Films Books and More - About Anthony Mrugacz

Films Books and More – Anthony Mrugacz Reviews

More than just a thumbs up or down. Have something that one would like reviewed? Contact me.

FILMS

13 Days
Fahrenheit 9/11
A Clockwork Orange
Emperor’s Club
Primary Colors

MISCELLANEOUS

BOOKS

The Polish Underground State
Piggy, Foxy, & Sword of Revolution
One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich
The End of the American Era
Redneck Nation

“Hey, hey, hey. What ya got to say?. I said hey, hey, hey . What ya got to say?” Kool and the Gang

Anthony Mrugacz riding a cycle in Phnom Penh, Cambodia.

When I am not busy riding a cyclo in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, my efforts are towards analyzing and writing reviews for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Films, Books and More – Anthony Mrugacz Reviews Webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique websiteby a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year.

Last revision: October 14th, 2024.

Film: 13 Days (PG-13) – Films, Books and More – Anthony Mrugacz Reviews

The experience I had in viewing commands me not to review the film (rehash) nor re-explain history (boring), I would prefer to voice my insight and observations to the historical drama. A different approach was used, I viewed the film, listened to just the audio, and finally read the script. Though this was in reverse of it’s production, it increased the impact on my understanding of the climate in which the events took place. The knowledge I obtained from the film was of personal interest to me as I was alive but a mere three years old. What I find amazing is that in the continuing decade, more worldwide political and cultural events unfolding shaping the world for the next millennium. This may unfortunately down play the historical importance of this peak period of conflict during the Cold War. Be they obvious or insightful, here is my analysis of 13 Years.

Let’s look at a few peculiarities in the movie:

Protest scene: It seemed contrived, did Americans really protest the government’s actions during this crisis? Various Internet searches returned nothing. Maybe the 60’s protest era was blurred and retrograded to enhance the film.
Russian accents: Having grown up in a Slavic Community and in my second semester of Russian, I can say the accents were very authentic. Not at all like Sean Connery as a Soviet submarine commander in, “The Hunt for Red October”.
Fallout shelter: Such strange placement of the nuclear fallout shelter sign through the doorway of the White House’s Operators’ Switchboard Room. Growing up in the North it seemed every public building had these signs on the outside of a building. Placed for effect?
Russian Transport Ship Names: The ships that ran / slipped through the US Navy’s blockade were correctly named. Odd as it seems, two ships mentioned by name are listed below with their Russian equivalents and English translations. Gromyko- громкий loudGroznyy- грозный fearsome, redoubtable, formidable
News Broadcasts: The venerable Walter Cronkite appears but sadly Russian Newscasts are only viewed at the film’s end. I demand a remake of the movie. Maybe the FOX NEWS Network will back it. There new slogan is “Fair and Balanced” reporting. Let’s get the Soviets view in there!
Soviet: It comes from the word advice. The importance of this? The film mentions that possibly Khrushchev was answering to and in conflict with the Supreme Party Committee. It an important factor when the President and his Staff decided to go through back channels to communicate effectively.

The script attempts to mention Khrushchev’s vantage point and problems during the crisis. What in the world were the Soviets up to and why did they proceed as they did? I uncovered some information from the Internet that sheds some light on this:

The following is reprinted from this website: http://www.ferrum.edu/lwhited/honors100/MISSILE.HTM

Khrushchev’s Plan

By early 1962 Moscow had come to the view that while Kennedy was not likely to authorize an invasion of Cuba, he was impatient with the situations. The KGB reported, quite accurately, on the CIA¹s preoccupation with intelligence gathering and sabotage and suspected, again accurately, that the Americans were banking on the economic pressure on Cuba to spark some sort of uprising. This did not point to anything specific, but Khrushchev was now anxious on Cuba¹s behalf. So far the Soviet Union had only responded positively to Castro¹s post-Bay of Pigs requests for assistance. Perhaps they should do more?

The first decision, taken in April, was to meet Cuban demands for air defenses. On 12 April the Soviet Presidium approved delivery of 180 SA-2 missiles to Cuba, plus a battery of cruise missiles intended for coastal defense, prudent precautions against an invasion. In May Khrushchev began to develop the thought that he might usefully send nuclear weapons as well. He had the safety of Cuba in mind, but this was now bound up with the international position of the Soviet Union and the rather irritating state of the strategic balance.¹ At the time the Russians had twenty ICBMs, feeble compared with the burgeoning American arsenal. The United States had‹on 25 April‹just started an atmospheric nuclear testing program in the Pacific. Ad additional Soviet force in Cuba would be a great leap forward in closing the gap, and there were plenty of spare medium-range missiles. Putting missiles into Cuba would add significantly to the Soviet threat to the United States while complicating any American first-strike plans. The Strategic Rocket Forces, assigned responsibility for the deployment in Cuba, had little knowledge of the Caribbean but a keen sense of the strategic balance.

The plan was to deploy forty land-based ballistic missile launchers and sixty missiles in five missile regiments. This was to be accompanied by a full-sized group of Soviet forces, more than 45,000 strong, with four motorized rifle regiments (and more than 250 armored fighting vehicles), a wing of the latest Soviet fighter aircraft (the MiG-21), about eighty nuclear-capable cruise missiles for coastal defense, and a regiment of forty-two Il-28 aircraft. A submarine base with an initial deployment of eleven submarines, of which seven would have carried submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), was also planned. The medium-range missile, known in the West as the SS-4, had a 1,000-mile range, a megaton warhead, and some mobility, in that they could be moved to new sites if necessary. The 2,000-mile-range SS-5 intermediate-range ballistic missiles (IRBMs) required a more permanent construction if they were to be launched. The idea was to get them in before the November congressional elections but announce them afterward. Having been advised by the military that deception could be achieved, secrecy was the key to Khrushchev¹s plan.² In the light of the minimal measures taken to conceal the deliveries, he should not have been so confident.

Stepping back two decades early we know that both Super powers were burned, the USA by Japan and Russia by the Germany respectively. So you have two victorious and suspicious powers playing chess. The film states: “Russian understand action”, mind you they were caught sleeping by Nazi’s after carving up Poland.. What do the Americans understand? The film never touches the theory of American Democracy in crisis/action. The conflict between the hawks and the White House is portrayed simply as “Good Cop, Bad Cop”. It surely portrays Soviet policy and shows no insight to their internal function. The entire movie revolves around internal US Policy and Government conflicts. How interesting would it have been to go into the minds of the opponents! Maybe the movie was more about promoting American values or glorifying the Kennedys. In my honest opinion the movie would have been much more intellectual and a timeless piece of art had the Soviet internal turmoil been portrayed.

