I tend to choose the books I read quite carefully so I end up giving a lot of 5 star ratings. But I rarely STRONGLY encourage people to read a particuI tend to choose the books I read quite carefully so I end up giving a lot of 5 star ratings. But I rarely STRONGLY encourage people to read a particular book. I strongly encourage people to read this book. Frank provides a relatively brief but thorough history of populism. He explains what it is and what it is not and how it has come to be misunderstood and the term misused of late.
When listening to commentators or reading books, I have often heard people described as being a populist and it has very negative connotations, This has always made me slightly uncomfortable because I remember learning and reading about the Populist Era in U.S. history as a positive force in the country. As Thomas Frank points out, Populists of the 1890's, 1930's, and 1960's (Civil rights era) that the emphasis was on the common people and what they should be able to expect from their government. They supported science (as it was understood at the time) and technology and were fiercely democratic in their view. They are suspicious of big banks, big corporations, and big agriculture. Reform was their goal and very often and/or over time, many of those goals were realized. So when I have heard Huey Long, Father Coughlin, and Joseph McCarthy described as populists, that has always made me uncomfortable. Today, Trump is often times called a populist. The problem here is that none of these people are populist. Populism is an ideology that involves the common people and is optimistic. Those mentioned, and others like them are anti-populists.
Moreover, the left as well as the right have been guilty of this mischaracterizing populism. Populists strongly believe in democracy and unfortunately, the party that has held that belief the strongest and the longest is the Democratic Party but over the last 50 years, that has not been the case. Believing that only elitists and experts should make decisions for the people, they have made decisions and held beliefs that do not benefit the people. Bill Clinton comes to mind. He made NAFTA a priority and passed it without regard to what effect it might have on the average blue collar worker.
During times when populism was on the rise, as in the 1930's, FDR encouraged workers to organize into unions. The New Deal provided benefits unknown to the common people previously- Social Security came into being. Perhaps the biggest failure of the New Deal was that African Americans were not allowed to share equally in the benefits afforded (although many benefits did accrue to them), and FDR and the Supreme Court listened to the bigoted fools who demanded that Japanese Americans were placed in camps through out the war. Republicans have almost always been the party of big business and against regulation so while it is not surprising that they are not populists, they have painted themselves as populists, particularly under Trump. The problem is that while trump preached his support for the common people, in office most of what he did was against them. Huge tax cuts for the wealthiest was only the beginning. Sadly, too many people believed him and have supported him.
Franks' book ends on an optimistic note. He refers to a populist who wrote and published what were called "Little Blue Books" which were small, cheap, and readily available. They featured a variety of topics which usually included topics usually read by elitists and they were amazingly successful. The author and his wife believed in democracy and in the ability of the common people to understand that which had previously been presented only to high brow people. As an example of a current day populist, Frank refers to Bernie Sanders who extolls the virtues of a populist. Perhaps we need more politicians like him. ...more
This is an indispensable book for anyone interested in the state of the country to read now. Stanley discusses tenets of fascism, where they have beenThis is an indispensable book for anyone interested in the state of the country to read now. Stanley discusses tenets of fascism, where they have been put into use previously, and where and how they are being used now. Making references to Italy and Germany and how fascism was used there, he gives a good summary of how democracies have fallen into its grip in todays world. Places like Hungary, Poland, and Russia receive attention, and inevitably, the U.S. which is the focus of the book. It was published during Trumps term in office but one can see, based on it, and based on his campaign promises this year, that he plans to impose a much harsher regime if he gets into office again.
"Nationalism is at the core of fascism". Those hoping to gain favor with their constituents will often time create a scenario of us versus them and using immigrants to do it. Trump, from the time he ran in 2016, throughout his time in office, and during this campaign has used this regularly. I need not go into the details of comments he has made and attempts he has made to keep certain people out of the country. This is not new in America. An entire political party was based on anti-immigration in the 19th Century. But there are many more things he has done and has promised to do to make him dangerous. Moreover, the Know-Nothings were not a major party. This kind of thinking has come to dominate the Republican Party.
Stanley discusses many other facets of fascism: authoritarianism, racism, propaganda, etc. which I will not go into. As anyone who has read my "reviews" knows, I keep them short. Suffice to say, if you are planning to vote in November, you should read this book.
