Chilling...

[rowangolightly]

I clicked on this Netscape headline during lunch and damnear got indigestion:

http://politics.netscape.com/viewstory/2006/08/06/the-ten-most-harmful-books-of-the-19th-and-20th-century/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.humanevents.com%2Farticle.php%3Fid%3D7591&frame=true

Turns out it's on this site called 'Online Human Events' published by the 'National Conservative Weekly'. Makes for some intersting reading. But I am gonna do my usual "shake my head, ignore the scary and put my energy where it'll actually do some good."

::shakes head::

Guess we shouldn't read anything that might inform us about other ways of thinking, believing or acting even if we don't subscribe to those ideas, huh? Gosh, we might learn something or develop analytical skills or personal discernment or something.

Some of these I've read, some of them I haven't. Wish I'd read all of them.

Ok, that's my, what, second political post ever? Done. Now I'm going back to painting and put on some music for mental floss...want my good mood back.

Comments

Not worthy judges

[5rings.livejournal.com]

Speaking from a purely academic point of view, The "judges" listed are at best 3rd rate academicians. They aren't worthy to lick Kinsey's boots when it comes to judging scientific method, or scholarly merit. They are the Christian dominionist Taleban. 3rd rate minds wearing shoddy choir robes.
That said, the communist manifesto is a rant from a man who suffered too much. Das Capital was exceedingly immature, and Marx was way outside of any training. He spoke to his suffering. What resulted was immature, but compelling if you don't think about it too hard. True of most revolutionary points of view, including these aforesaid dominionists.

Re: Not worthy judges

[rowangolightly.livejournal.com]

Yes, definitely. I also wondered how many of those judges had actually read all of those books, you know?