Michael Novak has taken a unique approach to telling the story of a tragedy that happened in Lattimer, PA in 1897. Most of the book is the fact-filled history of a day when about 400 unarmed Slovak anthracite coal miners from Harwood marched to Lattimer to call on Lattimer miners to join their strike. They were met by the seriff and a heavily-armed posse of citizens. As the sheriff tried to stop them, someone yelled "Fire!" and the ensuing slaughter is known as the Lattimer Massacre. Nineteen miners died, many shot in the back as they tried to flee, and many others were badly injured. At the following trial, in which the defense attorney played on the prejudices of the jury, the sheriff and posse were acquitted. Novak personalizes the story by including the fictional story of a Slovak miner in separate chapters, and while I think this feature is unnecessary, it does make the reader even more aware of the injustice done that day. After Lattimer, the miners realized fully that they needed a strong leader and a strong organization, and John Mitchell of the United Mine Workers was on the scene to take advantage of that fact. I found The Guns of Lattimer to be an unexpectedly moving book. Novak is not an historian. The book combines all the best features of well-researched history with social commentary. Novak is himself descended from Slovak immigrants so the reader is able to see this story from their point of view. It's biased, yes, but factual. I recommend it highly.

This book compares the political theorist/theologian Yves Simon with 'neoconservative' Catholics Michael Novak, Richard John Neuhaus and George Weigel. The author uses outdated political theory terminology, referring to Adam Smith's theories as liberal for instance, so is hard to follow when relying on such labels (as he often does). He also dwells, like all political theorists, on obscure notions and not on practical realities. He does offer good backgrounds on some of the issues, including a scathing criticism of Smith's lack of moral thought, the neoconservatives' unquestioning of the capitalist system and American conservatives' rejections of papal statements on an ideological basis. Mostly, though, this is for political scientists only.

Neoconservative economics is a supposedly Christianized Smithian free market economics where free actors do good things by following market forces alone. This is good if the market force is with you, but for everyone else - well, neoconservatives do not think there is anyone else, at least anyone else who deserves consideration. The Neoconservative position is held by its proponents as a development of Thomism, the most robust philosophical system available to Christian thought. Thomas Rourke has tested this claim by contrasting the position to that of Yves Simon, a prominent twentieth century Thomist who spent a major part of his life in North America. Rourke's choice is highly appropriate because he avoids the trap of comparing classical Thomism, couched as it was in an entirely different economic world, to the realities of a mature free market economy. Simon was very much a part of America. In doing so Rourke has set up a conceptual debate that effectively explores many of the issues that are central to the understanding of the philosophical/moral/political relationships between economic action and society. This book is more about society and its functioning, than about economics. It is about the conditions necessary for the perfecting of the human person with respect to the treatment of material goods. This is an aim more familiar to the moral philosopher or the theologian. For this reason it may at times be remote from the frames of reference familiar to the modern economist. Economics has drawn distant from these issues during the early part of the twentieth century, and this debate constitutes a reversal. Unfortunately, few economists now understand the categories necessary to locate economic action within the context of a truely human society. It remains as a central need. The neoconservative enterprise has provided such an undstanding and Rourke explores the relationship between this understnding and that of the more orthodox Thomistic position. In doing so he revives interest in the perennial issues of human society and raises important questions that neoconservative must address and The book is well ordered and the chapters constitute subtle analyses of specific topics. The format is regular and familiar to readers of St. Thomas. A topic is introduced, the neoconservative position is outlined, then Simon's position is put and the contrasts explored. The book will even serve as a useful quick reference for those simply wanting a well researched presentation of the neoconservative position. The book is careful not to stray beyond its scope and pass judgement on the positions presented, that is for the reader. To the neoconservative reader this may still prove very uncomfortable because it exposes many areas where the position is indefensible on its own terms of reference. The book is far more valuable than a mere presentation of opposing positions or a criticism of the opposition. It is necessary reading for anyone seriously interested in understanding the dimensions of a truely human economics.

Ronald Bailey’s dumbed down “Earth Report” is nothing more than vulgar anthropocentrism marketed as feel-good ecology neatly packaged for the McMasses. Actually, even the title of the book is a misnomer. While Bailey’s book is a “report” of sorts, at no point does the author seem to express a sincere or grounded interest in the “earth”.