There was mention of a “New form of communication”. Bollocks! It seemed so contrived. Did the movie mention the new “super” atomic weapon the Soviets tested during this international political crisis? Nay! Khrushchev authorized the test of a mega-atomic weapon during these “13 Days” and there was no mention of it in the movie. The Soviets exploded a scaled down version of a new-mega weapon and the movie portrays the American test as the straw that almost broke the camel’s back

I could close with pages and pages of comparison between the threat of mass destruction and the current administration politically use of the threat of mass destruction. I would rather close with my personal response to the movie which was inspiration. Though I found the movie could have obtained greater heights, I understand that box office sales are the evil twin of producing the truth as art. The film, 13 Years, gave me an inspirational starting point for my own research into details of the historical and political events of which I had previously only a rose colored standard American view of the Cold War.

“The sun came up today.”

My efforts are towards analyzing and writing reviews for you, the people of Earth, to read and explore on this Films Books and More – Anthony Mrugacz Reviews Webpage. One may continue enjoying this website’s efforts by receiving free updates by subscibing here. Additionally, sponsoring this unique website by a donation is also very affordable at less than ten dollars ($10.00) a year for continued operation of these spectacular Films Books and More – Anthony Mrugacz Reviews .

Film: Farenheit 911 – Films Books and More – Anthony Mrugacz Reviews

My second viewing of Michael Moore’s docu-drama added clarity and confusion to my understanding of the Second Iraq War.. Using the guidelines for the “Steps to War”, I viewed the Bush Administration’s current policies out of alignment with the theory. Had the US- led invasion not occurred I wonder what direction the film would have taken if the UN had acted with force. My analysis using the steps to war theory shows the actions taken outside the norms of international behavior and leads to a realization that new norm of pre-emptive strikes will lead to increased use of hostility to resolve conflicts.

Territorial Issue
The dispute before the war over territory was non existent. The new “norm” was the doctrine of balancing power by implanting democracy into the minds of Iraqis. The film’s version has the USA using decapitation in performing this operation.

Handling These Issues in a Power Politics Fashion
Michael Moore portrays the Bush Administration as hardliners and the Senate as uncaring and unable to stand up as a check in the balance system. It seemed that the accommodationalists in our Federal Government and the UN were just an annoyances and their attempts at settlement were ignored.

Alliance Making
Our pre-war Alliances are portrayed as business associates instead of allies chosen over values of a democratic system. The films shows the Alliances formed for the war as beneficiaries of the USA.

Military Buildups
The mobilization of American Forces was displayed as the draining of American lives as the lower classes and reservists filled the ranks in this “patriotic” cause. The Devil’s Dictionary definition of Patriotism seems appropriate here, “Combustible rubbish ready to the torch any one ambitious to illuminate his name”. The Iraqi Military Buildup was the threat of WMD and the viewpoint of US hardliners of that threat. Pre-war norms were not based elimination of WMD.

Hardliners
This term could have been used to describe the “cast” of the Bush Administration. Their roles were depicted as such and the star of the show seemed to act as a puppet. Any accommodationalist behavior on the role of the Bush administration was gently ironed out.

Rivalry
The normal definition was and was not met. Since we were supporting the Iraqis against Iran does this not make it a long-term rival? On the other hand we were having continual confrontations with sanctions and no-fly zones. Mr. Moore had George W. Bush as a bully ready to avenge and American Values as the rival contender to the Iraqi Dictatorship that threatened us.

In conclusion the Steps to War theory was portrayed as the Steps to Fear. Not much was shown in the effectiveness of any international concert. A new theory may have to be developed for this century on the “Steps to Pre-emptive Strikes” or the “Go ahead, make my day” syndrome that may be the new standard in international power politics. The film does allow a quick rewriting of the Assumption of War to fit the Pre-emptive model:
1. War is taught.
2. War comes out of long term business plan.
3. War is product of deception.
4. War is way of making decisions for others.
5. War is multi-justifiable.
6. There is one type of war.

Novel: A Clockwork Orange by Anthony Burgess (Br.) 1963 179 pages

Film: A Clockwork Orange by Stanley Kubrick (Am.) 1971 137 minutes (originally rated X)

Films Books and More – Anthony Mrugacz Reviews

In comparing different aspects of the film and novel, first let us look at the control of time. The film, while covering the novel’s entire time frame, was limited to what the typical audience would enjoy and tolerate. My reading experience however controlled time with the peaks and valleys of my interest and two sittings finished the book. There was much descriptive 1^st-person narration left out of the film version leaving out potential pathos.

The pathetic situations had different affects on me. While reading I had a deeper sense of understanding hence more sympathy for the narrator. In the film I felt isolated from his experiences of violence and pleasure. Pathos was definitely stronger in the novel as the author created a realistic predicament for a troubled youth and the film seemed more like shocking entertainment than real life. The political setting in the novel was more prominent and that increased the believability of the narrator’s experience.

Upon seeing the film twenty years ago I did not have knowledge of why slang language was used so I thought nothing of it. Looking back at the time period when it was written right in the middle of the Cold War, I now see how creative and realistic the use of dialogue was in the novel. A majority of the slang was Russian and in 1963 the thought of a Western society’s youth using it seems quite subversive. I had the added pleasure of currently enrolled in a Russian language class and all the slang came to life in the novel. In the film it was more of an annoyance. Here’s an example of the dialogue with English / Russian equivalents:

“…there was no law yet against prodding some of the new veshches (things / вещи) which they used to put into the old moloko (milk / молоко) , so you could peet (drink / пит ) it…”

My conclusion comparing Clockwork Orange’s film and novel versions is the novel uses many elements of a novel’s definition to give a sense of experience the story. The film on the other hand was too “Hollywood” and sends the film more off into the realm of science fiction.

