Rating: 
Summary: Soros offers hope for America
Review: If you think the foreign policy of President George Bush is inept and leading America into a quagmire, then you'll love this book; Soros offers the intelligent businessman's solution to the conservative quicksand.Consider the background of Soros and Bush. Soros survived the Nazis and Communists in Hungary, got to the US in 1956 and had enough business acumen to become a billionaire. Bush is the son of Old Establishment money and political patronage who never earned a cent in his life, always relying on his Daddy's wealthy friends. Soros became rich by understanding the motivations and actions of others; Bush became president because political advisers Karl Rove and James Baker saw him as a pliant puppet, Does that make either man a foreign affairs expert? No. Soros' foreign expertise comes from the $500 million he spends every year to encourage genuine democracy around the world. Bush's policy comes from a narrow group of American Supremacist reactionaries who advocate a unilateralist approach which other nations may join but not influence. Therein lies the difference between the two: Bush has an America First policy, Soros advocates cooperative international solution. Who is right? Well, in the world of business, Soros' ideas of cooperation instead of confrontation works well. He outlines his approach with an articulate skill in this book, criticizing the Bush mistakes and saying other nations can offer invaluable help. Soros is the modern equivalent of President Woodrow Wilson who created the League of Nations, a brilliant idea which failed due to American isolationism and its failure to counter aggression. Like Wilson, Soros believes in rational people making intelligent decisions. In brief, it is the essence of his book. I recently re-read 'Common Sense' by Thomas Paine, the 1776 book that was the intellectual foundation for the American Declaration of Independence. Soros has written the modern international equivalent, as well-reasoned, eloquent and impassioned as Paine. However, there is a difference. Paine faced King George III, who may have been nuts but was obviously very astute. Today, America faces an amorphous irrational terrorism based on an utterly insane religious fundamentalism. Events in Iraq, Afghanistan and other Mid-East countries may well have an impact on the 2004 election. The choice will be between American Supremacist in a "follow us or get ready to fight us" tactics or a policy based on American Leadership with a "we'll respect your views" type of consultation and cooperation. Soros has been there. As a Jew in his native Budapest, he survived in the impact of the "Germany Above all Others" policy. He survived the utterly irrational communist fundamentalism. America made him vastly rich. He has been funding democratic programs in Europe since the 1980s. It's an incredible personal schooling on which to base his views. The 2004 election debate will likely be on the economy, with foreign policy as the runner-up. Much of the talk show debate involves extremists screaming at each other; Soros offers an intelligent alternative to the current quagmire.
Rating: 
Summary: A terrible Miss-assesment
Review: In 1898 Mr Soros would have predicted a 'bubble' and he would have predicted the same 'bubble' in 1945 and he would have been wrong both times just like he is now. Mr. Soros whose home country of Czecheslovakia was twice saved by America, first from the Nazis and then the Communists, is now whining about American power in this weak account. This book assaults America and the 'bush doctrine' and the criticism is 'how dare America defend itself against terrorism'. This false account attacks American policy of confronting terror because secretly this book is pro terror. Its pathetic how someone can write a book attacking the very country whose liberal economic policies allowed them to a massive fortune. Had Mr. Soros grown up in Saudi or Communist Russia he would still be a penniless peasant but he is now using the very money American capitalism allowed him to speculate on to attack the hand that feeds. A terrible miss-assessment.
Rating:
Summary: Eloquent and badly needed
Review: In this book, Soros argues that foreign policy under the Bush administration has failed because of an 'America first' philosophy. 'America first' public policies assume that we do not have to consider the impact on other countries when we make foregin policy and America should only think about it's own needs, especially in the very short-term. These strategies never worked for any president, but he zeroes in on Iraq policy to illustrate his point.
For instance the presumed next secretary-of-state Condoleeza Rice said the United States would punish countries which had not agreed with America's decision to invade Iraq. Because the evidence we used for this incursion was faulty and we have even publicly conceded there reaklly were no WMD's in Iraq, I am curious what Dr. Rice thinks punishing other countries will accomplish.
This book reinforced my perception that those countries will be loathe to join the Bush administration on any other project. They do not wish to voluntarily work with an administration living in a world where America believes that it can punnish independent nations for not wanting to use forged evidence to to kill their own troops. I honestly do not blame them either.
They may have the titles, but people inside the Bush administration lack the people skills which are needed for 21st century government. These officials still do not want to realize that team work and coalition building (both of which require accurate data) are essential for building a world that is both strong and safe.
Essentially creation of such a world requires adherence to the time-honored grade school adage: Do onto others as you would have them do onto you". Part of me honestly had hoped that such a phrase would not be over Bush's head.
Rating:
Summary: I didn't want to, but...
