Read pragmatism and justice reviews, rating & opinions:Check all pragmatism and justice reviews below or publish your opinion.
100 Reviews Found
It did exactly what it was supposed to do. I was needed to have this book for my ethics class. It is an interesting book addressing ethical dilemmas in the field of criminal justice. If anyone is highering I am a double major in criminal justice and sociology with a concentration in social psychology, and I will be graduating from the University of Alabama at Birmingham in December.
Fascinating book. I love all of his books. I even have fun rereading them. He has the inside scoop on all the popular as crimes. To his book is a short summary of previous books he has written. He has a fun sense of humor to lighten things up. Well worth the read.
Dominick referred to himself as an observant outsider & that description fits his style very well. His observations were fascinating to read; he could capture moments in such a method as to place the reader right there in the courtroom. He could capture a gesture, a sneer, a smirk, whatever was *really* going on around him. He caught nuances.Having read newspaper accounts of the cases at the time & having seen the television coverage of some of them created this book all the more enjoyable. Were there things I learned in here? Absolutely. Gossip? Innuendo? Clues? Yes. Did he leave me wanting more? You bet!This book was a light, simple read after the passage of so much time. 433 pages (no pictures or fluff) & I ordered a few more books immediately based on tips he dropped in this one.Hated to see this one end!
I bought this for my dear Aunt,who suffers from macular degeneration, which has left her unable to read. She Loved it! My family has always been fans of the late Dominick Dunne and his chatty, spilling the beans style of reporting on trials of the rich and infamous. Included are the cases of Claus Von Bulow, Martha Moxley and O.J. Simpson. A can't miss for real crime aficionado's........
Amazing read, Dunne always tells a amazing story. [email protected]#$%! was twice as long so could be more detailed. Was hungering for more. A huge part of book detailed the O.J. Simpson case. I was not expecting so a lot of pages dedicated to Simpson, but was not disappointed. It was very insteresting and more detailed than a lot of of the other of the cases in book. I devoured this one.
Dominick Dunne is a phenomenal story teller, none of his coverages are boring.His privileged insider info and the web of mates and acquaintances helped him build a case for each of the trials he watched, thus giving us an expert position on each. A transcendental book!
This is an immensely readable refresher of the principles pertaining to justice as written by a wide array of philosophers, from Aristotle to Rawls. Ultimately, Mr. Sandel argues convincingly that what the right thing is cannot be separated entirely from the hazards of our genes, education and circumstances and that discussions of moral matters require more than considerations of utility and consent. To Sandel, there is a civic dimension to justice that too few attempt to engage. These are thought provoking ideas brought forth in examinations of some very contentious modern problems from immigration to affirmative action to abortion, you name ever, the most attractive thing about the book for me was the self-reflection it promoted in me as I tried to engage the questions as rigorously as I could. Doing that, in the first instance, is the Right Thing to Do, I think.
I will divide my (short) opinion about the book in two parts: firts, the content of the book and second, the material of the book.1.- Content: I have been using the book for a month and I can say that the book is unbelievable whit the content that it provide about Justice. In the book there are a lot of differents authors that talks about the justice whit their respective examples, ideas, opinions and definition about Justice and more. I search that the book is not so complex at all, maybe the part when Sandel (the author of the book) thanks about Kant can be a small confusing, but besides that, its not hard at all to understand the book. In conclusion, the book is really good, not hard to understand it and provide the basis for understand the concept of terial: I found the material of the book a small fragile and delicated, but I could see that coming because of the and the color of the book, white. In the second weak the book got dirty in the left side whit some kind of black material. I don't know what it is, but the point is that the book can obtain dirty very simple and it's difficult to clean it up. In the back of the book (also in the left side) it got a small creased only by passing the pages of the book. Again, I don't know what nlusion:- Content of the book: 10/10- Material of the book: 9/10- Opinion: 4.5/5
Any work by this author is dependably good. Dominick Dunne's life is an example of how amazing evolves from evil. Mr. Dunne's daughter, Dominique, was murdered by her boyfriend who served only about two and a half years for his crime. Mr. Dunne's tragedy led him to career in reporting on justice, and that he does very well. Not confining himself strictly to the legal proceedings, but in a lot of instances, relying on the comments of those close to the participants, he learns more at dinner parties than most reporters do covering the same events. This book discusses the O.J. Simpson trial, the Menendez brothers, and others, and if I interpreted one of the remarks in the book correctly, the author is fictionalizing the Safra murder in Monaco as his next book. Despite Mr. Dunne's intimate acquaintance with the globe of the rich and infamous, he obviously is a man of amazing heart. He says what he thinks and his decency and honesty, especially about himself, shines through. And after all he's been through in his own life, he knows the perspective of the victim too well.