Film: Emperor’s Club – Films Books and More – Anthony Mrugacz Reviews

My impression of the Emperor’s Club is that it reinforced the importance of decisions and their consequences in life. The irony is that each character lived and acted as if they were all on different roads. The antagonist, Sedgewick, seemed so determined to avoid being molded in his father’s image that he came full circle to fit neatly in that role. It was as if the great Greek and Roman philosophers lining the walls of the classroom had their turn at being the ancient gods and watching his fate. It may have been easy to lose heart while watching this film as we witnessed the anti-student become so materially successful and morally deceitful. I took great heed in the words of Professor Hundert early on when he told a student, “All roads lead to Rome”. That could be a brief way to sum up the final scene when Professor Hundert confronted Sedgewick and told him the truth about moral character and destiny’s final say in the matter. The movie actually picked up my spirits and gave enlightenment to passed decisions I have made to go against the grain based on my personal standards. Or am I confusing my personal stubbornness attempting to justify moral character.

EVENT: ACLU Banned Books – Films Books and More – Anthony Mrugacz Reviews

This event at Book people caught my eye as a great way to have fun with my girlfriend, who has a Masters Degree in Political Science, and work on completing some of my community assignments for class. We dressed casual, arrived on-time, and were quite eager to see what would happen. The event sponsored by the ACLU was better than I expected as I witnessed four authors emotionally charged from their individual readings. All the books they read aloud to us were banned by different school districts throughout the state of Texas. A booklet was available for ten dollars that gave a complete list of books currently banned from Texas schools.

The authors who read from their favorite books were: Bill Minutaglio- Grapes of Wrath, Turk Pipkin – Farenheit 451, Elizabeth O’Brien – Hamshire, and Sherri Scarborough – The Giving Tree. Each author not only read but shared with us their connection with the books, when they first read it, how it affected them, then a small comment on the absurdity of the book’s banishment. All left the podium almost in tears, leaving a deep impact on me. Having recently returned to school full-time after a two decade absence, I needed to surround myself with positive influences. Afterwards we became lost in the maze of books like kids in a candy store. We both were glad to have gone.

BOOK: The Polish Underground State: A Guide to the Underground 1939-1945 Author: Stefan Korbonski

Films Books and More – Anthony Mrugacz Reviews

Second World War, two words stand out, victory and propaganda. History is written by the victors, the details by the survivors. Stefan Korbonski’s book on his experience in leading the Polish Civil Resistance to the Nazi Occupation during WWII is a fascinating story of a government, though underground, was totally functional. A native Pole born in 1903, he fought in survived in many unknown wars and uprisings in Poland up to and including WWII. After escaping the Soviets early in the war, he returned to Varshava (Warsaw) to lead the Underground State. He eventually fled to the US in 1947 due anticommunist stance and threat of arrest. And what of the above mentioned propaganda? All mention of the start of WWII tells of Poland’s defeat in a month and not much else until Soviet Liberation. Korbonski’s book details the Polish People struggle against 6 years of Nazi Occupation, the struggle for a valid and solidifying government structure during those times, and well as internal political conflicts within the Polish Underground State.

A unique aspect of the book describes the Polish Government in Exile and Polish Underground in Varshava. Not only were there internal squabbles over policy decisions on how to fight the war, but also on post war Poland. The different political power struggles for Poland carried deeply into the War. Very different than out two party based middle class societies, pre-war Poland was post WWI Poland too. A heavy influence from communist, peasant, and other parties did not allow for a dominating political rallying point. This can also be seen in the current Iraq. Not only were the conflicts internal but also who was really the legitimate government for Poland? The escaped government officials who were leading during this disaster or the factions remaining on the ground actually ruling the country directly. All this takes place mind you during a war and it makes for an amazing tale as plans and tactics change. The outside political powers of the West and Soviets came into play, as any aid to the Poles was given in order to help determine which way post-war Poland would align.

Most remarkable was the Poles adherence to justice during this time. Crimes against the Poles committed by Nazis were not retaliated against immediately. Two important items were examined; first a trial was held and documented before taking action on these crimes. Secondly the backlash against the population had to be considered. Some Poles that collaborated with the Nazis were often spared if they felt they could be rehabilitated after the war. Often one had to work in a Nazi munitions factory in order to feed his family. Therefore a Polish Citizen would be spared the collaboration charges. Their view was that necessary collaboration supplied money, food, ammunition, and even more chance for sabotage. Often German Industries were kept in tacked as potential long-term advantages were always weighed.

As we see in modern Iraq, a successful military campaign is only half the battle. In occupied Poland, the Germans established a regional government. No all Germans were hard core Nazi fanatics and the book details of many examples of positive interactions between the Poles and Germans in regards to the Polish populace. Numerous examples abound of the attempts to govern the people were met with humorous Polish propaganda twisting the German Provisional Governments decrees. One mistake made by the Germans is the Poles idea of central government. Often the Germans played by their rules. One is the belief in a strong trusty worthy central government. Slavic thinking doubts central authority. So a Germanic ways were not that effective in governing the Poles. The resistance movement took full advantage of the Germans inflexible way of thinking. In one example women started cutting their hair short and dressing more and acting more masculine while soldiers would hide among the populace by limping. Note the women played an equal part in this struggle as throughout history the Poles say the fired the weapons and their women reloaded them.

Being deprived of their citizenship and all its benefits did not deter the Poles. Universities, hospitals, communication facilities, churches, judicial courts, and even theatres remained open. The Nazis have looked around and seen that they were on their way to successfully subject gating Poland but were in fact it was surviving quite well. Later in the century this would again appear as the Poles used the Catholic church system as a means of communication in organizing civil disobedience against the Soviets.

The book is history and is not an easy read. The story of a complex struggle in an ancient culture with difficult to pronounce geographic names. If one is to fully comprehend it I would suggest having a map of Poland and a firm belief in democracy is worth the struggle. I was lucky enough to visit Poland in 1998 and rather than be a tourist I followed many a road that was noted in this book. On important lesson I learned and experienced from my Polish brethren was tolerance. I was so inflamed after reading this book I was beyond anti-German. Returning to my family village was fueled this anger further as I learned that all the graves of my ancestors were bulldozed over and the civil records dumped in the river. It’s odd to stand on a small bridge over a body of water that bears your great-grandparents surname only to know that those waters washed away all documentation of your family history. Not much reward after a 5,000-mile journey. Much is mentioned of the death camps in Oswiecim (Auschwitz) but it had little effect on me as compared to Pawiak (pah-VEE’-ak) Prison in Varshava (Warsaw). At this location the SS tortured and imprisoned Polish Resistance Members. On the memorial wall there I found a one of my family surnames etched. There is a detailed chapter on the Warsaw Uprising on August 1^st 1944. When I strolled through the city streets that morning there was an eerie silence as ever single building was being adorned with a Polish flag.

