This section includes book notes of 150-300 words as well as some book reviews of 600-900 words on books of particular interest to the members of our group. If you have either suggestions for books you would like to review or see reviewed (including recent books of your own), please contact Andreas Umland [andreumland@yahoo.com].
Book Notes Wendy Brown, Regulating Aversion: Tolerance in the Age of Identity and Empire, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006, 268 pp., USD 29.95, ISBN 0-69112654-2 (hbk). Reviewed by Amentahru Wahlrab (Illinois State University).
Liberals, according to Wendy Brown, “identify with the aristocrat holding his nose in the agora, not with the stench” (178). Regulating Aversion critiques the recent phenomenon of liberal tolerance, noting that tolerance reifies that which we do not like (p.47). To be tolerant one must be in a position of power—tolerance is a one way street (p.178). The dark side of tolerance designates “difference” as “dangerous in its nonliberalism (hence not tolerable) or as merely religious, ethnic, or cultural (hence not a candidate for a political claim)” (p.174). Thus, tolerance becomes a veil that covers a purifying, conquering urge—the contemporary version of the civilizing mission: “the native, the fanatic, the fundamentalist, and the bigot are what must be overcome by the society committed to tolerance” (p.184). Ultimately, tolerance talk depoliticizes or securitizes that which is inherently political. Wendy Brown takes her readers on a genealogical journey of tolerance that winds its way through Freud, the Museum of Tolerance, the War on Terror and the state. She offers a sustained, relentless critique of a concept that has been offered up as the silver bullet against the horror of collective violence by most contemporary liberals and proponents of multiculturalism. Regulating Aversion, at times, leaves the reader wondering if there is anything that can be done to prevent or limit the amount of violence witnessed around the world. However, for those who must receive an answer to the question “what is to be done?” Brown offers cautious hope: “we can contest the depoliticizing, regulatory, and imperial aims of contemporary deployments of tolerance with alternative political speech and practices” (p. 205). If the
feminist rallying cry is that the “personal is political” then Brown’s reformulation is that “depoliticization is political.” Regulating Aversion is accessible to upper level undergraduates and might serve as a capstone text for courses in democratic/liberal theory or even courses in contemporary political theory. It is filled with current examples and even moments of levity.
Charles Goodwin, Satan’s Cauldron: Religious Extremism and the Prospects for Tolerance, Lanham; Boulder; New York; Toronto; Oxford: University Press of America, 2006, xv + 94 pp., GBP 13.99/USD 19.95, ISBN 0-7618-3379-X (pbk). Reviewed by Eileen Barker (London School of Economics). It is fear, claims Charles Goodwin, that leads people to validate their own beliefs by condemning those of others, and this results in escalating religious extremism and persecution. The question is: What can be done about it? Satan’s Cauldron features numerous vignettes describing various historical examples of religious intolerance (such as the rise and fall of the Cathari and the Thirty Years War). But there are also instances when tolerance prevailed under potentially similar circumstances, which can lead to confusion over exactly which are the significant variables. It is suggested that forgiveness, volunteerism and democratic dialogue could provide some sorely needed bridges between extremism and toleration. Quite so. But Goodwin’s conclusions tend to rely on selected illustrations and metaphors rather than any systematic argument: Quantum belief opens up ‘a middle ground where tolerance can prevail’; and ‘As the world becomes more emotionally uncertain and intellectually complex, spirit-influenced belief systems [such as those of the Maya or Pentecostals] may offer answers that comfort increasingly large numbers of people.’ The editing is decidedly shoddy. There are numerous typos and/or spelling mistakes (‘Jurgeensmeyer’; ‘Samma Theologica’; ‘Simone Weill’). The index is grossly inaccurate – I couldn’t find any fits (try finding Pagels or Ratzinger). On those intermittent occasions when references are supplied, they are irritatingly (and inconsistently) incomplete. The book is not without its redeeming features. It contains some ‘nice’ information concerning the substance of religious thought – consider the pronouncement of one of Christianity’s most prominent saints (Thomas Aquinas) that heretics deserve banishment, not only from the Church by excommunication, but also from the world by death. But while Satan’s Cauldron might stimulate conversation at a dinner party for middle-class liberals, it is unlikely to impress or influence either politicians or academics – and I doubt whether the more intransigent militants will be at the table.
