Nixon Book

I'm almost done with Nixon Agonistes. It's too complex for me to summarize in a review, look here for a good one. I will say that it provided a lot of context about an era I tended to ignore, under the assumption that most people in the 60's were either stupid or confused. Too much confusion, people were trying to build sand castles underwater. What I didn't know was how interesting it all is, how much of what we take for granted now was born in that era. Definitely worth reading.

Anthony Kennedy

I've listened to about half of a Cato discussion with Helen Knowles about Anthony Kennedy's judicial philosophy, interesting enough to flag her book for future reading.

POW: Mia Bay and Pamela Newkirk

The National Constitution Center put up an interesting discussion between journalism professor Pamela Newkirk and historian Mia Bay, on the life and historical memory of Ida B Wells. I think it worth promoting because
1) I consider myself relatively well versed in American history and I didn't know who she was.
2) Her story is the story of Jim Crow, of the rollback of the rights gained after the civil war. This is an era that doesn't get a lot of play in the narrative of American history, it goes against type. The general narrative is the story of progress- rights gained, biases and bigotries outgrown, of freedom gained. The years after Reconstruction saw the reverse- rights lost, terror imposed, freedom lost. It's not surprising people don't like to dwell on it, but they should at least be aware of it.

The biography Mia Bay references is here.

POW: Georgi Derluguian

I found an outstanding lecture from 2004 by Georgi Derluguian, given at the U of C. He discusses Chechnya and the origins of the conflict there. There are a lot of ideas here on how the physical realities of living in a mountain range affect society (multiple languages, isolation) as well as specific details (didn't convert to Islam until late 17th century, the population was built by people fleeing the great invasions crossing the plains to the north, one of the early Chechen leaders was the former Soviet chief of the Air Force responsible for the bombing campaigns in Afghanistan). There is also an idea that the whole region of the Soviet Union went through a reversion, a demodernization process. "Look at the hats!"

Here is his book.

POW: Simon Schama

Carnegie has put up an excellent discussion with Simon Schama related to his new book, The America Future: A History. Schama's conversation is a work of art unto itself.

Next: 1968

I've started reading Nixon Agonistes: The Crisis of the Self-Made Man by Garry Wills. I'd seen a reference to it somewhere as one of the best works on Nixon but could never find it in libraries. A few weeks ago I found it at the Goodwill Store in SE Portland, they have an excellent book section for those in the area.

It also has some relevance to the Bacevich work, in that one of the catalysts for militarism in America is the counter-reaction to the cultural changes of the 60's. The sections I've read so far cover 1968, and it's eye-opening to someone who wouldn't exist for a few years. Wills describes an atmosphere of fear, mistrust, and paranoia dominating society. Violence- be it racial, political, and everything else- was a constant expectation and it was frequently met (much more frequently then today's boogieman, terrorism). At first glance I'd say it's inaccurate to see Bacevich's militarists as countering the spirit of the 60's, their seige mentality seems more like a continuation of it. Everyone was afraid or angry about something, conflict was the norm. Some people moved on, others stayed in their bunkers. The latter are today's militarists.

Book Review: The New American Militarism

I finished reading The New American Militarism on the plane yesterday, great book and heartily recommended. Bacevich describes himself as a conservative critic of the Iraq invasion, which he sees as resulting from the institutionalization of militarism within American society. The book pointedly avoids blaming Bush or administration officials, instead looking at a series of broad cultural dynamics, both civilian and military. These include briefly,

• Conservative christians, who adopted a seige mentality in the wake of the cultural changes in the 60's.
• The idolization of the military in the 80's and 90's, in a generational reaction against perceived injustices in the 70's.
• The development of smart weapons and the broader seperation of military and civilian society, which made "clean" war seem like a possibility.

This resolves a problem I had with an earlier work, American Empire. There he argued for a fundamental continuity between the Clinton and Bush administrations, which I didn't buy. The discussion here implies a continuity of circumstance more then in the actions and initiatives of the presidents, and Bacevich states explicitly in the preface that

What is most striking about the most powerful man in the world is not the power that he wields. It is how constrained he and his lieutenants are by forces that lie beyond their grasp and perhaps their understanding. Rather then bending history to their will, presidents and those around them are much more likely to dance to history's tune.

Bacevich at the end offers a surprising reinterpretation of the last 30 years, where he adopts the neocon lingo of World War IV with a twist: instead of radical Islam waging war against a sleepy Western world he sees America fighting for political dominance of the broader Middle East, in a continuation of the western tradition going back to Alexander the Great. This idea is offered as a sketch, and I'd like to see him use another book to flesh it out.

This is good stuff with continuing relevance, particularly for those confused by why so little has changed under Obama.

UPDATE: I added this to the book review site with an addendum here.