Sunday, May 24, 2015

Cedric de Leon's "The Origins of Right to Work"

Cedric de Leon is Associate Professor of Sociology at Providence College. He is the author of Party and Society: Reconstructing a Sociology of Democratic Party Politics and co-editor of Building Blocs: How Parties Organize Society. Before becoming a professor de Leon was by turns an organizer, a local union president, and a rank-and-file activist in the U.S. labor movement.

He applied the “Page 99 Test” to his new book, The Origins of Right to Work: Antilabor Democracy in Nineteenth-Century Chicago, and reported the following:
The Origins of Right to Work is about the bait-and-switch that characterizes the place of workers in American democracy: enticed by the American Dream, they are at the same time prohibited from fulfilling its promise through the collective power of their unions. Right to work laws allow workers to reap the benefits of union contracts without having to pay the dues or fees that support the daily operation of unions.

These and other limits to collective bargaining have led many scholars to speculate on why the United States is so antilabor compared to other liberal capitalist democracies. Most of these folks emphasize the role of workers or judges in inaugurating the distinctly antilabor ethos of American democracy. In The Origins of Right to Work, I argue that we need to look more closely at the changing relationship between nineteenth-century political parties and workers.

Page 99 casts doubt on the notion that judges were responsible for right to work laws. Such laws were – and are – statutory laws passed by politicians in state legislatures, not decisions handed down by the courts on the basis of legal precedence. Indeed, as I point out on page 99, even the landmark court decisions (e.g., Commonwealth v. Hunt [1842]; The Danbury Hatters' Case [1908]) were shaped by the context of party politics.

As an alternative to the judiciary thesis, I argue that right to work laws emerged because workers, who were once loyal Republicans and Democrats, defected from the major parties into trade unions, socialist parties, and revolutionary organizations. Unable to persuade nineteenth-century workers with the same old political slogans, the two-party system instead tried to control workers through right to work laws and violent force.
Learn more about The Origins of Right to Work at the Cornell University Press website.

--Marshal Zeringue

Friday, May 22, 2015

Susan J. Terrio's "Whose Child Am I?"

Susan J. Terrio is Professor of Anthropology at Georgetown University. She is author of Judging Mohammed: Juvenile Delinquency, Immigration, and Exclusion at the Paris Palace of Justice and Crafting the Culture and History of French Chocolate.

She applied the “Page 99 Test” to her new book, Whose Child Am I?: Unaccompanied, Undocumented Children in U.S. Immigration Custody, and reported the following:
Page 99 gets to the heart of the key issues of U.S. immigration policy and the treatment of undocumented minors after their apprehension by American authorities. Although unlawful entry is a civil, not a penal, offense these youth become ensnared in two separate and convoluted federal systems: mandatory detention in closed facilities and removal proceedings in immigration courts. The government becomes their legal guardian while at the same time prosecuting them for immigration violations. We should ask ourselves if automatic detention is necessary to ensure the protection of a vulnerable population? What due process rights do detained child migrants have under U.S. immigration law? Despite the frenzied media coverage of migrants flooding across the U.S.–Mexico border in 2014, little is known about what happens to them in federal custody or how the U.S. government got into the business of detaining children and youth. This is the story of a legal tug-of-war between the constitutional protection of individual rights regardless of legal status and the government’s interest in border security. This tension affects new migrants as well as those who were brought as children and spent their formative years in this country.

Page 99 describes the experience of Orlando, an undocumented Mexican teenager who came to the US at the age of nine. He turned sixteen in an Arizona reform school where he was sent after adjudication for an assault. When he completed his sentence with a clean record a juvenile judge ordered his release. Instead, immigration authorities re-apprehended him and transferred him to a Virginia juvenile prison under government contract that holds undocumented minors deemed to be security risks.

This page describes my tour of that Virginia prison where I saw the central surveillance monitors, empty classrooms, and immigrant boys confined to their residential “pods” because the facility was on lockdown. The deputy director explained that this was due to problems with the two prison populations: the “domestic” and the “federal” youth. Orlando’s clinician described him as “one angry kid.” He knew that as a U.S. citizen he would have been released to his family after “doing his time.” Instead, he was sent to a real prison, this time with no set endpoint, far from his family, and facing the real threat of deportation to a country where he had no family.
Learn more about Whose Child Am I? at the University of California Press website.

