Customer Reviews

Understanding the Political World: A Comparative Introduction to Political Science (9th Edition)

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

In his book, Danziger does an excellent job in portraying the political world. One might argue that this is essentially what any other book on political science would do, and this true. However, Danziger manages to apply his own personal style to the work. His explanations are clear, and to the point. One of the major features of the book are the "boxes" that appear every so often. These usually contain real life issues, or historical events that demonstrate what is trying to be taught. All in all, James N. Danziger's book is an informative, and well text on the political science.

"Understanding the Political World" is a great reference for those who are new to the political genre. It does well to highlight the major characteristics of political structures and its relation/attachment to economy types.

i think this book is awesome. I love the study cases/debates in it. I used it for my university course.

This is such a great book. i do recommend it.

This is a great book for anybody interested in an unbiased, fact-based introduction to the field of politics. Danziger does a particularly good job at highlighting the controversial issues that pervade modern politics (welfare, interventionism, etc.) without attempting to steer the opinion of the reader in either direction.

This is a really well written book that does a great job of explaining how political scientists try to make sense out of politics. It is full of interesting stories and examples, offers understandable explanations of major concepts, and it connects the reader to many of the current events in the world.

Great looking book. Looked brand new, no tears anything. It was way cheaper to buy it here than to buy it from the book store.

This was ordered as the tenth edition for a summer class. When it arrived the book was a 8th edition which was vastly different and affected my ability to perform as well in the class.

Extremely fast shipping (got it the next day after I ordered). Excellent Condition and very reasonable price. Thank you very much (you saved me $30 - from my school's book store price).

The book came in great condition, just as the seller claimed and I received it on time. Very satisfied.

Though this text is generally fair in its educational value, but some facets of it make it completely unsuitable for the courses which it is designed for.

The portions dealing with socialism and communism ruin the credibility of the author. When describing socialism, Danziger defines socialism as a system of government where "the most important goal is to provide high-quality, relatively equal conditions of life for everyone, with an active state assisting in the achievement of this goal"(16)

Though this is an adequate definition for a non-honors level 10th grade history class, it is a dreadful and unacceptable error for a college or university course.

It would seem that the author has never met a socialist, read a socialist work, or even read an encyclopedia article on socialism. A more accurate definition of socialism can be found in the 1989 edition of the "World Book Encyclopedia", which defines socialism as a system of government where "national or local governments, rather than individuals... own a nation's resources and control their use"(560). For those of you whom do not own an encyclopedia, one can find the same definition on the notorious Wikipedia.

The same holds true for the definition of communism, which Danziger lists as a variant of socialism. "Marxist-Leninist socialism is a vairiant of socialist ideology.... These variations are often called communism, Marxism, or revolutionary socialism, as well as Marxist-Leninist socialism."

Anybody with any knowledge of Communism will easily recognize how wrong this definition is. Communism as a social system is not a variant of socialism, as Communism is a state of human society WITH NO STATE. In addition, Marxism is not a social system, but rather a method of viewing the political world. Revolutionary socialism does not have the same anthropological basis as Marx's Communist theory, and Leninism is a variant on Communist dialectic materialism. Any student of western history or even anybody who has read the Communist Manifesto, a short and concise piece of literature that any political scientist should be familiar with, should be able to recognize this blatant error.

By begining the book with such large errors, the ethos of Danziger is fully destroyed. The trustworthiness of Danziger's text should be in full question, as such errors beg such questions as why he did not consult basic resources for a subject matter he obviously was unsure about, and what other inaccuracies are present in the book.