Do want.

Maybe Louis will buy it for me as a present

http://www.economist.com/node/187095...n/tw/te/rss/pe

Reply

Kissinger is a good writer. Offers a well crafted book from a pretty interesting perspective usually. Very informative on East Asia.

Reply

I thought only commies made titles starting with "On" ....

Reply

You could be on to something there.

A review in the UK Sunday Times lambasted the book for being very soft on the Communist regime in China. One line on the great famine; leaving the naive reader innocent of the fact anyone died in Tiannamen; saying Mao in the Cultural Revolution raised important issues about the relation between the state and society that the US needed to reflect on; praising Mao's shelling of Taiwan as inspired etc. The reviewer said Kissinger was writing with half an eye to the (official) Chinese audience on account of his extensive business interests in the country.

Realpolitik extends into the commerical domain too, I guess.

Reply

Hey, Kissinger can't help it if's he a smart guy.

Reply

I was nearly tempted by this thread to read this book.

Then I realised I would do so to understand Kissinger, not China. Which seems like a somewhat inefficient way to do so.



I would get it as a birthday present for Strike. But his impressionable college mind is not ready yet. Not ready for the nasty realisations of real world politics. I am not going to be the one to undermine the beautiful idealism of this talented young man. Not yet.

Reply

No one can truly understand Real Politik who has not lived and implemented it.

Also Kissinger's memoirs like the white house years may be a better look into the man himself. I read them at a very young age so I think alot of it went over my head and what I did read corrupted my innocent mind a little bit. Should probably read those again.

Reply

You already did that to me on a cold Paris night

I went in a boy and came out a boy with a noticeable hitch in his step


lolololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololololol

Reply

He's soft on communist China because he and Nixon got rich selling out to them. They are more responsible for China's rise as an industrialized powerhouse than anyone else in American politics, despite what Clinton-haters like to dream.

Reply