The ideal is to take Sandel's highly sought after class at Harvard, "Justice," which you can do online. It's amazing. The book a terrific method to continue pondering the vexing dilemmas that he for our contemplation. The "position" from which he presents the problems is neither completely relativist nor absolutist, and he forces in the most smart method to consider the sticky variables surrounding moral is a fabulous book for lay people who are overwhelmed by philosophy's jargon and overly headiness. Sandel is brilliant.
As an introduction to justice, this book is unbelievable and has inspired me to dive into basic sources (e.g. Rawls, Nozick, Sandel's other book Liberalism and the Limits of Justice).The author begins by establishing 3 views of justice:1) Welfare-based views (utilitarian)2) Rights-based views (libertarian & egalitarian)3) Moral/virtue-based views (communitarian)The author then works through utilitarian, libertarian, egalitarian, and communitarian schools of justice, showing how each responds to perceived shortcomings of preceding e author clearly articulates the salient points of each view. In addition, the author demonstrates each view's strengths and shortcomings via well-chosen situations and reflections.Unlike some reviewers who objected to the author's focus on Obama and Kennedy, I found the recent chapter to be an effective conclusion to the entire book. The theme of the final chapter was, contrary to what I expected having read those reviews, a critique of the liberal egalitarian view of divorcing morality and justice. And I found it te: the book covers much of the same ground as the EdX class, but I consider them to be compliments. The book goes into more detail than the class, though any book can't replicate the discussion forums show in a MOOC-format class.
5 stars for the book; ZERO stars to Amazon for the prominent claims that the Kindle ver contains page numbers.--> It does not.I like my Kindle and I hate zone numbers - part of the reason I chose an e-version of this book was Amazon's claims that it contains actual page numbers. It doesn't and they are not an TE: I am wide begin to being proven wrong and would welcome it; if anyone replies with a method to see pages, I will take it all back.
I can't quibble with the author's analysis of the limitations of the "liberal" justice theories of Kant and Rawls. I haven't studied them to any degree. However, it does seem to me that the principle of the "dignity of the individual" as an end, never merely as a means, has more substance than the author appears to it. He says it provides a foundation for "respect," meaning not to do another harm. But not necessarily any more than that, i.e. not specifically to seek the amazing of others or even the common good. Perhaps that is right in a minimalist view. The Hippocratic oath states "First, do no harm." One might say that is the first word about justice. But the implications of understanding others as having a fundamental dignity equal to one's own, in result being a family of man, goes well beyond not doing e "good" advocated by Aristotle appears by the author's own description to be premised on building up the "common good" which implies, first of all, the dignity (if not equality) of persons for whom pursuit of the common amazing is the purpose. The author also emphasizes Aristotle's focus not on prescriptions or rules about the "good life," but practical wisdom that uses judgment about particular situations. That approach fits the author's argument for seeing the identity and nature of persons through the "narrative" rather than "voluntarist" is kind of empirical evaluation of our concrete interdependence, horizontally within our society and vertically deep into our past, strongly suggests (if not dictates) the conclusion that the fundamental dignity of each human being implies a duty, Kant's categorical imperative, to our neighbor beyond doing no harm. In fact to act for his or her good. If people are not to be treated as mere means to another's private ends, then in concrete situations we will always be faced with choices about how to orient ourselves. Do we act in a method that is above all self-interested but in which there is at least no intended hurt to others? In that case, even if they are not in fact (unduly) harmed they are nevertheless being used as means to our ends.Kant's logic supports the notion that the dignity of other persons as ends in themselves demands that we must always act in such a method that we are not indifferent to the amazing to others that may be effected through our actions. After all, in a lot of concrete situations there is no bright line of demarcation between amazing and hurt our actions may visit on others. We may suppose that