The Poles however seemed to be now the least bit anti-German. Everywhere in Poland you will find plaques in locations were patriots died resisting the Nazis. No one plaque is inscribed with the word German or Germany, only Nazi. It was something I needed to learn myself about emotions, politics, and higher thought. A book / movie that highly complements this reading is “The Pianist”. I read the book a few years ago and tried to place it in the hands of many of my more open-minded friends. They ignored me only to years later tell me how much the enjoyed the movie and wanted to borrow the book. In closing I feel this book is a well-documented piece of history that should be read by those wanting to inflict war on other peoples. Winning wars over nations and winning hearts and minds of a nation are two completely different battles.

BOOK: Piggy, Foxy, and the Sword of Revolution – Films Books and More – Anthony Mrugacz Reviews

The Cold War can be labeled a political game of chess between two young hopeful
opponents. Each with a fervent belief in the validity of their respective systems, maneuvering to
win global domination and eventually their respective ideals of security. As this game progressed,
the Soviets underlying strategy was that the selfdestructive nature was an unchangeable feature
of capitalism. This blinding ideological dogma in which their opponent could not learn nor adapt
was false hope. Over the 20th century, capitalism did adapt and learned from its mistakes.
Needless to say, the Soviet Union’s implosion needs no rehashing, but it did arrive unexpectedly,
and was quickly delegated to the dustbin of history.

Book cover, Piggy Foxy and the Sword of Revolution for Films, Books and More - Anthony Mrugacz Reviews webpage.

However there lies a great challenge in the researching this discarded system. The secrecy and inner workings of the Politburo remained a mystery to the West as they tried to analyze the minds and strategies of their Communist opponents. Knowing the outcome, what signs were
missed during the game’s moves? Would understanding our opponent’s rise to power and consolidation techniques had helped in defeating him? Is conflict resolution a game of chance or careful preplanned analysis probing weaknesses? Political leaders dehumanize their enemies, this
this a characteristic that needs to be changed? Viewed from the outside, the Soviets seemed extremely unified.

Herein lies the underlying value in Vatlin and Malashenko’s, “Piggy, Foxy, and the Sword of Revolution” (Yale university Press 2006). Looking back at outcome of the Cold War, the West was at genuine disadvantage in spy networks and retaining secrecy. The true victors of the era,
the West, were the learners that adapted their institutions to advance while unknowingly the Soviets stumbled. Though some proclaim we had reached the end of history and a new global system has commenced, the truth is we have so much more to learn. Continued study of this era
from just a political view from the top would limit its usefulness for future generations. Retrospective analysis of all aspects in Soviet life, sociology, art, economics, and even psychology can give lend further insight to future issues dealing with Russia. The value of this book is demonstrated the difference in our perceptions and the reality inside Soviet political inner sanctum. A file full of sketches discovered in the Russian State Archives of Social and Political History (RGASPI) created by and portraying our opponents has come to life. How can one
organize and present this material in such a way, not only to help us understand the chronological events but also develop a thesis explaining political motivation to support the book’s layout? Why were some sketches included and others not? Do they focus on the artists involved in recording a human experience or doodling royal court jesters coloring the blanks between the lines of a stenographer? What inspired these drawings, shear boredom or political maneuvering? Could these top ranking officials of the proletariat dictatorship have unknowing left clues for future generations?

The book contains 181 works of art dating from the early days of Lenin’s leadership after the October Revolution, up to the Stalin’s purges in the late 1930’s. It is a psychological tale as viewed from those who experienced the early years of Bolshevik party democracy through the stressful period amongst the rank and file as Stalin consolidated power. High level politburo meetings maybe researched viewing agendas and reading recorded transcripts. However, rarely do understand the mindset and mood of those involved. Early drawings display a sense of comradery and openness in their comic caricatures. But as Stalin begins to show his teeth, the victims or audience of someone’s downfall, the sketches reveal underlying tensions, rivalries, and partisanship. Be they the victims or the blood splattered spectators, the illustrations display the boredom, self doubt, and the developing cruelty as the party turns on itself. Mankind, from his earliest days drawing on cave walls up to modern times, will use art to represent his conquering of external forces. This collection and accompanying textual analogy shows the opposite, internal forces cannibalizing a society while trying to preserve itself.

This early slice of the of the Bolsheviks’ seven decades in power focuses on one the most difficult aspects to follow, the division of the party in left and right factions over choosing a path to economic recovery. This book concisely illustrates Stalin’s pendulum moves off center over this controversial subject as smoke screen to destroy any opposition. It is explained in a way to fascinate a novice of Russian history as well as the connoisseur. The Foreword, written by Simon S. Montefiore, humanizes the private and social struggles within the party using the same style and resources from his previous works on Stalin. Attention is paid to the main artists position in the party and their envidable downfall and destruction. This section, along with the Introduction by the editors, reminds us to appreciate the mindsets of both the artists and subjects of these illustrations.

The editors, Vatlin and Malashenko, divide the book into two parts, The Gallery of Leaders, and Comrades and Problems. The Gallery of Leaders depicts the times before the flow of blood, when open criticism under party democracy not one’s selfdestruction. Often the sketches comical viewpoint would be unthinkable in Stalin’s court a decade later. Personality traits with political undertones are revealed in these sketches. Often passed around the tables at meetings to win influence, some oddly predicted the fate of the subject. This fraternal decade of party democracy gives way to the book’s second section, Comrades and Problems, as the Bolshevik witch hunt begins searching for blame while denying the system’s weaknesses. Comrades and Problems covers the monumental stress devouring the party members in the areas of finance and heavy industries, anxieties experienced in extended meetings at party congresses, and impending denunciation before the throne of Stalin. Friendly portraits gave way to scenarios involving corruption, wreckers, personal attacks in the press, accusations of mismanagement, and inner party rivalries. A main point of the book is that often these problems facing Soviet rulers were used as vehicles for destroying their opponents to seize power.

Examination of handwritten comments, dates, letterhead used, medium of art, when and where they were created offer clues into the chronology of events that currently can not be placed. The Soviet high level discussions concerning foreign policy were held behind closed doors, no record of the conversations were officially recorded. Perhaps, in the authors’ viewpoint, certain facts may come to light by further examination of these as well many more not presented in this publication, or are yet to be discovered.