--Marshal Zeringue

Thursday, May 21, 2015

Kristin Kobes Du Mez's "A New Gospel for Women"

Kristin Kobes Du Mez is an associate professor of History and Gender Studies at Calvin College. She received a Ph.D. in American Religious History from the University of Notre Dame. Her research interests include the intersection of religion, gender, and sexuality in American history, with a particular focus on women in American Protestantism from the nineteenth century to the present.

Du Mez applied the “Page 99 Test” to her new book, A New Gospel for Women: Katharine Bushnell and the Challenge of Christian Feminism, and reported the following:
What if it was Adam’s choice, and not Eve’s, that led to humanity’s fall into sin?
What if women’s submission to men is the work of the devil, and not the will of God?
What if Christian patriarchy is in fact man’s rebellion against God?
What if the Apostle Paul didn’t tell wives to submit to their husbands, and women to be silent in church?
What if redemption means the liberation of women?
And what if Christians have gotten their theology wrong because of mistranslations of the Christian scriptures? And men have perpetuated these mistranslations for centuries on end by doing everything they could to keep the work of Christian theology out of the hands of women?

A New Gospel for Women tells the story of Katharine Bushnell, a woman who asked these very questions over 100 years ago. Part history, part biography, and part theology, this book introduces Bushnell to modern audiences and provides an overview of her remarkable feminist theology.

Page 99 occurs just after the book switches from historical narrative to a description of her theology. Bushnell was an internationally-known anti-trafficking activist in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and it was through this work that she repeatedly observed seemingly respectable, Christian men committing acts of unspeakable cruelty against women. Ultimately, she concluded that “the crime is the fruit of the theology”—that Christian theology itself, as it had been handed down through the centuries, must be to blame. Rather than abandoning Christianity in its entirety, however, she turned to the original languages and set out to expose a long tradition of misogynistic biblical translation.

Page 99 offers a sample of her early work, and her sharp wit:
In addition to contesting familiar passages on female authority, Bushnell examined a number of other instances “where sex affects the English translation.” She discussed, for instance, the account of the “dukes of Edom” in Genesis 36, where in verse 14 Anah was introduced as the daughter of Zibeon, but ten verses later, and again in 1 Chronicles, translators had depicted Anah as a male. “We illiterate women are able to spell out the fact that several of these dukes were women!” Bushnell asserted, “Yet we are called upon to prove that women have ever ruled to any extent, or can rule, or were meant to rule, according to Bible teaching or history; and I answer that when woman’s sex is snowed under without protest between the beginning and end of a single chapter, by careless translators who take it for granted that men are doing almost everything that is done, the case is singularly hard to prove.”

In a similar vein, Bushnell pointed to the Greek word diakonos (διάκονος), which was translated as “minister” or “deacon” in each instance where it referred “to an office held by a man in the church,” but was rendered “servant” in the single instance where it referred to a woman (Romans 16:1), despite the fact that it was “distinctly [stated] that this is her rank in the church—an ecclesiastical order.” Bushnell also drew attention to Romans 16:7, where Paul mentions Junia as being “of note among the apostles,” a fact that both Chrysostom and Origen accepted as clear evidence of the existence of female apostles in the early church. To Bushnell’s dismay, however, modern commentators had “found themselves able to master the difficulty with one masculine flourish,” arguing that “if Junia is a woman she cannot be an apostle, and if Junia is an apostle he [she] cannot be a woman!”
But page 99 is just the tip of the iceberg—the rest of the book describes Bushnell’s dramatic revision of the entire biblical narrative, from Genesis through Revelation. And it asks how it was that Bushnell and her work have been all but lost to history. Its larger story, then, revolves around the relationship between Christianity and feminism, past and present. And, in light of the growing popularity of Bushnell’s writings among evangelical Christians in the global church today, it reflects as well on the future of Christian feminism.
Learn more about A New Gospel for Women at the Oxford University Press website.

--Marshal Zeringue

Wednesday, May 20, 2015

Karen M. Paget's "Patriotic Betrayal"

Karen M. Paget, a former member of the National Student Association, is a contributing editor to The American Prospect and co-author of Running as a Woman: Gender and Power in American Politics.