Much of what is covered is not new, but much of the detail is. Briefly, because of the fact that white people in America will soon be a majority/minority, many whites are frightened of losing their status in a country that has always had a white majority and a sizable percentage of white supremacists. fear of losing that favored status is used by politicians who use it to their own advantage. Another example is what Stanley refers to as sexual ...more
I rated this book 4 for a few reasons. The early part of the book had some inaccuracies inexcusable for a professional historian, in my opinion. The tI rated this book 4 for a few reasons. The early part of the book had some inaccuracies inexcusable for a professional historian, in my opinion. The two that come to mind is a reference to Truman's Second Inaugural. Truman was elected only once. He took over upon the death of FDR, finished the term and then ran in 1948. He did not run again. Adlai Stevenson was the Democratic candidate in 1952 so Truman had just one inauguration. The second rather blatant mistake, I think, was her reference to Eisenhower as a great civil rights president. He basis for it was the appointment of Earl Warren as Chief Justice, sending the troops to Little Rock, and signing the 1957 Civil Rights Act. Ike appointed Warren, the Republican governor of CA expecting a conservative judge. He said many times after that he regretted appointing him. He sent troops to Little Rock but did it kicking and screaming. Finally the civil rights law was a very weak law that Congress passed and he signed but was not crazy about it.
The book does a great job of drawing a line from Nixon (through the people who worked for him who then served other Republican presidents later), through Reagan, to the jr Bush to Trump. She takes all the things that happened during these administrations and explains how while they all wanted to destroy the democratic consensus until Trump has done it very openly. It is generally a very good book but I could not figure out why she started in the present then about half way through the book, went back to the Framers and moved forward.
I still recommend the book because she puts everything that has happened with regard to the democratic consensus in perspective. ...more
I would give this a 4.5 if I could only because it is so dense, has so much information, that I found it hard to get through. It is written as a worldI would give this a 4.5 if I could only because it is so dense, has so much information, that I found it hard to get through. It is written as a world history of the climate, its impact on civilization, and civilization's impact on it. It does not approach the topic simply from a Western perspective. It approaches the subject as it impacted the entire world from ancient history to the present and does an excellent job. It is a long read- not just because it is well over 700 pages but because of the gravity of the topic and because the amount of information contained is voluminous. I recommend the book because it is something we should all read but something that is not easy. ...more
This was a fascinating read for Catholics, fallen away Catholics, and anyone just interested in the topic. I was raised Catholic but knew very little This was a fascinating read for Catholics, fallen away Catholics, and anyone just interested in the topic. I was raised Catholic but knew very little about most of the popes. I remember watching The Borgias on Showtime and thinking what a corrupt monster he was but really about his contemporaries I realize he was just one of many tyrants.
This is a fast paced book. It is well researched and very readable. He ended the book during the Papacy of Benedict and I believe he was too easy on him as well as on John Paul II. Also, I wish he had spent more time on John 26th but he was trying to limit the book. He pointed out that Paul VI really missed the boat when he failed to liberalize the Church on things like birth control and ordaining women. I never thought of him as liberal and I did not know that he presided over most of Vatican Two where his actions were liberal but after, especially when he released Humanie Vitae (sp) he lost not only many Catholic lay people but also clergy.
I read about this book in an article in Atlantic Monthly and as it sounded interesting, decided to read it myself. I am from a town that used to be caI read about this book in an article in Atlantic Monthly and as it sounded interesting, decided to read it myself. I am from a town that used to be called the Gibraltar of Unionism and am well versed in the labor history of Butte, Montana and I also know about some of the more well known labor battles when the National Guard was called in and took the side of the employer against the workers but I am amazed how much I didn't know. When I first started teaching in Seattle, I taught Washington State history and learned what a vibrant history labor had here and now I have learned much more from this well written and researched book. From the UAW sit ins in Flint to Walter Reuther who was such an amazing labor leader. I had heard of him but never knew how dedicated he was in fighting for working people.
The book is clearly pro labor but Greenhouse pulls no punches when dealing with ineffective labor leaders like George Meany or of corruption that has occasionally occurred within the movement- an example would be the Longshoreman's union in New York where they worked with the Mafia.
A significant section of the book deals with more recent organizing at a time when unions have become less popular. He writes about the hotel workers in Las Vegas who have fought endlessly for fair pay and conditions resulting in most of the hotels along the strip being unionized. He also devoted a chapter to the tomato pickers in Florida who fought against amazing odds and managed to create a union where the members have vastly improved their working conditions as well as their wages.