Why and by who these documents were preserved, along with the intentions of the artists, I shall not reveal. There is trail of evidence these simple works of art out lasted their creators in political usefulness. This decades hidden secret is well worth read. The editors have gone beyond
supporting their claims of the value of these documents for understanding a cloudy era of Soviet history but also state their hopes future generations of historical researchers can expand on this understanding. What life was like during the hammering of Russian heavy industrialization is hard to comprehend only in text. The study political science needs to remain a balance between a fluid social science and strict analysis and interpretations of documented facts. This publication, Piggy, Foxy and the Sword of the Revolution, accomplish just that.

The 21st century again brings challenges of trying to penetrate, understand, and outwit fanatical organizations and authoritarian regimes bent on disrupting world security. The situations can not be satisfactorily met as they arise without previous in depth knowledge. Though the West’s ideals championed the last century, it can not rest on its laurels. Publications of this nature and those who support alternative methods of analysis, will remain crucial in the near future.

Additional comments:
In an experiment, I carried this book in public places that I visit. As usually my friends, familiar with my for at least 5 to 15 years, are often curious to see what subject I was currently reading. They were often surprised to see not a textbook or biography but a book of Bolshevik sketches. I am revealing my observation or the only reason that their reactions were totally unpredictable. Those that were whitecollar college educated professionals, glanced through the sketches, mming and ahing, and within 5 minutes handed the book back. The effect on the bluecollar noncollege educated individuals was completely opposite. They focused their attention on reading the ext and hesitantly returned it after my repeated pleas of my imminent departure. The focus group was only 8 individuals but fell within the same parameters of reaction. All subjects spent part of their years living during the Cold War.

BOOK: One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich – Films Books and More – Anthony Mrugacz Reviews

An entire human life becomes concentrated upon entering into the world of the gulag in One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich. Gone are the days to make decisions and nights for enjoying pleasure. All that matters are the moments that decide ones fate. Each zek’s decisions are of great consequence in insuring their survival. Alexander Solzhenitsyn describes a political prisoner’s life as not a slow meticulous isolated process of wasting time dwelling on the past or ones innocences. Rather life in the camp is an accelerated and intense social existence, where splitsecond actions are the determining factors in ones ability to live. The days of our free lives flow on and often decisions can be postponed without much thought of the consequences. In the camps however decisions are evaluated and executed with a predator’s intensity. Outside the camp life is regulate by Western ideological rules of law, inside by the Asiatic rule of man.

The regulated ritual life of the zek is designed to insure no pleasurable idle moments. Opportunities were therefore few and far between and a keen eye necessary to spot them. If such moments became ideas to dwell upon before action, one found oneself and at the ruthless mercy of
the system. The story begins with Ivan Denisovich Zhukov in bed feeling ill wondering if he should get up and proceed to the medical office. Suddenly the Tartar guard has accused him of a violation of regulations and at this one point would predict Zhukov’s bad twist of fate will ruin his day. However from this point on we start to discover that he is well educated in ways of surviving in the gulag. In a world of desperation with men scavenging food by licking others bowls, picking cigarette butts off the ground, and squeeling to the guards on fellow zeks. This gives the impression of humanity lowered to animalistic survival in what Zhukov’s first squad leader Kuziomin states, “Here, men, we live by the law of the taiga. But even here people manage to live. “. The opportunities that arrive for Zhukov to seize upon are not the selfish acts of selfinterest
but rather those times in which his quick thinking benefits others in hierarchal structure of the gulag. The incident of finding the hacksaw blade for a potential knife and trickery used to smuggle it passed the guards however is intended to be used as a tool and repair items for others hence benefiting all. An act of self preservation it was not but his understanding of the inner workings of imprisoned life and what was valuable to the whole which would include himself.

Other quick decisions Zhukov makes as when with Kilgas, they carry the roofing felt upright to fool the guards to seal their work area from the cold, when he stays behind to finish the masonry work because he has an unaccounted for cement trough, or when he enters the mess hall early to find trays and a table for his squad, demonstrate how seizing these moments allows him and the 104th squad to live. Zhukov’s observation also allow the theft of two extra bowls of food and later knowing which bowls of soup are filled with solid food to take care of their squad leaders. The food could have easily been for himself but his leaders survival ensured his well earned place in the zek society. Individually a man is nothing in the gulag as his existence is boiled to one day. The collective whole with eachdown trodden zek offering something allows them to live through an endless string of days.

The zeks generally look after each other especially newcomers in the ranks. Even the Buinovsky, the exnaval Captain, though struggling with his new existence is offered an extra bowl of food before serving his 10 day stint confined in a cell. Upon entering the gates after the work day, Ivan Denisovich offers to save a place in line at the parcel’s office for Tsezar thus earning an extra portion of supper from the grateful Tzezar. All these small favors go beyond just obtaining extra food and construct a support system. Soon after Tsezar receives his parcel of food stuffs, it is almost lost due to that dangerous dwelling on the moment instead of quick action. Zhukow once again masterfully saves the parcel from theft during a roll call with advice to Tsezar earning more than just tidbits of food but respect and standing in their society.

Is life in the gulag only an endless chain of circumstances balancing ones fate and leading to a life of fear and despair? Or is it how each moment is alive unto self and that the zeks must hold on to this to live not merely to survive? Grasping these moments is all Zhukow has to focus his existence, from the intensity of his work building the brick wall, to the careful storage and nurturing of extra ounces of bread he earns. Though the gulag is operated to keep the zeks on constant edge, Ivan Densiovich somehow manages to seize pleasurable moments for himself. Away from the worry being harassed by the guards or hammering of the constant Russian cold, there is one instance of feeling human and escaping the destitude of the labour camp. Ivan Denisovich refers to it as “dearer than freedom, dearer than life itself, past, present, and future”. It is a moment all of us take for granted at the end of each throughout lives, that feeling of satisfaction of a full stomach after a day of hard work.

Our lives in freedom are often spent waiting for something to happen in the future. Can we imagine what life would be like if all the free time were sliced out? Would we crave only a day to sleep if if our lives became as intense as that of a zek? Would we focus on each moment to keep our sanity all the while knowing an endless existence of repetitive days awaited us as the only future? Those who lost focus and dignity, thinking only of their own survival became the bowllickers and scavengers of zek society. The most successful in the camp are those who know their place and cooperated for the good of their squad . Alexander Solzhenitsyn takes us into such a world where one man carves out a triumphant existence if only for that day through an endless string of moments. The effect of time concentrating human existence makes the successful passage of day for Ivan Denisovich equivalent to a year in a man’s life. Zhukov’s efforts for one day produce a bounty, a pound of bread, that he
happily gloats over like a peasant after a good season’s harvest.

