This book constitutes an ambitious historical interrogation of the complex relationship between universities, local and global politics, and international funding for scientific research culture in the Cold War era. This accomplished monograph moves away from a reading of Uruguayan left-wing politics through traditional party politics to trace the major shifts in university research culture during the 1960s. The author's cogent analysis pivots expertly between university infrastructure and personnel, the wider political polarization of 1960s Uruguay, and the broader global context, particularly the nebulous role of the US state and private funding bodies, bringing these areas together for the first time.Furthermore, the university's role vis-à-vis crisis is not only a historical issue. Indeed, Vania Markarian frames her study by reminding us that while the Uruguayan scientific community is small, it is also vocal in its questioning of private funding's role in research and education, as exemplified recently in the local institutional debates surrounding the global pandemic: whether the struggle for better working conditions would be sidelined by the pooling of resources and acceptance of funding to fight COVID-19. Meanwhile, the case of Uruguay is particularly insightful, because the scientific community there is relatively small and the Universidad de la República, on which Markarian's study is based, was the only university in the country at the time. This allows the author to engage in a detailed study that avails of the university's rich archive and draws on minutes, legislation, and press reports to explore the internal tensions within the university and the reverberations beyond.Universidad, revolución y dólares takes as a starting point two notable controversies that begin in and span the 1960s involving different research fields in the university: the first in engineering, and the second in social sciences. While these may seem like microhistories or quite specific issues, Markarian deftly contextualizes and exploits these case studies to unpack the complex relationship between the university, intellectual imperialism, and global history. Indeed, the two cases elucidate the tension between the autonomous university committed to social issues and the acceptance of money from foreign governments and bodies, an issue that continues to preoccupy many university personnel within and beyond Uruguay. To this end, one of the strengths of this text is its view of the university not as an anonymous or faceless homogeneous body but as a community of different actors belonging to both faculty and student bodies, and their interaction with a wider public of political actors, activists, and journalists.The two controversies each merit one of the book's two substantive sections, which are in turn divided into six chapters tracing the background to the controversy and its impact both for the institution and for wider politics and society. The first section considers the debate generated by a science program in the Faculty of Engineering and Land Surveying that was funded by the Organization of American States (OAS) in 1965. The focus here is the anti-imperial rhetoric that emerges from sectors of both the student body and faculty and the intense debate about how scientific research should be financed. Although the overall success of the opposition to OAS funding was limited, Markarian finds that the alliance of different actors created a space for change and precipitated a period of structural reform within the university.The second furor, also emerging in 1965, was rooted in the field of social sciences and was sparked by a seminar on Latin American elites organized by the Congreso por la Libertad de la Cultura (Congress for the Freedom of Culture). Controversy centered on the role of the Central Intelligence Agency as the main investor, precipitating discussion about the origins of funding, particularly from US state bodies being used to study development in countries in the South. Against the backdrop of the Cold War, the controversy and associated debate led to a weakening of tercerismo, a position common in Uruguay as a type of third way between the opposing Cold War factions. Markarian boldly speculates that the scandal led to increasing polarization within Uruguayan academic culture, with actors tending to move toward the more radical socialist position of Cuba or the supposed modernizing projects offered by the United States.While the two case studies emerge from distinct disciplines, they underscore two key tenets of Markarian's research: that the politicization of debates, particularly under the banner of anti-imperialism, helped to define scientific policy and reform in Uruguay, and that the associated exchanges galvanized an alliance of different political and generational actors, ultimately paving the way for the emergence of the Frente Amplio (Broad Front) in 1971 as a coalition of left-leaning and progressive positions.The book is also notable for the absence of female voices and protagonists in the two main sections, an aspect that Markarian admirably confronts in the closing pages. Indeed, the author foregrounds a third controversy connected to the book's central themes: the debate around family planning and contraception. Although gender politics as another layer to exploring university reform is beyond the scope of the text, it does offer a compelling path for future investigation beyond what is a fascinating and rich study of the culture and politics of the Uruguayan university.