She applied the “Page 99 Test” to her latest book, Patriotic Betrayal: The Inside Story of the CIA’s Secret Campaign to Enroll American Students in the Crusade Against Communism, and reported the following:
From page 99:
In October, Ingram told an NSA academic advisor that he had all the money he needed to operate a Latin America program, “just as we planned it.” He did not identify specific donors, although to a prospective NSA staff member, he indiscreetly described a “new hush-hush agency in the government” that would be able to finance the NSA. In early November, he told a friend at Georgia Tech that he had found an angel.
This excerpt from Patriotic Betrayal captures a turning point in the covert relationship between the CIA and the United States National Student Association (NSA), an organized formed in 1947 by campus student government leaders. When Avrea Ingram, the NSA international affairs vice president, made these remarks in 1951, the CIA’s ad hoc funding arrangements with NSA had become untenable, and CIA officials devised new ways to route secret funds. Ingram’s angel was John Simons, an NSA founding father, who as a CIA career agent resurfaced as a director of the Foundation for Youth and Student Affairs. The name, meant to suggest a traditional philanthropy, in fact, served as a conduit for CIA funds.

In 1967, when Ramparts magazine exposed the NSA/CIA relationship, many Americans could not understand why the CIA would care about students – after all, campuses conjured images of football, fraternities and other frivolities. It was a uniquely American view: elsewhere, students were important actors; they overthrew governments, ousted dictators, fought colonial power, and, at a minimum, influenced education policy.

In the early Cold War, the CIA sought to counter Soviet influence abroad. The Soviet-backed International Union of Students in Prague, for example, claimed to represent the world’s students. In response, the CIA created and secretly funded a rival international organization, as it did in other areas.

Over the years, the NSA/CIA relationship grew into multiple covert operations, global in scope, and carried out by “witting” participants, students who had signed a security oath under the 1917 Espionage Act. The oath, if violated, carried a twenty-year prison term. During the 1967 press uproar, this threat kept participants’ lips sealed. Patriotic Betrayal is the first history of these sweeping CIA-student operations, from their origins and growth to the heroic effort of one NSA President to end the CIA’s grip on NSA, the subsequent Ramparts investigation, and the CIA’s frenetic attempts at damage control. Patriotic Betrayal goes far beyond the moral argument over whether the CIA operation was justified, and examines what the young operatives did. It reveals the central role that espionage—spying on foreign students--played over the years, and its unforeseen and dangerous consequences. It is a cautionary tale for those who today advocate similar covert strategies to win the hearts and minds of new enemies.
Visit Karen M. Paget's website.

--Marshal Zeringue

Tuesday, May 19, 2015

Ilana Feldman's "Police Encounters"

Ilana Feldman is Associate Professor of Anthropology, History, and International Affairs at The George Washington University. She is the author of Governing Gaza: Bureaucracy, Authority, and the Work of Rule, 1917–1967 (2008).

Feldman applied the “Page 99 Test” to her new book, Police Encounters: Security and Surveillance in Gaza under Egyptian Rule, and reported the following:
From page 99:
Balancing the multiple security concerns posed by Palestinian insistence on the opportunity to fight for Palestine was a challenge throughout the administration. Speech, action, and organizing were all identified as security problems and therefore had to be controlled. At the same time, and for the same reasons, these were the same arenas in which the administration had to be most responsive to people’s demands. A careful calibration was required to create an outlet for expression and a sense of a public, political space, without creating a truly free space that might actually threaten government control.
Police Encounters explores the dynamics of policing and security in the Gaza Strip during the twenty-years after the loss of Palestine and before the Israeli occupation of Gaza, when the Strip was governed by Egypt. Egyptian authorities saw Palestinians in Gaza as both potential security threats and objects of protection and their policing practices reflected this double concern. As also happened in Egypt at the same time, police relied heavily on informants and surveillance to respond to a broad range of security concerns, including matters of national security, everyday illegality, and social propriety. The “security society” that developed through police practices was a tremendously unequal space. The police had an array of coercive powers at their disposal that other people could never mobilize. Yet this inequality did not mean that police held all the cards. People in Gaza also acted politically through security society, in part by mobilizing policing techniques to other ends.

Acting politically was not just about acting against or in relation to governing authorities. Not only were people occasionally able to push back at government policies they opposed, they mobilized security techniques to shape the behavior of others in their community. In these efforts people sometimes deployed an explicitly political language, particularly the discourse of nationalism, to suggest that others were involved in corruption or betrayal. Even more frequently though, or so it seems from the available sources, they used the notion of propriety, and especially gendered propriety, to assert control over public space, private behavior, and social practices. Political mobilization for the nation and social mobilization for proper behavior in the community were often linked.