Louis P Pojman, Terrorism, Human Rights and the Case for World Government, Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2006, 112pp., USD 21.21, ISBN 0-7425-5160-1 (hbk). Reviewed by David Whittaker (formerly University of Teesside, UK) 'With many books the least helpful thing about them is their title' (Who, I wonder, said that?) Anyway, Terrorism, Human Rights and the Case for World Governmentas a title does not necessarily prepare you for reading asymetrical argument. Louis P Pojman, late 'military ethicist' at America's West Point, presents in two-thirds of the book a vigorous case for moving together through 'soft nationalism’ and 'cosmopolitanism' to world government all as antidotes to violent and specific destructive activity. Commendable logic here with a touch of elegance only marred by repetitive passages (which copy-editing should have removed). Fine. Yet, how does the first third to do with terrorism belong to the rest? Discussion of causality, motives, 'old-style' and 'new-style' terrorist action generally the weaponry of the weak, the pragmatic and ethical dilemmas facing counter-action are reasonably if conventionally put. Fine, again. It is when we move into the suggestion that terrorists' 'moral nihilism' is best met by our acting together in moral, ethical-globalist response that the book somehow lacks unity. Great seminar material perhaps. Sadly, Pojman, recently dead, cannot help us bridge the disarticulation evident in his book.
Donatella della Porta, Abby Peterson, Herbert Reiter (eds.), The Policing of Transnational Protest, Aldershot: Ashgate, 2006, 224 pp., GBP 55.00, ISBN 07546-2676-8 (hbk) Reviewed by Máté Szabó (Univ. ELTE Inst of Political Science, Budapest). Della Porta and her co-authors and co-editors focus on protest policing in Western democracies in the new millenium. The case studies of this volume give an overview and comparison of new tendencies in anti-globalisation, transnational protest. Policing protest is a specific policy of democratic regimes. They set up a frame of institutions and procedures to maintain public order whilst securing the rights of people to express and articulate their protest. In seeking to maintain public order in a more and more troubled world of global tension, new forms and strategies of protest policing have emerged. However the other basic value, democratic expression and the freedom to demonstrate, seems to be endangered even in long established and mature democracies of the Western hemisphere as in the US, Canada, Switzerland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark to list a few. The case studies of the volume prove that basic freedoms to organise, communicate and demonstrate opposition - one of the main traits of Western democracy - were
restricted everywhere when new types of transnational and anti-global protest were mobilised against global summits. Police forces were militarised, used proactive techniques of control, and more and more coercive strategies to control the environment of global summits. Violence by radical groups of demonstrators and proactive policing led to an escalation of coercion (Seattle, Genoa, Gothenburg). The main issue for Western democracies is whether transnational protest and terrorism will bring us a regime of ’1984’ surrounding global meetings, or can human rights and democratic procedures civilise the new policing of transnational protest?
Book Reviews Yonah Alexander, Counterterrorism Strategies: Successes and Failures of Six Nations, Washington DC: Potomac Books, 2006, 271 pp., USD 48.00, ISBN 159797-018-2 (hbk). Reviewed by Maura Conway (Dublin City University). This edited volume is the second in a series of three arising out of a project first begun in 1998 and drawing together academics, former government officials, journalists, and others concerned with counterterrorism strategies, historical and contemporary, and the lessons to be learned from same. The first book in the series, entitled Combating Terrorism: Strategies of Ten Nations (University of Michigan Press 2002) includes case studies of the United States, Argentina, Peru, Colombia, Spain, the United Kingdom, Israel, Turkey, India, and Japan. The US case is revisited in the present volume along with the experiences of France, Germany, Italy, Egypt, and Sri Lanka. A third volume is currently in preparation. The purpose of the latter will be to integrate the best practice strategies of the countries examined in the first and second volumes within a single analytical framework. As regards the present volume, Alexander and his co-authors—most of whom are academics with experience in government—describe the experiences with sub-state political violence of their respective countries and the counterterror strategies employed by their governments in response. There is a particular focus on how these strategies may have been influenced by the events of 9/11, which is also the reason for the reexamination of the US case here as the impact of 9/11 on US counterterror strategies was little known and therefore only cursorily treated in the original volume. In addition to the introductory and concluding chapters, Alexander is also the author of the first chapter in which he describes the evolution of US perceptions and definitions of terrorism, at both state and federal levels, while also providing a useful potted history of domestic US terrorism and international terrorism targeted at Americans. Alexander also highlights the evolution of US counterterrorism strategy pre- and post-9/11 in this chapter, and goes on to describe and analyse what he views as the “five key pillars” of US counterterrorism strategy post-9/11.
