I stumbled upon this book purely by chance but being interested in the subject I decided to give it a try. Based on the title and the summary on the cover I was expecting a serious, in-depth look at the concept of survivalism. What I found was disappointing.

The author spent several years on the inside of what he considers the survivalist movement interviewing and observing what he considers to be epitome of the survivalist mentality. As with most newcomers to the subject of survivalism the author seems to have bought into the stereotype of rubes in camouflage, racists and conspiracy theorists. He spent time with some pseudo militia types who ludicrously played army in the woods, visited a white supremacist camp in Idaho and attended a survival Expo full of hucksters and opportunists, attended some off the wall racist church and spent time with some folks who generally have some serious issues.

Those types are certainly out there but he makes no serious effort that I could discern to objectively define survivalism outside of the boundaries of his very narrow group of subjects. He did not mention the Mormons who have a long tradition of organization and preparedness skills (I am not Mormon) or make any attempt to examine the large number of people who embrace the concepts of survivalism but do not associate with the "lunatic fringe" that are always conveniently stamped as the poster child representatives of the survival mindset. His approach seemed to me to be like an alien coming to earth to study the human animal but spending all of his time in a lunatic asylum. In this example how accurate could the final report be by examining only the deranged and disturbed members of the species?

The book seemed to me to be hazy and unfocused. The few lucid points that were made had to be gleaned from a mass of psycho babble and what seemed to me to be a loosely veiled contempt for the people involved and the subject matter as a whole. It reminded me of a saying I once heard that goes, "Ph.D.s know a lot about very little". The author is not a Ph.D. (yet) but he often writes in a academically dry, pedantic style that just doesn't seem to say anything useful. I found myself skimming over paragraphs where he was going on and on about how pitiful these people's lives were hoping to find something about survivalism.

The author does make some valid points about the subcultures that are associated with survivalism but his focus seemed to be more on how warped these groups' core beliefs were and less about what they had to do with survivalism. Just because somebody is a racist or believes that the New World Order is coming does not invalidate the general concept of being prepared for hardship. He also occasionally comes through with what I felt were valid criticisms of many people involved in survivalism like the fact that "survivalists" focus too much on guns, gadgets and minutia and seem to have no plausible focus on what they are planning to survive, but I really had to work hard to filter through the static to get these points.

In the end it seems to me to be a sad waste of several years of the author's life (and a few hours of my time). I would summarize by paraphrasing the author out of context. In his opinion of the survival Expo he visited he spoke of it as "...commodified caricature, subject without substance, context without content..." That, unfortunately, sums up what I felt about this book. If you are seriously interested in survivalism you would probably be wise to pass this one up because, in my opinion anyway, it is seriously flawed, disappointingly biased and has very little to do with survivalism.

The Reader from Arizona who states that Professor Mitchell does not yet have his PhD is inaccurate. If Reader is so definite and so wrong about such a simple fact, then you might do well to question his review, too. In fact, I read the book, and I know it's terrific. Read it. It's a university press book, so don't be really knocked out surprised that it's occasionally academic, but Mitchell is a raconteur, and the book has some of the best stories I've read in a long time--Michael Moore and TV Nation found it worth their time, and so do the academics.

Dancing at Armageddon: Survivalism and Chaos in Modern Times
Richard G. Mitchell

Things ain't what they seem to be. The world turns, the media spins, and the author yarns a tale 20 years in the making. Mitchell jimmies open the bomb shelter for a glimpse of its denizens- survivalists who foresee trouble, make dark warnings, and prepare. Foreboding events call for a "creative transcendence of calamitous cultural change," and lead to surprising solutions. Better bury your house, stockpile your pins, and keep your Charmin dry. The truth is as close as your local coffee shop and flea market. On the topic of survivalists, not all readers who wonder are lost, but many are mistaken. Be prepared. You'll find yourself yanked from an armchair into pup tents, pawnshops, and the proper use of the garrote.

Mitchell shares his fears transparently, his gaffes candidly, and the chocolate cake story as with a close friend; seamlessly weaving narrative, observation, and analysis. Don't confuse good reading with poor sociology. The insights and methodology sneak home with you like campfire smoke after a weekend in the woods. Learn about survivalism from a man who teaches survival skills himself; it's a tonic for pulp media depictions. Fear whom you will, but first meet the people who are dancing at Armageddon.

