5 comments about The Man Who Changed China: The Life and Legacy of Jiang Zemin.

1. The author went to China compiled what gov't provided and interviewed his former teachers and friends to give readers a taste what the most powerful former leader of PRC was like. As a censored country the people he interviewed were cautious in providing politically correct ans during an interview. There is no question Jiang loved his fatherland and was loyal dearly to CCP. In the book there was no mentioning about his disastrous failure to stop corruption when there was time to do so. He is still remembered by the religious group as the instigator in curbing freedom of religion. He was not a good student at the unviersity. Many close friends and faculties were suprised he was appointed as mayor but alone as head of a state. I wonder what went through his mind when he declared his recent retirement as he could stay on forever as head of state like Mao or Deng. As China is slowly transfoming and open to outside this is a good source to understand politics, what it works and what is politically correct. Should the author take his time interviewing more people outside of China it could be a more accurate account of the past leader of China.



2. Well grounded on recent history and developments in China, this book provides a healthy balance to all the negative stereotypical repetition of the same old tired fairy tales about China out there. The author shows the world it's possible to be positive about China and be objective at the same time.



3. 
   In China, the 1990s brought sizzling economic growth, cool political stability and a steady expansion of personal freedom for urban residents. Shanghai, Beijing and other cities became modern and cosmopolitan. Peace reigned on all borders. Was it brilliant leadership that won these triumphs for China? Or was it a combination of circumstances, only mildly affected by the man in charge at the time, Jiang Zemin?
   
   In a new biography of Jiang, Robert Lawrence Kuhn tries to credit the former Communist Party chief with a primary role in China's advances. Yet by telling Jiang's story in detail, Kuhn's book reveals Jiang to be an above-average Party official, most skilled in the art of pleasing his superiors, whose great feat was simply political survival. The title of the book is `The Man Who Changed China.' But Jiang did not change China in any significant way. He climbed into the driver's seat at a time when the steering wheel was held by others. Only after years as Communist Party chief did Jiang assume real power, and once he had it, he showed no special flair for leadership. He just kept driving on the road laid out for him by Deng Xiaoping.
   
   How Jiang rose - from his first job fixing machines at a Shanghai ice cream company through a series of middling administrative positions to become Mayor of Shanghai and then China's Communist Party chief - certainly is a good tale. Jiang was born into an educated family in Yangzhou, north of Shanghai. His uncle was a Communist revolutionary who died in battle, giving Jiang an important credential for future leadership. Trained as an engineer, Jiang was known as a big reader with a good memory and a talent for making friends. At Jiang's first job, in the ice cream company, he was on hand when a Party official named Wang Daohan came to visit on day in September, 1949. Jiang gave a presentation and a factory tour, and impressed Wang with his energy and optimism. Wang eventually decided to take Jiang under his wing, and over the next 40 years, he nurtured Jiang's rise by winning him jobs in Beijing, Shanghai, Wuhan, and Changchun.
   
   Jiang was an intelligent but cautious administrator. He had no special charisma. As Kuhn reports, he was frequently underestimated. Meaning, he often came across as a lightweight. But over time he would prosper, primarily by diligent work and an ability to offend no one. He survived the Cultural Revolution and other political campaigns by keeping his head down.Kuhn's book is thorough. He recites a month-by-month summary of Jiang's years in power, often including details about the leader's taste for reciting poetry or the Gettysburg address, and singing songs. Jiang loved to perform, and to show off.
   
   For anyone who needs a compendium of Jiang's public appearances and political acts during those years, this is an excellent guide. Readers looking for real insight into Chinese politics will be disappointed. One strength of Kuhn's book is the access he gained, interviewing Jiang's sister and several of his close aides, including Wang Daohan. They offer intriguing personal anecdotes that inevitably show what a wise and thoughtful man Jiang has been. Kuhn's book is weakest where it counts most. At Jiang's critical moments - the Tiananmen protests and crackdown in 1989 that led to his ascension, the demise of political rivals Yang Shangkun and Chen Xitong - Kuhn offers little insight or fresh information.
   