most often if we pursue our self-interest with an eye only to clear and show hurt to others, we will err with responsibility for latent and unintended harm. The Golden Rule, said to be dismissed by Kant based upon its uncertainty in relation to how one wishes to be treated by others, at least can stand for the proposition that we would always wish others to take acc of our well being in the decisions they create for themselves. We would always wish others to act in a practical method as much as possible for my benefit consistently with their own, if not actually making any private sacrifice to their detriment to result my e upshot is that the rationale behind each theory of justice discussed by the author, insufficient and distorting by itself, may be seen as complementary as a corrective to each of the others. For example, the utilitarian model, problematic for failing to insist on fundamental rights, a perspective of pragmatism that the author admires in discussing Aristotle's emphasis on practical wisdom. Utilitarians simply carry the pragmatism principle beyond its capability, ignoring fundamental rights and the limitations on our knowledge of weighing consequences. Liberal justice theory arguably corrects for this by insisting only on proscribing the clearest cases of hurt (to fundamental liberty interests). The author in fact argues for a middle method that treats fundamental rights as a foundation of private human dignity (first, do no harm) but insists we go beyond that to address the higher purposes for which we live. Implicit in this approach is a recognition that human dignity which demands respect for primary rights also is the foundation for identifying the higher purposes which in principle must encompass the common good. Individual actions and decisions are always taken within a context of social responsibility.
ScienceThrillers Review: I never took Sandel’s popular core curriculum course while I was at Harvard, but a lot of undergraduates did. There was something unique about that class: people talked about it, and kept talking about it. Sandel was accomplishing what all educators want they could. He was lighting a , years later, Professor Sandel has written a book based on the content of that course which has now become popular beyond the ivy walls. Which means I had a second possibility to be his student. (Or third chance, if you consider I rejected the idea of enrolling in the online edX ver of Justice as too onerous.)No one would describe Justice as a beach read, but I did read it on vacation, an advantage that allowed me to focus more fully and not abandon the book for too-long intervals. It is a page-turner in its own way. Sandel’s bonus is two-fold. First, he streamlines the key arguments and perspectives of a select group of amazing moral philosophers. The ideas aren’t dumbed down, but they are artfully reduced to their essence. Second, he uses real-world anecdotes to illustrate the app of the different philosophies, and equally important, he explains the intellectual challenges created to each. (Which allowed me to pretend that’s exactly what I was thinking and I was glad he brought it up.)Moral problems used in the book contain the popular runaway trolley problem, outrage over the bailout, exploding gas tanks in Ford Pintos, a consensual cannibalism case from Germany, the voluntary military, surrogate pregnancy, kidneys, Bill Clinton and Monica, affirmative action, reparations, evacuating Ethiopian Jews, buying American, and much more. In each case, although Sandel is clearly a contemporary American liberal, he avoids taking a decisive stand but works through the logical conclusion of the relevant moral us about 80% of the book is an engaging, readable distillation of necessary ideas about justice, society, and morality. In the latest 20% or so, Sandel goes beyond teaching and presents his own argument for a fresh approach to justice in our times. Once you wrap your head around it, you realize that he is advocating for a revolutionary re-thinking of the moral neutrality which has been the unwritten goal of justice in America for some decades. His is a bracing, dangerous gambit–but once you’ve read the whole book, you’ll see why it may be the only method to save modern politics.A remarkable, compact book that will stimulate the logic circuits of your brain and leave you pondering Huge Questions.Unusual words: utilitarianism; Jeremy Bentham; John Stuart Mill; libertarianism; universal rights; laissez-faire; pure practical reason; Immanuel Kant; categorical imperative; intelligible realm; John Rawls; moral desert; Aristotle; telosIf you like Justice, you might like:The Righteous Mind: Why Amazing People Are Divided by Politics and Religion by Jonathan Haidt.
