What do you think?
Rate this book
The Beast Reawakens
A journalist chronicles fifty years of neo-Nazism, from its beginnings in post-World War II Germany through the fall of the Berlin wall and the emergence of skinhead groups in Germany and the United States
546 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1997
8 people are currently reading
651 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews
December 11, 2023
"Communism is a dream. Socialism is a program. Fascism is aesthetics." ---Leon Blum. Martin Lee understands that the perennial appeal of fascism is to the irrational, the beast in all of us, and thus while socialism and communism can be defeated by proving their materialist premises and promises wrong this does not apply to fascism. Just how did fascism emerge intact and grow following its military defeat in 1945? Lee takes us on a tour, from joint CIA-Nazi collaboration to Colonel Nasser's coup in Egypt (and his hiring of ex-Nazi scientists) to the post-war wave of Third World immigration from the global south to Europe and the U.S., and the"white riots" that followed, to uncover the many points of the hydra. However, after 1991 many fascists converged on the one place they believed the black and brown could grow: Russia. The combination of an all-embracing ideology, pan-Slavism, a more religious population than the rest of the West, and a mystical interpretation of the world dating back to the birth of the Third Rome gives today's fascists hope that "the iron dream" can be reborn on the white steppes.
P.S. The prise de pouvoir by Vladimir Putin seems to have, for the moment, derailed fascism in Russia. As inter-war Europe, from Finland to Bulgaria, showed, a military dictatorship or a strongman can create a cordon sanitaire blunting fascism by taking over much of its program.
P.S. The prise de pouvoir by Vladimir Putin seems to have, for the moment, derailed fascism in Russia. As inter-war Europe, from Finland to Bulgaria, showed, a military dictatorship or a strongman can create a cordon sanitaire blunting fascism by taking over much of its program.
October 6, 2008
Frustrating and disappointing. This book tells a fascinating and alarming story, and is dense with specifics - names, dates, events, and places. The problem is that with a book like this, if the reader finds that some of that factual content is false, it calls into doubt every piece of information that reader doesn't already know to be true from other sources. To someone who already knows everything the book has to say, there's nothing to be learned by reading it. To someone for whom the content is new, its value depends on the trustworthiness of the author.
Martin Lee is a journalist, which means among other things that he is used to rigorous standards for accuracy. So I was reading with the assumption that all this detail was legitimate, no small thing because many items were surprising and shocking. Then almost halfway through, while writing about a notorious Nazi commando, SS Colonel Otto Skorzeny, Lee related that in the 1960s Skorzeny was running a special-forces style training program in Spain, and quotes a "mercenary" named Anthony Herbert as saying most of Skorzeny's curriculum was outdated. In fact, Anthony Herbert was not a mercenary, he was an officer in the U.S. Army, a Ranger, whose job at that point was to seek possible improvements in the Ranger training program. Herbert, in his autobiography, Soldier, described the experience, and went to pains to make it clear that he did not like Skorzeny's ideology or admire him, but felt it was his {Herbert's) duty to investigate and see whether he could pick up any useful knowledge that might save American soldiers' lives. Actually, Herbert was a scrupulously conscientious person whose promising Army career ended in forced retirement over his refusal to help cover up American war crimes and high command malfeasance in Vietnam.
So at that point in this book, the author's credibility was gone, and I stopped reading. If there's any bigger waste of time than reading history written by a liar, I don't know what it is, and dishonesty is to truth in journalism as sewage is to pure water. If you have a gallon of sewage and you add a drop of water, you have a gallon of sewage. If you have a gallon of pure water and you add a drop of sewage, you have a gallon of sewage.
Martin Lee is a journalist, which means among other things that he is used to rigorous standards for accuracy. So I was reading with the assumption that all this detail was legitimate, no small thing because many items were surprising and shocking. Then almost halfway through, while writing about a notorious Nazi commando, SS Colonel Otto Skorzeny, Lee related that in the 1960s Skorzeny was running a special-forces style training program in Spain, and quotes a "mercenary" named Anthony Herbert as saying most of Skorzeny's curriculum was outdated. In fact, Anthony Herbert was not a mercenary, he was an officer in the U.S. Army, a Ranger, whose job at that point was to seek possible improvements in the Ranger training program. Herbert, in his autobiography, Soldier, described the experience, and went to pains to make it clear that he did not like Skorzeny's ideology or admire him, but felt it was his {Herbert's) duty to investigate and see whether he could pick up any useful knowledge that might save American soldiers' lives. Actually, Herbert was a scrupulously conscientious person whose promising Army career ended in forced retirement over his refusal to help cover up American war crimes and high command malfeasance in Vietnam.