   Most annoying is Kuhn's tendency to repeat Communist pablum as though it were anything beyond a Party line, such as Jiang's `core beliefs' in socialism and Party control, obviously a prerequisite to any government position. Kuhn, an advisor to the Chinese government as well as host of a PBS television series, sometimes writes like an American businessman freshly introduced to the vast potential of the China market: breathless, overly credulous, and looking for opportunity. Yet Kuhn's approach to Jiang's story - getting every detail - generally yields a basic accuracy to major trends and events. For instance, Kuhn describes the decision in 1992 to accelerate economic growth that led to China's broad flourishing over the following decade.
   
   It was a decision made by Deng Xiaoping, and at first resisted by Jiang and other leaders, who feared that it would lead to inflation and social unrest. True to his nature, Jiang saw that it was in his interest to follow, and then champion, Deng's views. But it was Deng who insisted on moving faster. He was the man who truly changed China. Not Jiang.



4. Senator Feinstein's remarks on the back of the book's cover, as to this being as close as it gets to "official biography," should be ironic warning to the reader (if the presence of a Kissinger quote didn't do it): Kuhn writes a scripted, canned biography that was allegedly fed to him by Chinese Communist Party apparatchiks.
   
   If anyone wonders how it is Kuhn paints such a rosy portrait of the man who was enthroned as China's unelected ruler by conservative Party elders during the Tiananmen Massacre, the story behind the book proves helpful. Jiang Zemin, ever a little self-absorbed, several years back commissioned a group of capable Chinese writers to produce the official word on him and his career. The group did their job, but apparently, a little too well. They dug up enormous amounts of riveting, scandalous material. Jiang, irate as much as nervous, dismissed the group, but not before several (and possibly more, it is believed) of the group made public some of its explosive findings; some of the writings can still be found posted in Chinese online. So disturbing were the findings (including serious evidence of treason) that Jiang reportedly feared he might not find another willing and obedient Chinese writer. Enter Robert Kuhn -- reportedly Jiang felt it would be safest to find an outsider, or foreigner, to write this time, and particularly one with some kind of financial tie (Kuhn has long been a consultant to China's government). They paired Kuhn up with a Chinese researcher and fed him a script that bears little resemblance to history.
   
   Thus the book, aside from its warm, flattering portrayal of Jiang, is marked by peculiar absences. We might ask: Where is Jiang's complicity in the Tiananmen Massacre? His role in the booming, government managed organ harvesting blackmarket trade? Or the executions (tied to the organ trade) of as many as 10,000 prisoners in a single year? What of China's becoming the world's leading jailer of journalists under Jiang Zemin? Or Jiang's inability to keep personal vendettas in check and thus launching a terribly brutal, if not expensive and irrational, persecution of the Falun Gong? Wasn't it during the Jiang Zemin era that China's environment suffered what is probably irrevocable devastation, with a staggering 15 of the world's 20 most polluted cities being in China by the time of Jiang's abdication? What of his disastrous mishandling of the 1998 floods? Or giving away of 1.3 million square kilometers of would-be Chinese land to Russia in December of 1999? So startlingly many are the silences in Kuhn's account.
   
   I was delighted to see recently a hard-hitting rebuttal to Kuhn's fairytalesque work. It is titled "Anything for Power: The Real Story of China's Jiang Zemin" and is available online in English translation at the website of The Epoch Times newspaper (http://english.epochtimes.com/211,100,,1.html). In incredible detail it unravels Kuhn's account and articulates the history it seemingly sought to silence. It draws on inside Party sources, and appears to incorporate the findings of the initial, disbanded biography group.
   
   Other biographies of Jiang (eg, those of Willy Lam and Bruce Gilley) similarly render Kuhn's account, though indirectly in this case, deeply suspect. That Kuhn does not take into account their work, although it was published before his piece, suggests a serious agenda; clearly his motive is not to build on the analysis, insights, and research of those who came before him as would normally be done.



5. This book is helpful in understanding China from a Chinese perspective. If Westerners will listen to its message with an open mind (vs. viewing the book in light of Western perceptions of China), it will improve understanding between East and West and could serve to reduce unnecessary tensions, which are frequently due to misunderstandings.

