"All my life," writes Conor Cruise O'Brien, "I have been fascinated and puzzled by nationalism and religion; by the interaction of the two forces, sometimes in unison, sometimes antagonistic." In these wide-ranging and penetrating essays, O'Brien examines how throughout the world today these age-old forces are once again threatening democracy, the rule of law, and freedom of expression -- particularly in the United States, the nation founded on Enlightenment values. He weaves together beautifully written discussions on these and other timely, related topics. Enlivening his grim predictions with dry wit, he nevertheless conveys an apocalyptic sense of the threats facing democracy as we approach the third millennium.
Conor Cruise O'Brien did a series of Massey Lectures in 1994 regarding the expectations of the third millennium and comparisons between the first and second millennium. This seems to be a compilation of his viewpoint of history and the expectation that the third millennium would be significantly different than the second millennium. This was not really noteworthy, as only a fool would think that the world as we know it, would remained unchanged through the course of time. The rambling lectures appear to be disjointed. While there are some predictions that remain to be seen, his opinions are weakly presented, therefore any impact on the reader is minimal.
I know a lot of Irish people don't like the Cruiser because of his opinions on the north, but I read this book, and I think that he's gone completely off his rocker. I did like the part where he said that JP II was clearly threatening to merge with Islam... Guess I missed that diktat.
However, the Cruiser was Dag Hammarskjold's man in the Congo, and his book "To Katanga and Back" (not available for reviewing on goodreads!), is a very readable account of that time.
This book was originally written for the CBC's Massey Lectures. The book was really hard to follow, I can't imagine what the lectures must have been like. There was very little to hold the different chapters together, and inside the chapters there a wild changes of direction.
I wasn't really able to figure out what O'Brien's main point was - perhaps that was part of his argument.