This is a very interesting book that goes into various philosophies of justice. Sandel starts with an explanation of the utilitarian and libertarian views. His exposition on these is rather too brief, even half-hearted. It is obvious that he disagrees substantially. He goes on to give a very amazing explanation of Immanuel Kant's philosophy of justice. His description of Rawl's and Aristotle's views is also useful. I can see amazing scope for developing Sandel's favoured approach of the narrative, identity in community, and moral engagement. The thoughts that he puts forth are promising, but have yet to be fully e book is written and illustrated with examples (hypothetical and real-life) that are simple for a lay person to understand. It is recommended for any reader who is interested in justice in modern politics.
The point of the book is to introduce some beautiful primary jurisprudence/moral philosophy, and the idea that common social problems should be argued with morals and ethics--in fact, they can't be excluded from discussions. If you're not familiar with a lot of the primary philosophical theories that are referenced in socio-political discussions (Kant, Utilitarianism, Aristotle, etc.), the book will be helpful.I found that Sandel repeats himself frequently, and uses a lot of short stories to explain a concept. It felt more circular and kind of energy-draining to test and search out the point he was trying to make. Additionally, he doesn't go into any true depth with the theories, just mentions a few primary points and then goes right into another hypothetical.
In this book prof. Sandel explores three approaches to justice. The one that justice is the maximizing utility or welfare, the second according to which justice means respecting freedom of choice and the third (which author himself favors) that the justice involves cultivating virtue and reasoning about the common good. The book includes a lot of history of political philosophy. I combined the book with author's video lectures at Harvard where a lot of moral dilemmas were discussed with the students. This book makes you reexamine some of your views on moral questions from a more analytical point of view.
The author Richard Susskind has written a fascinating book on how we can harness the power of technology to increase access to justice for more people. He describes the shortcomings in our current system and tackles some of the thorny questions on the street to creating online courts — e.g., can computers serve as judges? The writing itself is accessible, sprinkled with humor throughout. I highly recommend this book for anyone interested in law and tech.
Strength:• Well written---fast and short read• Plot focused tight novel• Fun method to slay several hoursWeaknesses:• Political parodies evident• Somewhat predictable• Flawed plotline• Stereotypical charactersExcellent airplane book that will hold your attention but likely one you'll leave in the seat pocket. Some books aren't meant to be literature or even memorable, but that doesn't mean this book is less than e author's hero development of the two main characters (I grew to like them) works well for beginning the novel series. I'm willing to read more to search out what they do in the next though this novel has some dystopian tones, the author's political risk taking illustrates well how most extremists feel when their party is in or out of power. Likely this book will offend nearly everyone more than once politically, while also reinforcing their biases too. As such, it's a gamble how any single reader will interpret the whole work. Most will probably see a lot of direct comparisons with current and past Washington intrigues. All who finish reading it will be grateful it was mostly fiction.If you have deep-rooted biases, you will search much within this story to love and hate. Just because a book is fun to read doesn't mean it's worthwhile. I'm still trying to always, the Audible narration facilitates my reading experience and added more than it distracted.
Amazing mystery/police story. The author reached high for his material, maybe a small beyond his understanding. Murdering Supreme Court justices for the purpose of re-balancing the political views of the body seems a bit far-fetched since they undoubtedly have more protection than this story suggests. However, the "what if" it did happen created for amazing suspense, and the suspense was developed well throughout the novel. As for the perpetrator, people generally choose mates they can trust. The villain turning out to be the protagonist's best and oldest mate was a pessimistic view to leave the reader with. This villain did not hurt his goddaughter, but he might have since a poor man tends to only obtain worse as retribution closes in.