Chapters two to four are concerned with European countries. In chapter two Guillaume Parmentier provides an accessible overview, despite the surfeit of unfamiliar acronyms, of the complex world of French counterterror strategy. In chapter four on the German case, Ulrich Schneckener provides a detailed history of Germany’s experience with terrorism, with sections devoted to the influence(s) of national, international, and transnational terrorism and German responses to each. Also, in the section ‘Dilemmas and Open Questions,’ Schneckener visits some of the major issues of debate arising out of the attacks of 9/11 and related events and how these are impacting Germany’s domestic security architecture. Chapter four is concerned with the Italian case. It is divided into two discrete sections, each authored by a separate contributor. In section one Germana Tappero Merlo discusses Italian counterterrorism from the 1970s to 2001 while in the second part of the chapter Sergio Marchisio details changes introduced since 9/11. Interestingly, the role of the European Union, of which all three states are founder members, is not mentioned in these chapters. Chapters five and six are devoted to analyses of the Egyptian and Sri Lankan cases respectively. In contrast to the other chapters in this volume, Ahmed Abou el-Wafa gives relatively little background on Egypt’s experience of terrorism. Instead el-Wafa focuses on the legal steps to combat terrorism taken by Egypt domestically, regionally, and internationally. On the other hand, Vernon L.B. Mendis’ chapter on Sri Lanka provides a detailed retelling of the history of the conflict between Sinhalese and Tamils. Interestingly, neither el-Wafa nor Mendis pay specific attention to the events of 9/11 and their impacts (or even lack thereof), a significant omission in the case of Egypt particularly. In his conclusion, Alexander summarises the content of the case study chapters and provides a small amount of analysis—seven to eight pages—relating to the counterterrorism successes and failures identified therein and selected lessons for future counterterrorism strategies arsing out of same. Overall, then, the present volume is interesting and useful, even if overly long on description and short on analysis, specifically critique. This would present a greater problem if the promised third volume were not devoted to a synthesis of lessons learned from the case studies presented in the first two volumes. While acknowledging that the present volume is clearly part of a set however, it would nevertheless have benefited from an analytically richer conclusion, with a special emphasis on comparisons and contrasts between the counterterror strategies pursued by the countries analysed in this particular volume. This would have resulted in a more convincing stand-alone text. Having said this, Counterterrorism Strategies would probably work well as a counterterrorism course textbook, providing students with the opportunity to formally (via written assignments) or informally (via class discussion) engage in their own comparison and contrast of the various strategies described.
Paul H. Lewis. Authoritarian Regimes in Latin America: Dictators, Despots, and Tyrants. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2006, 259 pp., USD 26.95, ISBN 07425-3738-2 (hbk). Reviewed by Paul Timmermans (University of Denver). The title Authoritarian Regimes in Latin America suggests that an extensive body of academic literature on inequality and exploitation must be covered by the reader. Such a suggestion is misleading, however. In between a rationalistic and a conceptual approach, Lewis covets the true meaning of a political culture. Organized chronologically, but with sufficient overlap, each of the ten chapters creates, first, a reliable account on comparative constitutionalism and, second, a very large part of the historical backdrop against which political actors such as Carlos Menem, Alberto Fujimori, and Hugo Chavez were only in more recent decades able to flourish. This book perfectly illustrates, moreover, how the classic axes of monarchy and tyranny and of aristocracy and oligarchy do not need to be revived: they have never left us. All chapters can be read without having to consult their sufficient yet sparse endnotes. There is no bibliography and the “For Further Reading” section contains only nineteen works of which probably Wiarda and Kline (Latin American Politics and Development) is among the best-suited companions. Also, the book’s subtitle may have been a later (and another misleading) addition because the text itself makes consistent use of the concept of the caudillo. Lewis reports how nineteenth-century liberals and conservatives, as well as twentieth-century communists and corporatists, are not so very different from current authoritarian figures in the Hemisphere. Thecaudillo has been, and still is, ‘impatient toward any restraint, disdainful of tradition, and contemptuous of institutions.’ (p. 247). This dictatorship-type also reminds us that the inherent contradiction between crusades and promises of a democratic constitution can, in the final end, only become apparent through both personal and historical actions. The main disadvantage of this book is that the material power of the United States, quite comparable to the influence of the Vatican and the past Spanish Crown, is often reduced to a silent premise. Even though U.S.