So at that point in this book, the author's credibility was gone, and I stopped reading. If there's any bigger waste of time than reading history written by a liar, I don't know what it is, and dishonesty is to truth in journalism as sewage is to pure water. If you have a gallon of sewage and you add a drop of water, you have a gallon of sewage. If you have a gallon of pure water and you add a drop of sewage, you have a gallon of sewage.
July 22, 2010
I don't know if the 'beast' has reawaken but those familiar with the books subject(s) will find themselves feeling fairly tired. The factual and spelling errors throughout also don't help. An eclectic work for the novice, but mostly regurgitation for the already initiated.
March 19, 2022
TL:DR: An interesting book but deeply flawed in its focus on individuals, personalities, and a quest for a psychoanalytic, rather than materialist, source for fascism.
For a book that prides itself on deep knowledge of secret histories, it buys much of the western anti soviet narrative and sometimes breathlessly accepts the analysis of the fascists it is analyzing. Lee seems at times desparate to spend more pages grasping at any rumor or assertion from the various Nazis he is chronicling to support his thesis that the Soviets worked with Nazis just as much as the West, even though the few points where he is obliged to pist actual numbers from primary sources, this is proven to be demonstrably false. This is a classic response of liberla historians to the cognitive dissonance of peeling back the ideology around US history and realizing that since WW2 our government has carried the torch of fascism around the world. Lee brings up the trials in Czechoslovakia and other parts of the eastern bloc during the fifties and repeats the standard western line that these were anti semitic purges. completely leaving out the execution of an American operation by a double agent, Operation Splinter Factor, to discredit communist leadership in the Warsaw Pact using fabricated testimony and evidence orchestrated by the fledgling CIA. This of course does not render the USSR blameless for falling for the US ruse, but it gives vital context to understanding the reasons for the purges rather than the baseless assertion that they were anti semitic. The people targetted in the purge trials were framed by western agents in order to eliminate them as good communists, and the USSR fell for it, which is a tragedy and a stain on their history, but that is a result of decades of invasion, sabotage, and assassination campaigns carried out by western nations since 1917, not because of some sudden, inexplicable anti-Semitic turn by the nation that destroyed Nazism, liberated the concentration camps, and setup the first autonomous Jewish state without doing settler colonialism and apartheid to enable it.
This book has some interesting parts to it, but unfortunately it is far more focused on the individuals in the fascist scene in Europe than the structures or institutions that created, supported and used them. Lee also has the classic Arrendt-ian liberal misunderstanding of communism as a form of "totalitarianism" and thus a twin of fascism. He repeatedly asserts, without any citation, that Marxist ideology was always merely a mask for Great Russian Nationalism in the USSR, that it was never actually socialist, that it was institutionally anti-Semitic. He equates the existence of neo fascists in the Soviet Union with their sponsorship by the state, even when being forced to admit that many of them were imprisoned or executed for their fascist program! He repeatedly claims that internationalism was always just a slogan, never a reality, which again is completely contrary to factual history when you look at the millions of people from across the Global South whose lives were massively enriched by Soviet aid.
The focus on Germany and the USSR to the exclusion of the US and Latin America really hurts this texts ability to be taken seriously. While the book covers Perons relations with Nazis in Argentina and mentions the US use of ratlines, it barely touches on Operation Condor and the decades of direct support for actual fascist regimes across South America. This is a vital part of understanding the history of fascism and the only reason to leave it out is that it disrupts Lee's thesis that fascism is an essentially European phenomenon, rather than one tied to material relations and thus possible anywhere capitalism exists. Similarly, the fact that this book only makes a couple short allusions in footnotes to Operation Gladio, the single biggest source of material support to European fascism post 1945, yet again exposes Lee's discomfort with the fact that the US, not the Soviet Union or even Germany, has been the hub and greatest champion of fascism since WW2. This is typical of the strong desire of some liberal Americans who, learning of some of the horrific crimes of the US state, look for any thread they can pull to demonstrate that, despite its horrors, that no other better alternative form of politics has ever existed, and therefore they have no obligation to do anything to fundamentally change their own country. They seek anything that will allow them to dismiss socialism as a viable alternative. This is not to say the USSR was perfect, did nothing wrong, or didnt commit many errors and some crimes of its own, especially in the later Brezhnev and Gorbachev years. Russian nationalism was sometimes revived as a political tool in the later years of the USSR as the CPSU stagnated and became detached from the Soviet masses. But that did not define the country, and quite to the contrary this use of nationalism was one of the primary factors in accelerating the corrosion of socialism. Rather than russian nationalism being the secret real face of the CPSU all along, it was and is a fundamentally anti Marxist position which slowed and eventually rolled back the massive and real progress towards internationalism made throughout the entire history of the USSR. Thus to equate Bolshevism with secret Russian chauvanism is an ahistorical attempt by liberals like Lee to discredit any alternative to western capitalist hegemony and assure them that they are doing all they need to by making the occasional journalistic critique without any calls to change the fundamentally exploitative structures of our society.