The book was published in 2019 and so does not speak of the recent success and organizing that have been occurring in the country. I have hardly touched on the events featured in the book but if you have any interest in the topic, I recommend it highly....more
Initially, as I began reading this book, I must admit that I was a bit annoyed. I felt as if this was another one of those anti-Catholic screeds ignorInitially, as I began reading this book, I must admit that I was a bit annoyed. I felt as if this was another one of those anti-Catholic screeds ignoring the role of other religions while attacking the Catholic Church for its role in slavery. Soon, and as my reading advanced, I realized that I had misjudged Swarns and that what she has written is an essential part of the Catholic Church in America and its role in the lives of the people it enslaved, made promises to, and then broke their promises for their own financial enrichment- to save and enlarge Georgetown University and to open and expand other Catholic universities in the U.S.
Swarns is an excellent writer, drawing the reader in with both the deep research that went into this book and plight of the people whose story is told. Even though there are attempts to continue to ignore or hide episodes in our country about which we are not proud, telling this history, and all of the other histories of its kind is essential to the country. As a historian, it has become obvious to me that in order to create the kind of society that most of us truly desire, we must come to terms with our history- even when it embarrasses or shames us. To overcome those things and truly embrace our country and one another, it has to be done. Sorry for the preaching.
The story does have a somewhat, if bittersweet, ending. Descendants of the 272 enslaved people bought and then sold by the Jesuits in 1838, have reached out to one another and are able to dig more deeply into their family history. Moreover, the Jesuits have participated and offered reparations to the survivors even though there are those who believe that they should do more.
Anyone interested in the history of this country needs to read this book and others about African Americans and the massacres that they have historically suffered. We owe this to them. Of course, we also owe the same focus to other groups we as a country have treated badly- Native Americans, Asians, etc. ...more
Another brilliantly researched and written book by Naomi Klein. For some reason this book went under my radar for several years. When I purchased it, Another brilliantly researched and written book by Naomi Klein. For some reason this book went under my radar for several years. When I purchased it, I believed it was newly published. It was, in fact, published in 2014 which led me to wonder throughout the course of the book, how much had changed since 2014. Still, there was an extraordinary amount of information of which I was unaware. For example, I was unaware that while David Gates has continued to flaunt his devotion to the environment, he holds huge stakes in oil companies; Richard Branson made enormous pledges to invest billions in solving the climate crisis all the while continuing to grow his airline by investing in more and more environmentally damaging planes and then backing off of promises. Warren Buffet auditioned for the role of green champion but owns dozens of coal burning plants.
The book can be rather depressing, reading about the lack of positive action and the limited amount of time there is for solving the problem before the planet becomes uninhabitable. Klein focuses on the immediacy of the problem and does see signs of hope- but only if we all become very actively engaged. On a personal level, I have discussed aspects of the book with friends who are environmentally minded but what I notice is that for them and for many, people are overwhelmed by the crisis primarily because they feel like they are unable to affect change. It is depressing because if we know nothing else about the crisis it is that unless the populations of the world demand action against the major polluters by demanding that our politicians divest themselves of the interest they have in the large, global corporations, nothing will change. I am looking for a more upbeat book to read. ...more
This book is written for people like me- a science dummy. It is very easily understandable without jargon and very interesting. It is also extraordinaThis book is written for people like me- a science dummy. It is very easily understandable without jargon and very interesting. It is also extraordinary to realize the rate of extinction on this planet- from golden frogs to little brown bats. These events are happening in our lifetime and although there are many people working diligently to save so many species- which in the end, includes us.
This is the first extinction caused, almost exclusively, by humans and we are doing it at our own peril. Sadly, there are too many very powerful people in charge of corporations that are adding to the problem who care only about themselves. They live in gated communities, have private police forces and protect themselves. There are those who seem to want to move to another planet to avoid the catastrophe they are largely responsible for creating.
Written by the same author who wrote an excellent biography of Thomas Frances Meagher, this book has been extensively researched what happened in the Written by the same author who wrote an excellent biography of Thomas Frances Meagher, this book has been extensively researched what happened in the 1920's in Indiana where the Ku Klux Klan gained a foothold on power, controlling the governors office, the legislature, sheriff and police departments throughout much of the state, and began to impose their will over the people- with the support of the people. One man was instrumental in bringing much of this about. He was a brute who married and abused women and raped women when the notion struck him. He was a sick, sadistic brute whose role only became clear when the dying statement of a woman led to his arrest and conviction.