Reviewed by:
Christopher Schmitt

Although not as fascinating as his PAPER CRYSTALS (a stellar work of modular origami), MATHEMATICAL ORIGAMI is a very solid work on the topic. David Mitchell again gives clear instructions in text and diagrams for a very intriguing branch of paperfolding. There are many books on geometric and modular origami, but Mitchell's are more than just "look at this neat design." Instead, they are well thought out and very intelligently written. A must-have for fans of the art.

My office generates lots of notices printed on brightly colored paper (usually printed on only one side). This is a great use for scrap paper. I think it is somewhat challenging (highschool level). I completed all but one. (the Decorative Rhombic Dodecahedron).
Americans should note that A4 paper is not the American satandard 8.5" X 11" but it doesn't make any difference for most of the structures. When you get to the Skeletal Cube shave the 8.5 inch dimension to 7.78 inches.

A concise and well-written book, with clear diagrams and straightforward instructions, suitable for any beginner in the field. Includes the most well-known mathematical representation
of modular origami. Advanced users might prefer a higher-level
book. Includes a list of references for further reading that might be helpful.

In 1934, veteran muckraker and socialist Upton Sinclair managed to win the Democratic nomination to run for Governor of California. Running on a blatantly Marxist platform, Sinclair through a scare into the rich and powerful of America who, in the view of this book's author, united together to unfairly slander Sinclair and rob him of victory. Campaign of the Century provides a heavily detailed, anecdote-filled accounts of the campaign and manages to weave in a fascinating social history featuring the most revered figures of recent American history. Over the course of the campaign we get fascinating portraits of Will Rogers, Aimee Semple MacPhearson, Louis B. Mayer, and Franklin D. Roosevelt amongst others.

The book's main flaw is the idealization of Sinclair. While Marshall is honest enough to admit that the man could be a flake, his platform is never really examined in any great detail. Nor does Marshall give any real evidence as to why Sinclair would have been a better governor than his opponent or even why he seems so convinced Sinclair would have won if not for the convenient boogeyman of Big Business. Instead, Marshall seems to simply assume that all readers will naturally agree that Sinclair was an angel and anyone opposed to him was the devil.

This being said, this is still a wonderful social and political history of the not-so-distant past. It should definitely be read by anyone who considers himself to be a political junkie or is just interested in history. Just remember to keep an open mind and not always automatically believe everything you read.

The author's obvious sympathy for Sinclair interferes with his telling of the monumental 1934 governor's race in California. Given the depths of the country's turmoil in 1934, it is doubtful is so wacky a candidate (although a brilliant and sincere one) ever was taken so seriously for such a major office.

The book is not so much about the campaign for Governor as it is about the negative campaign run against him -- 90% of the book focuses on people who opposed Sinclair and their tactics. In addition to employers bullying their workers to kick back contributions to the anti-Sinclair effort and scurrilous attempts to intimidate Sinclair supporters from turning out to vote, the author lavishes attention on the fact that mailings were sent out against Sinclair in huge quantities; that newspapers and other foes used his long record of incendiary quotes, outside of the mainstream by virtually any standard, against him. One presumes the author believes we'll be shocked that the Merriam campaign is campaigning.

Sinclair's opponent, the incumbent Governor Merriam, is portrayed as an imbecile, a non-entity who the author labels early on as "reactionary" (and re-labels him with the derogitory term dozens and dozens of times, as though it were informative rather than namecalling.) Merriam's support of the Townsend Plan and other "progressive" measures is dismissed out-of-hand as laughably and obviously insincere -- so insincere the author feels no need to burden himself with supporting his accusations. While it may be news to the author, it's a widely accepted historical fact that after Merriam trounced Sinclair, he endured the scorn of anti-New Dealers for pushing for the progressive policies he campaigned on, a fact which compromised his re-election effort in 1938.

