Posted on 05/16/2008 10:09:27 PM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode
That dang book gave us all the idiotic ideas that Roosevelt and Johnson burdened this country with. Its the headwaters of all things to do with entitlement programs!
Roosevelt was said to be enamored with Keynes.
Keynes was a eugenist. He was a director of the Eugenics Society in the 1930's and 40's.
This is exactly what I was thinking. It was Machiavelli that made me put my faith in liberty, and it was Marx that made me a capitalist. I think everyone should read these books to know what they're up against in regards to the professional politician.
Missing the Koran and Al Gore’s tome that even served as inspiration for the Unabomber.
The Koran is a political tomb for theocratic rule and is still used as justification for jihad centuries later.
The Bible is a guide for living by God’s Law but does not rule out the existence of Man’s Law and governence.
Anything written by Noam Chomsky.
I swear I corrected that to tome before posting (without spell check).
Now now, how many of the people who cite Chomsky have even READ Chomsky? Are ANY of his books best sellers?
They rent the video lectures and regurgitate the talking points.
I agree. If you don't read the books written by the minds who influence society (for the good or bad), you don't really know what's going on. On my FR page there is a book by Jacques Maritain. The first essay explains that a philosopher of evil influence is like a lighthouse telling you to steer clear.
But a curious question arises. How is it that we can read Marx and recognize him for what he is, but others take him seriously? I don't think one can say that those who take dangerous crackpots seriously are simply stupid. For example, Ernst Mach was definitely not stupid, but he took Haeckel's monistic rants quite seriously and even joined Haeckel's Monist Church. Perhaps it has something to do with lack of faith, and the absence of sanity that inevitably follows.
"Devolution," aside from inspiring one of the most eccentric new-wave bands of the early 1990s, is a meaningless concept. Evolution is not a linear, goal-oriented process, and to talk of "lower" and "higher" creatures -- or to refer to evolution going "backward" -- is to introduce moral or aesthetic prejudices where they have no place.
My mom despises this book and says Dr. Spock has a lot to answer for the lack of parents disciplining their children.
So is evolution.
Evolution is not a... goal-oriented process.
Neither is devolution, obviously. See? Meaningless concepts go hand-in-hand.
The comments here are every bit as good as the list. Spock’s book is right up there with the Koran and Mein Kampf. They could all be #1. “Origin Of The Species” is a real contender, too.
I’d put Origin in the first slot and all the new translations of the Bible in #2.
Exactly. This article is just an attempt by the author to make a disparaging point about creationism.
That’s interesting because it was Ayn Rand’s ‘Atlas Shrugged’ that made me a Christian again.
Just goes to show that some things are toxic in general release but cathartic when absorbed in proper context from a firm set of prior principles based in fact rather than preference or whim.
Absolutely - what a joke.
Yet for the author to put Behe’s book at #1 shows the absolute terror which has struck many whose god is evolution.....
LOLOL! Thank you for sharing your insights!
True.. evolution is as fictional as devolution..
Both require an arrogant pedantic smart ass to promote them..
was written in Paris by an Englishman named Hobbes."Well, there's the problem"
Kidding aside, I tend to agree with you. Fortunately 17th England had an even greater political philosopher in John Locke
The negative influence of Mein Kampf is grossly overstated. In reality it had two main groups who purchased it at the time of Hitler’s rise to power. The first was those who already agreed with him, so the book had little influence on their beliefs, it simply reflected them. The second was primarily those trying to appear like good Germans who probably didn’t even bother to read much if any of it.
Had the book’s popularity preceded Hitler’s rise to power I could agree it had been widely influential, but the series of events shows just the opposite. It is so poorly written and rambling that it’s ability to sway anyone to believe anything is limited.
If anything it should have served as a warning to the rest of the world regarding the wisdom of appeasement, and actually had the potential to influence action that could have saved millions of lives.
Since the fall of Nazi Germany Mein Kampf is primarily cited as influential only by those who already hold a strong belief in neo-Nazi ideals.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.