No comments about Our Lincoln: New Perspectives on Lincoln and His World.

5 comments about Jack: A Life Like No Other.

1. I thoroughly enjoyed this book. Not for the research -- as many of the other reviewers and the footnotes section of the book attest, most of the information has been available to us in other forms. But for the insights and attitude. Perret seems intent on making Kennedy human, and he succeeds. Kennedy is at once a visionary legislator (one of the first advocates of abolishing the mandatory retirement age and an early friend to both labor and Israel) and a bored playboy/senator (if a bill didn't interest him, he couldn't be bothered with it). A reckless womanizer who didn't really care about the impact his escapades had on his wife or career, yet one of the first politicians to recognize the power of the women's vote. And perhaps it was his confidence in his own rampaging heterosexuality that made him so comfortable with homosexual men -- something not very common in the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s. Most of all, Jack managed to balance overwhelming ambition and opportunism with a secret but very strong core of idealism and conscience. I wish Perret had been a bit more discerning in choosing his sources. (I mean, J. Randy Taraborelli and Seymour Hersh, for heaven's sake!) But this complaint did not detract from readability of the book. It left me feeling profoundly sad about what this nation lost nearly 40 years ago, and how different the world today would be if JFK, for all his myriad faults, had lived out his natural life.



2. It's true that JFK lived a "life like no other," but the author completely missed his chance to tell the reader why. This is the same type of tabloid swill that's already been done to death in, for example, "JFK: Reckless Youth" and "A Question of Character." The themes of JFK's being obsessed with early death and his drive to live every day as if it were his last, are interesting ones, and could have been a good premise for this book. But this book adds absolutely nothing to what's already been written. No new ground is broken, despite promises to the contrary. Also detracting from his credibility are the author's gossipy references to such things as JFK's personal habits while having sex, how many cigarettes a day Jackie smoked (do I care?) and the homosexuality of friends like Lem Billings and Joe Alsop. Obviously JFK felt comfortable and confident enough in his own masculinity and heterosexuality, and valued the loyalty and friendship of these men enough, that he was neither concerned about nor felt threatened by their sexual orientation. Also detracting from the book's credibility is the sloppy research and annoying lack of fact-checking. For example, the author mentions several times that Bobby and Ethel were married in 1951. They were actually married in 1950. The book also states that Bobby and Ethel's first-born son was Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. In fact, he was their second-born son (he was born in 1954); Joseph P. Kennedy II (born in 1952) was the first. Also, Kathleen "Kick" Kennedy is mentioned several times as JFK's "eldest" sister, and is even misidentified as such (in place of Rosemary) in one of the book's photographs. Perhaps the author fell into Joe, Sr.'s spell of pretending that Rosemary, the actual first daughter and third child, never even existed. These are just a few examples.

   This book is a waste of time.




3. Mr. Perret somehow succeeded in writing an incredibly boring book about a man who lived an extrodinary life. The book is also marred by continuous misstatements of fact and poor research. To those looking for a good book on JFK, I advise you to take a look at Nigel Hamilton's "JFK: Reckless Youth" for illumination on his early life, Richard Reeves' "Profile in Power" for a broad look at his presidency, and Arthur Schlessinger Jr.'s "A Thousand Days" for an intimate look at his presidency that also gives you an excellent sense of who he was as a person. "Jack" isn't worth the time.



4. The life of Jack Kennedy has been covered countless times in books, magazines and movies. Having made the transformation from assassinated president to tabloid favorite, one wonders if there is anything new to be learned about Kennedy, or if there is anything to be gained by buying Geoffrey Perret's book. If you're at all like me -- a fan of history, an admirer of JFK, but not too swayed by rose colored revisionism -- then this book will prove to be well worth the money. Perret starts at the beginning and fully explores the odd psychological uprbinging Kennedy experienced in a family that was extremely eccentric and neurotic -- quite a far cry from American royalty. He follows Kennedy through his pratfalls as a high school and college student, and laments on the never-ending health problems Kennedy ran into throughout his life. I, for one, never knew that our movie star president was often in a frail and precarious state. By the book's end, you walk away with a new appreciation for all of the complexities of Kennedy's character -- and there enough here to make Freud blink a few times -- and for the truly unique life that he led.