Perhaps the book's greatest flaw, aside from the curiously misinterpreted statistics and erroneous conclusions, is its perverse avoidance of addressing the spiritual and philosophical issues logically raised when considering mankind’s roll in the natural world. While the book does a good job of inundating readers with all sorts of statistics and corporate-sponsored meditations, Bailey refuses, in a rather disturbingly determined sort of way, to pose the “larger questions”. The result is a book that too often feels intentionally rushed and suspiciously simple.

In Bailey’s worldview nature is a tangible commodity with a value that can fluctuate (...). “Ecology” is seen only as a tool to better manage natural assets to meet corporate and economic needs. This “nature as product” ideology has been practiced by capitalist entities since the industrial revolution, but Bailey’s attempt to bring it to the masses, and the simplistic manner of his presentation presents a new and dangerous trend. Bailey even insists that we should judge a species as “good” or “bad” depending on its relative worth to mankind. For example, Bailey believes that North American white-tail deer are, “dangerous mammals” and “killers” because they have the audacity to stray onto roads and highways where they often cause serious accidents when struck by fast-moving cars and trucks. Not only do these deer/vehicle collisions cause human fatalities, they ALSO result in over 1 billion dollars worth of insurance claims annually. To Bailey this represents a prime example of poor asset management (the deer of course being the poorly managed asset). Bailey never once considers that the massive deer overpopulation (which has logically increased the risk of deer/vehicle collisions) may have something to do with reduced deer habitat and the almost complete annihilation of the white-tail deer’s natural predators (courtesy of mankind).

Bailey’s disarmingly pronounced hubris in “Earth Report” is matched only by his inane insistence that there aren’t even any real ecological issues at all (at least in the “green” sense)! Counter arguments are seen as radical and suspicious.

The technocrat-friendly ideas presented by Ronald Bailey in “Earth Report” are not only arrogant and misguided, they are downright dangerous. Bailey’s subtle and consistent suggestion that all is really well in the world, may just cost us that, the world.

TANSTAAFL - It's just that simple.

This acronym, meaning "There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch" is at the heart of this book- understanding and embracing it not as a phylosophy, but as a law of the universe.

Earth Report contributors understand that there is absolutely nothing in this world that comes without some cost. This understanding helps them make suggestions that encourage using laws of supply and demand to improve our economy.

Overfishing: There is always a cost to fishing. When no one is responsible for absorbing the costs of fishing, the cost is in the fish resources- populations of fish dwindle and we run out of the supply. But if someone has a vested interest in a fishing area, they can pass the cost onto the human economy. Their profits ensure that the area remains sustainable. Healthy fish need a healthy environment. Would you let someone dump toxic waste into your private fishery? Of course not.

Environment: This old topic has been hashed over again and again- usually with people arguing about whether or not humans are responsible for warming. But beyond this is the compelling argument of, "WHo Cares!" What is the cost of trying to stop HUMAN caused global warming? Huge. But we know that in the past, the earth has warmed even more without our help. If we pay the cost to stop human global warming, and natural global warming (or even worse- cooling) occurs, will our crippled economy be able to handle it? Most likely not. There is a real and dangerous cost to limiting our economy- one that this book points out when comparing the affects of natural disasters on robust economies versus weak ones. Any guess which one is more apt to deal with natural disasters?

This book is one sided, and presents one point of view. Read it along with the other information out there and I think you will be well on your way to forming your own opinions.

"Earth Report 2000" was written by ten scientists, each with excellent credentials, each writing on a different environmental topic. Here are the ten section titles:

1. Population, Food and Income
2. Pesticides: Increasing Food Supplies While Preserving Biodiversity
3. Global Warming
4. The Coming Age of Abundance
5. Causes and Prevention of Cancer
6. Forests
7. Conserving Biodiversity
8. Water Options
9. Rescuing the Oceans
10. Global Air Quality

It's a tour-de-force of all the important environmental concerns, and paints a much more optimistic scenario than we hear from some environmentalists and politicians. The book was edited by Ronald Bailey, who has also written on the subject in his book,"Eco-Scam: The False Prophets of Ecological Apocolypse."

Ron Bailey was formerly producer of a national PBS series called "Technopolitics." His style is confrontational and expresses more than just skepticism. He points out various statements of some politicians and more extreme environmentalists that suggest they are willing to resort to deception to gain public support for an anti-growth environmental program aimed at the goal of a more egalitarian society. He may be a little TOO confrontational for some readers, but exposure to his points seems to me to be essential for ANYONE to reach an informed view about the environment. I srongly recomment it!!!