Gordy identifies the methods by which the Milosevic regime, which obviously provided few benefits to its people, nonetheless maintained its power. Gordy identifies these methods as the "destruction of alternatives-" the removal of alternative political ideas, or of cultural institutions, such as popular music, that would enable individuals to unite in thought in a manner distinct from, and therefore threatening to, the regime.
This is indeed quite valuable to students of Yugoslavia or Eastern Europe; its broader value, however, is its contribution to the larger issues of power studied by sociologists and political scientists. How is power maintained? We frequently assume that individuals will revolt if conditions are so bad they have nothing to lose. Gordy documents the ability of the powerful to actually take away this option. Most mechanisms, such as cencorship, make revolt more difficult, raising the pain level people will tolerate; however, by keeping the more politically savvy urbanites near starvation, the regime actually compromised their very ability to express dissent.
Gordy provides an academic and, to the degree it is possible in social science, empirical explanation of power that is profoundly disturbing; sometimes it may be impossible to displace the powerful. True, outside forces crippled the regime; but what does this suggest about the American line that local groups should revolt to demonstrate support for democracy and earn military support? Don't throw it out yet, but Gordy presents an important argument. It also helps explain the success of earlier brutal regimes; Haile Selassie used similar techniques far more adeptly, and therefore more brutally, in Ethiopia. This book is both an insightful analysis of the Serbian regime's tactics and a significant study of the nature of power.