2 Reviews
|
5 star:
|
|
(0) |
|
4 star:
|
|
(1) |
|
3 star:
|
|
(1) |
|
2 star:
|
|
(0) |
|
1 star:
|
|
(0) |
| | | |
|
|
|
|
|
The most helpful favorable review
The most helpful critical review
15 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Agree to disagree
I think the previous reviewer just has an ax to grind about democratic peace theory in general. I do not agree in everything "Good Time Charlie" Lipson says, but I do think that his argument is solid, original, and worth a closer look.
Published on February 16, 2005 by John F. Daniel
|
 |
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Good theory but not a page turner
Lipson lays out a compelling argument for the contracting advantage of democracies leading to more peaceful relations among them. Contrary to a previous review, he does present good reasons why elected leaders can't just toss everything their predecessors did out the window (e.g. constitutional constraints, reciprocality, etc.) and explains that, even when they manage to,...
Published on March 12, 2005 by J. Schuler
|
|
|
Most Helpful First | Newest First
|
15 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Agree to disagree, February 16, 2005
This review is from: Reliable Partners: How Democracies Have Made a Separate Peace (Hardcover)
I think the previous reviewer just has an ax to grind about democratic peace theory in general. I do not agree in everything "Good Time Charlie" Lipson says, but I do think that his argument is solid, original, and worth a closer look.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Good theory but not a page turner, March 12, 2005
This review is from: Reliable Partners: How Democracies Have Made a Separate Peace (Hardcover)
Lipson lays out a compelling argument for the contracting advantage of democracies leading to more peaceful relations among them. Contrary to a previous review, he does present good reasons why elected leaders can't just toss everything their predecessors did out the window (e.g. constitutional constraints, reciprocality, etc.) and explains that, even when they manage to, the public debate has given other states fair warning to adjust policy. That said, the overall quality of the writing could have been a bit better, being on the dry, repetitive side, and he would have done well to get another proofreader. Just don't expect this to be one of those books you can't put down.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
|
|
|
Most Helpful First | Newest First
|
|
|