BOOK: The End of the American Era – Films Books and More – Anthony Mrugacz Reviews

Charles A. Kupchan’s The End of the American Era examines current American hegemony in it’s relative position with his “Whites Only” view of the cyclic nature of empire life spans. With an eye on the next century, he attempts to define the challenges the U.S. will face as the multi polar world powers develop. Using historical references, admirable quotes, and questionable statistics, he stumbles along to a suggested solution faced by our current mind-set. He states three major obstacles closing in on the leadership in Washington, emerging European self-awareness, Asiatic economic might, and the typical domestic issues.

He starts off with an history lesson like a narrator from Bills Clinton’s version of Dicken’s Christmas Carol, walking us through the past, present, and future. A carefully selected and often reselected list ofevents are used to set the stage for a new world. Getting us ready for this new role in a game with new rules and new types of players, we are not in his opinion prepared to weather the storm based on current policies, entrenched economic dominance, and world bully/dispute settler. His predictions are that our duality of unilateralism and isolationalism, so deeply engrained in our psychi, will not have the ability to continue as a uni-polar leader. He does believe there is enough of a trend that we can look to a future of a digital age dissolving much of the traditional nation-state ideologies. Pointing to a America’s New World Map, he thinks as we slip from industrial capitalism, social problems and political apathy will have major effects on the the next epoch of history.

The traditional “have and have not” argument are carved up into North and South for the world’s destiny. The theories of the “Clash of Civilizations” along with a Neo=corporate carrot to the 3rd world horses called the, “Golden Straitjacket, are his cartographic drawing instruments. World troubles are not defined by borders but by geopolitical boundaries which are a necessary to understanding future crisis. The new globe is being influenced by American primacy according to Kupchan but he predicts it will not last long. The US does have monetary and military might but we are stretched to thin and the economic ties could also pull us down. Our current mind-set was weaned on the past and glued to the present would be a summary of the situation by the author.

An interesting topic of globalization intertwined Americanization is addressed. The geographic effects of the digital age throughout the world and the problem of instability that it creates. Democracy as a desired fruit but inequity of classes the result. Kupchan writes that as globalization occurs, traditional problem areas are affected negatively, and the anger is directed at America.

This leads us to the two main imminent adversaries in the next decade or two. The European Union and China. Here he lays out the direction of Europe and China into their roles as polar contenders to U.S. hegemony. His analysis of Europe’s difficulties, motives, and strategies in the EU are that it will have a two-tiered strategy based on a Franco-Germanic core. The EU evolution will quickly in his opinion challenge the U.S. in the next decade. He sees their challenges on two-tiers, the 1st as creating a European through more than just economic ties but on united constitutionally based. This he feels is rapidly approaching. And secondly they will be able to manage the different social and economic positions of Eastern European countries joining in. The confrontation ahead is in a very basic form with our “laissez-faire” economic philosophy and Europe’s state-managed and socially minded economic systems. They way our two different systems reach out into the globe will prove to be very interesting. Kupchan sees this European growth in strength creating tension as the U.S. will desire it’s traditional role of supervision and decision-making while Europe will demand status based on their way of thinking. An example he sees often is the Balkans, where the Europe military could not handle the crisis and the US stepped in though reluctantly fearing domestic backlash to involvement in a EU problem. The European decision to strengthen their military is viewed as a mixed blessing to the American leadership. Many predictions of the US vs. EU grudge match title bout is focused on what is developing currently in each domestic front. The traditional “911 United We Stand till you start that American with us or against dialog” seems his basis for our current relationship with the Europeans.
He sees a very successful Europe down the road and thinks that the EU diversity will be the spark that ignites the unstoppable forward motion. And just over the hill China, two decades away, China.

US –Sino relations are talked about more in detail as our Sino-Asiatic political situations. Once again the duality of our relationship, for example, trading with China and supporting Taiwan and Japan. We bomb their embassy, we bump their planes, we buy their products, is his viewpoint of this upcoming power. He sees us a leader in this area and America needs to join in a different dialog to move things down the road to our liking. If our leaders can visit and our company trade even after all the minor skirmishes, can not Japan and China kiss and make up? This is the course of action the US should take so it can create stability in the region and be on good terms with everybody.

So how could I summarize the book? I can’t! The writing style and philosophies were such a “white” solution and centered in the same mind set of those he criticizes, he talks of American flip flopping on issues, I was unsure whom wrote which page. There were so many things that I would challenge in his book that I could not be swayed by his arguments. Maybe I am at fault but there is something basically wrong with the presentation of his thoughts. I would have found it more credible if it was cut down into 100 pages. The book was enjoyable but oh so debatable.

I will try to summarize the theme of the book and express my opinions in the same style that it was written in. Since he threw his notes together, I’ll review mine one by one, and toss them back. Much Euro-history is used, especially as England be an overstretched empire and the results it has on both world wars. He states that Britain could not stop the Nazis from overrunning Western Europe in a matter of months. Fact: invasion started May 10th, 1940- and in June 14th Nazis enter Paris. Why so picky? This was my 1st indication to watch author manipulation for theory enhancement. What if we “selected” data for our predictions! He mentioned Hitler’s reluctance to invade England, so I researched it. “Reluctance” seems a poor choice of words. I am just cautious of his viewpoints in detail of selected historical figures and just tidbits of others.

Looking at the digital age and the dot-com revolution attracting America’s best educated to become technocrats, he feels we neglected the historical disciplines suffered at the universities. Is this the “End” he talks about? Where does this paragraph mentioned fit in? What are our future “multi-polar powers” doing in this arena of education? He gets its right when he describes Bush’s cabinets and their philosophies based on Cold War reasoning but where is there any mention of the EU or China’s cabinets and their political ideology? He is defining the future world powers while looking in the mirror, does not seem relevant. What are the grand strategies that are competing with us in the next decades? He further goes into details of the “bad” during past and current president but successes are brushed over in a sentence.

So we are facing a world that is set to challenge us and we know only our faults and exactly how where they are headed based on the “white” of world. Much is made about the chaning demographics of US population, a percentage of this, less of that, oh and this is what they want and what they will do, wait sorry he gives no prediction or solution there just that changing demographics will affect domestic and world policies. Right, sure they are, America has never had immigrants that did not speak English and worked as unskilled-laborers. We are doomed! So why does he mention it. Europe on the other hand has got it under control with it’s policies. Is this man drinking or bi-polar?

