Best sociology of race relations books according to redditors

I highly recommend this book, to give you an idea of how the US has behaved in other sovereign countries history.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1783601779

> That being the case, one might assume that the American people would notice the pattern of intervention, see through the propaganda and assign blame accordingly. But that never seems to happen and...

The US government has aggressively overthrown the governments of many countries -- democratic and non-democratic alike, as author and former State Dept. historian William Blum has documented.

This behavior obviously flies in the face of the noble writings of the US founding fathers and our claim to respect governments "of the people, for the people and by the people." This is nothing more than raw imperialism on the part of the US.

The above is simply an "inconvenient truth."

My question is this: At what point should the people of the world stop talking about the crimes of "the US government" and when should the people of the planet start blaming the crimes of the US government directly on the American people? Is there a point at which we should blame the population of a country for the crimes of its government?

We often blame Hitler for everything evil act of the Nazis. We gloss over the fact that Hitler was elected into power and the German people went along with the crimes of the Nazis. I'm not saying the US government is as bad as the Nazi regime, but do Americans share in the guilt of the crimes committed by the US government?

It's a very dry read but there's a 1000 page CPA report that covers the entire occupation and what the US did after the invasion in mind-numbing detail, what went wrong and why. Let me see if I can find it, I wrote a low-level uni paper on it like a year or two ago. I think it was written by Paul Bremer but as I recall it was very frank about the mistakes that occured.

Edit: Here it is: https://books.google.se/books?id=OjM3DTks4ekC&pg=PA455&lpg=PA455&dq=coalition+provisional+authority+inspector+general+report+pdf&source=bl&ots=hSKJEkUytk&sig=ofhqub7tKjjNociRy8vg77vHwK4&hl=sv&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjesuKa86zSAhXB6CwKHbVpAsE4ChDoAQhIMAg#v=onepage&q&f=false

This report covers basically the entire occupation and thus the reason why IS exists, or at least exists as something more than just another Syrian Islamist opposition faction.

I haven't read any books about ISIS beyond that. If you want a book on politics/foreign affairs/the international system that covers
relevant concepts like power vacuums, states and so on, this book is the best textbook I've ever had in uni and it has pretty much everything: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Globalization-World-Politics-Introduction-International/dp/0198739850/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1488081222&sr=1-1

You missed the main point.

> It certainly doesn't deserve your assumption that NATO doesn't support Trump's decision.

NATO 100% supports this decision as the only reason that treaty(the one that was withdrawn from) exists is to protect NATO countries from medium range nukes. That treaty only served to hold back America's(the west's) development of intermediate nukes... not Russia's as they openly developed weapons banned by the treaty.

What are our options to keep the treaty? Threaten withdraw(which brings us closer to the end of the world via MAD, something no one wants), sanctions, threaten development of new weapons, and nuclear war are our options. Trump didn't give them "diplomatic cover", NATO countries and Democrats will be able and more than willing to sanction Russia after 2020 to further pressure Russia to rejoin the treaty which THEY already left/abandoned themselves.

Nukes serve as a deterrent and delivery systems alter the complex calculus of nuclear game theory, both only hold true if the enemy knows about them so it makes perfect sense to verbally communicate the development of new nukes.

You need to educate yourself on international relations, MAD, and the cold war because you are lacking a basic understanding of every single one of those concepts in favor of irrational partisan ASSUMPTIONS. Facts matter.

I should also point out

> They are never going to break ranks, and at no point will they admit to being weakened by the POTUS.

Numerous EU countries and NATO reps from them have openly came out against Trump going as far as saying America cannot be trusted to honor its NATO commitments. You are wrong about almost everything and confirmation biasing a narrative. Stop lying to yourself.

https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-International-Relations-Theories-Approaches/dp/019870755X

‘The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations’ (Oxford University Press) is excellent. It covers international relations theory, plus the global issues and changes facing world politics, effectively setting the stage for any deeper reading on geopolitics and international relations.

I’d also recommend iTunes U for introductory courses, plus podcasts and lectures (app of choice or YouTube) from academics. Plenty of good stuff out there for free to supplement reading.

The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations (Oxfo04) https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0198739850/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_4KysDb9BXX7A6

I'm far from an expert (or even particularly knowledgeable) on political philosophy but I highly recommend The Oxford Handbook of Political Philosophy for an overview of the important concepts of political philosophy. It has a bit of a focus on Rawls and Nozick, but covers pretty much all the other bases too.