I use this textbook in my diversity training seminars. Disregard the 1-star comments that are negative. The reviewers are complaining about white privilege as if they are now victims. I'm sure most of them only read the table of contents, but they are the people who could benefit from this book the most.
I've been a 5FDP fan since the beginning, and though they've had a bit of "too samey" problems with a lot of their songs, it is still a successful formula and every album has had at least a couple standouts. This one is nice and long, the covers are great. It is a bit mellower than expected, it has several slow songs, but I've always liked 5FDP's slow songs too and they're quite good. Overall, not disappointed at all and definitely worth the buy.
Wright has this method of clarifying what had seemed muddled and incomplete in my understanding of the Fresh Testament as he connects Biblical themes. He does it here again on evil and God's justice, as usual sticking with basic, down-to-earth exegesis that moves easily between Christian texts and their Jewish background. Here, his take on evil is illuminating, especially his brief, but thorough critique of modern philosophy's inability to rightly name evil for what it is and to establish that none of us are from collaborating in it.Once again, he highlights God's intention to redeem this creation rather than abandon it for some "heaven" somewhere else. The central element of that redemption is the forgiveness we keep and need to pass along, to others and to ourselves, even while we understand that evil has a lot of faces, including our own sometimes. He does not shy away from describing God's justice as judgment versus any of us participating in the evil that God confronts and e only weak point in the book was when he began to apply it to true life situations. His examples just lacked the vigor and clarity of the rest of his book. But, I've already recommended the book to a mate a my church who was hungry for something thoughtful on this topic.
Wright does not address the "why" of evil (because he, rightly in my opinion, states that Scripture is silent on the matter) as much as he addresses the "what" of evil: what God has decisively done and will do about evil, specifically through the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The book raises a lot of good, thought-provoking questions while offering a cursory overview of the topic and inviting further exploration by the reader.
Very honest and well researched. Gives the reader an opportunity to examine the mainstream beliefs about how our meal is produced. If animal products aren't used in the commercial production of our food, then petroleum products are. Well written.
This book is absolutely brilliant. As a Longtime keto dieter I was strongly opinionated towards meat eating for a healthy human body. This book sheds more light on how agricultural society has ruined our environment and ecology. It every single argument posed by the veganism supporters and smashes them with scientific facts. Its time to heal the globe and human beings from self destruction.
"A self created man is just not admitting where he got all the parts"This quote by John Kenneth Galbraith is one of the most succinct and necessary in regards to the myth of the heroic producer who created every dime of his entirely on his own, and owes nothing to the society that created his wealth not listen to the reviews that claim the book argues that all that we produce "belongs to the government," along with a parade of other strawmen arguments trotted out by those dissatisfied by its thesis. It does not claim that. It does not create that argument. It's claim is that we do own the fruits of our labor to the extent that we contributed to the creation and production of that production - but that, to some degree, we own back into the society that made the infrastructure that allowed that production to be e book is the most informative I have encountered in regards to articulating the importance of a system of public goods for meeting the needs of society as a whole. In reality, without some way of collective enforcement of the rights we keep so dear, you wouldn't' have the privilege of arguing on the internet from the comfort of your own own. It is the greatest book I have seen pointing out the flawed and unrealistic religion that is is book points out why the alleviation of poverty helps everyone. Why you benefit in a globe where the not good are taken care of. Why social goods made by collectively pooled resources let us all to have fun more wealth. Why courts, laws, patents, and enforcement create it possible to produce to start with. Why education is the wellspring of all the progress we keep so dear from the onset.Until someone can produce for me a person who got rich in a Capitalistic society with no infrastructure, property rights, patents, educated workers, national defense, roads, sewers, water, airports, and countless other public goods woven into the very primary fabric of our wealth creating society, the charges levied versus this book our invalid. Someone flippantly said "This book just says without Uncle Sam, youPlease, do not listen to the Randists and Tea Party Right wing nuts who denigrate the book. Read it and come to your own conclusion. Not everything is captured by shop signals. The greatest and wealthiest countries learned long ago, that taxes are a method for us to do big, hard things that create us all better off, which cannot be achieved by any one person 's the Libertarians who wish something for nothing. They wish to have fun a society and wealth created possible by billions of investments in Infrastructure, for free. They are the ones wanting welfare. Not the other method around. We do own the fruits of our own work. But we owe some of that, to the framework that created that possible so that wealth creation can remain possible. This book is a attractive articulation of that mans have traded things back and forth for their own benefit since our species has been able to walk upright. No one disagrees with this. A globe with no government would be possible - and has indeed existed before. Some would succeed brilliantly in such an anarchistic world. But the for not being at the top would be far crueler, far harsher than we have today. It would amount to a lottery where he very best and strongest would have fun a possibly very glitzy and dominant position (To the extent that modern technology would even let that - primary research, and technology from public funding has contributed to a vast degree of the advancement we have today), but the rest would languish in a terrible, brutish and uncertain globe with no method to hold the powerful from crushing the under the them. Libertarians and tea partiers recognize only the monopoly of public power. For some reason, the idea of personal power as a coercive force is utterly invisible to them.