If you want a book that chronicles some of the bizarre personalities in the global Neo Nazi movements from 1945-1995, this is a pretty good text for that. But if you want a materialist history of global fascism that really gets into the roots of the social forces that produce and sustain fascism, or the history of the political structures that supported and used it, this book seriously falls flat. Honestly its hard to recommend this when other works like Whiteout by Cockburn and St Clair, Blowback by Christopher Simpson, Washington Bullets by Vijay Prashad, The Jakarta Method by Vincent Bevins, and Predatory States by McSherry exist and cover this topic much better. For a materialist examination of classical fascism; its causes and development path, check out Nicos Poulantzas' Fascism and Dictatorship: the Third International and the Problem of Fascism.
For a book that prides itself on deep knowledge of secret histories, it buys much of the western anti soviet narrative and sometimes breathlessly accepts the analysis of the fascists it is analyzing. Lee seems at times desparate to spend more pages grasping at any rumor or assertion from the various Nazis he is chronicling to support his thesis that the Soviets worked with Nazis just as much as the West, even though the few points where he is obliged to pist actual numbers from primary sources, this is proven to be demonstrably false. This is a classic response of liberla historians to the cognitive dissonance of peeling back the ideology around US history and realizing that since WW2 our government has carried the torch of fascism around the world. Lee brings up the trials in Czechoslovakia and other parts of the eastern bloc during the fifties and repeats the standard western line that these were anti semitic purges. completely leaving out the execution of an American operation by a double agent, Operation Splinter Factor, to discredit communist leadership in the Warsaw Pact using fabricated testimony and evidence orchestrated by the fledgling CIA. This of course does not render the USSR blameless for falling for the US ruse, but it gives vital context to understanding the reasons for the purges rather than the baseless assertion that they were anti semitic. The people targetted in the purge trials were framed by western agents in order to eliminate them as good communists, and the USSR fell for it, which is a tragedy and a stain on their history, but that is a result of decades of invasion, sabotage, and assassination campaigns carried out by western nations since 1917, not because of some sudden, inexplicable anti-Semitic turn by the nation that destroyed Nazism, liberated the concentration camps, and setup the first autonomous Jewish state without doing settler colonialism and apartheid to enable it.
This book has some interesting parts to it, but unfortunately it is far more focused on the individuals in the fascist scene in Europe than the structures or institutions that created, supported and used them. Lee also has the classic Arrendt-ian liberal misunderstanding of communism as a form of "totalitarianism" and thus a twin of fascism. He repeatedly asserts, without any citation, that Marxist ideology was always merely a mask for Great Russian Nationalism in the USSR, that it was never actually socialist, that it was institutionally anti-Semitic. He equates the existence of neo fascists in the Soviet Union with their sponsorship by the state, even when being forced to admit that many of them were imprisoned or executed for their fascist program! He repeatedly claims that internationalism was always just a slogan, never a reality, which again is completely contrary to factual history when you look at the millions of people from across the Global South whose lives were massively enriched by Soviet aid.