Page 99 addresses one part of this complex security terrain: the perception by Egyptian authorities that independent Palestinian political or military activity was a threat that needed to be contained and the concomitant requirement that these authorities be responsive to Palestinian national claims and demands. Balancing between these competing demands was a challenge throughout the Administration. One way that Palestinians were sometimes able to effect a change in Administration policies was by changing the threat calculation. That is, by creating a situation where not responding to a demand seemed more threatening than meeting it.
Learn more about Police Encounters at the Stanford University Press website.

--Marshal Zeringue

Monday, May 18, 2015

Charlotte DeCroes Jacobs's "Jonas Salk: A Life"

Charlotte D. Jacobs, M.D. is the Ben and A. Jess Shenson Professor of Medicine (Emerita) at Stanford University.

She applied the “Page 99 Test” to her new biography, Jonas Salk: A Life, and reported the following:
What is happening on page 99 of Jonas Salk: A Life?

Salk, the most junior scientist in the group which advised the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis (NFIP) on polio prevention, had just recommended that they undertake a clinical trial of his polio vaccine. His suggestion brought back painful memories. Such an attempt had been made in 1934, and the results had been disastrous. New York scientist Maurice Brodie had made a polio vaccine using presumably killed poliovirus from the spinal cord of infected monkeys. He vaccinated six volunteers and pronounced it safe. At the same time, Philadelphia researcher John Kolmer made a vaccine using a live poliovirus. Having inoculated forty-two monkeys, his two children, and himself, he publicized its success. A deadly polio outbreak had just struck Los Angeles, and the public was clamoring for protection. A race was on to see whose vaccine would be the first to rid the world of polio.

The two scientists conducted trials including over 10,000 children. It appeared to afford little protection, and a number suffered paralysis from the vaccine. The careers of both men plummeted; a few years later, Brodie died from a suspected suicide.

Polio vaccine work was constrained as investigators in the field became leery. Not Jonas Salk. In 1948 he told the NFIP research director, Harry Weaver, that he planned to have a vaccine in five years. “There was nobody like him in those days,” Weaver said. “His approach was entirely different from that which had dominated the field.... He thought big. … He wanted to leap, not crawl. His willingness to shoot the works was made to order for us.” For this Salk would later be rebuffed by the scientific community.
Visit Charlotte Jacobs's website.

My Book, The Movie: Jonas Salk: A Life.

--Marshal Zeringue

Saturday, May 16, 2015

Howard Gillette, Jr.'s "Class Divide"

Howard Gillette, Jr. is Professor Emeritus of History at Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey. He is the author of Between Justice and Beauty: Race, Planning, and the Failure of Urban Policy in Washington, D.C.; Camden After the Fall: Decline and Renewal in a Post-Industrial City; and Civitas by Design: Building Better Communities, from the Garden City to the New Urbanism.

He applied the “Page 99 Test” to his new book, Class Divide: Yale '64 and the Conflicted Legacy of the Sixties, and reported the following:
Jack Cirie was a real tough guy at Yale: a “local” who excelled in football as well as in the boxing ring. Not surprisingly he joined the marines at the time of his graduation in 1964, making the corps his first career, including a second deployment to Vietnam. What, then, was he doing in the 1980s at the ‘60s hotbed of experimentation, the Esalen Institute? Yet there he is, pictured on page 99, wiry, determined, and wearing an Esalen designation on his shirt as he sets out for a race. His training at Esalen is with George Leonard, a former Look magazine reporter, who coined the term “human potential movement” before throwing himself into it. Dogged by his involvement in the war, Cirie tries in the years after retiring from the military to reconcile his war experience with his inner needs.

Cirie’s effort to reconcile war with peace, external rewards and inner satisfaction, mark him as part of an “in-between” generation: carrying the socialization of the 1950s into the turbulent 1960s. Among his classmates—famous and not—there was a shared sense of obligation to national service. And yet, unlike the silent generation it might have been part of, these men could not count on becoming a part of a unified leadership elite. Instead, as members of this class absorbed the experiences associated with the sixties, they divided: Stephen Bingham, wanted for murder by the FBI in conjunction with a fatal shootout at San Quentin prison, William Bradford Reynolds rolling back busing and affirmative action in his position as head of the civil rights division of the Justice Department under Ronald Reagan. Fellow classmate Joe Lieberman sought the center, and it didn’t hold. These are the stories that begin to identify how a cultural turn in the 1960s had such a lasting and diffusive effect.
Learn more about Class Divide at the Cornell University Press website.