It chronicles how easily Americans were taken in by these people and how racist they needed to be in order to support them. It is yet another forgotten page of American history that needs to be read. ...more
This book should be required reading for anyone who cares about the future of the country- and the world. These "Christian Nationalists" are real, theThis book should be required reading for anyone who cares about the future of the country- and the world. These "Christian Nationalists" are real, they are extremely well funded and they are making headway. They have gone a long way in making the wall of separation between church and state crumble- in no small part thanks to the corrupt and twisted opinions of Clarence Thomas but he is certainly not alone. I believed that the connection between Putin and Trump was exclusively about money and it largely is but it is also part of the agenda by the religious right and Putin and Trump are right on board with it. By the way, the Christianity being preached by these people bears little if any resemblance to the Christianity that I learned about growing up. They use the Old Testament and in many ways are even more harsh than it is.
Their ideas are based in an harsh Old Testament, system of beliefs as already mentioned, but they go further in many respects. They believe that if you are poor, disabled, or just down on your luck, it is a punishment from God and you should not be helped.
Over the past several years I have tended to shy away from these current events type of books because they are so disturbing. I usually read history because it has already passed so it is easier to accept the end result. Stewart does end on a hopeful note but it does not alleviate my anxiety because it is just a general hope on her part that the good guys will somehow win. The solutions to the problems caused by the far right seem to have become so pervasive that undoing the damage could take a very long time. ...more
I learned a great deal from this beautifully written book. Nafisi is a Western Literature professor from Iran who taught at a few universities includiI learned a great deal from this beautifully written book. Nafisi is a Western Literature professor from Iran who taught at a few universities including Tehran University during the revolution. She and her countrymen watched their country change almost overnight and women lost most of their rights. People were not safe- they could be arrested by the religious police for things as ridiculous as eating an apple seductively- well that was the charge anyway. Women were particularly targeted by the extremists who twisted the Islamic religion into the crazy, intolerant institution that continues to rule in Iran.
Nafisi herself lost her job for refusing to wear the veil and was even jailed. It was during this time that she invited the most dedicated women students in her class to take part in a private class at her home. Thus began relationships that lasted for many years. A few of her students ended up being executed for the flimsiest of reasons.
What it was, in part, was a study of how people respond to life in totalitarian regimes but it so much more. Nafisi "unpacks" several characters from well known works of fiction from Humbert in Lolita to the characters in The Great Gatsby, and on and on.
While it is common to believe that the Civil War ended at Appomattox Courthouse with Lee's surrender, the truth is far more complex. As Caroline E. JaWhile it is common to believe that the Civil War ended at Appomattox Courthouse with Lee's surrender, the truth is far more complex. As Caroline E. Janney's book proves, it was, in Churchill's words, not the beginning of the end but the end of the beginning. Many of the army of Northern Virginia were not present at Appomattox to receive a parole either because they chose not to believe that the war was over and committed themselves to traveling south to join Johnston's army to continue the fight, or that they had fallen off the pace because they needed sustenance, or some simply wanted to go home.
Although Lee surrendered himself and his army, his words helped to fuel the "lost cause" ideas that are still used to justify allegiance to the Confederacy. Moreover, Grant's words granting parole were ambiguous enough that people on both sides of the conflict were uncertain what they meant and there were tens of thousands of soldiers roaming the countryside who needed to understand their status and return home or be imprisoned. It was a logistical nightmare with Union generals in different parts of the South issuing paroles or arrest warrants without knowing whether what they were doing was lawful. The debate raged as to who should be pardoned and who should not.
While it was clear that it was impossible to charge every Confederate with treason, there was a sizable number who believed that the leaders should be held accountable. Curiously, it was Grant who seemed to have ultimately decided that no one should be held accountable. Therefore, those whose treason was most easily proven: Lee, Davis, Stephens, Beauregard, and many others, were left off the hook. There is no question that Grant's highest priority was for peace in the country with the end of slavery. Unfortunately, it became clear with the election of Hayes in 1876 that would not happen.
This is an exhaustively well researched book on an aspect of the war that is not usually dealt with. As Janney makes clear, it was not possible for soldiers to simply lay down their arms and head home.
