For anyone interested in international law or human rights, this is a must-read. I am assigning this book to my undergraduates this semester because, although the subject matter is complex, Minow's prose is clean and spare. Minow does a terrific job of summarizing the episodes of mass violence of the 20th century AND the literature in legal and political studies on war crimes, human rights violations, and justice. I don't always share her optimism that solutions can be found, but I cannot think of another author who grapples with this difficult subject matter quite as gracefully or comprehensively.

Martha Minow has done her research. She carefully explored the different approaches to mass violence without over-moralizing or answering any of the unanswerable questions. Drawing on history, she charts a course for the human rights community today. This is a readable book for people who are new to the concept of human rights and those who have phD's in the field. Best of all, it does not leave you with a feeling of a weight upon your shoulders. Instead, it is some-how optimistic about a future that addresses the mass violence. I underlined about half of this book, and would recommend it to anyone.

Collaboratively compiled and edited by Richard Shweder (Anthropologist and Professor of Human Development, University of Chicago), Martha Minow (Professor of Law, Harvard University), and Hazel Rose Markus (David-Brack Professor in the Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University), Engaging Cultural Differences: The Multicultural Challenge In Liberal Democracies offers an outstanding and highly recommended selection of scholarly essays by a series of educated and experienced authors who closely scrutiny of the principle of tolerance as applied to such diverse cultures and societies as Germany, France, India, South Africa, the United States, and more. From the good, the bad, and the ugly about assimilation, to male and female circumcision debates, to human rights and the American Anthropological Association, these college-level essays shed a discerning light on human nature at its best and worst worldwide.

This book was used in my Gender, Law, and Policy course at Harvard Law School, and I believe it is a well edited collection of pieces about important legal and social issues involving and affecting women. It covers a broad range of topics and presents a variety of viewpoints.

Minow gives a well-balanced overview of the problem of being different and how we tend to define "difference" as something inherent in others. She offers solid suggestions for overcoming the unstated assumptions we make that harm those whom we see as different. Her references are well-documented, and cover a broad spectrum of political perceptions.

Minow recognizes that the same unstated assumptions that affect our views of the "different" also affect the inflexibility of our legal system. Her explanations are both clear and cogent.

The work is strengthened by practical illustrations and by the realization that sometimes we work in less than ideal situations, with what we have. Well written and very "read"able. One of my favorites.

Save your money. Not only does this book not offer any possible solutions, it doesn't even provide a comprehensive analysis of the problem. It is heavily documented with endnotes (which is good) but the multitude of studies, op-ed pieces and surveys are never really brought into the text and explained. Instead, the book reads as if Ms. Minow summarized each source into a single sentence and then haphazardly strung the sentences together.
The reader is bombarded with constant repetition. Given the subject matter, repetition might not be a bad thing, but here it seems to result more from disorganization than an attempt to clarify important points. Indeed, the reader is left with the impression that the constant citations are meant to make up for the fact that the book reads as if it were dashed off in a series of odd moments stolen from more important duties.
Ms. Minow may be granted some latitude because she is a lawyer and brevity adorned with citation is bread and butter to the bar, but she is not writing for lawyers here and I would suspect that even lawyers would find her polemics redundant and unenlightening. I was eager to read this book, hoping to gain greater insight into the issue of privatization. I was sorely disappointed.

I enjoyed reading this book because it is both accessible and sophisticated. In a discourse too often characterized by polemics and sound-bites, Minow offers a thoughtful view of the trend toward privatization. Reading her book helped me see how complex these issues are, and gave me new insight into arguments I might otherwise have dismissed. I found it a rare treat.

Martha Minow's book is a tremendously valuable, engaging guide to thinking about the respective roles of the public and private sector in promoting our common good. With great insight and fair-mindedness, Minow identifies the promises and problems of the shifting roles of the public and private sector in many areas of our lives; schooling, welfare, legal services and health services. I think how we allocate public and private responsibility will have a huge impact on the future of our democracy. There are, as Minow points out, advantages in creating more private responsibility in education, for example. But these pros need to be weighed very carefully against the disturbing prospect of abandoning our commitment to public, integrated schools. As she has in her other books, Minow brings great wisdom to this vital topic.