Three selections from the End of Ideology are worth the price of the book. First, the essay Bell wrote for this latest edition in which he makes a strong case that with the end of ideology, "history" has begun anew. Next, the new introduction he wrote in the mid-70s which discusses the critical reception of this book. Finally, the last chapter of the original book, a masterful history of Marxist thought.

In essay on the resumption of history, Bell clears away much of the underbrush that has grown up around the notion of "global capitalism" by pointing out that the end of empire (and that includes the Soviet Union) and the colonial era has had the largest impact on world politics over the past forty years. The reignition of various ethnic groups whose identities had been suppressed under various Uber states and ideologies is just as important a part of the story. The 1975 introduction is a fascinating refutation of his, mostly Marxist, critics. For instance, C. Wright Mills, the maverick sociologist, apparently came after Bell for his review of Mills' "The Power Elite" (included in "The End of Idelogy"). Bell neatly dissects Mills' both in the essay and in his answer to Mills' criticisms. Bell, the empiricist, is the clear winner in these two rounds. The last chapter on Marxism is worth re-reading and re-reading for Bell knows the subject and the players intimately, as only a former boy Socialist born in New York's Lower East Side could. He explains how Marx's transmutation of Hegel's ideas into "dialectical materialism" set the stage for generations of leftist intellectuals to misinterpret or reinterpret events into Marxist prattle according to their understanding or lack of understanding thereof. It's a post-graduation education on Marxism in 35 dense, but, brilliant pages.

Two juicy chapters on the American "mafia" and the inflation of crime statistics and the stoking of public fear by law enforcement, although somewhat dated contain some remarkable insights: among them that the "mafia," like American business in general had to move from "production" to the "consumption" mode, i.e., turning toward the consumer to make money through gambling, and away from more traditional, less lucrative businesses such as prostitution. These two articles, written when he covered the labor beat for Fortune magazine, still have an edge now, as the same "crime wave" and "mafia" hysteria continue to be generated by the media and law enforcement.

Bell's wide-ranging knowledge, his clear-eyed appraisal of the American scene, his tenacity in trying to discover the real levers of power, are qualities one rarely finds in this era where shouting and sloganeering still suffice -- although much of this now comes not from the left-hand side of the spectrum, but the right.

Although first published in 1960, just before a torrent of social change drenched the US and the world, sociologist Daniel Bell's insightful collection of essays comprising "The End of Ideology" still has much to offer, even at century's end. From his thoughtful assessment of the failure of socialism in the United States to his vivid description of the psychological strains burdening the average American worker--the latter still sadly true in the computer age--Bell believes that the day of traditional airtight ideological solutions and posturing has ended.

Much of what sustained the old "urban progressivism" which, despite its flaws, was a force for much positive social change in the US, has largely disappeared. Bell predicted conditions peculiar to American society combined with trends like the steady decline in labor union membership, the steady progress of workplace automation and, even then, the emergence of mass electronic communications would make humans less willing to accept the singular utopian pronouncements of what he called "millennial" movements. Instead, ongoing social fragmentation, diversification and conflict would make coping with major socioeconomic problems along traditional "party" lines unrealistic if not impossible.

Given the persisting belief among many that traditional "government" is failing us and the continued rise and influence of vocal, single-interest splinter groups with considerable access to a variety of media--despite their familiar revolutionary noises--it is hard to disagree. There is much Bell couldn't have foreseen given his vantage point at the very end of the placid 1950s, but his perceptive yet readable critique of our traditional way of looking at many of our pressing social issues and our political history still has a compelling, hopeful freshness, its basis being, as he had said himself, "is that the present belongs to the living."

If you are having a difficult time establishing a romantic relationship with someone because of past wounds and failures of one type or another, this book can surely help. It can help you heal those wounds, improve your self-image, and teach you the principles of self-love. There is a lot of uninhibited discussion in this book on sexuality and ridding oneself of guilt feelings assocated with pleasure and self-love. There is a lot of insight crammed into this book for the cover-price. What most impressed me was the honest depth of the discussion. This is not a book of fluff or jargon. It takes a hard look at the difficulties involved in maintaining a relationship. Should be read and reread.

In a crowded, often cheesy category, this guide stands out for its clear-headed frankness and for making a monogamous relationship sound so darn sexy and worthwhile.

The authors approach sex as a part of life that is essential to human well-being, and attempt to guide readers to exploration and integration of sexual desires. It is their sincere wish to return the spirituality to bump & grind; for readers to see their sexuality as something so utterly natural, that to imagine a sex life without love and commitment is to imagine a meal of divine pasta without sauce.

There are chapters on healing and getting over blocks. These are written with great compassion, but without perpetuating a victim mentality. The techniques they suggest one take to awakening desire without shame are written logically and sympathetically. They make the recipe for that "divine pasta" seem effortlessly easy and fun.

This is a self-help book that does not belabor the reader with thoughts of, "That's all well and good, but it seems like too much work." This is one self-help book that has no need to urge you to put it down and get started. Believe me, you'll be eager to get busy!