This book turns much of what has been taught and understood about American history and specifically the role of Native Americans in that history on itThis book turns much of what has been taught and understood about American history and specifically the role of Native Americans in that history on its head. Instead of the usual fare served up of the discovery of a new world open for exploration and claiming as one's own, it presents a picture of the "new world" as new only to the Europeans who came to colonize it. That is not particularly new but what is new is the argument (exhaustingly researched and extremely well detailed) that the Indigenous people people fought back, blow for blow, gave as good as they got and until the post Civil War when the railroads covered the country, brought bison to near extinction, and the government acquired the resources, they controlled vast quantities of the country. From the Iroquois to the Cherokee to the Comanches to the Lakota, Native Americans fought to preserve their culture and country unlike the oft presented picture of a civilization in defeat who faded away. First, the author makes clear how different each nation was and how in their own distinct ways they fought to maintain the life they had before the arrival of the Europeans. There is no attempt to sugar coat the behavior on either side but obviously, begins with the notion that it was the Europeans who were the colonizers and genociders.
This book is a very important contribution to our understanding of the people who inhabited this country before us, how they fought to maintain their culture and also how they were open to compromise through treaties and land cessions but how the treaties were almost always scrapped or simply ignored. It is the story of the racist and genocidal policies and behaviors of the people who came to claim the country. ...more
The day that Nixon resigned is imprinted in my mind nearly as clearly as the morning when I awoke to hear that RFK had been assassinated or when my fiThe day that Nixon resigned is imprinted in my mind nearly as clearly as the morning when I awoke to hear that RFK had been assassinated or when my first grade class had been informed that JFK had been shot. I was in Wise River, Montana in a bar when it was announced. It seemed on that day that the long national nightmare had ended. At the time, I read All the Presidents Men, followed by The Final Days and Theodore H. Whites' book, Breach of Faith. I have read some books since but they don't come to mind. I think I was tired of hearing about it and wanted to move on although I do remember Ford announcing the pardon of Nixon. I opposed it then and I oppose it now. I believe that history has shown that if Nixon had been held accountable, subsequent presidents would have been held accountable- beginning with Reagan for the Iran-Contra Affair.
In a meticulously researched and written book, Graff has given readers a thorough and highly readable account of the Watergate scandal. Previous material that I have read did not include information on all of the subcategories of the scandal that added together made Nixon the most corrupt president up to that time. Moreover, I have always regretted that in the articles of impeachment a charge about the illegal bombing of Cambodia was not included although it was discussed. Also excluded was the income tax evasion for which he was guilty. The author gives a play by play narrative taken from both primary and secondary sources as it played out. It would appear that Nixon's paranoia and lack of trust of his "enemies" formed how he ran the White House from the time he assumed office in 1969. From his knowledge of the burglary and wire tapping at the Watergate Hotel to his lies and his role in the coverup that led to his downfall, he was guilty.
Before then, there was the burglary of Daniel Ellsberg (leaker of the Pentagon Papers) to the plan to break into the Brookings Institution to find evidence that JFK had ordered the assassination of President Diem of South Vietnam. The burglars never followed through on this, largely because of the insane plan worked out by Chuck Colson was seen to be too expensive. In any case, the tapes of the Kennedy White House later made clear that he had not done this. There was so much corruption and so many plots within Nixon's White House that it would take pages and I have no inclination to do it.
In addition to the myriad of other crimes, was the use of the FBI and CIA to carry them out. Moreover, Nixon never was repentant for his crimes and for the hell he put the country through to cover them up. In giving his final speech, in his memoirs, and in the interviews he did with David Frost (who was not up to the job) he ignored Watergate as best he could instead focusing on the wonderful things he had done for his country. In the intervening years, I have heard many people argue that Nixon's only crime was in getting caught.
I highly recommend this book both as a source in 20th Century history classes, for those who doubt the criminality of what he did and for anyone wanting to read a thorough and objective account of the Nixon White House.