-ambassadors were big players, sometimes directly involved in propagating their own constitutional model towards many of the governments mentioned, Lewis has no handle on such international support for one, rather than another, indigenous faction or party. More research is also still due on the use of concepts such as of “guaranteed representation” and of the “dominance of the political” over economic interests, and how these concepts were affected by the structurally sound positions of U.S.-based corporations. Because of the descriptive approach taken here, few, if any, speeches are cited. There is no mention of Haiti or slave revolts. Revolutions are summarized in accordance to the states of which they were once a part with the lone exception of Ernesto Guevara’s ideology. The advantage of this choice, however, is that Lewis can spend more time treating caudillo action as if it were the subject of a natural pattern that governs all states alike. If state power is to be defined as its party government, then the most
authoritative and charismatic persons within such administrations are indeed to be studied. But the power of the entire social strata from which they stem is also again influenced by relations between states. In brief, as this book’s inductive approach evolves from a “what actually happened” question, readers may be led to neglect the more charming issue as to “what could have happened” in all those moments where other than American constitutional models had been implemented. Even though Lewis is eminently concise and comprehensive, sometimes the “what if” of historical inquiry could have helped us better appreciate how election results were rigged, why exile was preferred over assassination, or whether utopian-leaning lawyers could ever have conclusively outlawed feudal-aristocratic hauteur.
T.V. Reed, The Art of Protest: Culture and Activism from the Civil Rights Movement to the Streets of Seattle, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2005, pp., USD 25.00, ISBN 0-8166-3771-7 (pbk). Reviewed by Christopher Rootes (University of Kent at Canterbury). To those of a serious political disposition, the assertion that the ferment of the late 1960s and early 1970s was more cultural than political was more than a trifle irritating. Yet it appears that the cultural revolution that began in the 1960s has been more unambiguously consequential and enduring than most, perhaps all, of the political changes that began then. Certainly, no adequate account of protest and social movements can ignore the significance of culture. The claims of culture have recently, sometimes stridently, been advanced by proponents of the ‘cultural turn’ in social movement studies. Insofar as they deride and reject resource mobilisation theory, ideas of political opportunity structures, and the political process approach, the culturalists tend, like all iconoclasts, to jettison baby and bathwater alike, and so do social movement theory few favours. T.V. Reed teaches English and American studies at Washington State University. He sees culture as integral to the process of social movements as well as their products, but he is not among those who think culture is more important than political processes. His book ranges wide across the broad canvas of US social movements of the past four decades, but with more than a token gesture to the movements for global justice that mark both the culmination of US social movements since the 1960s and their transformation in a globalised context. The cultural products and representations of movements considered here range from song (civil rights), theatre (the Black Panthers), poetry (feminism), murals (Chicano/a movements), film (the American Indian Movement), rock music (famine and apartheid), graphic arts (anti-AIDS activists), literary criticism (ecologism), and new electronic media (the global justice movement). This is a beautifully written, humane and thoughtful book, informed not only by knowledge and understanding of culture in its broad and narrower senses, but by
familiarity with the key texts and perspectives of American social movement theory. The book is always a pleasure to read, and it is occasionally nicely acerbic. At one point, for example, Reed remarks that ‘the most unambiguously positive thing’ he can say about three films on the American Indian Movement ‘is that Kevin Costner … was not involved in any of them’. The book is not based upon extensive original research so much as thoughtful reflection on decades of reading, observing and conversing, but it is none the worse for that. It is neatly and tightly structured, clearly presented and well argued. As a serious, nontechnical introduction to US social movements in the last decades of the twentieth century, it can be recommended to anyone. But it also makes a larger contribution. To social movement scholars irritated by or sceptical about the strident claims made for the importance of culture, it builds a bridge, and, better than any programmatic or polemical statement, it demonstrates that culture matters to social movements, how it matters, and why it matters. And it suggests how and why the reverberations of the cultural performances that are social movements have enduring significance.