Again hardly an expert on IR, but I found The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations to be an excellent intro textbook.

These aren't necessary 'neoliberal' books, but I would highly recommend them to anyone before wading through some of the classic primary sources on these topics. People might get a little bit lost in there otherwise.

The book is "Making American Foreign Policy in a new Era"

> No, deciding that US policy is world domination of both friend and foe is conspiracy theroy

The US has a long documented history of overthrowing the governments of our "allies" -- ask most people from Australia or New Zealand, for example. Or ask Saddam Hussein.

Heck, we even have a history of waging literal terrorist attacks on our allies, e.g. Operation Gladio, push our allies to the political right and to be more militaristic.

We've also overthrown dozens of countries, both democratic and non-democratic alike. Former State Dept. historian William Blum wrote a book on the topic, Killing Hope.

As to the cited quote about us taking over the world, that is one journalists opinion from reading Pentagon documents -- and our actions match his summary very, very well.

> "Our first objective is to prevent the reemergence of a new rival…to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power. These regions include Western Europe, East Asia, the territory of the former Soviet Union and southwest Asia." -- US Dept. of Defense Planning Guide, 1992, announcing its plan to dominate the world.

Of course Sanders is right but the CIA has been helping governments to kill dissidents all around the world since 1945.

Read [Killing Hope] (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Killing-Hope-Military-Interventions-since/dp/1783601779) by Robert Blum

You won't find better than Killing Hope by William Blum https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1783601779/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_awdb_t1_u.wUCbZFKPPTR

If America dies - the world wins. So simple.

>Tell me, if I were not an armed forces member what would change?

I don't know. Would you be a cop? We love hypotheticals.

>In reality nothing of course, I am not a very important person, but let's assume I were. Let's assume that by me not joining the US military, the US instantly becomes about as militarily powerful as Sweden.

That's a hell of a non sequitur...

>Who wins? Essentially fascist Russia,

Russia and China aren't imperialist countries in even remotely the same way the the US imposes its form of imperialism. The US is a hegemon, there are entire theories devoted to this - and there are non devoted to the idea of Russia, China, or any other country you can name - aside from the US. Why?

Here's a hint. https://s30.postimg.org/91mnxzz0h/wmb.png

Here's a book on the topic: https://www.amazon.com/Killing-Hope-Military-Interventions-Updated/dp/1783601779/

>Neither your ideology nor mine benefit.

Actually my ideology does benefit from the downfall of the prime predator nation. Communism is against predation.

>Elliot Abrams

OMG! You aren't kidding! A convicted monster returns for more blood. He helped fund the contras in Nicaragua. I'd invite the propagandists here to read William Blum's 'Killing Hope' so history does not repeat itself. To quote this serious history of the CIA p293...

People caught in these assaults were often tortured and killed in the most gruesome ways. One example, reported by The Guardian of London, suffices. In the words of a survivor of the raid in Jinotega province, which borders on Honduras:

Rosa had her breasts cut off. Then they cut into her chest and took out her heart. The men had their arms broken, their testicles cut off , and their eyes poked out. They were killed by slitting their throats and pulling the tongue out through the slit.

The Guardian, 15 Nov 1984

In November 1984, the Nicaraguan government announced that since 1981 the contras had assassinated 910 state officials and killed 8,000 citizens.

Israel is complicated, more than you seems to know.
On women rights and treatment: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_of_the_Wall

I'd suggest you to read this book for an unbiased description of the divisions within Israel and the Middle East:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Divided-Why-Were-Living-Walls/dp/1783963425/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1527082313&sr=8-1&keywords=divided

So in US you need gun for free speech? Last time I've checked free speech is not an issue in Europe and we do not have fire arms in our constitutions.

Mental health usually is not incur in hospitalisation either and as far as I know most if not all European countries closed down "mad houses".
The fact his that an unstable person in Europe very unlikely has the means to procure him/her self a gun.

If you have guns everywhere I understand you feel more safe if you have a gun as well... the point is that if NO ONE has a gun, you do not need a gun.
Heck... in Ireland the police is not armed! Only a special team within the police corp is armed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_firearm_use_by_country#Unarmed_police_forces

So... in Europe you countries where even the police is not armed... and you say school shooting are happening because there is not security protocols?

I believe americans knows they are wrong but they like to troll the world, it can be that you all are serious on this!

There is no security controls in schools in Europe what so ever and yet in US you had more school shooting since 2015 that in Europe since 1930!!!!

Source for US:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States#2015_to_present

Source for EU:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shooting#Europe