement, as toward a goal; advance.
...
intr.v.
...
3. To increase in scope or severity, as a disease taking an unfavorable course.
Idiom:
in progress
Going on; under way: a work in progress.
End quote
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Progress
The U.S. has progressively been on the path of war for corporate greed for decades, and progressively wiped out most of the American Indians, historically, f.e. Both are progress, hellish kinds.
Similarly, liberal and conservative are not terms that are well used to describe politics, for, f.e., liberal can be about something good, or something wicked, and the same applies for the other term. The U.S. liberally treates "colateral damage" as acceptable or insignificant, just an unfortunate, but unavoidable part or consequence of the "business" of war; and the U.S. clearly chooses to conserve this insane and wicked imperialistic manner of treating other people, progressively massacring more innocent civilians every day, for the numbers don't cease to rise or grow.
Besides, many people who supported Obama for the U.S. Presidency referred to themselves as "progressive", when Obama had no respectable track record as a senator and could not be trusted; characteristics that open-minded people could definitely know ahead of time. Being close-minded is not progressive in any good sense.
Everyone may want progress, but not all progress is good.
"Surprise! I agree with you! "
No big surprise here. I think after you cut through the mud there is wide agreement out there on the underlying things if not for the desired methods.
"calling their opponents "idiots" "
I try to avoid it until after the other has already done so in full measure. Than I try to ignore them afterwards.
Merry Christmas to you.
This is an outstanding list. For all the messenger-killers out there, Ralph' list is a must read.
I read Jeremy Rifkin's book "the European Dream" some years ago and Steven Hill's book is a great follow-up. Steven Hill wrote one a couple years ago called "Ten Steps to Repair American Democracy", that ought to be a must-read for anyone interested in politics.
Love him or loathe him, Ralph Nader is one of the greatest(although quasi-censored) public figures we have.
Ralph Nader at his best. Aware, literate, curious, inquiring, and provocative. These selections are all designed to get people thinking and to not just roll over and accept the status-quo as inevitable.
Whether you agree or disagree with the points made by the various authors you will be challenged to look beyond your normal way of seeing things. Personally, my favorites on this list are: Empire of Illusion, It Takes a Pillage, and the Operation Censored Collection of the top 25 un or under reported news stories of 2008-2009.
Poet
Don't forget "The Road".
ANOTHER CENSORED Story and What the World Needs to Know About Mordechai Vanunu
Mordechai Vanunu was released from Ashkelon prison to open air captivity in east Jerusalem on April 21, 2004 after 18 years-most all in solitary-on April 21, 2004.
In 1986, Mordechai Vanunu was clubbed, drugged, bound and kidnapped from Rome by the Mossad because he told the truth and provided the photographic proof of Israel's clandestine 7 story underground WMD facility in the Negev.
In the case of Mordechai Vanunu, please know that the restrictions that have held him captive in Jerusalem come from the Emergency Defense Regulations which were implemented by Britain against Palestinians and Jews after World War II.
After WW II, Attorney Yaccov Shapiro, who later became Israel's Minister Of Justice, described the Emergency Defense Regulations as "unparalleled in any civilized country: there were no such laws in Nazi Germany."
During one of my seven trips to Jerusalem since 2005, I asked Vanunu, "If the British Mandate has expired why not the British Mandate's Emergency Defense Regulations?"
Vaunu replied, "The reason given is security but it is because Israel is not a democracy unless you are a Jew. This administration tells me I am not allowed to speak to foreigners, the Media, and the world. But I do because that is how I prove my true humanity to the world. My freedom of speech trial began January 25, 2006 for speaking to the media, the same day as the Palestinian elections…When I decided to expose Israel’s nuclear weapons I acted out of conscience and to warn the world to prevent a nuclear holocaust."
In 1963, Peres was Israel’s Deputy Minister of Defense when he met with President Kennedy at the White House. Kennedy told Peres, “You know that we follow very closely the discovery of any nuclear development in the region. This could create a very dangerous situation. For this reason we monitor your nuclear effort. What could you tell me about this?”
Peres replied, “I can tell you most clearly that we will not introduce nuclear weapons to the region, and certainly we will not be the first.”
In 2005, Vanunu told me, "President Kennedy tried to stop Israel from building atomic weapons. In 1963, he forced Prime Minister Ben Guirion to admit the Dimona was not a textile plant, as the sign outside proclaimed, but a nuclear plant. The Prime Minister said, ‘The nuclear reactor is only for peace.’
"Kennedy insisted on an open internal inspection. He wrote letters demanding that Ben Guirion open up the Dimona for inspection. The French were responsible for the actual building of the Dimona. The Germans gave the money; they were feeling guilty for the Holocaust, and tried to pay their way out. Everything inside was written in French, when I was there, almost twenty years ago.