The focus on Germany and the USSR to the exclusion of the US and Latin America really hurts this texts ability to be taken seriously. While the book covers Perons relations with Nazis in Argentina and mentions the US use of ratlines, it barely touches on Operation Condor and the decades of direct support for actual fascist regimes across South America. This is a vital part of understanding the history of fascism and the only reason to leave it out is that it disrupts Lee's thesis that fascism is an essentially European phenomenon, rather than one tied to material relations and thus possible anywhere capitalism exists. Similarly, the fact that this book only makes a couple short allusions in footnotes to Operation Gladio, the single biggest source of material support to European fascism post 1945, yet again exposes Lee's discomfort with the fact that the US, not the Soviet Union or even Germany, has been the hub and greatest champion of fascism since WW2. This is typical of the strong desire of some liberal Americans who, learning of some of the horrific crimes of the US state, look for any thread they can pull to demonstrate that, despite its horrors, that no other better alternative form of politics has ever existed, and therefore they have no obligation to do anything to fundamentally change their own country. They seek anything that will allow them to dismiss socialism as a viable alternative. This is not to say the USSR was perfect, did nothing wrong, or didnt commit many errors and some crimes of its own, especially in the later Brezhnev and Gorbachev years. Russian nationalism was sometimes revived as a political tool in the later years of the USSR as the CPSU stagnated and became detached from the Soviet masses. But that did not define the country, and quite to the contrary this use of nationalism was one of the primary factors in accelerating the corrosion of socialism. Rather than russian nationalism being the secret real face of the CPSU all along, it was and is a fundamentally anti Marxist position which slowed and eventually rolled back the massive and real progress towards internationalism made throughout the entire history of the USSR. Thus to equate Bolshevism with secret Russian chauvanism is an ahistorical attempt by liberals like Lee to discredit any alternative to western capitalist hegemony and assure them that they are doing all they need to by making the occasional journalistic critique without any calls to change the fundamentally exploitative structures of our society.
If you want a book that chronicles some of the bizarre personalities in the global Neo Nazi movements from 1945-1995, this is a pretty good text for that. But if you want a materialist history of global fascism that really gets into the roots of the social forces that produce and sustain fascism, or the history of the political structures that supported and used it, this book seriously falls flat. Honestly its hard to recommend this when other works like Whiteout by Cockburn and St Clair, Blowback by Christopher Simpson, Washington Bullets by Vijay Prashad, The Jakarta Method by Vincent Bevins, and Predatory States by McSherry exist and cover this topic much better. For a materialist examination of classical fascism; its causes and development path, check out Nicos Poulantzas' Fascism and Dictatorship: the Third International and the Problem of Fascism.
November 12, 2023
Excellent overview of the lingering effects of Fascism and Nazism long after both were allegedly defeated in WW II - and how they resurfaced under the guise of the cold war. Nazi collaborators were face-scrubbed and redressed as "democrats" and members of the Free World; and so known war criminals were allowed to return to posts of privilege and power in the German Federal Republic. Meanwhile, unrepentant Nazis and their allies continued to spread old poisons from sanctuaries in Spain, the Middle East, and Latin America, contributing to the rise of military regimes and death squad states worldwide - again in the name of defending the Free World. We see after the "fall of Communism" that the inspiring trend continued.
Lee's tour-de-force of this dark underworld - often linked with the so-called "deep state" - is comprehensive and eye-opening. The rise of post-cold war fascism in eastern Europe (and now through so much of western Europe as well) again raises cause for concern: from Baltic States with large residues of oldtime war criminals, like Latvia, to the Islamophobes of Denmark - the Beast is still alive and evil.
Lee's tour-de-force of this dark underworld - often linked with the so-called "deep state" - is comprehensive and eye-opening. The rise of post-cold war fascism in eastern Europe (and now through so much of western Europe as well) again raises cause for concern: from Baltic States with large residues of oldtime war criminals, like Latvia, to the Islamophobes of Denmark - the Beast is still alive and evil.
January 12, 2012
Useful but dated. The book covers events through 1994, and Fascism (in one guise or another) has made immense inroads into mainstream politics since then; a revised edition is needed, although in today's climate it might not get published by a major publishing company.
Lee is strongest when he is detailing the means by which Fascism was kept alive through the difficult years of the Cold War. As some have complained, one must wade through a welter of names and political organizations, but the history of a semi-subterranean ideology is inevitably going to be complex, and I never found the book dull. There may be minor errors, unsurprising when such an immense volume of data is involved. A more important criticism might be that Lee does not clearly define what he means by Fascism, and he does not seem to differentiate it from Nazism; also he appears to regard neo-Nazism in Germany as a greater threat than neo-Fascism in the United States, although he does make a pioneering effort to discuss the latter. One is left wanting to know more about how extremist groups have infiltrated US politics.