This is a well written book offering some very good analysis but it fails in several respects. Perhaps it is too much to try to include the history ofThis is a well written book offering some very good analysis but it fails in several respects. Perhaps it is too much to try to include the history of over two and a half centuries in one volume. It certainly seems to have been for Lepore. In terms of history, she left out huge swaths of the story she was telling- unavoidable when you are attempting to cover so much ground- but she gave too much time to certain people and barely a mention to others. For example, she made Phylis Schafley out like the primary moving force of Republican politics from the days of the McCarthy hearings to the day she died in 2016. While she certainly deserves to be notorious for having defeated the ERA, she deserves little else. At the same time, most of the Kennedy era as ignored. JFK, in his short time as president, accomplished a great deal. Aside from his success in staring down the Soviets in the Cuban Missile Crisis, he also created the Peace Corps, created the first arms limitations agreement with the Soviets, created a plan for advancements in Civil Rights (cut short by an assassins bullet), in addition to many other things. I am not sure that Robert Kennedy was given more than a sentence throughout the entire book. RFK was one of the greatest men of the Twentieth Century- he represented hope to millions of people, but was somehow not important enough for inclusion in this book. Ted Kennedy, one of the longest serving senators in U.S. history, whose hands touched just about every piece of legislation that came before the senate during his career, was mentioned once.
She gave short shrift to Reconstruction, one of the great errors of historians of the past. I was hoping that she would connect the dots in terms of the Supreme Court, particularly during that time that led to its failure. She really did take on more than she could chew.
When it came to Watergate, Lepore gave the tired, inaccurate excuse for Nixon that Republicans have used ever since: his behavior was no different from any other president during the Cold War, he just got caught. I guess Ms. Lepore forgot about his secret bombing of a neutral country that resulted in one genocide and the genocide in Bangladesh that Nixon and Kissinger provided the weapons for with the full knowledge of what was happening. No Ms. Lepore, no other president has ever done those things. There are also points where she seems to glide over history quickly, just to move past it.
As stated above, she offers some excellent analysis at times and writes very well but this is certainly no masterpiece, as NPR Books seems to think. Maybe our history can simply not be written in one volume- at least not by this author. I would not discourage people reading the book because there is a great deal to be learned but I think readers would be better served reading volumes about separate individuals and events in the country where a more complete story can be told and the reader can learn more.
This book is a sermon from one of the most prominent African American ministers/writers alive today. It is from the heart, provides plenty of informatThis book is a sermon from one of the most prominent African American ministers/writers alive today. It is from the heart, provides plenty of information from his own experiences as well as the experiences of other Africans to explain what life is like to be black in America. It is enlightening and sometimes difficult to take in but there is one thing I am certain of: It is sincere and deserving of our attention.
It is divided into chapters covering a myriad of issues surrounding race and being black, replete with Dyson's own experiences. As someone from a background where the overwhelming majority of the population has been white who moved to an area of great diversification with a great many African Americans, it is especially helpful. ...more
Barbara Walter is a political scientist who has studied civil wars for 30 years. The CIA was given the task to study civil wars when it was noted thatBarbara Walter is a political scientist who has studied civil wars for 30 years. The CIA was given the task to study civil wars when it was noted that there was an exponential rise in their numbers during the 80's and 90's. They examined the conditions under which they occurred and graphed the similarities. Walter studied civil wars simultaneously. Many of the results are things we have heard before but to my knowledge, Walter is among the first to put them together in one place. She studied upheaval in places from the Ivory Coast to Rwanda, to Northern Ireland. A graph was created where healthy democracies are rated at +10 and authoritarian regimes are -10. It is generally the case that healthy democracies are almost guaranteed not to engage in civil war, nor are authoritarian regimes. The risk is in the middle where countries become what are called anocracies. Since January 6, the U.S. has entered this dangerous place. Two things have been the driving force in the movement toward civil war. Madison and Hamilton warned of one of them when they wrote the Federalist Papers. Factionalism is where a minority gains power through a variety of means and threatens the stability of the country. The other has been the rise of social media where extremists have been able to connect with one another, frighten people into believing that their government is no longer serving their interests and that they need to arm and protest; the hope is that they become radicalized and are willing to resort to violence.
We are set to become a minority majority by 2045. White supremacists are frightened of this as they believe their dominance is threatened. They cannot accept that people from different cultures and maybe skin colors different from their own will be a majority. Perhaps they are afraid that when in the majority, the current minority will treat them as they have been treated.
It doesn't have to end in civil war. The author uses the example of South Africa, a country that, in the 80's was the country most believed would end up fighting a civil war. It did not because a leader emerged who was willing to share power and democratize the country. Walter believes that we can resolve our differences in this country, as they can in other countries. She discusses what needs to be done, beginning with reigning in social media. She gives a variety of ways to do this and ends on a note of hope. This is an important book, especially at this time. ...more
Loading...