"Back then, the Dimona descended seven floors underground. In 1955, Perez and Guirion met with the French to agree they would get a nuclear reactor if they fought against Egypt to control the Sinai and Suez Canal. That was the war of 1956. Eisenhower demanded that Israel leave the Sinai, but the reactor plant deal continued on.
"When Johnson became president, he made an agreement with Israel that two senators would come every year to inspect. Before the senators would visit, the Israelis would build a wall to block the underground elevators and stairways. From 1963 to ’69, the senators came, but they never knew about the wall that hid the rest of the Dimona from them.
"Nixon stopped the inspections and agreed to ignore the situation. As a result, Israel increased production. In 1986, there were over two hundred bombs. Today, they may have enough plutonium for ten bombs a year."
Just prior to the taping of "30 Minutes with Vanunu" [freely streaming @ VANUNU ARCHIVES http://wearewideawake.org/ ] on March 26, 2006, Vanunu told me:
"Many journalists come here to the American Colony, from CNN and NY Times. They all want to cover my story, but their EDITORS say no.
"CNN wants to interview me; but they say they can't do it because they don't want problems with the Israeli censor. BBC is doing the same thing.
"Sixty Minutes from the United States from the beginning they wanted to do a program, but because of the censor situation they decide not to do it."
THE REST:
http://wearewideawake.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1517&Itemid=227
Eileen Fleming,
Founder of WeAreWideAwake.org
A Feature Correspondent for Arabisto.com
Author of "Keep Hope Alive" and "Memoirs of a Nice Irish American 'Girl's' Life in Occupied Territory"
Producer "30 Minutes with Vanunu" and "13 Minutes with Vanunu"
Ray Berthiaume
Another bombshell! Thanks so much for the facts that the MSM would never reveal.
Great references, it is really a shame that we in the US have such limited sources of "news" (other than the internet). When I lived in the UK, about 4 years ago, there was a documentary on BBC 2 (nothing mentioned on BBC News however) about Israel's nuclear program and how the British, French and later the Americans helped Israel's development of nuclear weapons. It also talked about Vanunu. Yet no such documentaries are shown here in the land of the free, for example. BBC News is often mainstream pap, but BBC2 documentaries are world class. Adam Curtis is another example of that.
Thanks for the update, Eileen. And I'll shortly be re-viewing your 30-minute interview with Mordechai Vanunu. It's been a considerable while since I first viewed it, so this is a good time to view it again; thanks to the reminder in your post.
And on the topic of Israel-Palestine, I just learned last week about a new book by Ramzy Baroud about his father. The book is copyrighted 2010, so it of course couldn't be in a list of recommended 2009 books, but I think it's available; or if it isn't yet, then it'll be out sometime soon. I guess it'd then be for January, according to the page for the book, which is entitled, "My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza's Untold Story". The page for it is linked in the homepage and provides a list of several good or great endorsements, as well as a preview by Stephen Lendman.
www.ramzybaroud.net
And there's a fine 3-minute promo. video at Youtube for the book, which definitely seems to be great.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9K2VpARDkzw
The Emergency Defense Regulations were established and imposed by Britain or England, first, eh. That triggers anger, and while it's good to know that England didn't enforce or apply this only to non-Jews, the Palestinians, it nevertheless was another war crime by Britain and it unfortunately has been maintained or adopted by the Israeli leadership.
Israels 200+ nuclear missiles should be the bargaining chip in dealing with the supposed Iranian nuclear weapon ambition. If you want Iran to stop, then put up the Israeli weapons of mass destruction as a carrot. Stop the hypocrisy.
I don't really understand what "private equity" means. I guess it's high time I found out. Thanks for the heads up Ralph.
Joe
Equity is a share in a business. "Private" equity is where a business offers shares to individuals without offering them to the public. The comapnies listed on the various stock markets are "publicly traded" and thus are not in the realm of private equity. If you own a business, you might have financial backers who own part of the business, i.e. "equity" in exchange for the money they put up. That's private equity assuming you don't go through the considerable gyrations required in an Initial Public Offering aka "IPO".
One problem with private equity is that there is no secondary market to exchange shares, like there is with public companies in the form of stock markets.
Aw hell, Ralph, I think I'll just slit my wrists now and save the time and expense.
First, I'll read Greg Mortenson's new book, "Stones into Schools: Promoting Peace with Books, Not Bombs, in Afghanistan and Pakistan." There's a man who knows just how shitty this world is and does something to address the problem anyway.
Happy Holidays to all!
"I think I'll just slit my wrists now and save the time and expense."
Sigh, and this is the kind of attitude that keeps the public hooked to sound bites. :(
By the way, the book you recommended I like too. But be it your books or Ralph's books, this cornfed electorate is too hooked to soundbites and less into reading and learning. Lord knows what will make this nation as smart as Europe let alone most Asian countries.
Oh good lord.
Happy holidays, Jennifer.
What is wrong with what she said? She was being nice to both you and Nader.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.