5. Jack is a nice easy read but one tends to wonder where Perret got some of his ideas or if in fact he got them from anywhere but his own imagination. There are times when Perret seems to make up small insignificant happenings to forshadow the inevitable outcome of his life. That aside, Jack is a good book portraying a President so unique and so different than most ex-Presidents. This would be a good first Kennedy read.

No comments about How McGovern Won the Presidency & Why the Polls Were Wrong.

5 comments about Exit With Honor: The Life and Presidency of Ronald Reagan (The Right Wing in America).

1. The book is just over 200 pages of text, so detail is obviously lacking. In addition some statements/ideas are repeated verbatim, as if I didn't get the point. If you are somewhat interested in the 80's or Reagan this is a decent starting point. Think of it as the Cliff Notes on Reagan.



2. The author only gives credit to Reagan for restoring America's pride. He also presents the same myth about "mortgaging our future" with the national debt. Hey historians, if we've mortgaged our future, why is the economy so strong today? If you make 50,000 with 5,000 in debt, are you better off making 500,000 with 25,000 in debt?



3. After reading this book, I was left to wonder: What did RR really do while president? The book is written from the middle, but with an emphasis toward the positive aspects of RR's presidency, with small amounts of negativity thrown in for balance. The book doesn't talk much about any one subject. A good quick primer on this mediocre president who will go down in history as one of the most divisive, deceptive presidents of our country.



4. If you are searching for an opinionated book on Reagan, than this is not the book to read. If it is general information with a few suprising tid-bits that you seek, than this book is worth your time. Pemberton tries his best to give an objective analysis of Reagan throughout this book. His thesis is that Reagan's up-bringing, job/co-worker influences, and general attitude toward life and the American people shaped his ideas for running the nation. Pemberton covers all the stops, from Reagan's mother's influence, to his radio career, to his acting career, to his governorship, to his presidency. Pemberton gives the facts about the Iran Contra mess and leaves it to the reader to decide Reagan's involvement. If you do not know much about Reagan, and you seek information but not opinions, than this book is an excellent resource that reads well.



5. There aren't too many "fair and balanced" opinions out there on Presidents Reagan, Clinton, and GW Bush. This book on Reagan by Pemberton comes as close as most to some semblance of objectivity. No book comes close to the quality and objectivity of a recent president as does Cannon's "President Reagan: Role of a Lifetime." But Pemberton does a fine job in covering Reagan's entire life in a small number of pages (214 of text).
   
   I used the book in an American government class and I thought it was readable for the students and told the larger story of the 20th century. Reagan's life, whether one agreed with him or not, in many ways represented the story of the 20th century. After WWII, the nation embraced FDR and his policies. In time, with the Great Society and the rise of anti-communism, the nation stepped away from the liberal label. Contrary to what many on the right believe, the nation never embraced conservatism to the same degree it embraced the New Deal, but changes did occurred. And the end of the Cold War was another huge event. The left and right will always argue over the impact Reagan had on the end of the Cold War, but Pemberton did well in presenting the many different theories. He also was quite fair in analyzing Reagan's budget and tax policies, which are also still debated today.

No comments about John Quincy Adams - Old Man Eloquent (Biography).

No comments about Great Expectations: The Troubled Lives of Political Families.

No comments about The Sack of Rome: Media + Money + Celebrity = Power = Silvio Berlusconi.

3 comments about The Juggler.

1. An outstanding contribution to World War Two diplomatic history, Warren Kimball lays to rest one of the old chestnuts common to most people - that Franklin D. Roosevelt, the domestic reformer, had no consistent foreign policy, merely reacting to events. Weaving humour, deft insight, an unparalleled knowledge of the sources (Mr. Kimball is the editor of the FDR-Churchill correspondence) and diplomatic history together wonderfully, the Juggler is one of the central texts for anyone looking at the wartime Grand Alliance.



