First published in 1961 by Stackpole Books, Street without Joy is a classic of military history. Journalist and scholar Bernard Fall vividly captured the sights, sounds, and smells of the brutal— and politically complicated—conflict between the French and the Communist-led Vietnamese nationalists in Indochina. The French fought to the bitter end, but even with the lethal advantages of a modern military, they could not stave off the Viet Minh insurgency of hit-and-run tactics, ambushes, booby traps, and nighttime raids. The final French defeat came at Dien Bien Phu in 1954, setting the stage for American involvement and a far bloodier chapter in Vietnam‘s history. Fall combined graphic reporting with deep scholarly knowledge of Vietnam and its colonial history in a book memorable in its descriptions of jungle fighting and insightful in its arguments. After more than a half a century in print, Street without Joy remains required reading.

"Mr. Draper believes that recent years have seen the suppression of political by military instrumentalities in the conduct of American foreign policy. After an opening chapter which briefly traces this process in two smaller instances - Cuba and the Dominican Republic - he devotes the rest of this book to a painstaking inquiry which seeks to dissolve the confusion that still envelops the story of our presence in Vietnam."

2021 Reprint of the 1940 Edition. Translated by Bertram D. Wolfe. Facsimile of the original edition and not reproduced with Optical Recognition Software. In this short work the author criticizes the Bolsheviks and presents a prescient warning of their dictatorship. Nonetheless, she continued to call for a "dictatorship of the proletariat", albeit not of the one-party Bolshevik model. In that context, she wrote the words "Freiheit ist immer die Freiheit des Andersdenkenden" ("Freedom is always the freedom of the one who thinks differently") and continues in the same chapter: "The public life of countries with limited freedom is so poverty-stricken, so miserable, so rigid, so unfruitful, precisely because, through the exclusion of democracy, it cuts off the living sources of all spiritual riches and progress". Bolshevik theorists such as Vladimir Lenin and Leon Trotsky responded to this criticism by arguing that Luxemburg's notions were classical Marxist ones, but they could not be applied to Russia of 1917. They stated that the lessons of actual experience such as the confrontation with the bourgeois parties had forced them to revise the Marxian strategy.

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1915 edition. Excerpt: ... chapter ii the uses of A king The reason why we trust one man, rather than many, is because one man can negotiate and many men can't. Two masses of people have no way of dealing directly with each other. They have to deal through representatives. It is a pure fiction to speak of negotiations between the United States and Germany. For when you look around to find the "United States" you discover a hundred million people spread over vast territory, with certain common habits, ideas, and loyalties, but nowhere do you find anything called the "United States " which can strike a bargain with "Germany." The American people cannot all seize the same pen and indite a note to sixty-five million people living within the German Empire. They cannot say: We ask for this, but if you will grant that, we'll do so-and-so, and then we'll both be satisfied. Each man may know what he thinks (a tremendous assumption), but what "we the American people" think is one of the most difficult matters in the world to find out. We all try to find it out. The papers print editorial comment from different parts of the country, they interview leaders of opinion, publish letters from correspondents, take straw ballots, and ask questions in the smoking-room of the club, on the street car, and at the quick-lunch counter. They may throw some light on the general reaction to a particular event. But more accurate than this it is hardly possible to be. The "will" and "mind" and "voice" of a great people are not the same thing as the will and mind and voice of a single man. When an individual thinks out a course of action, he goes through a delicate mental operation, a good part of which is unconscious. But a whole people can no more think in unison than it can make love in...