Review: It is a shame that I can give this book no better than 2 stars. For starters, I agree ideologically with much of Soros's case. I am utterly convinced that the war in Iraq did nothing for us (and much against us). I am also disheartened because what should have been a feasible war on terror has consisted in nothing but us knocking out countries we don't like with a coalition growing more brittle by the day. What makes my low rating more of a shame is that Soros and I share a common philosophical hero in Sir Karl Popper and are both committed to the idea of the open society.
But, alas; for all that, I must rate the book only two stars. Why? It is simple. While the first half of the book (Soros' critiques of Bush's international methods) is astute and well thought out, it is poorly backed up, quite over-simplistic, and its arguments are readily available in many other books of better quality. Soros is not even close to the only guy who has criticized the go-it-alone "Bush Doctrine." Read Etzionni's "From Empire to Community" for a much more researched, professional, and less rhetorical critique (and there are scores of other books you've doubtless heard of). What's more, while the section makes good theoretical arguments, the research is shoddy and most consists of personal anecdotes or references to New York Times articles. Not too impressive.
The second section (where Soros was supposed to propose his vision of the solution) was maundering, much less than clear, and episodic. One chapter suggests that instead of relying on the UN, we might rely on what is called the "community of democracies" but fails to make clear how this group won't suffer from the same self-interested in-fighting and utter imptence to enforce decrees as the UN. He also talks about how the US should use its superpower status to work for the 'good of the community' rather than simply national interest. Yet he doesn't explain in the slightest how we could get a gauge on this (as if the 'community' is a monolith as opposed to an aggrgate of diverse nations!) or any of the other innumerable difficulties posed by such a nebulous concept. To make matters worse, there is even a chapter in section 2 where he talks about little more than whether the cold war was fought over capitalism or 'the open society.' What relevance did this have? I thought section 2 was about Soros's ideas on a solution?!
If I were you, I would read one of the other books arguing against current foreign policy, and hightest on my list is Etzionni's "From Empire to Community." It contains similar arguments (both positive and negative) as this one, but is much more thougyhtfully researched, less vague, and in the end, probably a better buy.
Rating: 
Summary: With friendly advice like this who needs enemies
Review: It is always a source of wonderment to me that some of the people who have benefited the most from American power are the most vocal in condemning it. (...) Soros made little of his money from ventures which help societies. As a currency speculator, he represents one of the worst segments of capitalism, sort of like the bottom feeder in a fish tank, making billions by putting pressure on world currencies and profiting by the destruction of personal savings and national wealth. His funding of efforts to allow children to be able to use hard drugs is no different. (...) One can only wonder how he actually survived the experience when he has no witnesses to tell us how he actually saved his own skin while others went to the ovens.
But the flaw in his book is that he doesn't seem to understand that the power of America he condemns comes from what some have called "institutionalized greed." Capitalism works on the basis of a society composed of people acting in their own self-interest, and not acting as they are told to by people in power who supposedly act and intervene in the interests of others.
While complaining about Bush's supposed insensitivity towards the rest of the world and his "abuse" of world opinion, Soros spends millions of dollars to circumvent the campaign finance laws which were meant to prevent the kind of abuse and special interest dominance in politics that Soros is guilty of.
If Soros were to be true to himself and his supposed concern about the world, he should donate all of his ill-gotten gains to the United Nations so that they can go back and help the countries that his greed has damaged. This book is a great fiction, written by someone who is guilty of all of the things which he accuses Bush of, but has obviously never thought to look in a mirror.
If you want to further enrich a greedy billionaire to destroy America, buy this book.