Just as can be expected of a book that focuses so exclusively on the negative side one campaign ran against the other, that campaign comes across as morally flawed while the other is virtuous. The author acknowledges Sinclair's demagogery (he claims "208" New York mobsters have been sent by capitalists to undo his campaign, just as Joe McCarthy said, "I hold in my hand a list of 205 communists...") shameless pandering (claiming belief in God in the closing weeks in the face of decades of loud, principled agnosticism) and smear campaigning of his own (Sinclair's orgainization runs an "expose" on Merriam's KKK background, a complete falsehood) yet these instances cover several sentences while the anti-Sinclair excesses are covered in several hundred pages.

Nonetheless, this was a largely enjoyable read, despite being somewhat tedious in detail at times. The story is riveting, it is eloquently (although not objectively) told, and performs it's greatest service in reminding fat, happy modern day America where prosperity is considered a fact of life that this country was a far different place not so long ago.

Greg Mitchell provides an absorbing account of one of America's most fascinating gubernatorial campaigns, the titantic 1934 California struggle between famed novelist and muckraker Upton Sinclair, who exposed the Chicago meatpacking business in his epic work, "The Jungle," and Lieutenant Governor Frank Merriam, hand-picked candidate of the powerful monied interests who kept their candidate carefully under wraps in a manner reminiscent of the later candidaces of Californian Ronald Reagan and Texan George Bush the Younger.

The race is fascinating in a current context for being the first instance where the ferocious impact of corporate public relations spin control dominated. A smear was launched against Sinclair based on his socialist roots. What was termed socialist in those days, as evidenced later by perennial Socialist presidential candidate Norman Thomas, was a strong desire for regulation, better working conditions, and greater security for the citizenry in the retirement and medical care areas. While Sinclair, due to his Socialist background and controversy over his End Poverty in California program, failed to receive the endorsement as Democratic Party nominee from an apprehensive Franklin Delano Roosevelt, he obtained financial assistance from wealthy Los Angeles socialist property magnate Gaylord Wilshire and many grassroots volunteers seeking security and justice during the ravages of the Great Depression.

Louis B. Mayer, William Randolph Hearst and other powerful monied interests fought hard to prevent Sinclair from winning, or having his platform properly debated. Mayer had MGM make and release so-called documentaries which were shown in his studio's movie houses revealing scores of impoverished people coming to California to get in on Sinclair's largesse and take advantage of his promise to end poverty in the state. One controversial segment showed a man with a thick Russian accent exclaiming soothly, "Well, Sinclair's ideas worked in Russia. I don't see why they won't work here."

These were blatant propaganda films purported to reveal spontaneous behavior which were actually rehearsed efforts with actors performing their intended roles. They worked all the same. The fact that Sinclair's socialism was rooted in humanism and not Marxism was deliberately overlooked as distortion and fearmongering prevailed.

Despite these efforts, and being hopelessly outspent, Sinclair ran a spirited campaign based on ideas and ran a strong if unsuccessful race. After it was all over he took it all philosophically, exclaiming that, "If I'd been elected governor I wouldn't be able to continue sleeping with my bedroom window open."

When I started reading this book, I was very interested in it -- I loved the author's writing style, and it really wrapped me into the story. This lasted for about 10 pages, at which point I started thinking, "When's he going to get to the point?" I stopped thinking of the writing as beautiful and started thinking of it as expositional filler, the words of someone writing so he can read his own words. I tried to stick with the book, thinking that eventually I'd find something interesting again, but I was disappointed. If you're at all curious about this book, I suggest you try interlibrary loan and save your cash.

A unique book; entertaining, funny, puzzling, but what does it all mean? Perhaps there are no easy answers. If you're prepared to do your share of the work, this book will take you on a fascinating spiritual journey. It's compelling on the first read - but more enjoyable each time you return to it, because that's when the different layers of this multi-faceted tale really present themselves.

