Heidegger in 90 Minutes: Library Edition (Philosophers in 90 Minutes)Paul Strathern | 1900-01-01 00:00:00 | Blackstone Audiobooks | 0 | Philosophers
Exploring in vivid detail the trap into which the dreams of America's leaders have taken us and the likely consequences of our dependence on a permanent war economy, Johnson's prophetic book, Nemesis, shows how imperial overstretch is undermining the republic itself, economically and politically.
Reviews In a day and age of mindless reality TV shows and copious books written for the pop culture mind, Chalmers Johnson deftly and thoroughly defines, both from a modern perspective and historically as well, why America can keep its empire and lose its democracy or lose its empire and keep its democracy. It, however, cannot do both simultaneously. You will never read or listen to another news report in the same way after reading this book. In my opinion, we may have elected a new and very capable president, but a larger corporate machine actually rules the earth.
Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic (American Empire Project)
Reviews Chalmers' previous work, Blowback had come highly recommended to me by a friend whose political views are pretty much the opposite of mine, but who I deeply respect and quite enjoy arguing with. I had really intended to read that volume first, but as I am live in Germany and must take what I can get in terms of English writing, I came across this one first.
I was deeply disappointed with this book. Let me open by putting my cards on the table; I suppose I am relatively conservative, with an emotional bent towards libertarianism, but I've studied enough economics and read enough politics to temper my emotions with reason. I like the United States, but am not blind to its flaws nor am I a fan of Bush, Cheney, or their associates, and I did not vote for them in either election in which they ran. I also feel that the Iraq war has been an almost unmitigated disaster. The nation needs a serious and critical discussion examining our response to 9/11, and some soul searching about how to deal with it and how to deal with future events of its type that will likely occur. "Nemesis" is not a serious examination.
To be sure, Mr. Chalmers has extensively footnoted his tome, perhaps in an attempt to give it a sheen of academic respectability. Footnotes, however, can be a double edged sword. After all, the reader may actually go out and look them up, as I have done to more than a few of them.
Mr. Chalmers opens the book with some contentions that are, and there is no kinder way to put this, sheer fantasy. The first is that some sort of military coup lies just around the corner. He states early on that General Tommy Franks is "open to the idea that `the constitution could be scrapped in favor of a military form of government.'" (Nemesis, p.14) I'm relatively familiar with the organizational culture of the American military. I've never served, but I did write my master's thesis about the origins of military coups in developing countries, and did extensive work comparing their military cultures to that of the European powers (particularly the UK) and the United States. Given that my research indicated that civilian objective control is a deeply ingrained value in American military culture, I found this comment a little surprising. I can't imagine a four star general stating, or even thinking, that knocking of the congress and the president would be a good idea. So I dug out the original interview with Franks, where he actually laments the militarization of US foreign policy, and states that a military coup would be a "worst case scenario." That's hardly being, as Mr. Chalmers claims, "open to the idea." Of course, the source for Mr. Chalmers claims is the Propagandmatrix website, which is hardly reputable, and also distorts General Franks statements to the point of libel. So either Mr. Chalmers is deliberately distorting the truth about General Frank's statement, or he's simply a very bad researcher. I'll be charitable and assume the latter.
Throughout the book, Mr. Chalmers' sources are either biased, dodgy, misquoted, or out and out bogus. He also seems to be carrying a very serious political axe to grind.
The truth is that neither party, Republicans or Democrats, covered themselves with glory in the lead up to the Iraq war. The Republicans were vainglorious and foolhardy, and the Democrats willingly supine. But the people singled out for excoriation are, unsurprisingly, almost exclusively members of one party. Guess which one it is.
