Political book discussion

[sees_all1]

I'd like to review and discuss politically motivated books in here without the politics. The main criteria for these books is they have to be non-fiction, and make a political argument. Reviews of books like 1984, Animal Farm, Brave New World or The Giver don't belong here.

When I say without the politics, I mean without the politics.

 

GOOD:

I thought book x's argument of (controversial or political subject) was poorly written and employed several fallacies, namely ad hominem and strawman.

BAD:

I disagree wtih book x's argument of (controversial or political subject) because these facts prove my opinion and directly contradict theirs.

 

 

I just finished reading Pinheads and Patriots by Bill O'Reilly, and Arguing with Idiots by Glenn Beck.

I thought Arguing did a good job selling the conservative point of view, but I disliked the amount of "Celebrity Idiot" in the side panels of the book. I don't care how big of an idiot or hypocrite Barney Frank is, it has nothing to do with your argument of how persuading Americans to own homes with tax credits is bad policy.

 

Pinheads read as some old fart griping about the world while drinking a weak cup of tea on the rocking chair. The transcript of Obama's interview was also difficult to read, because of all the interjecting. It would be more easily understood on video or audio. O'Reilly should stick to the TV.

 

Overall I'd recommend Arguing with Idiots but not Pinheads and Patriots.

[Sy_Accursed]

Your good example includes politics.

 

You cannot feasibly discuss and political book without politics because you are required to mention politics to make any coherent statement about it.

 

You can however discuss a political book without discussing politics itself.

[sees_all1]

Your good example includes politics.

 

You cannot feasibly discuss and political book without politics because you are required to mention politics to make any coherent statement about it.

 

You can however discuss a political book without discussing politics itself.

 

The point is to discuss their argument and not argue their argument (either for or against, supplement or contradict).

Also, saying something along the lines of "they changed my mind on this subject" is welcomed, but trying to change the minds of others here isn't.

[Skeptical]

Please, don't pretend that they actually wrote those books.

 

They fired off a bunch of half-baked ideas, and someone else turned into into something that one can read without throwing up in fear and disgust.

 

Good luck trying to keep this discussion from turning to politics.

[sees_all1]

Please, don't pretend that they actually wrote those books.

 

They fired off a bunch of half-baked ideas, and someone else turned into into something that one can read without throwing up in fear and disgust.

 

Good luck trying to keep this discussion from turning to politics.

 

Have you read either? O'Reilly's book reads as though he's talking to you on TV, and Beck's book credits about 10 people for writing it. My guess is he decided the big picture, wrote outlines of what he wanted, then had everyone fill it in with quotes and statistics. Its still Beck's name on the cover... but who cares?

 

My plan for keeping this away from politics is pretty simple - ignore anything that deserves to be its own subject in off topic. You could help this thread by posting reviews and recommendations of the non-fiction books you've read. I'm open to reading anything, which is why I created the thread.

[Alg]

Does George Orwell's essay "Politics and the English Language" count? It's not a book, but it is nonfiction, and it does make a political point.

Generally, it's him attacking the language of the academics of his time (And ours). You can read it here, it isn't that long (Considering), and it's well worth it if you're going to discuss politics in OT.

[sees_all1]

Does George Orwell's essay "Politics and the English Language" count? It's not a book, but it is nonfiction, and it does make a political point.

Generally, it's him attacking the language of the academics of his time (And ours). You can read it here, it isn't that long (Considering), and it's well worth it if you're going to discuss politics in OT.

Yeah, it works. Orwell does a very good job of making it impossible to take a contrary position. "No, I'm completely for vagueness, greek words and lots of syllables!"

 

That article took a lot of words to describe the fluffing of english. One part I can relate to was the softening of words for political purposes.

I'll probably reference it again when I have to write a very large paper that says much about nothing. I'll do everything he warns against. :D