Ten most Dangerous Books -- according to Human Events

headscratcher4 · 2nd June 2005, 09:25 AM

http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=7591

These are the ten most harmful books as defined by Human Events -- a conservative political magazine. Note, Darwin only rated a Honorable mention...lead positions, predictably to Marx, Hitler and Mao, but Kinsey and Rachel Carson?

What's your list look like?

Mine would include the Bible (old and new testaments) and the Koran, and anything written by Anne Coulter.

Eleatic Stranger · 2nd June 2005, 02:55 PM

I was particularly amused that Dewey and Comte made it on that list. Is anyone else bothered by the fact that Mein Kampf and whatever Mao's book was called made it on that list? I don't see how either of those were really, well, dangerous.

Hitler and Mao? Yeah, those guys were dangerous. But their books really only had an influence as far as I know due to, well, the fact that the authors of those books also happened to have an army and all.

Finally it's funny how things like Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which actually were "dangerous" (well, as dangerous as a book can be - Protocols certainly led to a whole lot of trouble) were left off, too, isn't it?

gnome · 2nd June 2005, 04:12 PM

Quote:

When the business cycle threatens a contraction of industry, and thus of jobs, he argued, the government should run up deficits, borrowing and spending money to spur economic activity. FDR adopted the idea as U.S. policy, and the U.S. government now has a $2.6-trillion annual budget and an $8-trillion dollar debt.

I love how they blame FDR for trillions of debt incurred mostly under Republican administrations.

Also I love how secular humanism beat out Das Kapital.

Eleatic Stranger · 2nd June 2005, 04:27 PM

What's really funny about that is the wierd fake causation going on - FDR adopted the strategy before Keynes wrote the book as well as the whole new deal/debt thing.

IllegalArgument · 2nd June 2005, 04:56 PM

Just a heads up, there is already a thread from a couple of days ago.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.p...threadid=57695

Cheers.

LotusMegami · 2nd June 2005, 09:19 PM

1. Dianetics
2. Bible
3. Chariots of the Gods

I consider the Koran to be relatively benign. I've read all of it - admittedly a sloppy translation - and found little that I would consider harmful.

As with the Bible, I think the world would be a better would be a better place if those who claim to believe in the Koran read all of it - straight through, every word.

I found it an easy read. The Bible, on the other hand, can get really dry in places. But if you claim to be a Christian, you have an obligation to read it, even the description of the Ark in cubits.

hgc · 3rd June 2005, 05:02 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Eleatic Stranger
...
Finally it's funny how things like Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which actually were "dangerous" (well, as dangerous as a book can be - Protocols certainly led to a whole lot of trouble) were left off, too, isn't it?

Simple formulation: dangerous book = antithetical to our religio-political views, which Protocols decidedly is not.

(For that matter, nor is Mein Kampf, but to leave it off would have been bad form. I happen to know that Shlafley sleeps with it under her pillow.)

headscratcher4 · 3rd June 2005, 06:21 AM

oops

headscratcher4 · 3rd June 2005, 06:24 AM

Have to agree with a couple of things...

"The Protocols..." has had a far more evil effect than Hitler's Mien Kamph. Without Hitler to lead the movement, Mien Kamph would be dangerous like the Turner Diaries, only less read. It is an appallingly dull book, not unlike Marx...it would seem to me that to be truely dangerous, the book would have to be read by a great many people, not just held up as read. I suspect that not a great many people have actually read Mein Kamph, just as very few have really read Marx...it is the ideas inside and behind these books, IMO, that makes them powerful symbols, not the actual words on the page. For example, how many of those who oppose Darwin have actually read the Origin of the Spicies? It seems obvious that many fighting evolutionary theory know little of Darwin or his book. Not to suggest that Mein Kamph isn't an evil book...but Nazism wasn't caused by Mein Kamph, nor was anti-semitism. While the book played a role in Hitler's career, he would have been doing the same things, saying the same things even if he'd never been in Jail and had time to put it into a book. The Nazis didn't take over Germany because of the book....in this respect, it would seem to me that State and Revolution (by Lenin) is a far more dangerous book than the Communist Manifesto...

Batman Jr. · 3rd June 2005, 05:29 PM

Quote:

from http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=7591
The Evil Empire of the Soviet Union put the Manifesto into practice.

Um, no. Marx believed in democracy and freedom of expression.