2. In The Juggler, Warren Kimball attempts to paint a new picture of FDRýs foreign policy. Warren Kimballýs thesis is that FDR had a vision for his foreign policy and did not merely react to events but attempted to craft a post-World War II world. From Lend-Lease to World War II, Kimball argues that FDR was consistent in his beliefs and desires. As a politician, FDR (unlike President Wilson) was willing to compromise to ensure his dream would come to pass.
   
   The tragedy was the FDRýs vision was beyond humanity. Like Communism, he thought that the utopian ideal would allow humanity to transcend our weaknesses. War would no longer be profitable so nobody would want to wage it. This vision went beyond his grasp to attain. He did succeed (whether it was he doing or merely the geopolitical realities of the Russian threat) in ensuring that the UN would be founded and that the US would continue its presence in world affairs.
   
   Warren Kimball wrote an important book to dispel the preconceptions of FDRýs foreign policy. Despite contradictions and vague notions, FDR did have a larger vision and didnýt spent his Presidency merely reacting to foreign events.



3. Chapter one of this splendid book begins with this incredibly revealing remark that FDR made on May 15, 1942:
   
   "You know I am a juggler, and I never let my right hand know what my left hand does.... I may have one policy for Europe and one diametrically opposite for North and South America. I may be entirely inconsistent, and furthermore I am perfectly willing to mislead and tell untruths if it will help win the war."
   
   Franklin Roosevelt was a very charming man. He was so agreeable to so many different people and interests. But as one historian put it, behind that charming mask was a cunning mind. FDR had the perfect temperament to direct World War II foreign operations. It may not have always been obvious what he was up to, but look at the results he achieved.
   
   Another historian titled his FDR biography "The Lion and the Fox." Another historian compared FDR's sly foreign policy to that of looking into a kaleidoscope. You cannot see how the patterns are forming... unless you take apart the kaleidoscope and see its hidden methods.
   
   This brief book takes apart the kaleidoscope. It was written by Warren Kimbell, one of the greatest foreign policy historians of the World War II era, after a long and distinguished academic career. He was the editor of the correspondenses between Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt.
   
   The text itself is brief - only 200 pages. The writing is interesting and concise. The footnotes are extensive - 77 pages - and loaded with useful tidbits. The book mentions the interpretations of several different foreign policy experts and highlights the most credible.
   
   The book uses fourteen chapters to describe Roosevelt's strategies in several different arenas. For example, one focuses on Lend-Lease. Another focuses on Casablanca. Another part mentions FDR's ant-colonialism viewpoint. Another details FDR's vision for a safer, more secure post-war world.
   
   Kimball describes Roosevelt's foreign policy as "Americanism," which was a profound change from America's role in the world before FDR came to power. Read this book to find out what he means.

2 comments about The Carter Presidency: Policy Choices in the Post-New Deal Era.

1. Jimmy Carter must be ranked among our weakest and most ineffectual modern Presidents, and this book fails to take a truly critical examination of Carter and his failed domestic and foreign policies. Upon entering office, Jimmy Carter slashed our military budget and tried to cozy up to the Soviets. Their response was to invade several countries, mainly through their proxies. When the Soviets marched into Afghanistan, Carter's response was to withdraw from the Olympics. After the US embassy was taken over in Iran, Carter tried to appease the Iranians, and then launched a failed and inept rescue mission, which epitomizes Carter's foreign and military record. On the domestic front, it wasn't much better. Energy prices skyrocketed, inflation was rampant, and taxation rose, along with interest rates. Carter's response was to create more government entitlement programs, and accuse the citizenry of malaise. Very, very little was accomplished during the Carter years, as he was a weak, highly flawed little man out of his element on the world stage.



2. After reading books on Reagan and Bush published by University of Press Kansas I had higher expectations than what this book delivered. It is actually written by several people with Fink and Graham editing. This causes several problems, the worst of which is repetition. Fink and Graham frame the major issues at the beginning of the book, and the contributors spend half of the rest of the book repeating what was already written. Also, none of the contributors were actually close enough to the source to offer interesting insight--most of the book seemed to be sourced from the AP. Ironically, the book suffered from many of the same problems as the Carter administration: too many people too distanced from the subject trying to be too objective and never delivering on clear goals. These sort of topical overviews are better handled by one author.