Plutarch argues in a dialogue in "Moralia" that animals are able to reason, including pigs. Malcolm Mitchell would agree. He has devoted a slim book of voyage and meditation to the theme of wise and stupid animal beings. It is called "The Hog's Wholey Wash" (the quote marks are part of the full title). The long title says it all: "A Complete Allegorical Manual on Consciousness & Cosmos, with Vindication Sublime of that Most Maligned Terrestrial Species or `The Hog's Wholey Wash.'"
* The book is the ideal bedside companion, being written in short, four-page sections. It is also the perfect gift for the jaded friend who has read everything. (Mind you, the tastes of the friend have to be really jaded, for the language here is "superswineishly" slipper and sly, Joycean, Gurdjieffian, neologismically inventive. There is a lot of humour here amid the "higher" wisdom. One never knows what the next sentence will bring.
* The way Virgil led Dante through a hierarchy of worlds, the "Pig-Being" leads us through all the worlds that are, instructding us along the way. Here is one pig that is garrulous, but no boar, being closer to Plutarch's philosopher than it is to the sty-variety. In fact, Malcolm Mitchell's pig is in a class by itself, the dispenser of unlikely wisdom to the animal nature that hogs the limelight.

I've read quite a bit of Zen literature, including translations of the original sutras, koans, etc. but I'm most disappointed in this tape. The tape, and I assume the book, has the quality of a harangue, with the reader constantly admonishing the listener. Much of the tape has the form, . . ."and if you don't understand this, you will never understand anything about Zen." After a while, it grows tiring. Buddha didn't phrase his lectures as cryptic, snide criticisms of his audiences capacity for enlightenment, and that's how this tape comes across. In contrast, listen to "The Teachings of Zen: Master Dogen" for a deep and empathic description of Zen philosophy.

I am a Buddhist, have studied formally in all three main branches of Buddhism and was a monk during the most intense part of my study. I own hundreds of Buddhist texts, and if I could only own one book, this would be it. This is absolutely the clearest expression of Enlightenment I've encountered. Foyan is wonderously clear, avoids reliance on Koan's and historical cases (but has a few references to them), and instead, simply expresses Realization on his own, directly, brilliantly, in every sentence of this book. A previous reviewer wrote (in his excellent review) "Logical contradictions are purposely employed to get you to see something beyond logic", while there are a few statements like that, that is a slight misunderstanding of why most of the apparently "contadictions" are there (with due respects to the reviewer, no insult is intended). Instead these "contradictions" are direct expressions of the Truth of Reality, and that requires 1) that you see directly and don't confuse the labels for the reality itself and 2) that everything be seen simultaneously from both sides (the relative or functional view and the absolute). So a statement such as "you must have nonseeing right in seeing" or
"all that is necessary is that there is no hearer or heard when you hear" is presenting both sides, not negating one with the other. However, there are statements such as "the ancients told you.. all sounds are Buddha's voice... You have misunderstood, supposing that all sounds are actually the voice of Buddha" that appears to be a contradiction, but again this is pointing out (POINTING not explaining) the diffence between the understanding and the perception of that truth. I've said much too much, the Zen Master would be beating me over the head with the stick by now. You will enjoy this book, and you will hear the voice of Enlightenment speaking across 9 centuries of time, if you get this book, you'll need no others, and eventually you can give this one away. My Highest recommendation.

Absorb these passages fully and you will need no other books on Zen. Of course, it might take a succession of time to fully absorb these passages.

The book transcribes lectures from Foyan, who teaches autonomy, "I have no Zen for you to study!" and independence. Consequently, the text might appear difficult as Foyan purposely gives nothing to grasp at -- and if you do grasp you will experience a subtle whack to your intellect. Hint: Logical contradictions are purposely employed to get you to see something beyond logic.

Just turn to a random passage at random moments of intuition and over time it will become clear. For the spiritually sharp, this should be the only book on Zen you will ever need. Then the need of itself will dissolve...

This is a very easy to read book. However, I was very disappointed with the lack of tools or skills I was able to learn from this book. This is ONLY a biography of the author and all he's been through. Although his personal perseverance is commendable, there are merely a handful of core attitudes and actions that he implemented throughout his trials, that I could really use. This was not what I expected when I purchased the book. I am very impressed with the author's ability to keep going in the face of adversity, but what I walked away with after reading this book.........was not what I expected.