Quote:

He could not have predicted 21st Century America: a free, affluent society based on capitalism and representative government that people the world over envy and seek to emulate.

Wrong again. America is a mixed-market economy. Large portions of its machinery are reliant on socialist systems such as public schools.

Quote:

from http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=7591
FDR adopted the idea as U.S. policy, and the U.S. government now has a $2.6-trillion annual budget and an $8-trillion dollar debt.

Smooth. Blame George W. Bush's fiscal irresponsibility on a guy who's been dead for 60 years. These people are officially retarded.

treble_head · 6th June 2005, 11:28 PM

Here's one for you: The Case for a Creator: A Journalist Investigates Scientific Evidence That Points Toward God
by Lee Strobel.

Vagabond · 14th June 2005, 12:16 PM

Smooth. Blame George W. Bush's fiscal irresponsibility on a guy who's been dead for 60 years. These people are officially retarded.<<<<<

Yeah, FDR ran a 50 billion deficit during a world war and while it might be a lot in adjusted dollars by today's standards it's pocket change. The Republicans also ripped Carter a new ass because he ran the biggest deficit in history at the time which was 70 billion. Which the current admin blows in a month. They aren't retarded just using their common tactic of avoiding responsibility for everything they do.

IllegalArgument · 14th June 2005, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Batman Jr.

Wrong again. America is a mixed-market economy. Large portions of its machinery are reliant on socialist systems such as public schools.

I wonder if most Americans realize that their favorite sport, football, basically runs on a socialist model.

losman · 9th July 2005, 07:57 PM

The Turner Diaries- It seems like every white power kook has read this book and used its twisted takes to fule their racial bigotry and anti-government agendas

2nd June 2005, 09:25 AM	#1
headscratcher4 Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: USA Posts: 7,749	Ten most Dangerous Books -- according to Human Events http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=7591 These are the ten most harmful books as defined by Human Events -- a conservative political magazine. Note, Darwin only rated a Honorable mention...lead positions, predictably to Marx, Hitler and Mao, but Kinsey and Rachel Carson? What's your list look like? Mine would include the Bible (old and new testaments) and the Koran, and anything written by Anne Coulter.
	__________________ Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals ... except the weasel. -- Homer Simpson

2nd June 2005, 04:12 PM	#3
gnome Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 9,869	Quote: When the business cycle threatens a contraction of industry, and thus of jobs, he argued, the government should run up deficits, borrowing and spending money to spur economic activity. FDR adopted the idea as U.S. policy, and the U.S. government now has a $2.6-trillion annual budget and an $8-trillion dollar debt. I love how they blame FDR for trillions of debt incurred mostly under Republican administrations. Also I love how secular humanism beat out Das Kapital.
gnome Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 9,869	__________________

2nd June 2005, 09:19 PM	#6
LotusMegami Thinker Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Indiana Posts: 192	1. Dianetics 2. Bible 3. Chariots of the Gods I consider the Koran to be relatively benign. I've read all of it - admittedly a sloppy translation - and found little that I would consider harmful. As with the Bible, I think the world would be a better would be a better place if those who claim to believe in the Koran read all of it - straight through, every word. I found it an easy read. The Bible, on the other hand, can get really dry in places. But if you claim to be a Christian, you have an obligation to read it, even the description of the Ark in cubits.
	__________________ I want to defect.

3rd June 2005, 05:02 AM	#7
hgc Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 12,986	Quote: Originally posted by Eleatic Stranger ... Finally it's funny how things like Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which actually were "dangerous" (well, as dangerous as a book can be - Protocols certainly led to a whole lot of trouble) were left off, too, isn't it? Simple formulation: dangerous book = antithetical to our religio-political views, which Protocols decidedly is not. (For that matter, nor is Mein Kampf, but to leave it off would have been bad form. I happen to know that Shlafley sleeps with it under her pillow.)
	__________________ Bowel-shaking earthquakes of doubt and remorse assail him and wail him with monster truck force. - Cake, The Distance Was there a second singer on the grassy Knowles? - Stephen Colbert

3rd June 2005, 06:21 AM	#8
headscratcher4 Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: USA Posts: 7,749	oops
	__________________ Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals ... except the weasel. -- Homer Simpson

2nd June 2005, 02:55 PM	#2
Eleatic Stranger Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 439	I was particularly amused that Dewey and Comte made it on that list. Is anyone else bothered by the fact that Mein Kampf and whatever Mao's book was called made it on that list? I don't see how either of those were really, well, dangerous. Hitler and Mao? Yeah, those guys were dangerous. But their books really only had an influence as far as I know due to, well, the fact that the authors of those books also happened to have an army and all. Finally it's funny how things like Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which actually were "dangerous" (well, as dangerous as a book can be - Protocols certainly led to a whole lot of trouble) were left off, too, isn't it?