The main thrust of Murphy & Nagel's claim is that pre-tax income cannot be a moral base for the measurement of the fairness of taxation. Their claim is that the ultimate social justice of the entire economic system is the only proper end, of which taxation is a part, thus taxation and the equity thereof cannot be measured in a vaccum, rather only versus the resulting would seem however that Murphy & Nagel create their claim too powerful in that they claim that pre-tax income (and vertical equity) cannot be utilized as even a factor in the measurement. Unfortunately for their theory, pre-tax income is a fact of the shop economy and the positive law surrounding such economy. Thus, if we are to ignore everyone's pre-tax income, the only possible effect is that all after-tax income must come out equal. To claim any other effect must come through the app of a judgment as to vertical would seem that their claim would be far more sound if it were limited to saying that vertical equity may only be utilized as a means to achievement of the end of social justice. Murphy & Nagel, however, wish to create their claim stronger so as to be able to discount the tax equity argument entirely. Ultimately such an argument must fail due to the reality of pre-tax income, but it is still a very interesting and well written book.
This book was extremely informative of the topic. It was very detailed, and it had some interesting points, vignettes, case studies, and "think like an administrator" exercises to apply the knowledge. The issue is, it reads just like a textbook. The best textbooks, in my experience, read more like a story, where the author pulls you in with the info provided. This book simply drones on and on and on.... you obtain the point. It's a shame because it really entails some interesting knowledge, but it's hard to create yourself hold going, allow alone have fun it.
The first chapter of this book is absolutely astounding. To my knowledge, the first chapter is the most comprehensive, well written overview of species-inclusive intersectional anti-oppression theory I have yet read. I would highly recommend this book for the first chapter alone to anyone wanting to know how race, gender, orientation, species, etc. all interact and how all systems of oppression work together and the history of intersectionality work. It makes no sense to struggle for human rights while ignoring animal rights...just as it makes no sense to struggle for women's rights but ignore rights, etc. All are connected.While I thought the first chapter was thrillingly comprehensive and well argued, the rest of the book quite frankly bored me. I think this may have to do with the fact that I'm well versed in animal rights, so the stories being shared didn't really interest me. Anytime I see graphic discussions of violence versus animals, I skim...so I did a lot of skimming. For someone who does not know about what happens to other animals, this would be a amazing introduction, especially for those who are already tuned in to anti-sexism or critical race e first chapter is very academic, but the rest of the chapters are supplied by leading female activists and leaders in the animal rights movement. Most of the stories are biographical, explaining how these women came into the movement and how their private experiences with oppression inform their activism. Again, this may be interesting to some, but I had been hoping for a more academic piece. I'm glad that women are given voice, as this is so rarely the case in the animal rights movement, but this wasn't what I was expecting.Overall, I would recommend this book as a supplementary addition to a college-level course on Animals & Society as well as race and gender studies. I think students would learn a lot from the first chapter and would search the private stories (in rather short chapters) simple to comprehend and relate to. Otherwise, I would also recommend that first chapter to seasoned advocates who are fresh to intersectionality politics. For those looking for a solid academic exploration into human/animal intersectionality politics, this is not the book for you. I would recommend Carol Adams' work, particularly "Animals and Women: Feminist Theoretical Explorations" edited by Adams & Donovan.