Rating: 
Summary: Lucid, Cogent, Nous Analysis; Weak Solutions
Review: Mr. Soros is not your typical decerebrate from the left. He is sincere and comfortable removing emotion from his arguments. Soros' grasp of financial markets and global economics is quite broad and deep and his analysis of the last 50 years found in chapter six is worth the price of the book alone. As a disciple of Karl Popper's open society Mr. Soros is passionate about his mission -enough to spend many millions of dollars. As a classical liberal, I admire Mr. Soros' general goal of establishing open societies and his effort to privately fund the growth of free societies worldwide. Soros's thesis is that US hegemony has gone too far. Our pernicious methods have all but guaranteed exponential growth in international problems unless we do something to curtail our powerful military actions. The response to 9/11 should have been more of a police investigation --not a military action. On these points Soros is absolutely correct. Epuration of Hussein is something upon which Soros seems to be indifferent; but he offers a very good analysis of the Bush administration's failure to adequately understand, plan, and accomplish a "war on terror." The Bush administration has failed miserably due to an emotional reaction driven by fundamentalist beliefs. The result is a tremendously misguided use of our military overseas. At home, civil liberties and social engineering in America have become easy targets for the Bush administration's didactic homeland security thugs. Sadly, Soros readily accepts the Democratic party line and its candidates as an oscitant alternative. While he is somewhat critical of the United Nations he is all too ready to accept the UN as a legitimate governing body over international issues. The fact is Democrats will just throw my hard earned money down a rat hole faster then the Republicans. The UN is a corrupt joke with absolutely no legitimacy. Furthermore, Soros offers no criticism toward others in the G7. In fact, he fawns over the European nations morphing into a French apologist half way through the book. Students of history know that the Europeans created much of this gerrymandered mess and now we are forced to deal with the aftermath. Soros rejects the notion of the moral imperative. Instead Soros is motivated by the Popperian idea that absolute right and wrong cannot be known. He calls it the "human uncertainty principle." (197) Based on that Soros humbly suggests that he may be wrong, but he is willing to take one for the team in an effort to open up the dialogue and stop the insanity. While I admire his effort and do agree that the Bush administration is clearly out of control, moral imperatives do exist and do not necessarily have to be based on religious foundations. Soros instead suggests a more subversive methodology for achieving open societies and ridding the world of dictators and other leaders who stand in the way. His critique of the US policy toward the states of the former Soviet Union, for example, is right on the money. However his attack on a state's right to protect sovereignty is way off base and he loses a lot of points by constantly revisiting this idea. Cultural differences alone make this an insane idea, let alone the multitude of metaphors acted upon as truth in the world. I think George Soros is a good American who means well. He cares deeply about nurturing freedom and open societies. He understands that we are clearly playing a zero sum game in Iraq. This book offers an excellent critique of the failures built into US policy. He likens it to a bubble economic condition where the result can be "quite catastrophic, similar to a bubble's bursting." (203) Soros offers some weak solutions in chapter seven, but I think his goal is less solution based and more focused on stopping the freight train to destruction. Soros does underestimate the fact the there are still really bad people in the world that need to be eliminated before his utopia can be realized. Strangely, Soros offers no detail on how to finance his ideas beyond suggesting that the US tax payer continue to foot the bill. Wrong answer George. While this book is by no means a quietus (Soros even says it is not its function), it is worth your time regardless of your politics. The Republicrats have become homogenized talking heads and we need more meaningful rhetoric like the material presented in this book.
Rating: 
Summary: For open-minded Americans only
Review: Notwithstanding my strong prejudice against Soros' continual but unsuccessful attempts to be a good writer of politics on top of my even stronger admiration towards his trading record and books, I like a book by an American who strives to tell his fellow citizens what the whole world (except many Americans) already know, that 1) Bush is pushing America and the whole world to harm's way 2) what Bush should do or stop doing to remedy his own crime or vice. So for non American readers, unless you find pleasure in telling yourself that one of the biggest traders of our time shares the same opinion with you, you dont have to buy and read this book. The same logic applies to those American readers who know that Bush had wronged seriously. For those Americans who still believe Bush is a good president who works for the goodness of your country and not for his families' and friends' financial benefits, dont waste your time and money.
Rating:
Summary: Enlightening and Foreboding View of The Future
Review: Soros is a self-made businessman and honest philanthropist - an unusual mix in this day-and-age. He has no hidden agenda, no political career aspirations, or behind-the-scenes mouths to feed.
It is this reason that this honest and clear perspective on the current Administration's political and military tactics and overall strategic direction is enlightening.
He is not burdened with the career aspirations of so-many other writers - he can write as he sees and backs it up with clear quotes and examples.
As a 'foreigner' living in the USA, and achieving my goals through the freedom afforded me by this country, I recognize the need for the protection of this BUT Soros provides an insightful comment on where this might lead us all - from victims to perpetrators of even greater atrocities on a global scale.
An excellent book that all should read for balanced commentary on the state of the world and America's part in the future.
Rating:
Summary: Bush presidency an aberration.
Review: Soros is out to prove that the Bush presidency is an aberration. Bush and his cronies have taken the country down the wrong path, domestically and internationally. He sets the stage with a letter written in 1998 and sent to President Clinton by Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard L. Armitage, William J. Bennett, and numerous other neoconservatives urging him to remove Saddam Hussein from power. (...) Soros views neoconservatives as ideologues who stop short at nothing to achieve their goals. The abuse of power, he asserts, comes at a price: The alienation of the U.S. in foreign affairs which began during pre-Iraq invasion. Soros believes the Bush doctrine and his presidency will be rejected at the next presidential election, and he spends much of the book laying out his case on why this is so.
Rating:
Summary: A Refreshing Read
Review: Soros offers an appropriate description of the current Bush administration and its detrimental effects on the world as a whole. While the book does contain some factual inaccuracies and misspellings, Soros provides solutions to the current problems with the way the United States handles its position as the World's sole super power. I applaud Soros on his dedication to open societies. He is a pragmatist that has the ability to find flaws in any system, making him one of the most balanced authorities on subjects such as globalization and foreign policy.
| 