--Marshal Zeringue

Thursday, May 14, 2015

Sheila A. Smith's "Intimate Rivals"

Sheila A. Smith is Senior Fellow for Japan Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.

She applied the “Page 99 Test” to her latest book, Intimate Rivals: Japanese Domestic Politics and a Rising China, and reported the following:
In Intimate Rivals, I explore the growing contention between Japan and its neighbor, the increasingly powerful China. I look within Japan to see how China’s transformation is affecting Japanese citizens and their interests, and page 99 presents the conclusion to the first of four chapters that look at the issues that resist compromise between Tokyo and Beijing. This page falls in the final discussion of what is arguably the most conspicuously contentious issue in the Sino-Japanese relations – war memory.

Chinese sensitivities to how postwar Japanese leaders memorialize their imperial veterans at the Yasukuni Shrine is well known, and has colored the relationship since the early years after the two governments concluded a peace treaty in 1978. Today, perhaps even more than those veterans, it has come to symbolize Japanese rejection of China’s right to limit Japan’s options.
Yasukuni thus remains a lightning rod for those who want to challenge foreign criticism of Japan’s past. Within Japan’s conservative party, many younger politicians use their visits to Yasukuni to burnish their conservative credentials, and it remains a rallying point for those who resent Chinese and South Korean criticism of Japan and its interpretation of its twentieth century history. Indeed, in his return to power in late 2012, Abe Shinzo raised the possibility of yet another round of Yasukuni nationalism.
The larger thesis of my book, however, is that nationalism is not what characterizes Japanese responses to this transforming China. True, some issues – war memory and their island dispute – offer the space for marginal voices to come to the fore, voices that have long existed yet have gained little traction in Japan’s mainstream politics. These old issues of contention, however, have at times made partners out of the two governments as they sought to limit popular sensitivities in the quest for a better overall relationship.

Grounding that relationship has been the economic interdependence and the shared concern with peace and prosperity in the region. Other issues such as their shared maritime boundary in the East China Sea and their increasingly interdependent market for food have forced the Japanese and Chinese governments to come up with new solutions to new problems. All told, Japan’s citizens are demanding better solutions, and at times better protections from their own government as the impact of China’s rise challenges old patterns of negotiation.

As complicated as Japanese responses are, there is no consensus within Japan on a strategy for coping with geostrategic change in Asia. Intimate Rivals demonstrates how complex a process geostrategic change can be, and the Japanese public has turned to its government to improve its ability to manage this complexity better. At the end of the day, China’s rise has reshaped not only the international relations of the Asia Pacific but also Japanese domestic politics.
Learn more about Intimate Rivals at the Columbia University Press website.

--Marshal Zeringue

Wednesday, May 13, 2015

Calvin Schermerhorn's "The Business of Slavery and the Rise of American Capitalism, 1815-1860"

Calvin Schermerhorn is an associate professor in Arizona State University’s School of Historical, Philosophical, and Religious Studies, and is the author of Money over Mastery, Family over Freedom: Slavery in the Antebellum Upper South.

He applied the “Page 99 Test” to his new book, The Business of Slavery and the Rise of American Capitalism, 1815–1860, and reported the following:
The Business of Slavery shows how the firms that financed, traded, and transported enslaved people exemplify modern capitalism. Credit expansion was an essential building block, and in the 1830s banking expansion fueled unheard of growth. Cotton and sugar planters relied on credit. And so too did slave traders, who used it to buy captives and reallocated credit to buyers like car dealers do today.