Mitchell is amazing. Even though he was not heavy enough, he wanted to be a gripman on cable cars. He got the job--and just worked harder (heavier). One day, riding his motorcycle in San Francisco, he was hit but a truck. The resulting fire disfigured his face and took his fingers. He started Vermont Castings during the fuel crunch of the early seventies. One day, flying some executive friends in his small plane, the engine quit on takeoff; the crash left Mitchell paralyzed. He went on to be a talk show host, the mayor of Crested Butte, Colorado, and he even ran for congress. Today, he is a professional speaker who motivates audiences worldwide. Continually on the go, you have probably seen him in airports-ahead of you.

Change happens! You can be a victim or do something about it. Mitchell is an inspiration both to those who have suffered injury and those who have not. He focuses not on what he can no longer do but on what he can-and he enjoys life to the fullest.

As the author of 113 books (including revisions and foreign-language editions) and over 500 magazine articles, I highly recommend this book. DanPoynter@ParaPublishing.com.

If you are depressed, lonely, unsure, feeling sorry for yourself, or feel like life has dealt you a bad hand or know somebody that feels that way then get this book. My wife and I had the distinct honor of meeting this author last year and hearing his story from his lips. Afterwards, I simply could not put the book down until I was finished reading it. After listening to W Mitchell and reading this book we know that we don't have anything to complain about. When a challenge surfaces (no matter how difficult it appears)we simply focus our energy on how we are going to deal with it. Life is too short. Truly, It's Not What Happens to You, It's What You Do About It! {PS. There is no 'period' after his name W for special reasons and events that took place in his life.}

Novelist Greg Rucka came aboard the Batman books during the groundbreaking "No Man's Land" epic. I loved that story arc, but since then, I've found Rucka's work, both on Batman and other comics (Whiteout, Batman/Huntress, etc.) to be either hit or miss. He is capable of great work, as the Two-Face story in this book shows, but when he's off his game.....oh boy.

The biggest problem here is Editorial; When DC rebooted Detective Comics, post NML, they made a few awful decisions- Artist Shawn Martinbrough's work is boring and nondescript, and it's made even worse by the "Limited" Colors used. The book looks like someone spilled a mug of Hot Chocolate on it. Just awful. Why bother to color it at all? It would be much more palatable in black and white.

An Editor should also have stepped in to stop Rucka from using a ridiculous designer drug as his plot device; The drug doesn't just addict, it turns it's users into animals. Literally. Snakes, Wolves, etc. After years spent trying to keep The Batman books (Semi)believable, the sight of addicts turning into snakes had me howling with laughter. Is this the best the great Ra's Al Ghul could do? Pathetic! Ra's Al Ghul is not my favorite Batman villain, but I think that's why he never used to turn up much: It took a really talented writer to do something with him. Rucka was not that writer. After all of that buildup, the story doesn't end, so much as stop. It's almost like Rucka ran out of writing paper....

With the great array of Batman books out there, you can't really be in bad enough shape that you'll want to waste your cash on this....

Great read. Not so great art work but you can't blame that on rucka can you. Rucka did a great job with the villans i think. i purchased this along with batman broken bat. Broken Bat was a little better cause of the art work. BUY THIS BOOK!

Frank Miller, Jeph Loeb, Ed Brubaker & Greg Rucka. What do all of these guys have in common? Apart from being absolute masters of the comic book medium, and also being able to tell cracking good mystery tales, they have the distinction of being able to give us the BEST Batman tales. Greg Rucka's take on Batman/Bruce Wayne is at once both believable and fantastic! Do yourself a favour and check this book out. The story flows along at a brisk pace and the art is done in a psuedo film nior style. Very groovy.

This fascinating and suggestive book makes a strong argument that an undue emphasis on financial performance has caused American corporations to shirk their responsibilities to workers, creditors, communities, or any other group except stockholders. To prove his point, author Mitchell, a business law professor at George Washington University, tackles a vast range of topics, from industrial sociology and shareholders' derivative suits, to Enlightenment individualism and comparative corporate governance. This makes for fascinating reading, and is designed to show that capital markets force corporate managers to focus on short-term financial results. However, it also left me with the sense that Mitchell's theoretical stretch exceeds his empirical grasp: none of the issues is really developed in any depth.