All in all, still an eye-opener, and an invaluable reference, particularly with regard to European Rightist politics.
Lee is strongest when he is detailing the means by which Fascism was kept alive through the difficult years of the Cold War. As some have complained, one must wade through a welter of names and political organizations, but the history of a semi-subterranean ideology is inevitably going to be complex, and I never found the book dull. There may be minor errors, unsurprising when such an immense volume of data is involved. A more important criticism might be that Lee does not clearly define what he means by Fascism, and he does not seem to differentiate it from Nazism; also he appears to regard neo-Nazism in Germany as a greater threat than neo-Fascism in the United States, although he does make a pioneering effort to discuss the latter. One is left wanting to know more about how extremist groups have infiltrated US politics.
All in all, still an eye-opener, and an invaluable reference, particularly with regard to European Rightist politics.
November 16, 2009
I picked this up at the Churchmouse in Sonoma, California a couple of days ago and plan on leaving it with my interested host, Tom Miley, when I return to Chicago.
If one had taken a political science course on ideology in the thirties, one would have studied Communism, Socialism, Democracy, Monarchism and Fascism. Today, Fascism and it's Nazi relations are treated as historical curiosities, if at all. Lee's book argues that Fascism is hardly dead--that, indeed, fascist ideology is current in our own Republican party.
If one had taken a political science course on ideology in the thirties, one would have studied Communism, Socialism, Democracy, Monarchism and Fascism. Today, Fascism and it's Nazi relations are treated as historical curiosities, if at all. Lee's book argues that Fascism is hardly dead--that, indeed, fascist ideology is current in our own Republican party.
January 24, 2019
This book wasn't what I was expecting going in, but I ended up finding it pretty enlightening nonetheless. It's focused almost exclusively on what happened to prominent German Nazis after the end of WWII, especially Otto Remer and Otto Skorzeny, but many others as well. We learn about their efforts to influence the way we remember National Socialism and to keep the ideology alive through various licit and illicit organizations, some based in Germany, but others in Spain, Italy, Argentina, and the United States.
It has an interesting reading of the way Germany was situated during the Cold War, formally allied with the West but also with a long history of relations with Russia. After the war, many Nazis were able to exploit the East-West tensions and leverage themselves into arrangements with either the U.S. or Soviet Union, who suddenly cared more about keeping tabs on each other than de-Nazification efforts in Germany. The fact, justified by realpolitik, that many Nazi war criminals were paid by U.S. intelligence services after the war remains shocking and disgraceful.
If the polling and statistics cited can be trusted, apparently there has been a relatively high percentage of the population of Germans that believe some version of "Hitler wasn't so bad, but he let things get out of hand" or that the Holocaust numbers have been inflated or that Germany itself was a sort-of victim in World War II. It's honestly not hard to believe that this could be the case, given how susceptible we seem to be in our own time to nationalist hokum.
My chief complaint is the way that, after a time, the chapters begin to reflect the old saying that history is just "one damned thing after another." While the previously mentioned Ottos are present throughout, we are introduced to dozens of other prominent Nazis/neo-Nazis/fascists who led various factions and organizations. Some of these, like Willis Carto, are pretty well known figures, but many I had never heard of are also discussed at length. After a while it becomes increasingly difficult to remember who is who exactly.
As I said, this isn't really what I imagined this book to be about. I thought it would be a more theoretical treatment of fascism generally, and would focus more on the phenomenon in America. Instead, it barely touches on any theoretical discussion of fascism, or the kind of politics that allow fascist movements to thrive. Like most of the men described in the book, it's concerned more with action and less with ideas. It's still a good resource and told me lots that I didn't know about this dark and little understood history.
It has an interesting reading of the way Germany was situated during the Cold War, formally allied with the West but also with a long history of relations with Russia. After the war, many Nazis were able to exploit the East-West tensions and leverage themselves into arrangements with either the U.S. or Soviet Union, who suddenly cared more about keeping tabs on each other than de-Nazification efforts in Germany. The fact, justified by realpolitik, that many Nazi war criminals were paid by U.S. intelligence services after the war remains shocking and disgraceful.
If the polling and statistics cited can be trusted, apparently there has been a relatively high percentage of the population of Germans that believe some version of "Hitler wasn't so bad, but he let things get out of hand" or that the Holocaust numbers have been inflated or that Germany itself was a sort-of victim in World War II. It's honestly not hard to believe that this could be the case, given how susceptible we seem to be in our own time to nationalist hokum.
