a neat book, Well written. The problem with Levien (as with any lefty writer) is that he agrees with my prejudices. JPH

Love it or hate it -- this book takes a strong view on politically sensitive topics, and is going to infuriate some readers as much as it gratifies others. In my view, it is a thorough and revealing picture of how American patriotism developed, and what strands of patriotism are in play today. The author is particularly incisive on the links between one type of American patriotism and fundamentalist Christianity, and on the impact of Israel on US views and politics. But I am approaching the book from a decidedly left of center stance: those who have different views are far less likely to be impressed. For those who like this sort of thing, it will be the sort of thing they like. For those who don't, it won't. APM ( )

http://nhw.livejournal.com/193833.html

Anatol Lieven's analysis is basically that the driving force of American politics is nationalism; that this has a good side and a bad side; and that at the moment under Bush the bad side is prevailing. I finished the book with a much better understanding of what is going on than I had before.

I found his second chapter, analysing the "splendour and tragedy of the American Creed", particularly compelling. There are some wonderful things in American political culture and history. The words of Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence, or of Lincoln in the Gettysburg Address, are moving for anyone who cares about big political ideas like freedom and equality - however flawed they may have been in implementation, the rest of the English-speaking world hasn't really come up with anything as powerful.

Writing a book that attacks the dark side of American nationalism does carry the risk of drifting into polemic, but he manages to leaven this with shafts of sympathy, compassion and even admiration for America. I found most of it utterly convincing. His last chapter, which addresses the US/Israel relationship as a special case where American nationalism has overridden any sensible policy on the Middle East ("what use is a strategic ally when you actually have to ask them not to help you in a war in a nearby country?") has made me reconsider my own thoughts on the Palestinian issue; on the whole his analysis is pretty sympathetic to Israel (though I doubt if everyone will see it that way) and he makes a good point that Israel's actions in 1948 should be judged by comparison with what Europeans were doing in Europe in 1948, rather than by later standards. ( )

While the portion of this book dealing with how the politics of resentment helps to drive popular support for an aggressive American foreign policy is interesting, one really has to wonder who Lieven meant this work for. If you follow politics at least enough to vote in general elections, you don't need this book. If by some chance you share the general outlook that Lieven criticizes, and you happen to pick up this book, you'll simply scoff. Even if you're inclined to agree with the Lieven's thesis you'll probably find it patronizing of the folks on the other side of the political aisle; no one has a monopoly on resentment in this country. That a plea is tacked on to the end of the book to stop Israel being the tail that wags the dog is also a bit jarring, and blunts Lieven's wider arguement about how the United States is blundering into the abyss of failed empire as so many other nations have done before. I have to conclude that this book is mostly meant for the bemused among the non-American audience, apart from those undergrads taking political science who happen to get assigned it. ( )