Do agree with anything here? He does mention current events fairly accurately but so do newspapers. So after be subjected to a wandering through selected historical items finally a idea that seems reasonable. The addressing of crisis before they start but wait it’s a quote from Kaplan! Globalization as good thing- a list of benefits and beliefs that make sense, a few paragraphs I agree with, once again not written by Kepchan but Friedman. The free market will be the ideological road we travel on but at different speeds. I like Friedman’s optimistic thinking.

Kupchan had to lecture us on the Great Depression and the eventual rise of Germany and Japan that predated WWII. I disagree, Japan’s governmental change and direction changed after the Russo-Japan War. Why does he tie in world economic events and world politics with such simplicity? Is he trying to show that are current globalized economy will be subjected to his theories? His facts seem off. Later he discusses the South East Asian fianancial crisis that started in Thailand dominoed throughout the world and we were such an important player, pushing aside Japan to resolve the situation. It just dominoed so much it went all the way to Russia for all the same reasons as in Thailand and all the other Asiatic countries. All these currencies, one problem. I refuse to agree here, I was in Europe in 1998 when the Russian Finanacial Crisis began, the only English newspaper I could find was the Financial Times. I by default followed the scandal, it was more of the collapse of pyramid schemes and irresponsible investment from Europe into Russia. He compares two sides of the globe, one with a banking system, the other with lord knows why and they are relevant. Ask a businessman from Singapore if he wants a credit card, he’ll ask what is the interest rate? Ask a Russian and he’ll wonder what it costs. Oooh- the great cycle of a dominant power is fading due to an emerging power but let’s load down this book without ever leaving the office right here from my window. I am now loaded down with world facts. All the Europeans and Chinese are going to get mad over something that the Media has inflamed, the resulting attack on us carried out by there keyboards clicking away over the internet will be devastating. The EU and China has problems too that will effect this rapid rise to power , but they are mentioned in black and white terms. I am glad Kupchan reminded us that the loss of control in the flow of information played a big part in the unraveling of the Soviet Union. Bollocks!

Halfway through the book I was pretty not going along with whatever direction the book was heading. I glanced at the inside cover an lo and behold the acclaim. Let’s look at the one from George Soros. No lets look at the books written by Mr. Soros, popular results for george soros : The Bubble of American Supremacy: Correcting the Misuse of American Power , The Alchemy of Finance, George Soros on Globalization. I see a circle jerk coming on here. Do I disagree wtith the author, I think he should have to eat page 108 to start.

The European threat to our supremacy is anchored on France and Germany, hello? Bullied by the two. If they are the anchors why did Poland back the US invasion of Iraq? I get the feeling you join the EU, you bow to France and Germany. Or do you play the US as an ally to offset them? Lets’ take a time to speak of the Roman Empire, barbarians, and Constantinople. There is a great description of barbarians by Ammianus Marcellinus but it sounds like American holiday shoppers the day after Thanksgiving. The split of the Roman Empire and the rise and fall of it along with Constantinople plays an extremely important part in understanding the Russians. Kupchan talks about their joining the EU like a magical fairytale. If more hilarious he tries to use this historical event to describe the USA and EU, the ancients fell apart design and us by design. If the EU is to rise it will have to tame the Russian bear but it won’t come out of the woods so easily.

When we get to some meat of how the EU is surging forward, the example of Germany’s important tax reforms in 2000 to stimulate the economy. Attention: If a state-guided social system and state-governed economy makes a tax cut, they are having some serious problems. Kurchan goes on how they’ll just save the day with no unforeseen obstacles in their plans. Can we ask the author to eat page 132 also? My god, you can drive from Germany to France without having your passport checked, can’t you see the rising power in Europe? No discussion in the chapter of the EU problems in forming an authoritative central governing body that is respected by all citizens would be complete without poignant words from Robert E. Lee smack dab on page 141. More to fear from Europe, there corporations are merging and buying up everything just like the Japanese did, it is a sign, just don’t think about it. The best part about his European emerging power analogy is that he list the 4 main reasons his opponents, the Euro-skeptics, say the EU will face a difficult struggle, and it’s the best part of the book and most accurate.

In my opinion the author has it all wrong, Asia not Europe will step up to the plate. The confrontation between the US and China will be made difficult due to our domestic problems in issues. The 3 cents an hour laborer will be just as pissed off as the 3rd generation factory rat that thinks Ford owes him a job. The Eastern Asian Tigers will have just as much trouble with the Islamic Extremist as the Western World. Europe will get off the ground quickly but by the time August rolls around they’ll be on vacation for 6 weeks on the Riviera. The book should be titled the end of the European Era. I just don’t see the rivalry between us and the EU. We fight more because we have more in common and it makes the situation seem worse. We can at the earliest start the US-Euro rivalry commencing in 1492 but I would argue that is way to early. The struggles between Rome and Constantinople, Catholic vs. Orthodox, Christian vs. Muslim, Celts vs. the Normans, Turks and Russians, the list goers on and on of rivalries that are Euro-centric in nature. This goes back more than a millennium. The author tries to create a rivalry from current US/EU issues but these can be settled. The ones that will hold down Europe, have done so for a thousand years. The US will always intervene in European affairs and Asia. Our commonalities with Europe make it easier than dealing with Asiatic powers. The tactics of believing we are isolationist and acting unilaterally may just be the duct tape that holds the world together. The author failed to convince me of an upcoming rivalry with Europe by both his selected information and writing style.

FILM: Primary Colors – Films Books and More – Anthony Mrugacz Reviews

Viewing a film based on a book written by “Anonymous” was an enlightening experience. Without seeing any trailers or reviews previously, I had some preconceived notions. I anticipated a behind the scenes view of a political machine in action at election time. Instead it was humanistic view at the people and contradictory nature of a politician image versus their personal life. The main character is brought on to the campaign, or should I say swept, as he is caught up in inspirational persona of the candidate. Rather than focusing on the struggle logistically of a campaign, the movie reveals the personal conflicts of the election team.

The character portraying Bill Clinton overemphasizes his image as “Slick Willie” and often ignores his intellect. He is portrayed as a womanizer and a compassionate storyteller. It does show his ability to make people believe he listens and cares, and in general I think it is true. The magic of the man is actually his skill at manipulating the truth in to a believable half-truth. The interactions are viewed by the main character and at times it rocks his faith. Somehow he is so locked into the beliefs of his party that he overlooks the politician’s faults. He is the one staff member portrayed as naïve as the rest of the staff has the role of damage control. “Bill” leaves a mess like a criminal wanting to be caught. I have the impression that his character was almost psychopathic. The expression ”blowing smoke of someone’s ass” comes to mind when I think of how Clinton’s people skills are demonstrated.