"Earth Democracy" by Vandana Shiva both a masterful critique of globalization and a hopeful vision for a better world. Ms. Shiva compares and contrasts top-down systems of authoritarianism and exclusion with bottom-up systems of egalitarianism and mutual cooperation to discuss how corporate power is proving to be a grave threat to democracy and the long-term viability of the planet. Ms. Shiva contends that a mutually-supportive network of empowered local communities might be able to make a global society that is based on humanitarian principles of peace, compassion and Shiva has long been highly regarded as an activist and scholar. She has authored a lot of books and is a frequent media commentator. "Earth Democracy" serves to further Ms. Shiva's stature as a leading intellectual who continues to eloquently voice the concerns of the poor. Her special ability to blend science, history, politics, economics, gender problems and other fields of study into her text is impressive. The effect is a book that rewards its readers with a lot of pages of thought-provoking insight and Shiva points out that two thirds of humanity owes its livelihood to a sustenance economy that finds itself under increasing pressure from capital. She finds similarities in the earlier eras of enclosure and colonialism with today's struggle over intellectual property rights and patents, where the strong use the law to privatize resources for profit. Arguing that overconsumption by the wealthy is the root cause of environmental destruction and human injustice, Ms. Shiva makes a compelling case for granting local communities more control over resources so that alternative, sustainable economies can be Shiva brilliantly connects the insecurity wrought by globalization with the "ideologies of exclusion" and "cultural nationalism" that fuels battle and terrorism. As state power largely serves to protect corporate interests, the economically uprooted and excluded masses seek identity through nationalist conflict and sometimes prove vulnerable to manipulation by religious extremists. On the other hand, Ms. Shiva cites the Indian farmer's struggles over seed and water rights as examples of how people might come together in a positive method to reclaim a more peaceful and secure Shiva reminds us that Mahatma Gandhi proved how little acts of resistance can hasten the end of empire. She believes that a multiplicity of movements such as Terra Madre that are struggling for meal security, the environment, democracy and human rights will support us break from the self-destructive path that has been prescribed for us by the corporate elite.I highly recommend this necessary and inspiring book to everyone.
I loved reading this textbook because it felt like a delivery of everything I wanted to know for sure, plus a bunch more. However, it can be a small bit of a slog and perhaps not for beginners. Not a lot of people in my class broke into it, and we were all Ed. majors. It takes a small determination, but the info and thorough sources and resources inside are amazing in my opinion!
A surprisingly diverse release from these metal monsters. I love them for their aggression songs, the ones that obtain me through the day. But this album also explores a more mature side of the band. They have broadened their musical landscape with slower songs like "I Refuse" and "When The Seasons Change". The cover of "Blue On Black" is very amazing too. But my favorites are still the anger anthems. Standouts are "Top Of The World", "It Doesn't Matter", "Fake", and "Bloody". (I'd give this 5 stars, but I can't obtain into "Sham Pain", "Stuck In My Ways", the boring cover of "Gone Away", or the unnecessary filler "Rock Bottom".)
Is it groundbreaking and incredibly deep music? No. But this CD is collectively head and shoulders ahead of Got Your Six, plus there are at least 4-5 really really standout tracks on this one, namely the slower songs like Blue on Black. Well worth your if you're a fan.