Credit expansion relied on foreign investment and banking innovations. New Orleans financiers Edmond Jean Forstall and Hugues Lavergne founded property banks, which collateralized slave property through mortgages, then securitized them. Owners leveraged lands and property in people to reinvest. And with state guarantees, slave-mortgage-backed securities were sold in the financial centers of the North Atlantic. The first such property bank was the Consolidated Association of the Planters of Louisiana. From page 99:
The Consolidated Association seemed to be dwindling when the twenty-eight-year-old financier [Thomas Baring] landed in New Orleans [in 1828]. Baring liked what he saw in commercial New Orleans. Cotton, sugar, and other commodities were ripe for investment, and rapid agricultural growth created great demand for credit. Besides opportunities to own or finance actual commodities shipments, American state bonds were appealing. Their interest rates compared favorably to those of British and European bonds. A quarter century after financing the Louisiana Purchase, the House of Baring was poised to fulfill the promise of the Mississippi Valley slave country.
And Barings fulfilled it in spades. They marketed Louisiana’s slave-mortgage-backed bonds, reselling them on British and European markets. With foreign investment ballooning credit, Forstall helped found other property banks. Barings sold more state bonds to investors in London, Amsterdam, and New York City. Other investment bankers followed suit. Cotton and sugar markets surged on the proceeds, and the domestic slave trade mushroomed. Louisiana became a model for banking in other Deep South states, and by the mid-1830s the region was the most credit rich, most monetized region of the country.

But like the home mortgage crisis of 2008, confidence crashed in 1837, leading to a financial panic and a slave mortgage crisis. Unlike real property, however, mortgaged humans were easy to hide. And slaveholders were supreme not subprime. They elected repudiationists who burned outside investors. Nevertheless, the cotton, sugar, and slave economy recovered, and by the 1850s the country was again awash in credit financing capitalist expansion on the backs of African Americans.
Learn more about The Business of Slavery and the Rise of American Capitalism at the Yale University Press website.

--Marshal Zeringue

Tuesday, May 12, 2015

Peter Singer's "The Most Good You Can Do"

Peter Singer is Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics, Princeton University, and Laureate Professor, School of Historical and Philosophical Studies, University of Melbourne. One of the most prominent ethicists of our time, he is the author of more than twenty books including Animal Liberation, Practical Ethics, and The Life You Can Save.

Singer applied the “Page 99 Test” to his new book, The Most Good You Can Do: How Effective Altruism Is Changing Ideas About Living Ethically, and reported the following:
In The Most Good You Can Do I describe some people who go to great lengths to help others and make the world a better place. Julia Wise and her partner Jeff Kaufman donated a third of their income to charities, even when they were living on only $40,000 a year; Matt Wage turned down the opportunity to do a graduate degree in philosophy at the University of Oxford in order to earn more money so he could give more away – he now gives away half of his income. Chris Croy is one among a number of people who have donated a kidney to a stranger.

Why do people do this? That question is discussed in several chapters of the book, and page 99 occurs in a section that explores the relationship between altruism and happiness. I report on studies showing that being generous and helping others correlates with being more satisfied with one’s life. In the only complete paragraph on the page, I speculate on why this might be the case.
Perhaps we imagine that money is important to our well- being because we need money to buy consumer goods, and buying things has become an obsession that beckons us away from what really advances our well- being. An in-depth study of thirty-two families in Los Angeles found that three-quarters of them could not park their cars in their garages because the garages were too full of stuff. The volume of possessions was so great that managing them elevated levels of stress hormones in mothers. Despite the fact that the growth in size of the typical American home means that Americans today have three times the amount of space, per person, that they had in 1950, they still pay a total of $22 billion a year to rent extra storage space. Are they happier for having so much stuff? Graham Hill has known both sides of this question. After selling an Internet consulting company, he bought a four-story 3,600-square-foot house and filled it with all the latest consumer goods. His enjoyment was brief; he soon became numb to his possessions and found that his life had become much more complicated. He now lives in a 420-square-foot apartment with a minimum of possessions and likes his life far better than before.
The book focuses on Effective Altruism, both the underlying values and the emerging social movement that has taken that name. It asks how we can decide between the various good causes – and good organizations – that an altruist might support. I argue that there are objective reasons for holding that some causes are better than others. In particular, the best of the charities that assist people in extreme poverty in poor countries typically offer much better value for money than one can get by contributing to art galleries, museums, opera houses, and elite universities like the one at which I work.
Learn more about the book and author--and about how leading an ethical life involves using a portion of personal wealth and resources to efficiently alleviate the effects of extreme poverty--at The Life You Can Save website, Facebook page, and Twitter perch.

The Page 99 Test: The Life You Can Save.

--Marshal Zeringue