All of Hillary Clinton’s positive attributes are never rely shown. She is portrayed as an innocent, faithful, and supportive spouse. When the truth of her husband’s sexual exploits is revealed to her, her reaction is to slap “Bill” and a few of the staff members. I found her portrayal less real and her weaknesses were used in the script to intensify her husband’s shortcomings. The couple doesn’t have much of a relationship in the film. Somehow I find it hard to believe that moments of intimacy of the non-sexual kind are non-existent of the campaign trail. If they are, it could be the reason for his sexual promiscuity.

Unfortunately what I hoped to learn from the movie did not weigh in heavily enough and often humor, sex, violence, and the like were used to make the movie interesting. The main character holds on to his beliefs even though they are thoroughly rocked and tested during the long 143minute film. Personally I was very upbeat about Clinton’s election and suffered the same temporary disillusionment that main character had. Rather than just go the ride, I did have some sympathy for him and that’s the highlight of movie for me. I had previously viewed and written about “13 Days” and found that more intellectual. Primary Colors is a good movie but once again the “Hollywood” factor distracted me enough not to get drawn deeply into the film.

BOOK: Redneck Nation, How the South Really Won the War – Films Books and More – Anthony Mrugacz Reviews

Author: Michael Graham
ISBN: 0-446-52884-6

Redneck Nation, is a comical and autobiographical view of current American culture and how it lowest common denominator is spiced with the flavor of the old South. The author, Michael Graham, was California born, raised, sorry, reared in South Carolina and eventually migrated North. The book focuses on his shock after trying to flee to join the Northern Elitists, only to find the same problems permeating Yankee culture. An extremely easy and enjoyable read, I first met his ideas with some skepticism. The author slowly draws you in and I found myself more akin to Bubba on the front porch than relating to a nose-raised socialite relaxing at Martha’s Vineyard. The author first examines his childhood, specifically his education in a small rural town. The status quo was for everyone to pass and the curriculum to be unchallenging. He states that accelerating above the curve was discouraged as it made the other students look bad. He then compares the current federally mandated and statewide standards in the school systems: “Expensive, inefficient, and incompetent. In a word: Southern.” The dropout rates for minorities and the leading dropout rates of high schools were not in the south, the leaders being Cleveland and Milwaukee. At one point he advocates apologizing to Governor Wallace, as the current system calls for separate but equal education for the underprivileged minorities! Even the system of government funding for public bilingual education. Education has slipped from a discipline to a politically correct and more sensitive system catering to racial difference.

Is this equality and setting the stage for equal competition in the real world? Food and culture are prime examples in the text of invasions and differences. Bagels, he complains, have invaded the South. On the other-hand the North has not embraced southern cuisines equally. New York Bageleries every where but try to find grits in Manhattan! The funniest examples were hair salons and clothing stores. In the south you could find New York Hair Salons and Manhattan Fashions. Nowhere in the North are there Texas Big Hair Parlors or Alabama Diners. What has crept north are some of the dumbest Southern pastimes, NASCAR and Professional Wresting. Often he dwells on the Constitution and free speech. The South demanding prior to the Civil War the freedom and liberty from an oppressing and infringing federal government. And what did the Civil War produce? Try and take a truckload of backwoods Mississippians to Washington DC and let them tell a House of Senators how to do things. He frequently demonstrates the correctness and originality of the Southern way of politically thinking, live and let live. Or better translated, this is how we do things and don’t mess with it or you’ll get your ass kicked. So the Northern values of free speech are prevalent and have also worked there way to the South.

The evidence may be the success of the Civil Rights Movement and the mass protests of the 1960’s? Unfortunately not- try and take your right to free speech on the capitol stairs here in Austin, Texas. A few years ago when a busload of Klansmen tried to rally and speak there, they were met with an angry mob. They never left the bus. Does this mean the once again the South and it’s political traditions of “Shut up or else” has taken over national mentality, I believe so. Often the author laughs at all the northern regulation and compares it to common sense in the South. Northerners scacrifice rights to have laws written to control stupid behavior. In Dixie, you do something and get yourself hurt, your called “dumb”. Many examples are given throughout the book comparing “ways” in which we live and how the South has overwhelmingly penetrated the North. Shall I continue list examples from the text? No, as I feel it would not be a fair analysis of the book. What the underlying theme is basically the hypocriscy of our society and our acceptance of it.

I was at first very resistant to what the author was saying. Anyone could take all his stories and facts and rewrite them showing how the North and it’s culture won out and the Old Southern Ways are dead in Dixie. This I believe would not change the theme of the book. America has become a nation of lazy whiners saying how unfair things are in the world. Our hyprocracisty and willingness to accept it does more damage our national future than any governmental policies. Narrow mindedness is crosses the Mason-Dixon line in both ways. This book was a grand example how simply a complex political and cultural system could be analyzed using humor.

However not much was offered in the way of solutions. Personally I have had the opposite experience growing up in the North and settling in Texas. It was a very difficult experience in the areas of employment and personal relationships. To my surprise, a book I read for entetainment, helped me realize what had been frustrating. Moving to a different cultural needs much more introspective understanding of oneself than trying to see why a new environment is wrong and easy to judge. The book may have pointed out great discrepancies in our society but equally as much the contradictions in some of my personal beliefs. On the plus side, this trouble of not fitting in to the Southern Way in my last place of employment, due in the words of the owner, “Your standards are too high!”, has inspired me to complete my college education. I might have spent the rest of my life trying to figure out what he meant had I not read and enjoyed “Redneck Nation”.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Joe Lieberman, Redneck
How the South Really Won the War.
Where is the South?
North vs. South: A Primer
Rednecks and White Wine
Nothing gets This Bad Except on Purpose: Redneck Education
B.J.U.S.A.
Without Merit
Darwin is Dead
It’s a __ Thing. You Wouldn’t Understand
Mario Brothers
Submit, Hell!
Taken to the Extreme
Blowed Up Real Goo
Hee Haw!

About Anthony Mrugacz and Films Books and More – Anthony Mrugacz Reviews wants you to know the following about links to Amazon products on this website: