One would think that in 209 pages of text at least one original idea would appear. The book is separated into 13 topical chapters with an introduction and a conclusion. There is an extensive notes section and a surprisingly good index.
The topics cover everything from Education, to Healthcare, to Government and Business and much in between. The essential argument of the book, and one I actually cannot disagree with is that the biggest problem in the US right now is government. Government regulation and intellectual luddites are stifling innovation and holding the country back from making the conceptual leaps and paradigm shift that it is capable of to extend American leadership into the 21st century and beyond.
Speaker Gingrich makes an eloquent argument that over-regulation and political interests are holding the country back. There is no reason for the current economic and societal malaise that we are not inflicting on ourselves. I found especially demining his description of the over-cautious FDA drug and device approval process and the ways in which oil exploration and extraction in the US is being deliberately slowed and even stopped. I share the Speakers concern that there is a large segment of people in America that actively want the country to fail and work to see that it does. I find it equally dismaying that such people even exist. What I don’t share is his optimism that there is a way out of the mess by working within the current system. I hope that he is right and I am wrong.
Regardless, this is a well written book that explains the many issues presented in a rational and non-extremist manner. Speaker Gingrich is a past master at making seemingly complex issues easy to understand, Breakout continues in that tradition and for that reason alone is worth reading. I recommend this book to anyone interested in contemporary politics and the ways in which said politics are stifling progress both societally and technologically.
I picked up Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America’s Police Forces because the book looked interesting and I was shocked at what happened in Boston during the search for the two bombers. The sight of police officers kitted up like my platoon and I was in Iraq on TV pulling people out of their homes at gunpoint and then searching those homes without a warrant shocked and dismayed me. Therefor the title of the book was at a minimum intriguing and I decided to read it.
The book itself is separated into 9 chapters in what is essentially chronological order. There are 31 pages of endnotes by chapter and an index. The book is a history of policing in America with particular emphasis on the rise of SWAT teams since their inception in the late 60′s in Los Angeles. While the book is obviously biased, that is to be expected from the title. This is an advocacy book after all. What concerned me was how well the author made and presented his case that American police departments are becoming less about fighting crime and more about becoming a quasi paramilitary force that ignores constitutional protections when convenient.
I thought that the book does make a pretty good case that police do look at citizens as the enemy. If you have had any run ins with law enforcement recently from a traffic stop to airport security, much less had your house invaded by a SWAT team it is evident that police take an us and them mentality. Personally, I find it amazing that SWAT teams have become so prevalent and as the book makes very clear, there is no basis for them as the vast majority of the time SWAT raids turn up no weapons, and often nothing else.
There are many examples in the book of SWAT raids gone wrong but SWAT is not the biggest of the problems detailed in the book. The biggest problem the book points out is two faceted and that is the way in which law enforcement has been politicized and how compliant courts have stood by and even encouraged law enforcement to ignore the 4th Amendment against unlawful search and seizure. Law enforcement has always been at least somewhat political but the author in m opinion, rightly highlights how the “war on drugs” has been used to criminalize a large segment of society for victimless crimes. Even more disturbing is the way in which judges apparently rubberstamp requests for no-knock warrants and then if something goes wrong or even the wrong house is raided neither officers nor departments are held to account.
There are situations where the use of a SWAT team and paramilitary tactics and methods are appropriate. What this book says is not that SWAT teams need to be eliminated but that using one should be the exception and not the rule. Mr. Balko makes a very compelling case for the overuse and abuse of both SWAT teams and no-knock warrants. I highly recommend this book for its in-depth look at the way in which the Constitution is essentially being ignored in the pursuit of at best ill-defined law enforcement goals.
I apologize in advance for the blatantly political tone of this piece but I am flabbergasted by what I see happening on the eastern periphery of Europe and the anemic reaction to state on state aggression by the rest of the world.
I read this piece by Justin Logan from the Cato Institute this morning and was struck immediately on how similar in tone this piece is to the rhetoric of the pre-WWII America Firsters. Is Estonia Worth a War?
I just ask myself are people so blind or so willing to seek peace at any cost that they will not stand up to tyranny until the cost of stopping it is orders of magnitude greater than if they had stood up for principle at the beginning? The same kinds of arguments against involvement in WWII were made by isolationists in the US and appeasers abroad as Hitler’s Germany slowly re-armed and swallowed its neighbors in the years prior to WWII.
Largely the same process is in action in Russia today. Whereas Germany felt slighted and unjustly treated after WWI modern Russia feels slighted and mistreated after the unsatisfactory (from their perspective) end to the Cold War. It is interesting that roughly a generation passed between 1918 and 1939 and roughly a generation has passed between 1989 and 2014. Russia was stripped of large swaths of territory in the wake of the fall of communism and Germany was stripped of territory, actually split into two separate blocks by the Danzig Corridor, in the wake of Versailles. The German people felt they were not defeated, (hence the popularity of the stab in the back myth), while many Russians today feel that they were betrayed from within by Gorbachev and Co. Hitler was an ideologue that fed on and amplified public perceptions of being unjustly handled by the Allies and Putin has done the same in Russia. As Germany expanded it was only weakly opposed by the Allied powers and we are seeing the same sort of reaction in the West to Putin’s actions.
History seems to be repeating itself before our eyes as yet another European ideologue and dictator forges ahead towards war and an attempt to dominate its neighbors. Is the West going to stand idly by and allow it to happen again until the cost of stopping it is immeasurably higher? The stakes are higher this time around because Russia is a nuclear power. The time to stop Putin and Russia is now and a serious demonstration of Western resolve would achieve without bloodshed what will costs thousands, if not millions of lives later on.
Has the West learned nothing from history other than that War is bad? There are things worse than war, and if the Western leadership does not find their spine soon they will see what those things are.
Below is an animated map of the progress of WWII day by day from 1 September, 1939 to October, 1945 when the last major units of the Japanese military surrendered. It provides a fascinating view of the way in which the fortunes of the went back and forth.
[FULL DISCLOSURE: I received my copy of this book free from the author. I was not paid for this review and the opinion expressed is purely my own]
The True German: The Diary of a World War II Military Judge by Werner Otto Müller-Hill is one of those rare books that come out of war. A diary written by someone to satisfy themselves with no expectation that it will ever get published. As such, it provides an almost unique view into the mind of the person writing it. The vast majority of war memoirs are self-serving and written to make a point. Diaries tend to be less so, and this one in particular as it was written for the specific purpose of allowing the author to vent his spleen of thoughts and opinions that he simply could not openly express in Nazi Germany without risking death or imprisonment. The book is 186 pages of text and covers the diary entries from March, 1944 to June, 1945.
What is striking about this diary is that it was written by somebody who was part of one of the vital aspects of the totalitarian regime that kept the Nazis in power, a military judge. Müller-Hill is remarkable in that although he was a military judge, he was not a hanging judge as so many Nazi era judges were. Indeed, he boasts in the diary that he never sentenced a man to death although he was pressured to do so. He always managed to find a sentence that avoided the firing squad.
Werner Otto Müller-Hill had served Germany in World War I and was 54 years old when World War II started in 1939. His age and experience color his observations throughout his diary and he constantly compares the Nazis to the Kaiser era. This is interesting because he is someone with intimate knowledge of both eras. He makes several predictions in his diary that turned out to be prescient.
However, the most striking thing that comes out when reading the diary is how Müller-Hill struggled to reconcile his role in the Nazi war machine with his own conscience. What comes out is the internal debates of an ordinary man who knows he serves an inhuman regime but finds himself powerless to do anything to stop the destruction of the country and people he love. He does what he can but knows that will never be enough. This book is a step to putting to rest the myth of a Germany full of Nazis and goes far toward showing that some, if not most, Germans were opposed to the regime but unable to do anything because of the iron grip of the police apparatus the Nazis built. If anything, the lesson to be learned from this diary and the Nazi era is not that Germans are evil but that if tyranny is not stopped early resistance can become almost impossible. This diary represents the story of one person who could not fight openly yet still resisted the regime in whatever way they could.