I rarely write negative reviews, but this was particularly egregious. This had the makings of an interesting story, until the author puked his private political beliefs all over plot. The character is a US Secret Service agent who literally took a bullet for the President. And regrets doing so. Wait... the character (?) believes that it's OK to slay a person if you don't subscribe to his/her political beliefs? The character (?) doesn't realize the a physical attack on the President (regardless of party) is an attack on our nation? This is only one example of the hero's (and the author's) extremist political beliefs. It kind of created me feel dirty reading it. Not sure why the author would intentionally wish to alienate at least half of his potential audience this way. Sad really, it had potential to be a really amazing story. There was another particular device that the author used that just didn't create sense... The character (?) has extensive training and an innate expertise in kinesics. He can read people so well, he's like a human lie detector. Due to this ability, he was given the nickname "Peep". Not sure how peep = read people but... the guy who can READ people so incredibly well has the latest name REEDER! If the people READER is already named REEDER, does he really need the stupid nickname?
Well, my first and latest Max Collins book. Reasonably well written with a decent plot. Unfortunately the author injects his political beliefs into a fictional story too much. I don't mind a political jab in a book. I just look at the source and chuckle. Unfortunately , this novel had every conservative being evil , stupid, or both continually through the entire book. The main hero was a former Secret Service agent, who was a liberal that took a bullet for a poor evil conservative President. Sorry, his hero did not fit the personality of Secret Service agents I have met.I just couldn't obtain past the liberal bias of the author. I suppose he writes for a various reader than me. My mistake.
I am currently in an Administration of Justice Master's Program and needed this book for one of my summer courses. While being full time employed as a law enforcement professional, I am additionally needed to read 3 chapters of this book weekly and provide a 5 page review for the week. I was excited to know that I was down to the 12th chapter in this book until I realized the book I purchased only had 4 pages for the 12 chapter. I was relieved at first, "4 pages and I'm done," I said to myself. But something just didn't feel right. After further reviewing the book, the table of context revealed about 30 pages are missing out of the 12th chapter. I am furious and hope this review is address asap.
This book addresses all of the neccessary info of the social ramafications involved with our knowledge of the human genome. In this book, the heart wrenching accounts of America's eugenic movement are strong enough to move anyone to become actively involved in the problems at hand. A true eye opener, one which makes it painstakingly clear that we are not prepared to with the info that we have aquired about ourselves and eachother.
The globe of juvenile justice cannot, and should not, belong solely to policy makers, researchers, court officers and legal advocates. Fate determines whether a kid is thrust into a life of delinquency and destruction, or spared. Along come Sherman and Jacobs, compiling the best, most latest thinking. Putting a fresh lens on the issue, they encourage us to see the vast, long-term social and economic impacts and possibilities.I have known Fran Sherman for almost two decades. She has dedicated her formidable talents to the problem of juvenile challenges, passionately bringing people together and paving the path with fresh insights. This collection will encourage more nuanced thinking and courageous action. It might also create the conversation about juvenile justice more urgent and accessible to all.
An essential resource for activists, students, and a wider, concerned public. I've been teaching different chapters of this book since it came out in 2011 and found it to be a comprehensive and very accessible source for introducing students to the history and practice of meal justice movements across the US.
Elaborates on Proudhon's still-correct maxim that "Property is theft," especially in an age of heavy corporations, piddling inheritance taxes on large fortunes, and Libertarian blather about the amazing freedom of property- and capital owners to screw the unpropertied and less propertied others through capitalism's legalized thievery. Nothing helps the few acquire and enhance the wealth of few at the expense of the laboring or unemployed a lot of more than government and the law in a capitalism-dominated society like this one (where property has more rights than persons). Anyone who thinks that being not good is fun or that the not good don't work -- usually MUCH harder than the rich -- should test poverty some day. This useful study could have left the realm of philosophy and social theory a bit more and offered further statistics (there's lots of it) in help of their analysis.
First of all, I have used Reading For Diversity and Social Justice as the textbook for my Social Justice Courses. I like this textbook because of how the readings are arranged around the "overview" of the the concepts, the voices /stories of people who have had experiences and then the Next Steps/ What to do and others. I have used Readings for Diversity and Social Justice for the past four years and I like the book!