2nd June 2005, 04:27 PM	#4
Eleatic Stranger Critical Thinker Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 439	What's really funny about that is the wierd fake causation going on - FDR adopted the strategy before Keynes wrote the book as well as the whole new deal/debt thing.

2nd June 2005, 04:56 PM	#5
IllegalArgument Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Reston, VA Posts: 1,757	Just a heads up, there is already a thread from a couple of days ago. http://forums.randi.org/showthread.p...threadid=57695 Cheers.

3rd June 2005, 06:24 AM	#9
headscratcher4 Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: USA Posts: 7,749	Have to agree with a couple of things... "The Protocols..." has had a far more evil effect than Hitler's Mien Kamph. Without Hitler to lead the movement, Mien Kamph would be dangerous like the Turner Diaries, only less read. It is an appallingly dull book, not unlike Marx...it would seem to me that to be truely dangerous, the book would have to be read by a great many people, not just held up as read. I suspect that not a great many people have actually read Mein Kamph, just as very few have really read Marx...it is the ideas inside and behind these books, IMO, that makes them powerful symbols, not the actual words on the page. For example, how many of those who oppose Darwin have actually read the Origin of the Spicies? It seems obvious that many fighting evolutionary theory know little of Darwin or his book. Not to suggest that Mein Kamph isn't an evil book...but Nazism wasn't caused by Mein Kamph, nor was anti-semitism. While the book played a role in Hitler's career, he would have been doing the same things, saying the same things even if he'd never been in Jail and had time to put it into a book. The Nazis didn't take over Germany because of the book....in this respect, it would seem to me that State and Revolution (by Lenin) is a far more dangerous book than the Communist Manifesto...
	__________________ Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals ... except the weasel. -- Homer Simpson

3rd June 2005, 05:29 PM	#10
Batman Jr. Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 1,255	Quote: from http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=7591 The Evil Empire of the Soviet Union put the Manifesto into practice. Um, no. Marx believed in democracy and freedom of expression. Quote: He could not have predicted 21st Century America: a free, affluent society based on capitalism and representative government that people the world over envy and seek to emulate. Wrong again. America is a mixed-market economy. Large portions of its machinery are reliant on socialist systems such as public schools. Quote: from http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=7591 FDR adopted the idea as U.S. policy, and the U.S. government now has a $2.6-trillion annual budget and an $8-trillion dollar debt. Smooth. Blame George W. Bush's fiscal irresponsibility on a guy who's been dead for 60 years. These people are officially retarded.

6th June 2005, 11:28 PM	#11
treble_head Cupcake Loser Moron Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Look. Behind. You. Posts: 10,973	Here's one for you: The Case for a Creator: A Journalist Investigates Scientific Evidence That Points Toward God by Lee Strobel.
	__________________ I am humble. I am modest. Those two things are what make me great. That's not going to work Treb. I'm still going to like you. - Arthwollipot

14th June 2005, 12:16 PM	#12
Vagabond Professor of Human Nature Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: St. Louis Posts: 818	Smooth. Blame George W. Bush's fiscal irresponsibility on a guy who's been dead for 60 years. These people are officially retarded.<<<<< Yeah, FDR ran a 50 billion deficit during a world war and while it might be a lot in adjusted dollars by today's standards it's pocket change. The Republicans also ripped Carter a new ass because he ran the biggest deficit in history at the time which was 70 billion. Which the current admin blows in a month. They aren't retarded just using their common tactic of avoiding responsibility for everything they do.

14th June 2005, 12:23 PM	#13
IllegalArgument Graduate Poster Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Reston, VA Posts: 1,757	Quote: Originally posted by Batman Jr. Wrong again. America is a mixed-market economy. Large portions of its machinery are reliant on socialist systems such as public schools. I wonder if most Americans realize that their favorite sport, football, basically runs on a socialist model.

9th July 2005, 07:57 PM	#14
losman Scholar Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 55	The Turner Diaries- It seems like every white power kook has read this book and used its twisted takes to fule their racial bigotry and anti-government agendas
losman Scholar Join Date: Aug 2001 Posts: 55