I am not a philosopher and I do not have any knowledge of communitarianism prior to reading Bell's work. Still, I find this doctorate thesis which Bell wrote at Oxford a very interesting, engaging and thought-provocative one.

Bell traces the history of communitarianism and illustrates the main pillars in this paradigm. In so doing, he also argues that communitarianism is closer to the natural aspirations of human beings and its political implications offer more protection on human freedom than the liberals would otherwise suggest.

This is not a typical doctorate thesis that one would normally expect - one that is very dry and has citations appearing almost at the end of every sentences. Rather, Bell presents the thoughts of communitarians and those of its critics (mostly libertarians) in an often lively dialogue format - not indifferent from those in Plato's time.

I highly reccommend this book to those who are dissatisfied with liberalism and the current political system it shapes. Bell and his fellow communitarians may offer you important insights to human aspirations. It may also give you inspirations for a new form of participatory democracy which emphasizes more on the common good and overcomes the challenges of individualism.

I don't often read biographies, but, admirers of Billy Graham need to read this book. Mrs Graham's story gives insight into the life of one of the most influential Christian leaders of our time, in a humorous and easy to read manner. Also, if you want to find out more about Patricia Cornwell and who influenced her, this book may help.

if this book makes the claim that race doesn't exist, I hope that everybody can see right through that (although at least one fellow reviewer seems to accept everything he's told, as long as it fits with the egalitarian myth). Here's a little example that everyone ought to understand.

My aunt and uncle have a mixed-breed dog: a chihuahua crossed with a dachshund. This dog has a dachshund-like body and a chihuahua-like face, and is very nervous and skittish like a chihuahua. Does the fact that this dog is a mixed breed, keep us from concluding that there does in fact exist the breed "chihuahua" and the breed "dachshund", each of which has its own distinctive shape, coloring, and personality traits?

This is what people are claiming: that because there are lots of mixed-race people in America, then race doesn't exist. This has got to be the dumbest argument I've ever heard. And "no biological basis for race" -- so, I guess that melanin all comes from one's environment? These arguments are so dumb, it's no wonder that regular people never question them. It's a case of the Emperor's New Clothes.

This book was written as a response to the 1994 book "The Bell Curve" by Herrnstein and Murray. But unlike several other books that condemned TBC without any empirical data, this book actually does expand the issue of racial differences intelligence and is well worth reading by any one interested in this ongoing debate. At least in this book, while still motivated by an egalitarian goal to deny racial differences in intelligence, the authors do give TBC credit for being essentially a very sound book empirically, while picking away at some of the issues at its periphery. But as they do this, they also make many fundamental errors and omissions. This is to be expected however because TBC is very hard to refute on empirical grounds alone.

As an example, the authors take TBC to task for using heritability in the broad sense rather in the narrow sense like breeders do, which reduces the heritability between races supposedly by about 20% or so. The problem is, as shown by Jensen in "The g Factor", heritability in the broad sense should be used in comparing group averages, while heritability in the narrow sense should be used in predicting the expected intelligence of one's children. TBC was not a book on how to have smart kids or breeding cows for higher butter fat production. So the argument was a feeble attempt at obfuscation.

Later in the book they admit that Blacks almost make as much money as Whites when wages are adjusted for the average difference in intelligence between the two groups. But they go on to say that "almost" is not good enough. The error here of course, as even they argue in this book, is that earnings are not just a matter of intelligence. It is the most important trait with regards to wages, but other traits are also important. Research has shown that conscientiousness is the second most important behavioral trait after intelligence in occupational success, and one would have to assume that conscientiousness would vary among racial groups as easily as intelligence due to evolutionary forces on selection under different ecological conditions. And Rushton has shown that many behavioral differences exist between Whites and Blacks on average, including conscientiousness.

So this book is a mixed bag on not denying that there are differences in the average intelligence between Blacks and Whites while trying at the same time to ameliorate the damage that recent research has produced showing that the differences are in fact real and persistent. But the funding for this book was such that the authors had no choice but to use some very fancy footwork to dance around the primary issue and try to diffuse its impact with regards to education and equality. Politics always comes into play, depending on who is paying the piper.

This book is fantastic for the layperson that was swayed by the misuse of psychometrics in science. These authors evince clearly that there is no biological concept of race. Any effort to compare races is simply false beacause even anthropolgists and biologists cannot decide the cutoff point in races.So why do psychologists put people in categories that do not even exist? Ideology.The authors of the Bell Curve have no way to define the boundaries of race- even so there is no such thing as racial purity. In America 20% of whites have black ancestry. Unless psychologists can clearly delineate where races end and begin, books like the Bell Curve have no scientific legitimacy.

is again presented by Daniel Bell, Stephen R Graubard and colleagues in 'Toward the Year 2000.' This "work in progress" was started in the 1965 by the Commission on the Year 2000 of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. It does not try to "predict" the future but rather to uncover and explore those social factor which will have a long term effect. The some 50 scholars contributing toward the study are mostly sociologists and historians with a liberal smattering of theoretical economists. They are not imaginative futurists, cultural creatives, or social activists so the chance of them being unbiased and perhaps right makes this an important resource for anyone seriously preparing for the future.