An additional target for slander is the US military itself. "...Soldiers are unaccountable for their acts to any authority except their military superiors...[US Military] investigations are normally oriented towards covering up what happened. (Nemesis, p.31)" This is both misleading and blatently misrepresentative of actual events. The military does indeed have its own court system, and its own body of regulations (the Universal Code of Military Justice), and soldiers that commit crimes while under the flag are prosecuted and dealt with by this system. But I would like to remind the reader that it is no picnic to be prosecuted under the UCMJ- most penalties are far harsher than civilians would likely receive outside the system. I would also like to point out that the Judge Advocate General's Corps is by no means a rubber stamp body. The only significant resistance, for example, to the extreme broadening of rules governing torture did not come from Congress, or from civilian legal groups (although some of them did object). The most vehement, longstanding, and effective attempt to stop the "broadening" of interrogation techniques, or use of "enhanced interrogation, came from within the military. It was the JAG that fought the good fight. (Josh White, Washington Post, July 15th, 2005). The Military lawyers that I know universally condemn these procedures as both unlawful, ill conceived, and ineffective. Mr. Chalmers want to present a picture of the military as wishing to run buck wild and fight the whole planet. This is hardly the case.
Mr. Chalmers problems with sources extend beyond misquotation into misrepresentation or misidentification. "Historian" Kevin Baker is actually a journalist who has written a historical novel. Is Dan Brown also a "historian?" Naomi Klein, though potentially a good source, is presented as an uncontroversial one, which she is not. Items from conspiracy theory websites are valued at the same rate as legitimate news organs as the Washington Post. Noam Chomsky is taken seriously. Good God, it's awful.
In all seriousness, the issues that this book addresses need to be talked about, and this book needs to be written. But not by Mr. Chalmers.
Reviews If I was to base my review of this book based solely on it's depth of information and the necessity for it to be read by those who aren't aware of America's behavior in other countries, or who are obstinately in denial about it, I would give it 5 stars. Chalmers Johnson isn't just some policy wonk or wind bag pundit; he's a guy that has had a lot of hands-on experience in dealing with the issues he talks about in this book. His level of detail and sense of urgency are tangible.
The reason I gave it 3 stars is because:
1.) As someone pointed out, this book is pretty depressing. The picture Mr. Johnson paints is pretty bleak, so much so that his comparisons to Rome and it's fall seem like a fait accompli; an unchangeable fate of collapse and hardship. While his analysis may be spot on, it certainly doesn't leave the reader with the warm and fuzzies.
2.) The authors data is sound and his theories may prove to be true, but he does also have some opinions that have to be sorted through. He definitely has some opinions about things that are, of course, going to set the arch of the narrative he's writing, but they do occasionally manifest themselves in the form of personal attacks. The dust jacket of the book will certainly confirm that he isn't/wasn't a fan of the Bush administration, but he also seems to have a problem with author Thomas Friedman and takes a very negative view of Congressman Charlie Wilson's actions towards Afghanistan.
Pros: The author shows the reader a world that isn't often covered by most regular, liberal, or conservative media sources. America's armaments manufacturing industry, world wide network of military bases (garrisons), and concentration of too much power in the hands of too few are dirty little secrets no one can deny responsibility for. This is important information that people should know about.
There are some good history lessons here for those that aren't familiar with America's Machiavellian tinkering with the political systems of other countries.
This book should serve as a clear warning to those of us that still care enough about the US to not bury our heads in the sands of ignorance or pointless self aggrandizement.
Cons: This book is depressing. It's stark history and cold analysis. Reality is brutal and we have to accept our part in it or fail.
The author's opinions will instantly turn off people of a certain mindset. The author isn't a pinko liberal elitist, but I'm sure his angle on things will make some think he is.
Not the good-time read of the summer.
If you have the guts to take a body blow to your patriotism, and the brains to weed out the author's personal BS, READ THIS BOOK.
Reviews Together all three books in Johnson's "American Empire Project", Blowback, The Sorrows of Empire, & the final one, Nemesis should serve as a wake-up call to the dangers facing this country & the sobering thought that the last days of the American Republic might actually be at hand. These are not the only good books written on this subject but they're among the best I've read. I thoroughly enjoyed them. They should be read in the chronological order in which they were written. Excellent treatment of a truly scary subject. Well done!
Reviews Nemesis is the most negative book I've read in years. The author, an academic intelectual, has virtually NOTHING good to say about America or Americans. He has the Noam Chomsky-Chicken Little view of the world. ANYTHING wrong is America's fault no matter what.We are the most dangerous, evil, contemptable, bunch of corrupt people in the world. There is no relief from the first page to the last. It is too one sided to have ANY merit.
Dixon
Download this book!Free Ebooks Download