In particular, Mitchell fails to systematically compare the behavior of public and non-public corporations in the U.S., or to compare American corporations with corporations operating in less-individualistic legal and cultural environments abroad. Yet such comparisons would be crucial to testing his points about the harmful impact of financial markets on American corporate management. In reading the book, I also wondered whether the pressures to maximize short-term returns are less the result of "American individualism" and more the result of a business environment where hostile takeovers are easy and executive compensation is tied to stock prices. In any event, these issues can't be resolved by theorizing. Mitchell needed to interview some managers to find out what really makes corporations tick.

This is a pity since Mitchell writes well, has common sense, and cares about ordinary Americans who spend most of their working lives in large business organizations. His concerns about warped corporate priorities were entirely vindicated by the scandals at Enron (where shareholders as well as workers were screwed by corporate managers bent on boosting short-term share values), which were exposed only AFTER his book appeared in 2001. We need more books pointing out that American-style capitalism isn't the last word on business and can take a heavy toll on humane values. I just wish that Mitchell had crossed his T's and dotted his I's.

I found myself being frustrated by the convoluted nature of his arguments to prove - IMO - unnecessarily academic and esoteric points. The writing style, while reasonably light, does labour on some issues to justify and support his arguments to a degree that is a little too involved. While I fully appreciate that Mitchell needs to properly formulate and support his arguments (and he is right in most of what he says I must add) - the shear "readability" suffers from the overly-academic rigour present. I would happily accept less rigour for have more anecdotes of misbehaviour for a more "easy read". Nevertheless what he says is very important, solid and I agree wholeheartedly with it.

The way Mitchell breaks down the corporate system in America today is outstanding. The way it practically predicts Enron is eventfully precise. His view for the future is one that is intricately complex, but at the same time simply logical. Great reading for those who are already knowledgeable about the subject or those newly acquainted with it.

This book has a few good quotes, but alot of junk too. The Christian stuff is mostly mushy pulp, and the selections from Buddha are pretty superficial compared to the rest of what he supposedly said. There are a few good talks from Zen Masters, but only a few. I wouldn't recommend it. The wisdom in this book doesn't compare to other books of a similar nature, and you can probably pick this one up at a used book store dirt cheap. If you do find it there, though, save it for someone who is a near hopeless materialist. It might help them out abit. Other than that, save your money and buy a copy of the Tao Teh Ching, or Kahl Gibran or a book of pithy quotes.

A book that had potential--but missed the mark. There are a few jems inside but over all there are much better compilations out there...so just skip this one.

Now here is a book that will keep you pondering about the ultimate meaning of life itself - it is a compilation that extols the spiritual life. In its pages you will find the writings of the greatest spiritual luminaries, who have graced this world with words of immortal bliss. It brings together the essence of the minds of the mystic visionaries, and it makes one feel that we are all brothers and sisters in truth. No matter what your spiritual practice, preference, or inclination, this book has much to offer its readers.

This book is an enjoyable read which will introduce you to all the major players in the negotiations that led to the Good Friday Peace Accords, and give a good sense of what the challenges were and how the various parties worked to overcome them.

Unfortunately, it was probably too early for Mitchell to come out with any new details, and he is reluctant to be overly critical of any of the parties -- no doubt a wise move as the peace process contiues to move forward.

Hopefully, we will see another account from Mitchell in the future which will give a little bit more bite in terms of how he really feels. In the mean time, this book is well worth the quick read.

If you followed the peace negotiations while they were occuring, you really have no need of this book. Mitchell is frustratingly vague throughout, relating the negotiations in the most general of terms and not giving us much new insight. I don't think I learned anything about the negotiations from this book that I didn't already know. Vague and dry, read this book only if you didn't follow the peace negotiations at all.

Senator Mitchell deserves tremendous respect for his (continuing) role in the Northern Ireland peace process. This book delivers a clear and consise account of his participation in the events that led up to the Good Friday agreement. We get glimpses of all the major players and many unsung heroes who worked behind the scenes.

Perhaps in reaction to the long-winded Irish politicians he uses a very broad brush to describe the events and often condenses days of complex talks into a few sentences. This is not, as I initially hoped, a detailed description of the negotiations. But it does portray the kind of patience and determination that was needed to pull everything together and gives a taste of the complexity of the political situation around Northern Ireland. It's a nice read for anyone, but especially geared for the average American.