My chief complaint is the way that, after a time, the chapters begin to reflect the old saying that history is just "one damned thing after another." While the previously mentioned Ottos are present throughout, we are introduced to dozens of other prominent Nazis/neo-Nazis/fascists who led various factions and organizations. Some of these, like Willis Carto, are pretty well known figures, but many I had never heard of are also discussed at length. After a while it becomes increasingly difficult to remember who is who exactly.
As I said, this isn't really what I imagined this book to be about. I thought it would be a more theoretical treatment of fascism generally, and would focus more on the phenomenon in America. Instead, it barely touches on any theoretical discussion of fascism, or the kind of politics that allow fascist movements to thrive. Like most of the men described in the book, it's concerned more with action and less with ideas. It's still a good resource and told me lots that I didn't know about this dark and little understood history.
August 17, 2024
Very interesting and shocking..... until I got to a part I know alot about because I was there in person.
The book claims the Ijzerbedevaart in Diksmuide, Belgium in '83 was a gathering to honor nazi soldiers who died in Belgium in WWII and was attended by over 10.000 neo-nazi's.
In reality it was a gathering to honor the Belgian soldiers who died fighting the nazi's and that year hundreds of neonazi's showed up trying to disturb and take over the gathering. 9.500 + attendants there were anything but neo-nazi's.
So if this 1 thing I do know alot about is pants on fire false, why would I believe the rest of the book is not?
I mean, the author even claims Ronald Reagan and Helmut Kohl are nazi-apologists and fascist.
The only value this book has is the long list of activist names spanning a 50 year time period.
Don't brother with the alarmist stories knitted around them by the author, inc the many hilariously hypocritical below-the-belt insults (too fat, skinny, tiny, ugly, feminine, bald, disabled....), but just look up their names on the internet instead.
The book claims the Ijzerbedevaart in Diksmuide, Belgium in '83 was a gathering to honor nazi soldiers who died in Belgium in WWII and was attended by over 10.000 neo-nazi's.
In reality it was a gathering to honor the Belgian soldiers who died fighting the nazi's and that year hundreds of neonazi's showed up trying to disturb and take over the gathering. 9.500 + attendants there were anything but neo-nazi's.
So if this 1 thing I do know alot about is pants on fire false, why would I believe the rest of the book is not?
I mean, the author even claims Ronald Reagan and Helmut Kohl are nazi-apologists and fascist.
The only value this book has is the long list of activist names spanning a 50 year time period.
Don't brother with the alarmist stories knitted around them by the author, inc the many hilariously hypocritical below-the-belt insults (too fat, skinny, tiny, ugly, feminine, bald, disabled....), but just look up their names on the internet instead.
December 17, 2024
Rounded up from 3 1/2. This book is pretty good, and gives a lot of detail about the nazi diaspora post-WW2 and how they retained power in west Germany. The one bad thing about the book is its almost total focus on Europe. I was hoping for more about Latin America, and there is a little bit about that and Egypt, but not nearly enough to make it a super engaging read for me.
April 6, 2020
What an eye-opening relevant novel that really lays out the constant festering of fascism. Thoroughly researched, interesting, and at times stranger than fiction. Get this immediately!
December 30, 2020
Vitally important reading for anyone wanting to understand the relationship between the post-WW2 world order, the United States, and fascism. This book radically reshaped my understanding of the current political climate on the right in both the US and Europe.
January 12, 2025
Good, not great. Worth reading, but could use more scope.
May 27, 2025
This book was published near the end of the last century, yet the situation seems the same as now, a resurgent far right, but why was it practically non existent for 10 to 15 years?
August 14, 2011
Alarmist in its assessment of its own time, and not very flattering to modern Germany, still a very interesting book about where everybody scuttled off to when the lights went out in Berlin 1945, and the frightening and strange characters who followed in their footsteps. Might be worth paging through in light of Breivik, whose manifesto sounded a bit familiar after reading this.
Read
December 19, 2007know thy enemy
January 23, 2008
Very enlightening and incredibly disturbing.
August 21, 2008
excellent...
February 20, 2016
reworks some of the ground in Loftus & Aarons, and in Simpson's Blowback. decent survey, nevertheless.
Want to read
May 2, 2017Wow! sooo depressing. But amazing so far.
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews