The Shield of Achilles | 
| Author: Philip Bobbitt
Publisher: Anchor
Category: Book
List Price: $19.95
Buy New: $11.19
You Save: $8.76 (44%)
New (19) Used (14) from $8.58
Avg. Customer Rating:  25 reviews
Sales Rank: 117944
Media: Paperback
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 960
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1.5
Dimensions (in): 8 x 5 x 1.7
ISBN: 0385721382
Dewey Decimal Number: 327
EAN: 9780385721387
ASIN: 0385721382
Publication Date: September 9, 2003
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Shipping: Expedited shipping available
Shipping: International shipping available
Condition: Brand new Item. CD, DVD, Book, VHS more than 400 000 titles to choose from. ALL days Low Price !
|
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Amazon.com
The scope of Philip Bobbitt's The Shield of Achilles is breathtaking: the interplay, over the last six centuries, among war, jurisprudence, and the reshaping of countries ("states," in Bobbitt's vocabulary). Bobbitt posits that certain wars should be deemed epochal--that is, seen as composed of many "smaller" wars. For example, according to Bobbitt the epochal war of the 20th century began in 1914 and ended with the collapse of communism in 1990. These military affairs--and their subsequent "ultimate" peace agreements--have caused, each in their own way, revolutionary reconstructions of the idea and actuality of statehood and, following, of relationships between these various new entities. Of these reconstructions (including the princely state, the kingly state, and the nation-state), Bobbitt is most interested in the current incarnation, which he calls the market-state: one whose borders are scuffed and hazy at best (certainly compared to earlier territorial markers) and whose strengths, weaknesses, citizens, and enemies roam across cyberspace rather than plains and valleys. The Shield of Achilles is massive, erudite, and demanding--at once highly abstract and extremely detailed. There is about it an air of detached erudition, one noticeably free of the easy "decline and fall" hysteria too often present in contemporary historical analyses. --H. O'Billovich
Product Description
For five centuries, the State has evolved according to epoch-making cycles of war and peace. But now our world has changed irrevocably. What faces us in this era of fear and uncertainty? How do we protect ourselves against war machines that can penetrate the defenses of any state? Visionary and prophetic, The Shield of Achilles looks back at history, at the “Long War” of 1914-1990, and at the future: the death of the nation-state and the birth of a new kind of conflict without precedent.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 20 more reviews...
 Outstanding Intellectual Contribution April 27, 2008
Ground breaking, this is a work of extraordinary work, carefully written and documented in an impeccable manner. I believe Professor Bobbitt began work on this book around 1993 and finished a few weeks after 9-11. So it was done with considerable thought. It is careful and deliberate scholarship...how often do you hear that today?
I have both the paperback and the hard copy. The hard copy is for my library. I use the paperback as a source book to outline and make written comments(which holds up pretty well). So this thick paperback is rather battle scared. If you are an academic, policy theorists, or someone who works in and around global policy you will appreciate the footnotes. Call me oldfashioned, but the number and quality of citations speaks a great deal about the author.
It is a brilliant on a number of levels: political theory, history, law, economics, and a touch of sociology. As the title suggests, it does, indeed, chart the course of history....describing the context for today's emerging global society.
This work has immensely practical implications for those interested in transnational threats. The first three goals of good science are exquisitely accomplished - those of description, explanation, and prediction. As to the final goal - prescription - that is accomplished through various scenarios. And, I believe, done in a more than satisfactory manner.
I do, however, have an issue. And it's not with Bobbitt. I have consistently seen Bobbitt's ideas and theories elsewhere, emerging several years after the release of Achilles in works dealing with globalization, "the next stage of terrorism" etc. If Bobbitt is mentioned, it is in passing; and he is never given full intellectual credit as his work is expropriated in a shameless manner.
Read Achilles. It is stimulating and provocative. It has longevity. You will revisit it on an ongoing basis.
A frighteningly insightful explanation of a frighteningly complex topic October 14, 2007
5 out of 6 found this review helpful
Philip Bobbitt is a constitutional law professor. Having gone to law school and a few dozen legal textbooks along the way, I felt right at "home" trudging through this beast of a book. It's a difficult read, there is no doubt.
For the person considering reading this book: be warned. This is not lowest common denominator drivel or faddish revisionist history. It is not sensationally written, nor is it even pleasant at times. But this book is way too cerebral to simply be called pedantic. It is crafted like a contract is carefully crafted. It is precise, thorough, and, if you can get going with the scholarly vocab and prose, riveting.
What this book is is a masterwork on the nature of the state -- what is is, how it functions and thrives, and how it dies. Bobbitt takes you through the history of the modern state since its beginnings in the Renaissance in Italy with the "princely state," how its bases of legitimacy have changed, and how law, history, and strategy have, and do mutually influence and shape each other, and the successfully innovative state along with them. The end is a look at "possible futures," three hypothetical approaches (most, there are no absolutes) states will take in their metamorphoses into market-states, mirroring the three approaches that fascism, parliamentarianism, and communism were to the nation-state. It pretty much predicts a lot of things becoming relevant to us only as mere glimmers on the horizon, such as whether we will choose to integrate the economies of Canada, the US, and Mexico, with a common currency, and also strategic issues, such as positing that the market-state, with its ostensible abandonment of society-wide total wars where entire populations fight other entire populations such as with the end of the "Long War" (basically the name of the wars of 1914-1990 as one continuous conflict of what form of nation-state would be triumphant, a central theme of the book), will find its elite states in those that most quickly eschew giant military infrastructure of tanks and aircraft carriers for resistance against, for example, information system and biological weapons attacks.
In a nutshell, this is a book that tells you how the world works, at least through one very qualified lens. The book leads up to, as Bobbitt maintains, the present, where we are transitioning to a new form of the state, the "market-state" (the US began as a "state-nation," was transformed into one of the earliest "nation-states" by the Civil War and the resulting 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution), with, as each state form before it, though they are contiguous and continuous, radically different bases of legitimacy, threats, and advantages.
Along the way, I got a giant dose of actual, factual history, like about the wars of the Balkans, which I didn't know much about, the real reason we entered World War I, which I always wondered about, and, interestingly, even cutting-edge political prognostication, foretelling stuff like the North American Union the US is in the process of entering right now. There was even the "Kitty Genovese Incident" that is a law school staple in criminal law classes being used as an incredibly apt metaphor for the paralysis of action leading to the slaughters in the former Yugoslav states. And it's all in there specifically to show you how the state functions and how it and history, law, and strategy transform each other.
If you don't want to be a know-nothing about history, you'd better read this book. Also, if you don't like it, please don't write a review that looks like you stopped to look in a thesaurus every five seconds. Philip Bobbitt will always be smarter than you, sorry. I'm not sure I like what he either predicts by his genius, or perhaps simply repeats from his inside view of the State Department and Council on Foreign Relations (I guess it's both), but the simple fact is this is one of the most scholarly, and easily the most insightful, book I have ever read. A banal description of evil? Perhaps. Indispensable? Also yes. It's right up there with "The Prince," though obviously not as uh, "concise," since, you know, "The Prince" is about 90 pages and this is about 820 pages.
 The mountains heave in childbirth .... May 19, 2006
11 out of 54 found this review helpful
.... and a little mouse is born. A flaccid bladder of utter banality inflated by the hot air of middle-brow legalism and obscurantist prose. No exploration of any depth or detail is carried out of the disruption wrought by a market-dependent way of life on the ecological, anthropological, cultural, social, political and psychological fibres that hold together the world's various societies, or on the fragility and volatility of the global market itself, which, of course, is portrayed as a fait accompli. Thus there is simply no contextual platform for the author's analysis, and, despite the standard air of portent, no clear picture of what law and militarism can or might actually do in the near future, and we are left non the wiser about what the course of history might actually BE. This work is fairly indicative of the mainstream American understanding of history; my advice is that they take a break from making it, or we are all in big trouble.
A Unique New Analysis of International Relations April 12, 2006
17 out of 18 found this review helpful
Phillip Bobbitt has created something very rare in the realm of International Relations: an entirely unique new idea. For those students of history and current events who have grown accustomed to the accepted world views: Realism, Idealism - internationalism vs. isolationism; this new entry will provide a welcome and refreshing perspective.
Rather than defining international politics in the typical framework of the "balance of power", or that of a "bipolar" or "mulitpolar" world, Bobbitt has completely redefined the course of history with his thesis. He states the modern state has evolved through the course of history and taken many different forms, based on the demands and interplay (or history) of Strategy and Constitutional development.
These various forms of the state have had differing expectations demanded from their populaces, and differing relationships amongst themselves at the international level. Based on a field relationship between Strategy and Constitutionalism, different forms of the state have proven dominant at different periods of time. Developments in one arena will create new trends in another- and the interplay is constant. Currently Bobbitt makes the case that the current incarnation of the modern state, the Nation-State, is giving way to a new form which he has named the Market-State.
Bobbitt backs up his arguments well with an historical analysis of the modern state ranging from the Machiavellian Princely-State to the wars of the Nation-States and beyond. The entire book is very well documented with Primary and Secondary sources, which are indexed and included in a comprehensive bibliography.
There is also a very interesting section written on the "Possible Worlds" of tomorrow based on the ground rules laid down throughout the book. So Bobbitt not only comments on our past and present, but continues with speculation and predictions on the near term future. This gives the "Shield" very well rounded experience for its contemporary reader. What will be interesting is if this section stands the test of time. I also hope that Mr. Bobbitt comments on his theses in future editions and expands this particular section as history progresses.
The book is Mammoth, and would require a mammoth review to do it justice. So at the expense of thoroughness, and to save you a few minutes I will say this: "The Shield of Achilles" is a long read well worth your time and its arguments should be considered by any students or participants in the field of International Relations.
Complex Interaction of War and Peace in Modeling States May 16, 2005
48 out of 49 found this review helpful
In "The Shield of Achilles," Philip Bobbitt has realized an impressive tour de force in studying in great detail the intimate interaction of law, strategy and history between 1494 and the contemporary era. Bobbitt correctly points out that there is no state without law, strategy and history because they complement and influence one another (p. 6). There can be a state only when the governing institutions of a society have an acknowledged monopoly on the legitimate use of violence at home (law) and abroad (strategy). History relates the account of the stewardship of a society over time that in turns influences law and strategy. Contrary to the conventional wisdom, Bobbitt convincingly shows that the history of the Modern State did not begin at Westphalia in 1648, but in the North of Modern Italy in 1494 (p. 805).
Bobbitt clearly demonstrates that the Modern State was put together when it proved necessary to create a constitutional order that could wage war more efficiently than the feudal and mercantile orders it replaced (p. xxv). Bobbitt spends most of his time covering the pattern of epochal wars and state formation, of peace congresses and international constitutions in Europe. The Modern State was indeed born and went through successive mutations in Europe before spreading to the rest of the world. Bobbitt gives his readers a nice pictorial representation of the six constitutional conventions of the international society of states at the end of Book I dedicated to the State of War (pp. 346-347). Book II focuses on the States of Peace.
To his credit, Bobbitt does not reduce war to a pathology that could one day be eradicated totally. War is as inevitable as death because the Modern State aims to be as efficient as possible to wage war when the opportunity arises to maximize its chance of survival and prosperity (pp. xxvii, 819). Contrary to the popular wisdom, Bobbitt rightly construes war not as the result of a decision made by an aggressor, but as the reaction of a state which cannot acquiesce to the legal and strategic demands of the aggressor (p. 8). Operation Iraqi Freedom is one of the most recent applications of this recurring observation.
Bobbitt also makes an interesting comparison between the assassination of Kitty Genovese occurring in New York in 1964 in the presence of multiple passive witnesses and the wide indifference of the international community to the plight of Bosnia for years in the early 1990s (pp. 411-467). The international community will find in this chapter a well-articulated argumentation for doing little or nothing in the naive or vain hope that such problems as the on-going genocide against certain groups of population in Darfur, Sudan will disappear as if by magic.
Furthermore, Bobbitt rightly draws the attention of his audience to the importance of the Peace of Paris of 1990 that ended what he called the Long War starting in 1914 (pp. 24-64, 609-663). The Peace of Paris celebrated the triumph of the parliamentary democracy as the winning nation-state model at the successive expense of fascism and communism. Bobbitt is probably at his weakest when he launches himself in scenario analysis about the future of the three competing constitutional forms of the market-state that is taking the place of the nation-state (pp. 717, 728). The international society of states has indeed the choice among the entrepreneurial market-state (e.g., the U.S.), the mercantile market-state (e.g., Japan and China) and the managerial market-state (e.g., the European Union) (pp. 670-676). Each incarnation of the market-state has its pros and cons.
As Bobbitt points out elsewhere in his book, Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda could be considered a fourth, malevolent version of the market-state that is a common threat to the other three versions (p. 820). For the first time since the birth of the Modern State, a state structure is no longer necessary to constitute a lethal threat to a society (p. 806). The market-states will have to cooperate with one another for example to contain WMD proliferation, cyber-terrorism against their critical infrastructure, which is increasingly privatized and internationalized, or environmental threats to the planet (pp. 785-797, 800, 806).
Bobbitt states that there is no certainty that the first three constitutional forms of the market-state can coexist peacefully (p. 781). Bobbitt enumerates the ten constitutional conditions that will facilitate the peaceful coexistence of market states (p. 802). Unlike the three constitutional forms of the Nation-State, i.e., parliamentary democracy, communism and fascism, the three constitutional forms of the Market-State could coexist peacefully in the long run. The members of the European Union will probably stick to their managerial model of the market-state because Europe was the theater of the bloody development of a highly competitive society of states for centuries. As the leading entrepreneurial market-state, the United States will remain the champion of globalization and push for the further opening of regional trading blocks and mercantile market states in the foreseeable future.
The greatest source of instability besides terrorism and rogue nations could eventually come from some mercantile market-states such as China and Russia. These two states have not yet fully embraced the tenets of Liberalism and are not satisfied with their military position in the world as Michael Mandelbaum correctly points out in "The Ideas that Conquered the World." In all scenarios, the United States will have to bear a disproportionate burden towards the maintenance of the society of market-states as long as it has the willingness and capability to assume its leadership role (p. 803).
To summarize, "The Shield of Achilles" clearly does not target readers who have a short attention span, do not acknowledge the importance of the past to peruse the future, lack persistence, or are interested in simplistic answers to complex issues.
|
|
|
